The Saudi Arabian Grand Prix did not disappoint, offering an exciting race that entertained the fans and, above all, provided some additional technical insights in what has been a complex start to the 2025 Formula 1 season so far. In recent years, the Jeddah race has always proven somewhat revealing, and indeed, even this year there were many cues to pick up and try to interpret over the course of the weekend.
We must start with the winner, Oscar Piastri, who with his victory also became the leader of the drivers’ standings. It’s no coincidence: the Australian’s composure and, above all, determination proved to be more than concrete weapons in his favor, including at the race start, where Max Verstappen, imperfect off the line this time, tried to force it but found himself alongside a driver with no fear or reverence, who didn’t hesitate to engage in wheel-to-wheel combat. Was the penalty to the Dutchman fair? While there are arguments that could favor the Dutchman, it is also true that we have seen far less fitting penalties before, and the one given to Max Verstappen seems fair overall. But the four-time Formula 1 world champion’s post-race anger likely stems more from being beaten on his own turf than from the penalty itself.
In any case, Oscar Piastri delivered another solid performance, including a brilliant overtake on Lewis Hamilton during a key phase of the race. Looking at lap times and data, there was even a slight degree of gap management from Max Verstappen behind him, confirming McLaren’s supremacy, albeit with smaller margins than in high-degradation races, as anticipated. In the internal battle with Lando Norris, the Australian moves ahead 3–1 in victories, with the British driver’s only win remaining the season opener. Oscar Piastri now takes on the team leadership, no longer as a promising talent but as a proven fact, in his third Formula 1 season. It will be interesting to see how Lando Norris, the team, and Oscar Piastri himself respond to this situation in the coming races.
The disappointed man of the day was Max Verstappen, who finished second after starting from pole. His first stint showed stellar pace, fast and metronomic, “classic Verstappen,” and before Charles Leclerc’s stint emerged, Max’s was clearly a contender for the best of the race. But then, of course, the five-second penalty erased any hopes of victory for the World Champion, as once he rejoined after the long pit stop, the Dutch driver was unable to close in significantly on Oscar Piastri’s McLaren. Regarding the penalty, there’s also the impression that, beyond public statements, Max Verstappen and Red Bull deliberately chose not to yield the position to Oscar Piastri after lap one, preferring to risk the penalty with the assurance of clean air up front. Aerodynamic disruption is now highly significant, compounded by the hot air hitting the following car, and at Jeddah, its effects started to appear at around 2.5 seconds behind.
Oscar Piastri himself said he couldn’t get close to Max Verstappen in the early stages, which suggests that without the penalty, the Dutchman would likely have had more than one chance to win the race, Suzuka-style. The RB21 was on an ideal track for its characteristics—fast corners, low curbs, and little degradation, but credit still goes to the Milton Keynes team for extracting everything possible from a race weekend, adjusting the car setup to the last moment, and then maximizing every in-race situation. Mercedes, on the other hand, disappointed with a completely misjudged setup aimed at rear-end protection, which triggered a major front-end crisis. George Russell collapsed completely at the end, while Kimi Antonelli could only raise his pace thanks to effective prior tire management.
The third step of the podium went, for the first time this season, to Charles Leclerc with a masterful drive, among the best of his career in terms of pace, consistency, and tire management. The SF25 surprisingly managed both tire degradation and keeping pace with the frontrunners, with the Monegasque driver recovering a remarkable 5.6 seconds on the Australian from his pit stop to the finish line.
The race plan devised with the pit wall was also perfect, with Ferrari’s strategists pulling off a masterpiece in modeling tire behavior, the only ones to realize that extending the first stint would pay off more than trying an undercut. The race-spec car and Charles Leclerc’s superb driving made this strategy viable with surprisingly large margins. Everyone else stopped around lap 20, showing marked degradation. Charles Leclerc had wisely built a safety margin from George Russell, managing his tires until the moment came to push for real, and once he had clear track, he unleashed his pace, dropping lap times from 34.4 to 33.6 in just a couple of laps.
The Ferrari driver built a strategic offset of nine laps over his rivals, and the surprising part is not just the ability to pit later, but that he still had about 10 laps of high tire performance available. The final stint on hard tires was just a matter of pushing, and Charles Leclerc gave it his all, overtaking George Russell cleanly and then holding off Lando Norris, whose comeback was more due to fresher, softer tires than any true McLaren performance edge.
Translating what was seen on track is not easy, and even Charles Leclerc’s comments after the race often sound like an oxymoron. He described a car that alternated between heavy understeer and oversteer, especially early on, yet also said he has not felt this comfortable with the car in a long time. He rightly pointed to qualifying as the key issue, since race pace and tire management seem strong points for the Maranello team, while also noting a downforce deficit. Yet Charles Leclerc also described a car lacking grip in low- and medium-speed corners, consistent with qualifying observations—though, interestingly, the first sector became a strength during the race.
In short, a complex puzzle of inputs which is difficult to interpret, but in our view it boils down to major differences in the car’s dynamic behavior between full and empty fuel conditions, as well as with very soft compounds whose sidewalls move more under qualifying-style loads. A trend in recent races is that after an initial phase of difficulty with a full tank—lasting about a third of the race, the SF25 single-seater enters its ideal performance window, amplifying performance and reducing degradation, a pattern we have explained many times in recent years. This may also “resolve” the balance issues, likely thanks to Charles Leclerc’s great sensitivity, which allows him to handle a difficult car once he finds the grip he needs—reminiscent of Max Verstappen at his best.
The key still seems to lie in the suspension system and its interaction with ride heights and the movement of Ferrari’s center of pressure, very different factors that ultimately converge on performance. Charles Leclerc’s complaint about low downforce in qualifying may be tied to the lack of fuel mass raising the ride height and thus reducing downforce.
With a full tank, the behavior is clearly not ideal, but once the first 30 kilograms of fuel are burned off, everything falls into place, producing top-level middle stints and very promising practice simulations. Tire warm-up issues are probably not to blame, as the same problems in Jeddah’s first two corners occurred even in afternoon sessions with over 50 degrees celsius track temperatures. What is harder to explain is how Charles Leclerc maintained great pace at the end of the race with an empty tank. We believe the hard compound’s stability helped eliminate lingering variables, and the fact that there is no longer a need to extract peak tire performance may have tempered the car’s extreme balance fluctuations.
Ferrari team principal Frederic Vasseur mentioned aerodynamic updates coming for Imola, but Miami will be a crucial test to see how the SF25 car performs in a sprint format. With lower setups and reduced fuel loads from the start, it will be interesting to see if Ferrari can once again ignite performance from the get-go.
Leave a Reply