Mercedes arrives at the Singapore Grand Prix with more questions to answer than perhaps any other Formula 1 team. Comparing the old and new W17 specifications will help assess the upgrade package introduced at Sepang, but an even bigger issue must also be resolved: why did the car struggle so badly in slow corners that would normally be expected to suit it?
The Brackley team suspects Malaysia may have been an isolated case created by an unusual combination of abrasive asphalt, high temperatures and tyre behaviour. Singapore, however, is packed with slow corners, making Marina Bay an important test of whether the W17 can recover one of its traditional strengths or whether its operating window has become more difficult to access.
Mercedes needs answers after its Sepang upgrade doubts
Mercedes’ decision to run different specifications on the two cars at Marina Bay confirms that something did not work as expected in Malaysia. Kimi Antonelli will evaluate the latest package, while George Russell will provide a reference with the previous specification.
Before Sepang, wind-tunnel data had suggested an improvement of around three tenths of a second from the new components. That confidence turned into uncertainty once the car reached the track, adding another layer to the questions already surrounding Mercedes’ W17 development programme.
In hindsight, the original mistake may have been not conducting the direct comparison during Friday practice at Sepang. Singapore is hardly the ideal place to perform such work, particularly during a Sprint weekend with only one free-practice session, but collecting data to study during the following break has become almost an obligation rather than simply an option.
George Russell says data does not show the upgrades have failed
Speaking to the media on Thursday, George Russell played down the idea that Mercedes already has evidence pointing towards a failed development package.
“There is nothing in the data that tells the team the upgrades aren’t working,” George Russell said.
He also correctly pointed out that Mercedes experienced fluctuations in competitiveness even with the previous specification. The same W17 that would have finished around 20 seconds behind McLaren at Budapest and Madrid was capable of producing an eight-tenths qualifying advantage over its rivals in Baku.
That variation gives Mercedes confidence that Sepang’s problems may have been driven primarily by the particular conditions rather than by a fundamental problem with the latest package.
However, the decision to compare the two specifications indicates that the picture is not yet completely clear. At the same time, entrusting the new components to Kimi Antonelli suggests Mercedes still believes the package contains additional downforce and performance potential waiting to be extracted.
Singapore must answer a second W17 question
Understanding the effectiveness of the upgrade package is therefore only the first issue. Mercedes must also establish how the W17 behaves on a hot circuit dominated by slow corners.
Looking back through the season, Mercedes has generally been competitive at tracks featuring this type of corner, including Monaco, Canada, Austria and Azerbaijan, although there are important differences between those examples.
Three of those events were held in relatively cool conditions. At the Red Bull Ring, by contrast, high temperatures exposed some limitations and Red Bull provided a much stronger challenge than the final classification alone suggested.
That leaves Mercedes with another important question: how competitive is the W17 genuinely in slow corners when temperatures rise?
Sepang understeer forced Mercedes drivers to use the throttle differently
One of Mercedes’ biggest problems in Malaysia was precisely its performance deficit through slower corners. From Friday onwards, both drivers complained of understeer and struggled to complete the desired trajectory through the corner.
They sometimes had to use the throttle to help rotate the car and bring it back towards the ideal line. On a circuit where tyre degradation was already expected to be severe, that behaviour placed additional stress on the rear tyres.
The new package may have contributed to those characteristics. As George Russell had suggested before the weekend, the developments could have shifted the W17’s balance, particularly because Mercedes had not introduced corresponding changes at the front of the car.
That possibility is one reason the Singapore comparison matters for a team whose broader 2026 dominance has already raised questions about just how large the W17’s underlying performance advantage really is.
Mercedes suspects Sepang asphalt and heat were decisive
Despite those upgrade questions, Mercedes’ main suspicion remains that the combination of Sepang’s surface and extreme temperatures had a decisive impact.
The Malaysian circuit featured the most abrasive asphalt of the season, even more demanding than Barcelona. Ferrari won there earlier in the year partly because it managed the tyres more effectively, combining strong overall downforce with a car that remained well balanced between the front and rear axles.
At Sepang, high temperatures were combined with progressive deterioration of the asphalt in certain areas. The result was an especially difficult combination that reduced available grip and made the Malaysian weekend almost unique.
When overall grip falls, more lap time becomes available in so-called grip-limited areas. That increases the importance of slower corners, precisely where Mercedes struggled throughout the weekend.
Red Bull, by contrast, remained competitive in these areas, particularly with its traction and corner-exit performance, independently of its straight-line speed.
New W17 package delivered high-speed load but not enough lap time
The W17 remained fast through Sepang’s quicker sections, where both drivers could feel the additional aerodynamic load generated by the new package. The problem was that those gains were not enough to compensate for the time lost elsewhere.
Mercedes also no longer enjoyed the characteristic straight-line advantage it had exploited at other circuits. Aston Martin and Audi provided useful examples, remaining competitive despite neither having what could be considered the benchmark power unit on the grid.
The difficulties showed that absolute aerodynamic load alone could not compensate for a car operating outside its optimum balance and tyre window.
Marina Bay slow corners could restore a Mercedes strength
Singapore contains numerous 90-degree corners and, despite relatively high temperatures even during the night race, generating temperature in the front tyres is not straightforward.
At similar circuits, the previous version of the W17 has generally performed well. Kimi Antonelli specifically highlighted that point in his Thursday media appearances, making the old specification an important benchmark for Mercedes’ experiment.
The Marina Bay layout places a major emphasis on slow-corner traction and front-end precision, which should make Singapore particularly revealing after Mercedes’ unexpected Malaysian weakness.
However, the W17 has not always been equally convincing when circuits of this type are combined with very high temperatures.
Mercedes may ultimately be chasing the right setup window
The Singapore test may therefore be less about deciding whether the new package is simply good or bad and more about understanding the setup window required to make it work.
High temperatures have repeatedly caused difficulties for Mercedes at venues such as Miami, Barcelona and Hungary. Sepang may have pushed those characteristics to an extreme because of its abrasive asphalt and demanding thermal conditions.
A technical analysis of the Malaysian weekend also highlighted how Mercedes developed significant understeer through Sepang’s slower corners despite gaining aerodynamic load in faster sections.
Those slow corners hurt the W17 badly in Malaysia. Mercedes’ hope is that on a circuit with fundamentally different characteristics they will once again become a strength.
If that happens, Singapore could provide the answer Mercedes needs: whether Sepang was simply an unusually hostile combination of asphalt, temperature and setup, or whether the latest W17 developments have genuinely altered the car’s balance in a way that requires a rethink for the final part of the season.
Leave a Reply