2026 Scuderia Ferrari HP F1 Team

[woocasz]

Second ADUO doesnt´t seem impressive. They´re lucky Piastri screwed up both Mclarens

actually, it is impressive
only 0,15s behind Russell, on a track where 75% of the lap is driven at full throttle.
its a step forward.

(bad news is Mercedes bring his ADUO update engine to Baku)

[matt_b]

Second ADUO doesnt´t seem impressive. They´re lucky Piastri screwed up both Mclarens

On this track, being only that far back is ok

Exactly its actually a very impressive upgrade, this track was always going to be Mercedes most dominant track on the calendar yet its only a 2 tenth gap, the remaining tracks will be interesting.

[Artur Craft]

I did not see the whole lap but it seems Gasly had very little tow(I saw the end of Chandok´s analysis) and still put it on pole 0.2s clear off the Ferraris. We saw how poor Lewis´ first lap was withou a tow, like 0.8s slower than pole. The race will give a better hint, but if Ferrari fall behind on race pace, we can declare the new ADUO to be unsucessfull. Audi was way too close on Q2, it seems their ADUO was more effective, eventhough that is to be expected as their engine is much worse than Ferrari which will have diminishing returns as a result

[Luscion]

Charles and Lewis once again very close in quali. i assume Piastri is getting a penalty so p3 and p4 isnt a bad starting position i guess

[Luscion]

I did not see the whole lap but it seems Gasly had very little tow and still put it on pole 0.2s clear off the Ferraris. We saw how poor Lewis´ first lap was withou a tow, like 0.8s slower than pole. The race will give a better hint, but if Ferrari fall behind on race pace, we can declare the new ADUO to be unsucessfull. Audi was way too close on Q2, it seems their ADUO was more effective, eventhough that is to be expected as their engine is much worse than Ferrari which will have diminishing returns as a result

i expect Gasly to fall down the order come sunday

[Artur Craft]

i expect Gasly to fall down the order come sunday

I expect the same but what about Russell and the Mclarens, I think they can outrace Ferrari without effort. Tomorrow, we´ll see a better picture. Further more, they reduced the energy to 5 MJ here to reduce super clipping, so I guess that helps to hinder Mercedes

[f1316]

Charles and Lewis once again very close in quali. i assume Piastri is getting a penalty so p3 and p4 isnt a bad starting position i guess

Yeah, this is what I’m waiting for - I would probably have taken a second row lockout, especially after Q2 when we were nowhere. Gasly will surely slide down during the race so I think we’re in an ok position to fight Russell with both car (perhaps splitting the strategy?).

Just need a good start and hopefully not getting slowed down by Gasly.

Tbh to be this close at Monza ain’t half bad - even though our hopes may have been higher - because if we can be in the ballpark on the most power sensitive of all tracks, we ought to be strong elsewhere.

[j_ste]

Second ADUO doesnt´t seem impressive. They´re lucky Piastri screwed up both Mclarens

actually, it is impressive
only 0,15s behind Russell, on a track where 75% of the lap is driven at full throttle.
its a step forward.

(bad news is Mercedes bring his ADUO update engine to Baku)

Will that mean another penalty for Kimi?

[woocasz]

Second ADUO doesnt´t seem impressive. They´re lucky Piastri screwed up both Mclarens

actually, it is impressive
only 0,15s behind Russell, on a track where 75% of the lap is driven at full throttle.
its a step forward.

(bad news is Mercedes bring his ADUO update engine to Baku)

Will that mean another penalty for Kimi?

yes
and for Russell as well

[Luscion]

Charles and Lewis once again very close in quali. i assume Piastri is getting a penalty so p3 and p4 isnt a bad starting position i guess

Yeah, this is what I’m waiting for - I would probably have taken a second row lockout, especially after Q2 when we were nowhere. Gasly will surely slide down during the race so I think we’re in an ok position to fight Russell with both car (perhaps splitting the strategy?).

Just need a good start and hopefully not getting slowed down by Gasly.

Tbh to be this close at Monza ain’t half bad - even though our hopes may have been higher - because if we can be in the ballpark on the most power sensitive of all tracks, we ought to be strong elsewhere.

