The current 2025 Formula 1 season has exposed major contradictions in the expected performance levels of various cars, highlighting the significant gap between theoretical projections and real-world results. Compared to the theoretical strengths and limitations inherent in each team’s car design, the actual results on track often went in unexpected directions, creating a sense of unpredictability that few teams have been able to manage effectively. Among these, Ferrari has emerged as one of the clearest and most striking examples of this paradox, particularly during the Azerbaijan Grand Prix in Baku. On paper, the Baku City Circuit was ideally suited to highlight the strong points of the Ferrari SF-25, with its long straights and combination of high-speed corners expected to play into the car’s aerodynamic and mechanical strengths. Many analysts and insiders expected the Scuderia to perform strongly at this venue, given these theoretical advantages. However, the reality of the weekend turned out to be a complete disappointment, both in qualifying and in the race itself. This came despite a highly promising start to the weekend on Friday, when Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc had topped the second practice session with a one-two finish for Ferrari, creating high expectations among fans and pundits alike. From an external perspective, it appeared to be another case of Ferrari’s now-familiar inability to convert Friday promise into competitive results over the course of the weekend — but is this really an accurate explanation?
The SF-25 and the evolution dilemma
According to credible sources within the Formula 1 paddock, the reality behind Ferrari’s inconsistent performance might be far more complex than simple weekend mismanagement. The disappointing results are not merely the outcome of poor adjustments to car setup during race weekends, but rather stem from deeper, more fundamental issues inherent in the design concept of the SF-25. These intrinsic characteristics of the car’s design, paradoxically, appear to have been accentuated after the introduction of the revised rear suspension from the Belgian Grand Prix onwards. What was intended to improve stability and overall performance has, in some respects, amplified the limitations of the SF-25, making it less adaptable under varying conditions.
After the early races of the 2025 Formula 1 season, Ferrari found itself confronting a critical dilemma regarding the evolution path of the SF-25. The central question was how to develop the car further in order to unlock the levels of performance that had been predicted by the sophisticated simulations in Ferrari’s technical center. These promising simulator results had only been partially confirmed on actual race tracks — notably during the Shanghai Sprint race, where Lewis Hamilton managed to extract an impressive level of speed and competitiveness from the SF-25, even if that performance proved difficult to replicate elsewhere. The decision ultimately made by technical director Loïc Serra was to focus the development effort primarily on the vehicle dynamics, particularly the suspension system, rather than continuing with the originally planned aerodynamic upgrades. Serra’s rationale was that optimizing the rear suspension would create a more stable and predictable dynamic platform, which in turn would allow the existing aerodynamic package of the SF-25 to perform more effectively across a wider range of track conditions, including high-speed corners and slower technical sections.
An aerodynamic development on hold
While the decision to focus on suspension modifications was rational from a theoretical perspective, it had significant consequences for the overall evolution of the car. The intensive development work on the rear suspension consumed approximately three months of the Scuderia’s technical resources, effectively freezing progress on aerodynamic evolution during that period. Most of the available resources — including engineering personnel, simulation hours, and wind tunnel testing time — were redirected toward perfecting the suspension changes. The primary goal of this effort was to make the SF-25’s aerodynamics less sensitive to changes in ride height, theoretically ensuring more consistent performance across variable track conditions. Although this objective was partially achieved, it came with a significant unintended consequence. The car reportedly became progressively less responsive to adjustments in setup. In practical terms, when a setup developed in the simulator coincides exactly with real-world track conditions, including surface grip levels and ambient track temperatures, the SF-25 is capable of delivering its maximum potential performance. However, when those conditions differ — even slightly — the car struggles to adapt effectively, and performance gains from weekend setup adjustments are limited or nullified.
