After the Singapore disaster, two unexpected podiums arrived. The team’s choices were excellent, yet track surfaces and tyre compounds played a decisive role.
A worrying outlook for Maranello after Singapore
The end of the season for the Maranello team seemed to be an uphill battle following the 2025 Singapore Grand Prix, one of the lowest points of the year for the Scuderia. The early halt to upgrades highlighted the combination of a car with unresolved problems, the time spent addressing the rear suspension and the gap to the competition who nonetheless pushed an upgrade programme even for the final races of the year. In the words of Fred Vasseur after the terrible Marina Bay race, there was concern of a season-end to be approached with blunt weapons, and that internal and media tensions might rise — despite the fact that very little remained to play for in the team and driver standings for the Scuderia, apart from second place in the constructors’ championship which could offer limited glory.
The qualifying for the sprint in Austin seemed to confirm these fears, but from that point onwards two podiums came in Texas and Mexico, not without creating surprise even within the team. Fred Vasseur and Lewis Hamilton had no doubt in pointing to better execution as the primary source of Ferrari’s strong performances. That is certainly true, at least in part.
Execution as part of the solution
For example, in qualifying we have seen a series of better tyre-preparation choices. The Ferrari SF25 inherited the advantage from last year’s car of not overheating its tyres, but in qualifying it pays a penalty due to greater difficulty in getting them into the correct temperature. Hence the technical choice of often having closed front-brake ducts, which increase brake-generated heat and help to ‘light up’ the tyre when preparing for a flying lap. In light of this situation, the choice during qualifying sessions to often wait in the pit-lane for 2 to 3 minutes before going out was particularly unfortunate — and it is no coincidence that Hamilton frequently complained about it for part of the season.
The process now appears decidedly more optimised, as does the work on the launch lap — which at Autódromo Hermanos Rodríguez was crucial especially in the middle sector — and that work now appears better. Staying on the topic of brakes, in Mexico a decidedly less extreme approach was seen compared to Singapore, and the infamous “Lift and Coast” to which the drivers were forced appeared aligned with what the competition was doing. Of course, on the execution front we must also cite Charles Leclerc, author of two outstanding performances in both qualifying and race, with high-level tyre-management work — a fundamental passage to achieve the two podiums (beyond what happened at the start in Mexico, which is outside this analysis). So the improvement on the execution front, as often cited by Hamilton and Vasseur, does appear to have actually occurred — but is this the only reason behind Ferrari’s good performance?
A major help from Pirelli’s “wrong” compounds
The last two races first of all share a common denominator in terms of Pirelli tyre compounds. Both in Austin and in Mexico the Italian supplier brought the so-called compound jump, which in fact excluded the use of the hardest compound in the race for everyone. In Mexico not only the hard, but also the medium turned out to be too under-performing compared with the soft, because of too marked sliding that caused particularly complicated surface temperature peaks to bring back given the very high track temperature (50 °C) and the altitude problem.
This pushed both of the last two races toward the use of very soft compounds in the race, making the step-time challenge more about managing tyre over-heating rather than pure car performance. Consequently Ferrari found very fertile ground to express what is perhaps its strongest asset. Looking around we also find confirmation from the rivals: McLaren is a car that manages tyre over-heating incredibly well and achieved a great victory in Mexico besides showing the best performance in the United States, whereas Mercedes, which has exactly the opposite characteristic, encountered two unexciting weekends.
It might be natural to ask why, if temperature management was so fundamental — so much so that it was more important than the pure car performance — the SF25 performed so well even in qualifying. Of course there are also mechanical and aerodynamic reasons which we will look at shortly, but on this aspect we want to underline that both in Austin and in Mexico the soft tyre did not allow pushing for a full lap without taking into account the risk of over-heating, even within the single lap — and this aspect closes the circle of reasoning in that sense.
Ride height concern: two extreme tracks proved helpful
The other, and final, topic we want to address concerns the equally infamous issue of the SF25’s ride height, which this year has so compromised performance due to the excessive plank wear to which this car is clearly subject. In this regard in the last two races we saw two situations at opposite extremes, which however both helped the Maranello team.
In Austin the track is extremely bumpy and irregular, forcing all teams, without exception, to raise their cars considerably. Clearly everyone tries to lower the cars as much as possible, but the possibility of compromising on the American circuit was almost nil — and this levelled the performance, with Ferrari able to make the floor aerodynamics and suspension package work in a window not too different from the competition, especially in terms of stiffness. In Mexico it happened exactly the opposite: the track surface is as smooth as a billiard table, the asphalt is extremely non-abrasive and the altitude means that the aerodynamic downforce of the car is anyhow contained, allowing everyone to lower the car extremely — and those who had limitations in terms of available stiffness did not suffer particularly. Without a challenge to find the best compromise — which is the situation where the Maranello engineers find themselves playing totally on the defensive — the SF25 therefore found a good load from the floor and was able to perform at a good level with both drivers.
Hamilton very close to Leclerc on a single lap
Beyond what happened in the early laps of the race, Lewis Hamilton delivered a remarkable qualifying performance in Mexico, very close to Charles Leclerc (less than a tenth difference). The confirmation of a low car and with a good level of grip, together with a suspension package with which the seven-time world champion has decidedly more confidence, was found in the weekend data analysed in the various free practices and qualifying. In Mexico Hamilton in fact showed himself to be very competitive in braking phases and high-speed corners — a first for the British champion this year in both cases. The impression is that the updated rear suspension did not bring significant improvements on the stopwatch but certainly shifted the SF25’s working point towards decidedly less extreme setups, a feature from which Hamilton could derive significant benefit — and the reduced ride height in Mexico completed the job, giving Lewis a car in which he for once had a certain level of confidence.
In Brazil, not easy to optimise the SF25
After those two races, Formula 1 moves to Autódromo José Carlos Pace (Interlagos) and the impression is that the track does not represent an easy challenge for Ferrari. The track is bumpy, but not as much as Austin’s, and a compromise setup will be obligatory. The medium-slow corners of the central sector then require quite a lot of floor downforce, creating some potential critical issues for the Scuderia. Ultimately, the two podiums we have seen are the children of an overall improvement and a growing awareness of some characteristics of the car, but also of two peculiar and favourable situations which will be difficult to replicate in each of the four remaining race weekends to complete the season.
Leave a Reply