Yup on a track that exposes the engine deficit the most, both drivers being 2 tenths off pole is really good. i could see Ferrari challenging for poles and wins on more "normal" tracks now

[Luscion]

Fred Vasseur

"We decided to start the first stint with worn tires, but we then encountered a battery problem and nearly got knocked out. That said, it was a good warning ahead of the next session, since we made it through. But it was very tight, because when ten cars are bunched up within two tenths, you're really on the limit."

"Anything can happen, but we knew it would be extremely tough to beat Russell, who benefited from Kimi's slipstream. We expected the same for Verstappen and had to keep him behind us. We knew that at Monza, the fans push us along, but it would be difficult given the circuit's layout. In any case, we should be starting from third and fourth places, which is a good option for tomorrow's race."

"The slipstream? There are two options: either you position yourself in the pack and benefit from a positive effect on the straight, followed by a negative one in the turns; or, if you have a penalized car, you can do what Mercedes did for Russell or Red Bull for Verstappen. If you give it a burst of acceleration on the straight, it's very powerful and effective. But in the end, I prefer having both cars on the second row. Let's take the positive from this day. Even though it would have been fantastic for the fans, we weren't expecting pole today. In any case, we're not far off; in these circumstances, it's not a bad result and it's a good opportunity for tomorrow.

Charles -

"I'm very disappointed, honestly. We didn't drive well; there were a lot of mistakes and problems during qualifying, first with the engine, then with other elements. We can only blame ourselves, and we're going to try to understand why we encountered all these issues only during qualifying, because normally, we manage to anticipate this kind of problem during free practice."

"I'm almost certain that, from what I've heard in the paddock, everyone encountered some difficulties, because it's one of the most challenging circuits for optimizing the Power Unit. But that's not an excuse. Pierre and Alpine did everything perfectly, and I think they surprised everyone in the paddock with impeccable work. I'm actually very happy for Pierre, but now it's up to us to try to make up for what we lost today."

"I don't think pole position was feasible, but a better grid spot probably was, and we need to aim to make the most of everything, which we didn't do today. We'll be struggling in the straights, we have to be aware of that, and it'll make things tricky for us because we'll have to use the boost to try to defend, but that means the other straights will become difficult afterward. It won't be easy, but I'll do everything I can to try to pull off a miracle. We managed it in 2024 and 2019; I think about it every time I come here, so we're going to give it a shot."

"I think they (Mercedes) are very, very strong in the straights. We're very strong in the corners, but there are a lot of straights here, so we'll be very exposed on those sections and it'll be hard to attack. That said, it's also true that deployment can make a huge difference, for better or worse. We need to be clever and see where the situation takes us."

Lewis -

"It was really very difficult. The car was working really well during free practice, and then, in qualifying, I didn't change anything, so I felt confident for Q1, which went well. Then, we stayed waiting, and we waited a long time in the pit lane for the first lap in Q2, and for some reason, we didn't have the pace. I don't know why, whether it was the pressure or the tire temperatures... We need to look into that."

"Then, my Q3 performance was pretty catastrophic. I found myself all alone, with no one around. When you follow another car, you arrive several corners earlier, the braking distance adjusts, it's all about the rhythm and I completely lost it on my first attempt in Q3. On the second attempt, the lap wasn't catastrophic, but as I said, the references were different and I wasn't able to make the most of it."

"We have a really fantastic car, I'm convinced of that. Ahead of us, there are only Mercedes engines, so I think we've done a good job to be as close to them as we are. But they're still gaining several tenths on the straight."

"We have to do our best. Hopefully we'll find circuits that don't rely too much on power, but I'm really grateful to the guys at the factory because they brought an update. They're giving it their all, it's just the situation we're in. We keep progressing and we have to attack full throttle. Everything has to be perfect tomorrow."

[atanatizante]

Second ADUO doesnt´t seem impressive. They´re lucky Piastri screwed up both Mclarens

Qualifying speed figures attached below for reference






Monza qualifying top speeds: what they may tell us about PU performance beyond ICE peak power

Looking at the qualifying speed tables, the first thing that stands out is how strongly the Mercedes-powered cars cluster near the top.

