Reports of internal tensions at Ferrari have resurfaced as the Scuderia’s 2026 World Championship challenge has faded, but the central question goes far beyond the future of Frédéric Vasseur. The real issue is whether Ferrari currently has a complete, coherent project capable of returning the team to the top of Formula 1.
Rumours of disagreements inside Maranello tend to emerge whenever a title begins to slip away, but the latest claims carry particular weight because they have been raised by Giorgio Terruzzi, a journalist who has rarely built his reputation around chasing sensational scoops and who has previously reported internal dynamics that later proved well founded.
These reports are not entirely surprising. Two years ago, we had already gathered confirmation of tensions between Ferrari CEO Benedetto Vigna and Frédéric Vasseur, with a power struggle believed to have created friction inside the Racing Division. Now, with Ferrari effectively out of the championship fight, those cracks appear to be becoming more visible.
Yet focusing solely on whether the Ferrari team principal is under pressure risks missing the bigger picture. The more important question is whether the Scuderia has built the technical, sporting and organisational foundations required to win a World Championship rather than simply remain close enough to challenge occasionally.
Ferrari’s problem goes beyond Frédéric Vasseur
There are two opposing interpretations of Frédéric Vasseur’s position. One side argues that Ferrari needs continuity and that replacing another team principal would simply restart a cycle the team has already repeated too many times. The other places most of the responsibility for the current failure on the French manager.
The reality is probably somewhere between those two extremes. Frédéric Vasseur has made clear mistakes in sporting management, but reducing Ferrari’s problems to one individual would mean ignoring structural weaknesses that existed before his arrival and involve the wider leadership of the company and racing organisation.
That broader distinction matters because the SF-26 has not been a complete technical failure. Ferrari has produced several interesting ideas during the season, and the team’s ongoing work can be followed through the site’s Ferrari technical analysis coverage. The problem is that progress has not necessarily come in the areas carrying the greatest competitive weight under the 2026 regulations.
The Ferrari SF-26 improved in the wrong areas
From a chassis and aerodynamic perspective, the SF-26 has shown some innovative thinking. Several solutions introduced by Ferrari during the year were subsequently reinterpreted or copied in different forms by rival teams.
Among the most notable concepts were the FFTM system around the exhaust area, the so-called “Macarena Wing” and several solutions designed to manage airflow through the rear section of the car. In other words, Maranello has produced technically interesting work, and it would be wrong to suggest that the engineering department has contributed nothing of value.
The difficulty is that the 2026 regulations place such a heavy emphasis on the overall power-unit package that a strong chassis on its own is not enough. Ferrari may have found aerodynamic ideas worth pursuing, but the championship cannot be won if the rest of the technical package does not reach the same level.
This is also why the team continues to use the current campaign as part of its longer-term development process. Ferrari believes that continued SF-26 development can provide useful information for its 2027 project, but the present season has already exposed where some of the biggest deficits remain.
Ferrari’s biggest disappointment is the 2026 power unit
The most serious concern is the power unit. Ferrari is an engine manufacturer, and everyone had known for years that the 2026 regulations would reward manufacturers that arrived properly prepared for the new generation of hybrid technology.
The expected step forward has not materialised. Instead, the indications that have emerged during the season suggest Mercedes has developed the most competitive power unit on the grid, with a particularly significant advantage in electrical performance and software management.
Ferrari, by contrast, appears to be chasing. That is arguably more worrying than any weakness in one aerodynamic component because the power unit sits at the centre of the 2026 competitive picture.
The comparison is explored in greater detail in the analysis of where Ferrari’s power unit is still losing performance to Mercedes. The broader competitiveness of the German manufacturer’s package can also be followed in the analysis of the Mercedes W17’s 2026 performance.
The internal-combustion engine is no longer the whole story
Much of the public discussion still focuses almost exclusively on the internal-combustion engine, analysing cylinders, combustion efficiency and compression as though traditional engine performance remains the dominant differentiator. Under the 2026 rules, that is no longer enough to explain the complete competitive picture.
Three areas have become particularly important:
- Electrical performance: how effectively energy is recovered and then delivered back to the car.
- Software: how intelligently the power unit manages and distributes available energy around an entire lap.
- Power unit-chassis integration: how effectively the complete car exploits all of the energy available from the hybrid system.
It is precisely in these areas that Ferrari appears to have lost ground. A competitive combustion engine cannot completely compensate if electrical deployment ends too early, software management is less efficient or the complete power unit does not interact with the chassis as effectively as the benchmark package.
Qualifying remains one of Ferrari’s chronic weaknesses
Another recurring limitation concerns qualifying. Ferrari continues to struggle particularly when it needs to extract maximum performance from the softer tyre compounds over a single lap.
Paradoxically, Ferrari’s technical leadership includes expertise in tyre management, yet the SF-26 has still found it difficult to maximise the C5 and other softer compounds during qualifying. Race pace has often been considerably more competitive, but the same performance has not consistently appeared on Saturday.
That difference carries a major sporting cost. Starting further down the grid compromises strategy, track position and the ability to control a Grand Prix from the opening laps. The contrast between Ferrari’s starting positions and Sunday results can be explored through the Ferrari Qualifying & Race Performance Statistics.
The issue also affects both sides of the garage, even if Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton can experience the limitations of the car differently from one weekend to another.
Ferrari also lost an early advantage at the starts
During the opening races of the season, Ferrari had found an effective solution for managing race starts. That solution was subsequently prohibited by the FIA, removing one of the advantages the Scuderia had managed to develop.
