Mercedes may be setting the competitive benchmark with the W17 in Formula 1’s new regulatory era, but Ferrari has emerged as an important technical reference point in a very different sense. Several concepts introduced on the SF-26 have subsequently appeared in related forms on rival cars, giving Maranello an increasingly influential role in shaping some of the aerodynamic development trends of the 2026 season.
From the unusual treatment of the exhaust area to the Macarena rear wing, floor inlet details and a distinctive sidepod philosophy, the SF-26 has repeatedly explored areas of the regulations in aggressive ways. Red Bull, McLaren and other teams have since adopted comparable ideas where their own car architecture allows it. The pattern recalls another Ferrari built around a major rules reset: the highly innovative SF70-H of 2017.
Why the Ferrari SF70-H became an F1 technical reference in 2017
Ferrari’s current approach has a clear historical parallel. When Formula 1 introduced another significant technical regulation change for 2017, the most striking interpretation did not come from a car designed by Adrian Newey. Instead, it was the Ferrari SF70-H that opened an aerodynamic path the rest of the grid would gradually explore.
The decisive innovation centred on the new side-impact structures, or SIS. Their dimensions and positioning relative to the cockpit were tightly prescribed under the 2017 regulations, leaving designers with what initially appeared to be limited freedom. Ferrari nevertheless found an inventive way to use the mandatory structures as part of a much broader aerodynamic concept.
Rather than positioning the upper structure directly at the leading edge of the sidepod inlet, Maranello incorporated it within an aerodynamic element ahead of the sidepod itself. That allowed Ferrari to move the actual sidepod inlet substantially rearwards compared with the previous SF16-H.
The benefit was significant. Moving the inlet away from the disturbed airflow generated by the front tyres helped reduce its exposure to the front-tyre wake, improving the conditions in which the sidepods could operate. The arrangement also provided advantages in aerodynamic efficiency and cooling, while creating greater freedom around the front portion of the car’s bodywork.
Viewed from above, the difference between the SF16-H and SF70-H was particularly clear. The newer Ferrari featured a much greater rearward displacement of the sidepod’s leading edge, while the upper deformable structure was effectively hidden within the horizontal aerodynamic element positioned ahead of the inlet.
The solution quickly attracted attention throughout the paddock. During the remainder of 2017 and into the following season, much of the field progressively moved towards concepts influenced by Ferrari’s original interpretation.
Giorgio Piola recalls the first hint of Ferrari’s radical SF70-H
Writing on GiorgioPiolaDesign.com, Giorgio Piola recalled receiving an intriguing indication of what Ferrari had prepared before the SF70-H had even appeared publicly. At the British Autosport Awards, the renowned technical illustrator found himself at a table alongside Patrick Head, Rory Byrne and Gordon Murray as the engineers compared some of the most extreme solutions they had created during their careers.
According to Giorgio Piola’s recollection, Rory Byrne was particularly enthusiastic about Ferrari’s forthcoming car. Without revealing the technical details, the South African engineer indicated that the new single-seater contained unprecedented and highly innovative ideas, while conveying considerable optimism about the Scuderia’s prospects for the 2017 campaign.
That background makes the SF70-H an interesting comparison for the current generation. Ferrari is not dominating the 2026 championship in the way Mercedes has with the W17, yet some of the SF-26’s solutions are once again attracting close attention from its rivals.
Ferrari SF-26 exhaust concept proves difficult for rivals to copy completely
One of the first distinctive features appeared as early as the February Bahrain tests. Ferrari developed an aerodynamic arrangement around the exhaust commonly described as the FTM, or flick tail mode, exhaust concept.
The layout combines a downwash ramp beside the rear crash structure with a series of small aerodynamic elements surrounding the exhaust. These winglets are intended to direct airflow upwards and make use of the exhaust-gas flow, with the overall effect designed to increase rear downforce.
Crucially, the concept depends on the mechanical architecture beneath the bodywork. Ferrari was able to create the necessary space because the differential had been positioned further rearwards during the initial design of the SF-26.
That packaging requirement explains why Haas, which shares some mechanical components with Ferrari, has been able to reproduce the concept more extensively than other competitors. Teams with different underlying layouts cannot simply copy the entire arrangement without being constrained by their existing architecture.
Other manufacturers have nevertheless pursued part of the same aerodynamic effect by positioning winglets of different shapes behind the exhaust. The FIA has already decided to prohibit this type of solution for 2027 as part of its attempt to reduce overall aerodynamic load.
The exhaust area is therefore an example of the distinction between recognising a valuable idea and being able to reproduce it completely. Some concepts can be added during a development programme; others depend on fundamental decisions made when the car is first designed.