From the screenshots:

Sector 1
Mercedes: P1–P8
RBR-Ford: P9, P11, P12, P17
Audi: P10, P13
Ferrari: P14, P15, P16, P18, P19, P20
Honda: P21, P22

Sector 2
Mercedes: P1–P7, P12
Audi: P8, P10
Ferrari: P9, P13, P15, P17, P18, P19
RBR-Ford: P11, P14, P16, P20
Honda: P21, P22

Finish line
Mercedes: P1, P2, P3, P5, P7, P10, P11, P16
Audi: P4, P6
RBR-Ford: P8, P12, P15, P20
Ferrari: P9, P13, P14, P17, P18, P19
Honda: P21, P22

Speed trap
Mercedes: P1, P2, P3, P4, P7, P8, P11, P13
Ferrari: P5, P6, P10, P15, P17, P19
Audi: P9, P12
RBR-Ford: P14, P16, P18, P20
Honda: P21, P22

Obviously, this is not an ICE dyno sheet. Drag level, tow, gearing, active-aero state, SOC at the measurement point and deployment strategy all matter. Still, the grouping is difficult to ignore.

The interesting part is that FIA's ADUO assessment is explicitly based on ICE performance, not on complete PU performance. Red Bull-Ford remains the ICE benchmark, while Mercedes was originally assessed in the 2–4% deficit bracket. FIA itself stresses that ADUO monitors the ICE component.

At the same time, even rival manufacturers have publicly suggested that the on-track PU hierarchy may be different. Audi's Jonathan Wheatley said earlier this year that they regarded Mercedes as the leading powertrain, despite the FIA ICE ranking.

That distinction may be particularly important under the 2026 rules.

The hypothesis I find most convincing is that Mercedes may not have optimised primarily for absolute ICE peak power, but for the usable power/energy envelope over the lap. A slightly weaker ICE at its absolute peak can still produce a stronger complete PU if it operates in a wider favourable rpm/load window, supports better harvesting, and allows longer or better-positioned electrical deployment.

This also brings partial-load harvesting into the discussion. Under the 2026 architecture, harvesting is no longer simply a question of recovering kinetic energy under heavy braking. Energy can also be recovered under partial load, so the PU controller can effectively trade some mechanical output in a less valuable part of the lap for electrical energy that can later be deployed where it gives a larger lap-time benefit.

The important point is therefore not just how much energy can be recovered, but where in the lap SOC is created and where it is spent.

A PU that reaches a long straight with 0.3–0.5 MJ more usable energy can deploy a substantial extra amount of electrical power exactly where it matters. That can easily outweigh a modest ICE peak-power deficit.

This is why I would be careful with statements such as "RBR-Ford has the most powerful engine, therefore it has the strongest PU." It may have the strongest ICE peak, while Mercedes could still have the better integrated energy system.

Ferrari ADUO2: perhaps the wrong question is “how many horsepower?”

This is also why I am increasingly sceptical that Ferrari's Monza ADUO2 should be judged mainly by the reported +10 to +15 hp figure.

The reports around the upgrade mention a revised turbocharger, combustion-chamber work, a different power curve, a new Shell fuel and, importantly, an improvement in the hybrid charging phase. Motorsport.com specifically reported that the objective was not only additional ICE power, but a different power curve and better hybrid recharge behaviour.

That may be much more significant than the headline horsepower number.

If Ferrari's previous weakness was partly that the ICE operated in a less favourable rpm/load region for energy management, then reshaping the torque/power curve could improve the complete PU even without a dramatic increase in peak kW.

Likewise, turbo work does not necessarily mean "bigger turbo = more boost = more power". Changing turbine/compressor geometry can alter efficiency islands, back-pressure, transient response and the rpm/load range in which the ICE operates efficiently. Reports vary on the precise hardware, which is why I would treat the exact turbine dimensions and blade changes as paddock information rather than confirmed fact. What is much better supported is the intent to improve PU efficiency and charging, not only the dyno peak.

The Shell fuel may fit the same philosophy.

I doubt the really interesting gain is simply higher fuel energy content. Under the current energy-flow framework, that avenue is heavily constrained. The more useful gains may be in combustion quality, knock margin, vaporisation characteristics and charge cooling.

That matters especially if Ferrari is deliberately running the 2026 engine in a relatively aggressive thermal window.