This is also where the question of Ferrari’s political influence enters the debate. From an editorial perspective, the Scuderia once again appeared unable to protect one of its regulatory innovations, while rival teams have more frequently succeeded in defending their own technical interpretations.
It is a theme that has appeared repeatedly over the years. Technical creativity matters, but so does the ability to operate effectively within Formula 1’s political and regulatory environment once a controversial interpretation comes under scrutiny.
Frédéric Vasseur’s biggest criticism concerns driver management
If there is one area where criticism can be directed more specifically at Frédéric Vasseur, it is the management of the Lewis Hamilton-Charles Leclerc partnership during the championship fight.
When one driver is realistically eliminated from title contention, a team fighting for the World Championship would normally begin concentrating more of its strategic attention and resources on the driver who still has a viable opportunity.
Ferrari did not make that shift. Only a few races ago, the Ferrari team principal was still publicly defending the freedom given to both drivers. In principle, allowing two elite drivers to compete equally is understandable. In a championship situation requiring decisive choices, however, that philosophy becomes harder to justify.
Continuing to treat both sides of the garage in exactly the same way can mean dividing strategic opportunities, points and resources at a time when the championship demands a clearer hierarchy. That does not make the driver policy the sole reason Ferrari failed to fight for the title, but it remains one of the more direct management decisions for which the team principal can be held accountable.
Ferrari may also have a mentality problem
Beyond outright performance, there is another concern: the culture and mindset within the organisation.
In a recent interview, a Ferrari technician described the new car as “iconic” because it had been created for a completely new set of regulations, even drawing a comparison with Ferrari machinery from the Michael Schumacher era.
That comparison is questionable. The first Ferrari designed for Michael Schumacher was the F310 of 1996, followed by the F310B in 1997 and the F300 in 1998. Those cars were fundamentally different from one another and were created in a technological era almost three decades removed from the SF-26.
Comparing a 2026 Formula 1 car with one from that period as evidence of technological superiority says relatively little. Modern cars inevitably benefit from far more advanced tools, materials, simulation capabilities and accumulated engineering knowledge.
The relevant measure is not whether the SF-26 is more sophisticated than a Ferrari from the 1990s. The relevant measure is whether it can win the championship against the cars competing today. At present, the answer is that the SF-26 is not a World Championship-winning package.
A strong chassis can win races but not necessarily a championship
Ferrari can still win individual Grands Prix. On circuits where power-unit performance carries less weight and chassis behaviour becomes more important, the SF-26 can remain highly competitive.
That does not change the overall picture. A balanced car can produce isolated victories, but a World Championship requires the strongest possible combination across every major performance area:
- power unit;
- chassis;
- aerodynamics;
- tyre management;
- strategy;
- team organisation.
Ferrari currently does not appear to excel simultaneously across all of those areas. The car can be strong enough in certain conditions to challenge for wins, but the complete operation has not yet demonstrated the consistency required to dominate a championship campaign.
Reported internal divisions would make Ferrari’s task even harder
If the reports of internal tensions are accurate, Frédéric Vasseur also faces a leadership problem. During his time in charge, the team principal is believed to have built a management group containing several trusted figures from the French-speaking engineering and management environment.
The likely objective was to create a compact leadership structure around people he trusted. According to several journalistic reconstructions and internal accounts, however, the effect may instead have been to deepen divisions between groups that already existed inside the Racing Division.
For a Ferrari organisation trying to rebuild itself into a championship-winning team, that would be particularly damaging. Technical departments, sporting management and senior leadership need to operate in the same direction rather than becoming separated into competing internal factions.
The real question is whether Ferrari has a championship project
Ultimately, every strand of the debate leads back to the same question: does Ferrari currently have a credible project for winning the Formula 1 World Championship?
At present, the answer appears negative. Recruiting Lewis Hamilton, pairing him with Charles Leclerc, placing Frédéric Vasseur in charge, producing an aerodynamically interesting car but not the benchmark power unit, losing political influence and continuing to experience reported internal tensions paints the picture of a team progressing through successive corrections rather than executing a strategy established years in advance.
That is the most worrying aspect. Ferrari does not lack talent, resources or individual technical ideas. The problem is whether those elements are being assembled into one unified long-term plan.
Would replacing Frédéric Vasseur actually solve Ferrari’s problems?
The answer is not straightforward. Frédéric Vasseur does not appear to be the principal architect of every problem affecting Ferrari, but neither has the Ferrari team principal so far transformed the Scuderia into an organisation capable of winning a World Championship.
Managing Ferrari is probably one of the most difficult jobs in Formula 1. The role requires departments to be united, internal and external political pressure to be absorbed, a winning culture to be built and unpopular decisions to be made when the sporting situation demands them.
Replacing the team principal alone would therefore guarantee nothing. If the deeper weaknesses remain unchanged, changing the person at the top could simply begin another cycle without addressing the reasons Ferrari continues to fall short.
Ferrari needs more than occasional wins and clever updates
Ferrari can continue winning individual Grands Prix. It can introduce interesting upgrades and even build one of the most sophisticated cars in the paddock. None of those achievements, however, automatically creates a championship-winning operation.
Without a benchmark power unit, a perfectly aligned technical direction, strong leadership and a mentality genuinely centred on winning the title, Ferrari risks repeating a pattern seen too often in recent years: participating in the championship battle without controlling it.
The problem, in other words, is not simply Frédéric Vasseur. The deeper concern is that Ferrari still does not appear to possess a complete and coherent project capable of returning the Scuderia to the status of Formula 1 World Champion.
Leave a Reply