MotoGP has officially confirmed that the Japanese Grand Prix at Motegi will remain on the calendar through the 2030 season.

One of the most popular circuits on the Asian leg of the calendar, the Japanese Grand Prix has been held annually at Motegi since 2004.

The return to the Mobility Resort Motegi will see MotoGP remain in an “established and important market, welcoming a fanbase renowned around the world for its commitment and passion for MotoGP.

Dorna Sports CEO Carmelo Ezpeleta stated: “Japan is important for MotoGP. Motegi always puts on a fantastic show and is a point of reference on the calendar for its event organisation.

“Japanese MotoGP fans are incredibly knowledgeable and we’re very happy to confirm we’ll race with them until 2030.”

President of Honda Mobility Land Corporation, Tsuyoshi Saito expressed:  “We are very pleased to announce that we will be hosting MotoGP Japan at Mobility Resort Motegi in and after 2026.

“We would like to express our sincere gratitude towards Mr. Carmelo Ezpeleta, Dorna Sports and everyone who has been a great support in extending this hosting contract.

“We will continue to aim for further development of motorcycle sports and sustainable event management.

“As we make the most of the rich natural environment of Motegi, we will keep working to present Grand Prix that can be enjoyed by many more fans.

“In cooperation with local residents of Tochigi and Ibaraki prefectures and the town of Motegi and various government agencies, we hope to offer even more attractive Grand Prix events than before.”

MotoGP has officially hinted at the upcoming launch of the 2026 calendar, which is set to be revealed soon.

The post Motegi remains on MotoGP calendar through 2030 appeared first on Motorsport Week.

Max Verstappen explained that track characteristics at the Formula 1 Bahrain Grand Prix heightened Red Bull’s issues and made a repeat of his Suzuka victory nigh-on impossible.

Verstappen’s Red Bull RB21 suffers with through-corner balance issues and poor tyre preservation.

Still, a resurfaced Suzuka layout mitigated those problems in Japan, and Verstappen was able to take a surprise pole position and victory.

There were reservations that Bahrain’s abrasive surface would expose Red Bull’s problems, and they did in a big way as Verstappen was only able to finish sixth, more than half a minute behind victor Oscar Piastri.

Verstappen told select media, including Motorsport Week on Sunday, that Red Bull’s “lack of balance” was “highlighted” at the Bahrain International Circuit. 

“When you have no balance and no tyre management, or worse tyre management than the others, then on this track it’s worse.” 

At Suzuka, Verstappen explained “the surface is completely different,” adding “the tyres play an even bigger role” in Bahrain.

“Normally, our car in the very high-speed corners is quite a bit more stable,” Verstappen added. 

“But here [in Bahrain], there are a lot more other factors that come into play.”

Even if Japan yielded a victory, Verstappen said that weekend was “hit and miss.”

The Dutchman said, “Friday, Suzuka was bad. Qualifying, then, it was a bit better. 

“The race, of course, was a bit better, but still not where I want it to be,” he continued. 

“At least then you are competitive. Here then, it was off again.“

Red Bull can only ‘mask’ problems through set-up

Red Bull Team Principal Christian Horner also spoke on the team’s deficiencies with the RB21 and how they were masked in Japan.

Given the RB21’s pitfalls, Red Bull has experimented with set-up and Horner admitted the team “literally turned the car upside down set-up-wise,” to win in Japan.

Still, that tactic can only take one so far.

“I think ultimately you can mask it a little through set-up and we were able to achieve that last weekend in Suzuka but I think this race has exposed some pitfalls obviously very clearly that we have that we need to get on top of very quickly and I think we understand where the issues are, it’s introducing the solutions that obviously take a little more time,” Horner said post-race in Bahrain.

Looking forward, Red Bull must work hard to fix its problems, which a correlation issue between the wind tunnel and track has made even harder.

Presently, as F1 heads to the Jeddah Corniche Circuit in Saudi Arabia, Verstappen said, “The layout will probably help a bit because in Jeddah there’s just a bit less deg, but when you’re worse on tyres, you’re worse on it everywhere.” 

READ MORE – Max Verstappen: Red Bull ‘worse than last year’ around Bahrain with RB21 car

The post Why Bahrain made it impossible for Max Verstappen to repeat Suzuka Red Bull victory appeared first on Motorsport Week.

Lando Norris admits he might need “to be more demanding” with McLaren strategy after a safe approach arguably ruled him out of winning the Formula 1 Japanese Grand Prix.

Norris started and finished second to Max Verstappen at Suzuka last time out, limited by next to zero overtaking opportunities and saw his lead in the Drivers’ standings cut to just one point over the Dutchman.

With passing on track out of the question, strategy could have proved pivotal, but McLaren pit Norris on the same lap as Verstappen, fearful of a Safety Car intervention scuppering an undercut or losing track position with an overcut.

“There’s a lot of things in hindsight, nothing which didn’t come without risk, which was probably the biggest answer to things,” Norris told select media, including Motorsport Week after arriving in Bahrain. 

“I think it’s very easy, and even for me when I stepped out of the car and I looked at things, I wasn’t best pleased with how things looked, and maybe what felt like our approach to the whole thing.

“But nothing was a guarantee, you know, nothing was a guarantee that I would have passed Max. Nothing was a guarantee that the undercut would have been strong enough. 

“I would have come out always in every moment in traffic and behind the car, so there was no guarantee for everything. 

“So, however much people want to talk and say things and say how bad of a job we did, I disagree and I stand always by our decisions as a team, and I have a lot of trust and faith that we always have our best interests at heart.”

Norris would do things differently if given Japanese GP do-over

Norris admitted that if he could do the Japanese GP again, he’d go with a “more aggressive approach” to strategy.

“I think at times there’s an ability where I might want to take more risk to go for a win,” he said. 

“I need to acknowledge that could be the case and sometimes I want to accept second is still not a bad result, but I’m here to win races and not settle for second. 

“So definitely from my side I would love to go back and redo things with a slightly more aggressive approach, but I do know deep down that it’s a long season and sometimes points on the board is better than taking unnecessary risks.”

Norris added, “I also always know that the team has the best picture of the whole race, better than any other driver,” but continued by saying, “I also have the best feeling of the car, the size, how overtaking might be, that kind of thing. 

“You just need harmony between you and your race engineer and strategy team,” Norris explained, before going on to debate with himself whether he ought to be “more demanding” from within the McLaren cockpit.

“It might be that I need to potentially be more demanding at times and more pushing of the team, but it’s just getting the dynamic right at the end of the day between that risk-reward factor and knowing how much risk you want to take on the day and how aggressive you want to be,” he said.

“Sometimes that’s me stepping up and doing it myself, and sometimes that comes from the team, and maybe it’s vice versa. 

“Maybe the team wants to be aggressive, and on that day, for whatever feeling I have, I’m not wanting to be too aggressive. 

“It’s just working as a team. I think we’re doing very well, but continuing to work on that and getting the most out of one another on the day.”

Norris is clearly wrapped in two minds about whether McLaren’s strategy in Suzuka should have played out differently, but as he points out, the team still came away from Japan with a strong result.

“Would I and have we reviewed what level of risk we wanna take in different scenarios, I think is probably our bigger question after last weekend,” he said. 

“Would I be willing to take that risk of boxing behind more cars and go for the win, then yes. 

“But, we still finished 2nd and 3rd, we still got more points in the constructors, and I still had a good result as a driver for points. 

“But I did lose out to Max, and he’s my main competitor.”

READ MORE – McLaren couldn’t risk alternate Japan strategy with Lando Norris in Max Verstappen chase

The post Lando Norris admits he might have to ‘be more demanding’ with McLaren on strategy appeared first on Motorsport Week.

Carlos Sainz risks further punishment for swearing in response to being fined for missing the national anthem at the Formula 1 Japanese Grand Prix.

Sainz was fined €20,000, with half suspended, for missing the Japanese national anthem at Suzuka last weekend.

It proved to be a costly toilet break that landed Sainz in hot water, and he feels the punishment was egregious given he missed the ceremony by the slimmest of margins.

“I think I’m the biggest supporter of punctuality and the way I tend to value things, and especially a national anthem with all the authorities,” he told media, including Motorsport Week, in the Bahrain GP press conference.

“I was the first one to put my hand up and say, I’m late, I’m sorry for that.

“At the same time, I was five seconds late, and to be five seconds late and have to pay 10,000, it’s for me, out of the question that we’re having to pay this money.”

However, Sainz could have landed himself in hot water with his continued remarks.

“But yeah, I don’t know if I’m gonna get a fine saying this but, shit happens,” he added.

“And it’s the way it goes sometimes.”

Why could Sainz get in trouble?

F1 drivers and those in wider motorsport are subject to strict penalties for swearing during media-facing activities.

In F1, the first offence amounts to a €40,000 fine, with a second offence costing €80,000 and a suspended one-month suspension.

Three strikes, and you’re out, with a third offence costing a €120,000 fine and a one-month suspension.

WRC driver Adrien Forumaux has already fallen foul of these penalties, which are more lenient on the rallying scene, but this prompted widespread backlash from the driving fraternity in the series.

The WRC drivers have since formed a driving body to voice their displeasure with the FIA over fines for swearing, and held a vow of silence during end-of-stage interviews at Safari Rally Kenya.

Max Verstappen was handed a punishment of “some work of public interest” when he was caught swearing in a press conference last year.

Time will tell whether Sainz uttering the word shit is enough to land him in trouble with the FIA.

Of greater concern to Sainz, however, is knowing where fines are being spent.

“And you guys know what the thing is here. For five seconds, it’s disappointing,” he said of his recent punishment.

“I hope someone tells me where this 10K goes, and they say, OK, at least it went to a nice cause.”

This was an issue raised by the Grand Prix Drivers’ Association, of which Sainz is now a Director, last year, but FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem said such matters aren’t of F1 drivers’ concern.

READ MORE – How Ferrari ‘habits’ are triggering Carlos Sainz struggles at Williams

The post Carlos Sainz risks further FIA punishment amid fruity response to Japanese GP fine appeared first on Motorsport Week.

Formula 1 tyre supplier Pirelli has accepted the call to action after a thoroughly underwhelming Japanese Grand Prix.

The last two GPs in China and Japan were dominated by one-stop strategies, and the latter made an unwelcome F1 first.

A newly resurfaced Suzuka drastically reduced trye degradation, and this made for, frankly, a boring spectacle as for the first time in F1 history, the top six finished where they started.

Post-race in Japan, this prompted George Russell to call out Pirelli, saying, “I think these last two weekends, I think the tyre compounds have just been too hard for resurfacing, and it’s been an easy one-stop both races, and that’s just really taken any fun from the strategy.  

“Yeah, I hope we can maybe react as a sport, because it’s, as I said, we all finished where we started, and there just wasn’t enough difference in the tyre degradation,” he added.

On that note, Pirelli informed all 10 F1 teams on Wednesday that the Miami and Emilia Romagna GPs will have a tyre allocation one step softer than last season.

This follows confirmation that this year’s Saudi Arabian GP will also be a step softer than last year, with all three of these races one-stop affairs in 2024.

Miami will use the C3 as Hard, C4 as Medium and C5 as soft, with Emilia Romagna one click softer, introducing the brand new C6 into a GP weekend for the very first time.

“We are well aware that teams and drivers have become very adept at managing and looking after their tyres to get the best possible race result, and that the drivers always want to push to the limit to experience the thrills that only a Formula 1 car can offer,” Pirelli Motorsport Director Mario Isola said. 

“We had further confirmation of this last Sunday in Suzuka, where, even in a race that wasn’t particularly exciting in terms of on-track action, everyone said they were pleased to be able to continually get their lap times down right to the end of each stint. 

“However, we must balance this with the shared desire among all key stakeholders in our sport to create the conditions for unpredictable and spectacular races. 

“Tyres and their behaviour are an important part of that picture and as a partner of Formula 1, we want to be proactive in this regard.”

All six Pirelli F1 compounds will be tried and tested by Round 7

Isola added that it was Pirelli’s intention to roll out the entire new range of tyre compounds in the early stages of the season, in order to inform decision making for the remainder of the campaign.

“When we began planning the production and shipment of tyres for the first few races, we aimed to run all the compounds in the new range during the early part of the season, as they feature circuits with very different characteristics,” explained Isola. 

“This would help us gather as much useful data as possible as quickly as possible to inform our selections for the second half of the year. 

“For 2025, we have a wider range of options compared to last year: there is more effective spacing between the various compounds in terms of performance and, overall, they seem to be less prone to both tread surface overheating and graining. 

“This also allows us to experiment with new solutions, making choices that can lead to a variety of valid strategies, both in terms of tyre usage and number of pit stops.”

This weekend’s Bahrain GP, with an abrasive Skahir surface a big player in decision making, will see the hardest range, C1, C2 and C3 in action.

READ MORE – Pirelli to bring softer tyre selection to 2025 F1 Saudi Arabian GP

The post F1 tyre supplier Pirelli responds after borefest Japanese GP appeared first on Motorsport Week.

Aston Martin CEO & Team Principal Andy Cowell hailed the “exceptionally respectful” