McLaren team principal Andrea Stella has offered one of the clearest technical explanations yet of the performance gap separating the MCL40 from Mercedes. According to the Italian engineer, roughly 30% of the deficit originates on the straights, while the remaining 70% is generated through the corners.
The analysis also highlights one of the biggest strengths of the Mercedes W17: its ability to combine excellent aerodynamic efficiency with strong downforce. The Silver Arrows have managed to produce a car that creates plenty of grip in the corners while maintaining exceptionally low drag on the straights, allowing it to achieve higher top speeds while using less electrical energy. Despite that, McLaren’s race pace in Austria was considerably stronger than the final classification might suggest.
Austria paints a different picture from a year ago
Twelve months ago, McLaren left the Austrian Grand Prix after a dominant one-two finish, with the MCL39 standing out for its exceptional tyre management. Ferrari admitted at the time that its biggest challenge was not simply matching McLaren’s pace, but understanding why it could only do so when the Woking team was managing its tyres while the Scuderia was pushing flat out.
One year later, both the regulations and the competitive order have changed significantly. Ironically, the current MCL40 still has room for improvement in exactly those areas that once made its predecessor so formidable: aerodynamic load and tyre management. This is not because McLaren now suffers excessive tyre degradation, but because it no longer enjoys the clear advantage it held throughout much of the 2025 season.
However, those are not the only reasons preventing McLaren from consistently challenging Mercedes again following its impressive performance in Miami. The Austrian Grand Prix, despite not being an ideal circuit for the strengths of the MCL40, provided several revealing technical clues.
Oscar Piastri lost only three seconds to George Russell over 45 laps
Paradoxically, the race tells a more encouraging story than the final results suggest. Oscar Piastri finished fourth, around 22 seconds behind race winner George Russell, but that number does not accurately reflect the Australian’s true pace.
Most of the gap was created during the opening stint, when Piastri became trapped in heavy traffic and was forced into several battles that cost him valuable time. By the moment he made his pit stop—interestingly on the very same lap as George Russell—he was already approximately 15 seconds behind the Mercedes.
During the closing laps, Piastri also lost another four seconds as he no longer needed to push, while George Russell increased his pace to keep Max Verstappen behind. Those circumstances make the final 22-second margin appear far larger than it really was.
From the first pit stop until lap 67, Piastri actually lost only around three seconds to the winning Mercedes despite having to fight both Charles Leclerc and Lewis Hamilton on track. While George Russell was arguably the slowest of the three front-runners—both Max Verstappen and Andrea Kimi Antonelli displayed significantly stronger pace during the second half of the race—the figures still represent an encouraging sign for McLaren, especially with Silverstone expected to suit the MCL40’s strengths through high-speed corners.
Thirty percent of the qualifying deficit comes on the straights
While McLaren confirmed itself as at least the third-fastest team in race trim, qualifying exposed the areas where the MCL40 still needs significant development.
Previous analyses had already indicated that the Woking team lacked something during acceleration zones and along the longest straights. Ferrari continues to generate substantial downforce, while Red Bull also demonstrated strong top-speed performance.
Austria, however, highlighted an even more striking characteristic: just how efficient Mercedes has made the W17 from an aerodynamic perspective. The car not only generates impressive downforce but also carries remarkably little drag down the straights.
Of course, aerodynamic efficiency is not the only factor involved. McLaren and Mercedes use different gearbox ratios, with the MCL40 running shorter gearing and the W17 adopting longer ratios, leading to different acceleration characteristics. On top of that comes each team’s energy deployment strategy, with the two power units managing electrical energy differently throughout the lap.
Taking all these elements into account, Andrea Stella confirmed that McLaren still loses around 30% of its overall performance deficit on the straights, while the remaining 70% comes in the corners, where the MCL40 simply generates less aerodynamic load than the Mercedes.
“The gap separating us from Mercedes has consistently been around three to four tenths of a second, with a fairly clear split: approximately 70% comes from the corners and the remaining 30% from the straights. In the corners, the reason is obvious because their car generates more downforce than ours. That is an area we are working on, and we already have concrete developments that will arrive on track.”
Mercedes combines downforce with outstanding efficiency
“The 30% that we lose on the straights could partly be related to additional drag, but we are also analysing how we use the power unit. The speed deficit is significant. You only have to look at the GPS data to see that we are losing at least one to one-and-a-half tenths on the straights. That is an area we need to investigate thoroughly to understand exactly where it comes from and how we can solve it.”
For that reason, McLaren is also developing its own version of a flexible rear wing concept, although Stella made it clear that it is not considered a game-changing solution.
Instead, the team’s priority remains generating more downforce before focusing on reducing drag. Mercedes’ ability to combine both qualities is precisely what makes the W17 so competitive. Greater aerodynamic efficiency on the straights also means using less electrical energy, creating further performance gains over an entire lap.
McLaren has repeatedly demonstrated in recent years that it is one of Formula 1’s strongest teams when it comes to development, often making the biggest improvements over the course of a season. The next package of upgrades has been designed specifically to address these weaknesses, and the technical group responsible is largely the same one that has delivered McLaren’s impressive progress in recent campaigns.
“The updates we have coming are mainly focused on the way the car interacts with the aerodynamics: the airflow structures, the overall behaviour of the bodywork and the process through which we generate downforce. These are much deeper interventions aimed at changing the foundations of the aerodynamic package,” Stella confirmed.
“The flexible wing is mainly useful when you want to reduce drag with the wing open, and that is certainly an advantage, but it is not the core of what we need to improve to become more competitive. Internally, it is very clear that this project must not divert either attention or resources away from our main objective: building a car that generates more downforce. That is what we truly need and, as I said, it is also the area that has proven the most difficult to improve in any substantial way.”
Leave a Reply