Matteo Togninalli, Ferrari’s current track engineering director, revealed the reasons behind halting development on the SF-25, highlighting multiple performance issues and comparing the Italian team to McLaren.
In recent weeks, rumors surfaced about a potential disagreement between Team Principal Frédéric Vasseur and Matteo Togninalli following the Singapore Grand Prix. Hamilton experienced a brake failure due to high temperatures, caused by technical choices made during the weekend. As the engineer responsible for determining setup directions, Matteo Togninalli was reportedly blamed, triggering Vasseur’s anger. Ferrari later denied that any dispute occurred. The technical picture of the SF-25 remains concerning, particularly due to the decision to halt development before rivals. Does the Austin weekend revival indicate hope for the remaining 2025 races?
Togninalli: stopping development early can make the difference
“As Fred often says, we struggle to put everything together. Everything means everything—not just one aspect or one person. The team is a complete package, like an orchestra. We chose to halt development perhaps earlier than some rivals, and currently there is a 1–2 tenth difference between P2 and P7. We are all very tight. Stopping the development of one package early can make the difference and complicate things. So if you combine the two, you miss some performance and try to recover it on track, but then risk underperforming and failing to put everything together,” Matteo Togninalli explained to AutoRacer.it.
At Maranello, under Loic Serra, Ferrari prioritized the evolved rear suspension and blocked all aerodynamic upgrades. A floor planned for Baku was rejected. With limited mechanical improvements available in modern F1, performance gains primarily come from aero updates. This choice has weighed heavily on Ferrari, as the SF-25 often fell behind Sauber, Williams, and Racing Bulls.
“We could have done better in Baku, and in Singapore we also had more potential. Charles’ final lap could have placed him P2/P3, for example, and if you start at the front in Singapore, you finish at the front. We must stay calm, do our best, and seize opportunities,” Matteo Togninalli added. While hearing perspectives beyond Fred Vasseur is positive, Matteo Togninalli still referred to the car’s ‘potential.’ The SF-25 had some margin in Baku, but even minor temperature drops making it difficult to drive signals deeper problems.
Togninalli’s ‘senseless’ Ferrari-McLaren comparison
“The balance is not easy. Look at the McLaren MCL39—it’s incredible. They aren’t strong because of more downforce, but because it’s more drivable. You can improve it with setup and minor tweaks, but that’s part of the car’s inherent behavior. Ours is quite challenging, so we’re more exposed to errors. Drivers must work harder to achieve results. Tires are very sensitive, so every small mistake—lock-up or oversteer—costs performance. When the car is at its limit, you use the tires more and degrade them. This applies to everyone, but a more drivable car is gentler on tires,” Matteo Togninalli explained.
He compared Ferrari’s balance to McLaren’s, emphasizing that describing the MCL39 as simply more drivable is oversimplified. McLaren’s consistency across conditions and tracks is the result of meticulous engineering. The SF-25 only matched MCL39 in the simulator. Austin appeared to be a positive weekend, but poor performances throughout the season remain. A flawed project will continue to be so, and the hope is that 2026 avoids repeating the same errors. Fred Vasseur is the first to hope for this, or his leadership will again be questioned.
Leave a Reply