Aston Martin arrived at the Silverstone Grand Prix weekend under a cloud of uncertainty. Adrian Newey openly admitted that the AMR26 project had been compromised from the very beginning, developed behind schedule and brought to the track with significant compromises.
As a result, the first version of the AMR26 has never enjoyed a genuine technical development path. The car is overweight, features an extremely aggressive aerodynamic philosophy with few alternative concepts explored, and has been further compromised by integration issues with the Honda power unit and by the solutions required to contain the vibrations discovered during the early stages of development.
The outcome has been clear on track. Aston Martin has fallen well behind the leading teams, with its race pace now more than four seconds per lap slower than the benchmark cars.
Silverstone data exposes Honda’s limitations
However, Silverstone allows a deeper analysis than simply looking at the stopwatch. Comparing Kimi Antonelli’s and Fernando Alonso’s qualifying laps highlights the true scale of Aston Martin’s technical problems.
The deployment analysis model, built using publicly available data, should be regarded as an estimate rather than an official measurement. Even so, it reveals an important fact: both Antonelli and Alonso reach the FIA-imposed limit of 6.5 MJ of deployable electrical energy over a qualifying lap.
The difference therefore is not the amount of energy available, but how efficiently that energy is converted into lap time.
The stopwatch tells the first part of the story. Antonelli recorded a 1:28.111 lap, while Alonso stopped the clock at 1:33.025, a deficit of almost five seconds. More revealing, however, is how that gap is created. Both drivers use essentially the same amount of electrical energy, yet achieve completely different performance levels.
The missing ingredient is likely the internal combustion engine, which remains Honda’s biggest weakness. According to FIA estimates, the Japanese engine currently produces between 8% and 10% less power than the benchmark Red Bull power unit.
Energy deployment tells the story
The figures also reveal a significant difference in deployment strategy.
Antonelli is able to use a substantial portion of his electrical energy at speeds above 280 km/h, deploying approximately 2.79 MJ in that speed range with the Mercedes.
Alonso, by comparison, uses only 1.14 MJ above 280 km/h because Aston Martin concentrates much more of its deployment at low and medium speeds. Alonso deploys 2.42 MJ below 240 km/h and 2.93 MJ between 240 and 280 km/h.
The clearest example is the Hangar Straight. There, Fernando Alonso actually deploys more electrical energy than Antonelli—1.415 MJ compared with 0.763 MJ.
Yet the stopwatch tells the opposite story. The Aston Martin covers the straight in 11.372 seconds, while the Mercedes completes it in just 10.861 seconds. More than half a second is lost on a single straight because of the Honda engine’s power deficit and because valuable electrical energy is no longer available where it would make the greatest difference.
The average speed comparison is equally revealing. Antonelli averages 288.4 km/h through the Hangar Straight, while Alonso manages only 276.5 km/h—a gap of almost 12 km/h. Peak speed also favours the Mercedes W17, reaching 305 km/h compared to the Aston Martin’s 299 km/h.
The problem goes far beyond Honda
Despite those figures, Aston Martin’s difficulties cannot be blamed solely on the power unit, even if it is estimated to be around 90 horsepower down compared with the Red Bull and Mercedes engines.
Ferrari provides the perfect comparison. The SF-26 also runs a power unit that is not considered the strongest on the grid, yet it has already claimed two victories thanks to an outstanding chassis and aerodynamic package.
That is where Aston Martin’s biggest weakness becomes apparent. The team is not simply lacking engine power—it also lacks a car capable of making the most of the power and electrical energy available.
If the car struggles through the corners, it requires more electrical deployment on corner exit. Likewise, if aerodynamic drag remains too high and the aerodynamic platform is unable to maintain efficiency at high speed, even recovering additional electrical energy produces only limited gains on the stopwatch.
Newey’s chassis also falls short
The problem is therefore not limited to the straights. The AMR26 consistently loses time compared with the leading cars in virtually every section of the circuit.
The high-speed Maggotts-Becketts-Chapel sequence offers a striking example. Alonso loses as much as 0.648 seconds there alone while averaging more than 12 km/h less than Antonelli through the section.
Those figures underline that Aston Martin’s shortcomings extend beyond the Honda engine and raise serious questions about Adrian Newey’s chassis concept, which many inside the Silverstone-based team had hoped would become one of the five strongest on the grid.
Hungary and Zandvoort will be decisive
It is therefore no surprise that Aston Martin plans to intervene on two separate fronts over the next two Grands Prix.
First, the Hungarian Grand Prix will see the arrival of what is effectively an AMR26B. Rather than correcting a single weakness, this comprehensive upgrade package is intended to restore balance to a project that currently lacks any genuine strengths. The team expects the package to deliver an impressive average gain of around two seconds per lap in race pace.
Then, at the Dutch Grand Prix in Zandvoort, Aston Martin expects Honda’s long-awaited engine upgrade to arrive, with an anticipated performance improvement worth approximately half a second per lap.
The Hungary-Zandvoort sequence is therefore expected to be decisive not only for the remainder of Aston Martin’s 2026 campaign but also for laying the foundations for next season, provided the encouraging simulator data generated at Silverstone is confirmed on track.
A defining test for Aston Martin
For Aston Martin, Budapest will not simply mark the arrival of another upgrade package. It will represent the first genuine examination of the team’s new technical direction.
The AMR26B must demonstrate whether the work carried out back at the factory has finally produced a more credible platform—lighter, more efficient, more stable and, above all, less dependent on aggressive energy deployment strategies that currently fail to generate enough performance.
The Honda power unit upgrade expected at Zandvoort may complete the package, but it cannot compensate for any remaining chassis or aerodynamic deficiencies.
Silverstone delivered one clear lesson: possessing electrical energy is not enough. Just as Mercedes has demonstrated throughout the season, success comes from having a chassis capable of converting that energy into performance at exactly the right moment and in exactly the right part of the circuit.
Leave a Reply