Telemetry data: how Montreal track conditions highlight strengths and weaknesses of SF-24, MCL38 and W15. The strengths and weaknesses of the F1 cars were evident in Canada.

A session that ended with the top two drivers recording the same time to the thousandth of a second, the poleman achieving the best time on used tires, and three cars within 20 thousandths. This is just a brief summary of how unusual the Montreal qualifying session was, yet the strengths and weaknesses of the cars were still evident.

In the third free practice session at the 4.361-kilometre Circuit Gilles-Villeneuve in Montreal, we saw a W15 with a lot of potential and wondered if changing track conditions would push the Brackley team’s car out of its ideal operating window, which has always been narrow and sensitive on the Mercedes or if Lewis Hamilton and George Russell would manage to remain competitive. In reality, only George Russell seemed able to put everything together, finding a significantly better level of grip than Hamilton, who mentioned in post-qualifying interviews that the car behaved differently than in free practice. This isn’t new for Mercedes, with the car being highly sensitive to varying external conditions and therefore tending to perform perfectly in one session and poorly in the next without setup changes. However, George Russell found the right setup to keep the car within the optimal range, likely helped by the “green” track conditions after the rain before the qualifying session in Canada, which somewhat reset to the conditions of the third free practice.

In the end, in the strange Q3 session, George Russell set the pole time on a set of used tires, three-tenths slower than in Q2, with crucial help from Alex Albon. The Williams driver was returning to the pits but maintained a high speed of over 300 kilometers per hour on the return straight. Russell found himself perfectly positioned behind Albon at the hairpin exit and drafted behind him until the final chicane, reaching a top speed of 334 kilometers per hour and gaining about a tenth on Max Verstappen. The young Englishman spoke about a car that has changed significantly with the latest updates, but to confirm this, we must wait for the race: Mercedes’ pace simulations have never seemed exceptional, and the unpredictable nature of Q3, where conditions and especially the cars’ response to environmental inputs were so variable, calls for caution, particularly seeing that Lewis Hamilton ended up with the same problems as before. Let’s look at the data comparing the top three for a clearer idea of the others’ performances.

The telemetry data shows that Max Verstappen was actually ahead until turn 7, thanks to a phenomenal first sector. A poor exit from turns 6-7 and notable traction from Russell in that segment brought the Englishman level with the Dutchman. They were practically even at the exit of the hairpin, with Russell gaining a tenth thanks to Albon’s slipstream. Verstappen had a great final chicane but it wasn’t enough. Generally, we noted that even in Canada, the RB20 struggled with curbs and some of the track’s bumpier sections, but the countermeasures implemented by Max Verstappen himself are bearing fruit. The Dutchman seems to have found a good compromise between setup, trajectory choice, and driving style to extract maximum performance from the car, minimizing the effects of the suspension’s rigidity, and this nearly put him on pole (while Perez in the other Red Bull finished P16).

Once again, the Woking car proves to be the most complete, with Lando Norris just 21 thousandths off pole and Oscar Piastri right behind his teammate. The cars of the team led by Andrea Stella were the only ones to finish qualifying with both in the top five, partly benefiting from the cooler temperatures, which generally suit them, and a higher downforce aerodynamic setup, as revealed by our calculations and their below-average top speed. Even in pace simulations, McLaren seemed fast, and this, combined with the strategic advantage of having two closely positioned cars, makes the McLaren duo ones to watch in the race.

Regarding the poor performance of the Maranello team, which saw both drivers eliminated in Q2, the impression, as directly noted by Charles Leclerc without mincing words, is that the SF24 never had peak moments in qualifying but instead spent the entire session in “survival” positions. A few small mistakes were enough to result in elimination. The evident lack of grip points to the tires, as when they do not “fire up,” the car becomes weak in all phases of the lap, from traction to braking to cornering speed.

Analyzing the data, the time loss of Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz compared to George Russell (who set the fastest time in Q2) showed a steady increase throughout the lap, indicating a car with clearly inferior tire performance. This is perhaps not too surprising, given that in Canada, two factors arose simultaneously: the temperatures were relatively low due to the bad weather, and the track’s morphology causes cars to experience most accelerations longitudinally, in traction and braking, rather than laterally, as the corners are generally low-speed. This inherently transmits little energy to the tires, as the lateral deformation of the carcass in corners occurs for a short fraction of time during the lap.

Combining this with an SF24 that already struggles to heat the tires due to the nature of its design results in the disappointing performance seen on track, with difficulty in qualifying already apparent during the third free practice session, which the Maranello team evidently could not rectify. Ferrari’s difficulty appeared entirely in the single lap, as the long-run feedback was not as bad. However, such a qualifying result risks compromising the entire Canadian weekend for the Maranello team. For those wondering why the updates did not yield results, the reality is that the package brought to Imola did not focus on improving qualifying performance. In conditions like those encountered in Montreal, the old issue of tire heating resurfaced fully. Tire inflation pressures might also have played an important role, as they are directly linked to temperature and performance, which Frederic Vasseur mentioned several times in interviews after qualifying.

Finally, we noticed a very angry Charles Leclerc after the session, which left us somewhat surprised since there were no blatant strategic errors by the team, as the Monegasque driver himself later stated. Usually, when the car lacks performance, the drivers (especially Charles Leclerc) tend to be disappointed but not necessarily angry with the team, suggesting something particularly upset the Monegasque driver. Perhaps (but this is just a hypothesis), the Monegasque had requested setup changes after the third free practice to improve single-lap performance that were not granted.

All the factors we’ve listed lead to a Grand Prix that once again promises to be very interesting. At the front, George Russell will fight like a lion to maintain the lead, with Max Verstappen and the two McLarens likely having their chances for victory. Behind them, the Ferrari cars are called to make a possible comeback, with the uncertainty of rain potentially making the race “crazy” and Safety Cars, a common occurrence on the Montreal track, possibly shuffling the deck even more.

Source: FUnoanalisitecnica