Lost time and missed opportunities
It is particularly noteworthy that, according to some insiders, the time spent redesigning and refining the rear suspension could have been used more efficiently to introduce at least two rounds of aerodynamic upgrades, had the focus not been concentrated exclusively on vehicle dynamics. Reports suggest that Ferrari initially considered a few moderate but potentially effective upgrades to the lower aerodynamics of the SF-25. These were intended to enhance downforce distribution, improve cornering stability, and better balance tire wear over the course of a race. However, the final decision was made to prioritize the suspension modifications over these aerodynamic initiatives. Some engineers within Ferrari believe that these aerodynamic developments would have been more effective in terms of improving the overall race performance of the car, in line with the feedback provided by the drivers Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc. Consequently, the aerodynamics department was relegated to a secondary role in the car’s development, limiting Ferrari’s ability to evolve the SF-25 effectively compared to other rivals Red Bull, Mercedes, and McLaren, who continued to innovate and bring meaningful upgrades during the season.
The on-track evolution problem
Another critical factor to consider is the extremely narrow performance gaps between cars in the current 2025 Formula 1 season. Rival team engineers have emphasized that the difference in lap times between the top ten cars on the grid is often less than two-tenths of a second, highlighting the level of competitiveness and technical precision required to gain an advantage. Lewis Hamilton’s twelfth-place finish in Baku — only approximately three-tenths of a second slower than the pole position time — serves as a striking illustration of how even minor inefficiencies in car setup or development can result in significant losses in track position. These observations underscore the importance of optimizing car setup throughout the race weekend. Engineers estimate that even a marginal improvement of half a tenth of a second through setup optimization can translate into a gain of three to five positions on the starting grid, which can have profound implications for race strategy, tire management, and championship points.
Given these tight performance margins, it has become increasingly evident that modern Formula 1 cars must be designed with inherent adaptability, allowing them to evolve effectively during a race weekend in response to changing conditions such as temperature fluctuations, track evolution, and tire performance. Teams such as McLaren and Red Bull have demonstrated strong examples of this adaptability in the early and mid-stages of the season, with Red Bull in particular regaining a competitive edge in the last two race weekends. Unfortunately, Ferrari’s SF-25 does not share this adaptability. The car was conceived as an extreme evolution of its predecessor, incorporating the pull-rod front suspension in an effort to achieve what British engineers refer to as “Peak Performance.” While this approach theoretically promised superior single-lap speed under ideal conditions, it has also made the car less forgiving and less able to respond to deviations from these optimal conditions, whether due to track surface variability, weather changes, or tire degradation.
Essentially, the SF-25 was engineered to maximize aerodynamic efficiency and mechanical grip under highly controlled circumstances, but this design philosophy came at the cost of flexibility and consistency. While rival teams found ways to make their cars more adaptable to real-world conditions and better able to respond to setup changes, Ferrari’s extreme design choices have created a car that can deliver impressive bursts of speed but struggles to maintain competitive performance across an entire race weekend. This lack of versatility has become a recurring theme, with promising results in practice sessions often giving way to disappointing qualifying and race performances.
For Ferrari, a team with a legacy of technical innovation and championship expectations, this has amounted to a frustrating and, in many ways, humiliating season. Misjudged development priorities, internal communication challenges, and a technical evolution strategy that inadvertently limited the SF-25’s on-track potential have combined to produce a scenario in which each race weekend feels like a repeat of the same story: initial promise on Friday, followed by underwhelming results on Saturday and disappointment on Sunday. Without a significant reassessment of Ferrari’s development strategy, internal coordination, and resource allocation, the SF-25’s 2025 season risks going down in history as one of the most frustrating and underwhelming campaigns in the modern era of the Scuderia.
Looking ahead, Ferrari faces critical decisions. Balancing aerodynamic development with vehicle dynamics upgrades, improving adaptability to different track conditions, and ensuring that both Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc can extract consistent performance from the car will be crucial. The lessons from this challenging season highlight the importance of not only innovative design but also strategic prioritization and flexibility, particularly in a Formula 1 environment where milliseconds make the difference between victory and mid-field obscurity.
And you? What do you think about Ferrari’s problems in the 2025 Formula 1 season? Let us know with a comment at the end of the article or on our social media channels: Facebook Group / Facebook Page / Instagram / X (former Twitter) and TikTok.