If the new fuel increases knock resistance and/or charge-cooling capability, the benefit may not show itself primarily as an extra 10–15 hp for a few seconds in Q3. It could instead allow the PU to maintain a more aggressive calibration for longer without reaching thermal limits.

And that becomes especially valuable in race conditions:

high ambient and track temperatures;
reduced cooling in dirty air;
repeated full-load operation;
battery and inverter temperatures rising over a stint;
less opportunity to use an extreme one-lap thermal map.

This is where I think Ferrari's strategy may be more interesting than the qualifying speed tables initially suggest.

Ferrari may have targeted sustained PU performance rather than qualifying peak

Leclerc already indicated that Monza required a compromise and that Ferrari had to consider the race rather than optimise everything for one qualifying lap.

The Friday long-run data also suggested Ferrari was relatively more competitive over race simulations than the raw straight-line speed hierarchy would imply.

So one possible interpretation is that Ferrari did not use ADUO2 simply to chase Mercedes' qualifying peak.

Instead, the target may have been:

less peak-power deficit + wider efficient operating window + improved harvesting + longer deployment + better thermal sustainability.

In other words, optimise the area under the PU power curve, not merely its highest point.

A simplified example:

RBR-Ford may have the stronger ICE peak.

Mercedes may have slightly less ICE peak power but can spend more of the lap at a favourable rpm/load point, harvest more effectively and deploy electric power for longer.

Ferrari's ADUO2 may be an attempt to move in the same direction.

This could explain why the Ferrari-powered cars do not look spectacular in every qualifying speed measurement, while the upgrade can still be valuable over a race distance.

The fuel question may matter more on Sunday than on Saturday

This is the part I find most interesting.

If the Shell development gives Ferrari a greater combustion/thermal margin, the performance gain could be disproportionately useful during a race rather than in Q3.

Instead of:

+15 hp peak

the practical benefit might be closer to:

"retain a higher PU output for longer before thermal derating or energy-management compromises become necessary."

That is a very different type of gain.

It could mean:

a slightly more aggressive race ICE map;
less thermal derating in traffic;
more freedom in partial-load harvesting;
a better SOC profile over the lap;
more electrical deployment late in the straights;
and potentially less performance fade over a stint.

This would also fit with the reports that Ferrari's revised engine has a different power curve and is intended to improve the hybrid charging phase, not merely increase maximum output.

My working hypothesis for the race

So, based on the qualifying speed distribution, the FIA ICE ranking and the available ADUO2 information, my current working hypothesis would be:

Mercedes still appears to have the strongest complete PU package, even if Red Bull-Ford remains the ICE benchmark.

And Ferrari's Monza upgrade may be aimed less at beating that benchmark in absolute peak power and more at improving the total energy balance of the car over a lap and over a stint.

If that is true, the things to watch in the race are not just speed-trap numbers.

I would look at:

Ferrari's speed at the end of long straights late in a stint, clipping behaviour, relative pace in dirty air, and whether the Mercedes advantage grows or remains stable as PU temperatures rise.

If Ferrari can remain closer to Mercedes over longer stints than the qualifying top-speed hierarchy would suggest, then ADUO2 may be doing exactly what it was designed to do — just not in the way that the headline horsepower figure implies.

[AR3-GP]

[sucof]

Qualifying speed figures attached below for reference....

Exactly what I tried to argue earlier here in the forum, with surprisingly low success.
The current powertrain formula is not about peak HP, and honestly, it was never really that either. But now this is even more so.
This powertrain has many elements which you have to harmonise so the overall performance will be higher. The engine can be looked at like a constant speed generator in some hybrid cars, which is done to achieve the best overall efficiency.
You will find certain rpm-s where you can optimise everything so you can charge your battery as well as reach top speeds, so your one lap overall performance will be higher.
Just like race performance can be different between teams kinda regardless of peak ice hp.

I also noticed since a few races that Mercedes seemed to be lot stronger in qualifying than in overall race pace, compared to the competition. "party mode" philosophy is still strong there
So we shall see here in the race, how Ferrari will perform, in the hope they put more emphasis on the race pace with this new engine update.

[sucof]

Is there any news in this? I thought he starts the first race with this mindset by default