Ferrari Macarena rear wing starts another 2026 development trend
A second prominent SF-26 innovation is the Macarena rear wing, a concept that exploits the greater freedom provided by the FIA’s 2026 legality volume at the rear of the car. The technical group led by Loïc Serra developed the configuration to optimise the behaviour of the movable flap in straight-line mode.
The objective is to achieve a larger aerodynamic benefit when the wing opens by reducing drag more aggressively. Ferrari has continued refining the concept, including through the latest SF-26 rear-wing configuration prepared for Zandvoort.
Red Bull became the first rival to introduce a comparable interpretation. Its flap rotates in the opposite direction to Ferrari’s arrangement, but the ultimate objective is similar, and the Red Bull version produces an even larger difference between its closed and open states.
That additional effect has not come without difficulties. On the RB22, the configuration created problems under braking, with the car struggling to generate the required aerodynamic load during the initial turn-in phase and becoming prone to rotation. Ferrari’s version has not displayed the same characteristic.
McLaren has also been developing its own interpretation. The Woking team tested the concept during free practice in Budapest but had not yet chosen to race it. The track running was instead used to collect data that could be correlated with wind-tunnel development before a final version was introduced, potentially at Zandvoort.
That work forms part of a broader Dutch Grand Prix development programme, with McLaren and Ferrari both pursuing rear-end performance as the championship enters its post-summer phase. Ferrari’s own accelerated SF-26 development programme for Zandvoort extends well beyond the rear wing.
McLaren follows Ferrari direction around the SF-26 floor inlet
The floor is another area where Ferrari has introduced details that have subsequently influenced McLaren. At the inlet, the Scuderia divided the channels formed by the vertical fences through the addition of a horizontal strake.
Further outboard, Ferrari exploited the permitted FIA legality volume by increasing the width of the lateral floor-edge inlet. The intention is to manage the mass of airflow passing through this highly sensitive region more effectively.
Both ideas have since appeared on McLaren’s car. The British team is convinced that Ferrari has identified a promising development direction in this area, reinforcing the impression that the SF-26 is influencing rival thinking even while Mercedes remains ahead in outright results.
Ferrari continues to develop the same region, with further floor and rear-wing changes forming part of the Zandvoort package. The emphasis remains on extracting aerodynamic performance from areas where the 2026 regulations still leave designers useful freedom.
Why Ferrari went against the trend with larger SF-26 sidepods
The sidepods provide another example of Maranello choosing a less conventional direction. Since the Spanish Grand Prix in Barcelona, Ferrari has remodelled this area by increasing the sectional volume of the bodywork rather than continuing the widespread pursuit of ever slimmer shapes.
At first glance, making the sidepods bulkier appears counter-intuitive. The purpose, however, is to increase their lateral surface area so that the bodywork can exert greater influence over airflow disturbed by the wake coming from the front tyres.
The philosophy is connected to the outwash effect, which the 2026 regulations have heavily restricted. A larger sidepod surface offers more opportunity to manipulate the airflow travelling towards the rear of the car, allowing designers to recover part of the aerodynamic control that the regulations were specifically written to limit.
Red Bull, McLaren and several smaller teams have moved towards broadly similar solutions, making Ferrari’s approach another example of a design direction that has spread beyond Maranello.
Ferrari influences 2026 F1 development even as Mercedes leads
The significance of the SF-26 is therefore not simply determined by the championship table. Mercedes may currently have the car producing the dominant sequence of victories, but Ferrari has repeatedly introduced technical ideas that have encouraged rival teams to investigate the same areas.
The exhaust architecture, Macarena rear wing, floor inlet treatment and larger sidepods do not represent one single aerodynamic philosophy. Instead, they show how aggressively Ferrari has searched through the 2026 rulebook for opportunities across different areas of the car.
Some solutions can be copied relatively quickly, while others depend on fundamental packaging choices that were fixed much earlier in the design process. That distinction is particularly visible around the exhaust, where Ferrari’s differential position gives the SF-26 possibilities that most rivals cannot reproduce completely.
The wider development battle is also continuing. Ferrari’s technical programme for the SF-26 remains active as Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc try to close the competitive gap, with aerodynamic work at Zandvoort followed by further development in subsequent races.
There is a striking echo of 2017 in all of this. The SF70-H demonstrated that a Ferrari did not need to emerge from Adrian Newey’s drawing board to redefine how the grid interpreted a new set of regulations. Nine years later, the SF-26 is again showing that outright championship leadership and technical influence do not necessarily belong to the same car.
Leave a Reply