In the opening rounds of the 2026 Formula 1 season, an intriguing element has emerged: the Racing Bulls VCARB03 has proven extremely hard to overtake on the straights, reaching very high top speeds thanks in part to the energy management of the Milton Keynes power unit. This insight also reveals something about what the Red Bull works team is currently missing.
From the first two races, a fascinating trend has become apparent, one that had been only partially visible during the Bahrain tests. In both Melbourne and Shanghai, Racing Bulls has consistently been one of the hardest cars to pass on the grid.
After the Australian Grand Prix, we analyzed Oliver Bearman’s race, where he spent many laps stuck behind a Racing Bulls car without finding an overtaking opportunity. Part of the explanation lies in a specific trait of the Milton Keynes power unit, which seems to have transformed top-end speed into a crucial advantage, both in qualifying and on-track duels.
This effect was also evident last weekend in Shanghai, where Racing Bulls repeatedly held off direct rivals. On a circuit like Shanghai, where battery management allows drivers to accumulate energy for the long back straight, this advantage may be slightly less decisive. However, on other tracks where the electrical component plays a different role and raw top speed becomes more critical, the benefit becomes far more significant.
High top speeds as a defensive weapon
Melbourne serves as the perfect example. The many straights combined with limited energy recovery opportunities forced any pursuing car to consume significant battery to attempt an overtake, risking vulnerability immediately afterward. In such scenarios, Racing Bulls’ high top speeds made a clear difference in defensive positioning.
This feature seems primarily linked to the operational philosophy of the Milton Keynes power unit. During the Bahrain testing days, the team already showcased very high maximum speeds, indicating a different approach to hybrid deployment compared to rivals. The Red Bull power unit, for instance, prioritizes maintaining higher top speeds at the end of straights, while other cars experience more significant derating.
Qualifying vs. race performance
It’s no surprise that on energy-critical circuits with long full-throttle sections, Racing Bulls has emerged as the top midfield qualifier. However, in the race, the situation changes slightly: the Faenza team tends to lose a bit compared to Haas, which mirrors some aspects of Ferrari’s approach, with a competitive chassis but some additional limitations on the power unit side.
The same applies to Red Bull, which placed a car on the second row in Melbourne, ahead of both McLaren and Ferrari. It’s worth noting, though, that Ferrari suffered deployment issues in Q3, widening the gap to Mercedes more than expected.
Conversely, on tracks with more energy recovery opportunities and less emphasis on full-throttle sections, rivals have caught up, partly thanks to lessons learned about the power unit in Australia. Alpine is the clearest example: from a harsh elimination in early Melbourne qualifying, the team scored points with both cars in China.
Racing Bulls outshining the parent team
This trend highlights a paradox. Compared to its reference tier, Racing Bulls is exploiting the power unit characteristics better than the Red Bull works team, which suffers from more pronounced chassis deficiencies, both aerodynamic and weight-related. In other words, the Faenza team is capitalizing on certain engine traits more effectively than the factory team.
During the race, Racing Bulls also faced some bad luck: tight duels and incidents amplified the gap to other midfield teams. Yet, the team still secured an impressive seventh place, notably ahead of Isack Hadjar’s Red Bull, who had spun early in the race but regained strategy alignment thanks to the Safety Car.
PU strengths vs. chassis limitations
This does not imply that Racing Bulls is more competitive than Red Bull outright. Rather, within its tier and resources, Racing Bulls is showcasing the quality of the Milton Keynes power unit more effectively, despite it being their first internally built engine, albeit with highly skilled engineers.
What unites both teams compared to their closest rivals seems to be a certain lack of pure downforce rather than an issue solely linked to the power unit. There is certainly room for improvement on the engine side, but the biggest performance gap lies elsewhere. Especially compared to Ferrari and Haas, the power unit is no longer the main differentiating factor.
The technical battle within the Red Bull family will be one to watch. If Faenza can continue to optimize their straight-line advantage while Milton Keynes scrambles to fix their chassis issues, we may see more weekends where the “junior” team gives the senior squad a run for its money.
Leave a Reply