Lewis Hamilton’s suspicion that Ferrari’s rivals were keeping performance in reserve before Q3 at the 2026 United States Grand Prix has received support from former Haas team principal Guenther Steiner. After Ferrari slipped from apparent pole-position contention to fourth and fifth on the Austin grid, Steiner suggested that rival teams may be holding back more pace during practice, creating expectations that the Scuderia struggles to match when qualifying reaches its decisive stage.
Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton had looked competitive throughout practice and the opening two qualifying sessions at the Circuit of the Americas. However, Mercedes and Red Bull found additional performance in Q3, leaving Ferrari unable to maintain the position it had appeared capable of challenging for earlier in the weekend. The contrast raised fresh questions about how much performance Ferrari’s competitors were revealing before the final qualifying runs.
Lewis Hamilton questions Ferrari’s sudden Q3 pace deficit in Austin
Ferrari entered the final phase of qualifying with encouraging signs from its SF-26. Both drivers had demonstrated competitive speed, and the car appeared to possess the performance needed to challenge for pole position.
That optimism was not reflected in the final classification. Charles Leclerc qualified fourth, while Lewis Hamilton finished fifth, behind the leading Mercedes and Red Bull cars.
The British driver was particularly puzzled because Ferrari had made no changes that could explain such a sudden deterioration in its relative competitiveness.
Speaking to Sky Sports F1 after qualifying, the Briton explained that the team had completed productive overnight work and that the car had felt particularly competitive during the third practice session. He also considered the SF-26 strong throughout Q1 and Q2, when Ferrari appeared firmly involved in the fight near the front.
According to the seven-time world champion, the car’s behaviour had remained consistent into Q3, and he believed he had completed an excellent lap. Nevertheless, the leading competitors appeared to find another level of performance when it mattered most.
His frustration was also evident over team radio. Hamilton questioned whether the other teams had increased their engine performance for the final qualifying session, given the sudden improvement in their lap times.
The concern followed another difficult period of qualifying preparation, during which Lewis Hamilton had already questioned his six-tenth deficit to Charles Leclerc during Austin practice.
Ferrari’s straight-line speed weakness remains a significant disadvantage
Lewis Hamilton identified Ferrari’s straight-line performance as one of the principal reasons for its qualifying deficit. In his assessment, the SF-26 was capable of matching its leading rivals through the corners, but the advantage generated in those sections was being lost on the straights.
The British driver estimated that Ferrari was surrendering several tenths of a second in the acceleration zones, describing the power deficit relative to Mercedes and Red Bull as significant.
Speed-trap figures reinforced concerns about the car’s performance. Among the drivers considered in the comparison, Charles Leclerc was faster only than the Aston Martin competitors, illustrating the extent of Ferrari’s straight-line disadvantage at COTA.
The issue had already emerged earlier in the weekend, when Ferrari’s Austin practice analysis highlighted stronger downforce but weaker straight-line performance.
Recorded maximum speeds can also be explored through the ScuderiaFans F1 top-speed comparison, which provides a broader view of the differences between cars. Such measurements are influenced by aerodynamic configuration, energy deployment and other running conditions, making them particularly useful when considered alongside lap-time and cornering performance.
Ferrari’s power-unit difficulties have been a recurring subject throughout the season. Formula 1’s Additional Development and Upgrade Opportunities system, known as ADUO, has provided the team with two opportunities for engine development across 2026 and 2027.
Even with those opportunities, the deficit remained an important factor at the United States Grand Prix, particularly when Ferrari’s rivals extracted additional performance during the final qualifying session.
Guenther Steiner suspects Ferrari’s rivals reveal less pace in practice
Guenther Steiner offered a possible explanation for the difference between Ferrari’s promising practice performance and its eventual qualifying result.
Speaking on the Chequered Flag podcast, the former Haas team principal suggested that Ferrari-powered cars had appeared unusually competitive during free practice at several recent Grands Prix, only to lose ground when qualifying began.
Steiner acknowledged that he had not conducted a detailed analysis of the data to establish whether the pattern was consistent. Nevertheless, he had developed the impression that Ferrari’s competitors were keeping more performance in reserve before qualifying.
He stopped short of describing the practice sessions as deliberate sandbagging. Instead, his suspicion was that rival teams were simply withholding slightly more of their available performance, whereas Ferrari appeared to show a greater proportion of its potential earlier in the weekend.
That interpretation would help explain why the Scuderia could look like a pole-position contender during practice but subsequently struggle to maintain the same relative competitiveness in Q3.
Steiner’s comments also aligned with the questions raised by Lewis Hamilton after qualifying, although the former team principal presented the idea as a personal impression rather than a conclusion established through detailed data analysis.
Ferrari’s practice expectations may be misleading, according to Guenther Steiner
Beyond the immediate qualifying result, Guenther Steiner believes the apparent differences in performance disclosure may be influencing expectations surrounding Ferrari.
When the SF-26 performs strongly during practice, the team can appear capable of challenging for pole position or victory. However, if its competitors subsequently reveal more speed during qualifying, those expectations become difficult to satisfy.
Steiner suggested that this pattern may have emerged repeatedly over recent races, leaving Ferrari looking less competitive in qualifying than its practice results had indicated.
The United States Grand Prix provided another example. The Scuderia had shown promising pace earlier in the weekend, including the encouraging performance highlighted by Charles Leclerc’s Austin FP2 benchmark. Yet neither Ferrari driver reached the front row when qualifying concluded.
The former Haas boss did not suggest that Ferrari had necessarily performed badly during the weekend. Rather, he questioned whether the team and its supporters were expecting too much from the car based on practice-session comparisons.
Charles Leclerc’s Austin podium offers Ferrari a more encouraging race result
Despite its qualifying disappointment, Ferrari recovered to secure a positive result in the United States Grand Prix. Charles Leclerc finished second, while Lewis Hamilton took fourth, demonstrating that the team remained competitive over the race distance.
Guenther Steiner recognised the value of the Monegasque driver’s podium and considered Ferrari’s race performance strong. Nevertheless, the result did not completely eliminate the concerns raised by its earlier loss of relative pace.
The Scuderia had been unable to match Mercedes during the decisive phases of the weekend, while Red Bull also remained an important rival. Ferrari’s strong Sunday performance therefore existed alongside the recurring question of why its apparent advantage in practice did not consistently carry into qualifying.
For Lewis Hamilton, the central concern remained the difference between the car’s competitiveness through the corners and the time surrendered on the straights. His assessment suggested that Ferrari was not necessarily lacking overall chassis performance, but continued to face a substantial limitation in straight-line speed.
Guenther Steiner’s interpretation adds another dimension to that problem. If rival teams are routinely revealing more performance during qualifying than Ferrari, the Scuderia’s encouraging practice sessions may offer an incomplete indication of its true competitive position.
The challenge for Ferrari is therefore twofold: addressing the established straight-line deficit while gaining a clearer understanding of how its performance compares with rivals before the final qualifying runs. Austin showed that the SF-26 could still deliver a strong Grand Prix result, but it also highlighted why the team’s early-weekend promise does not always translate into the starting positions its pace initially suggests are possible.
Leave a Reply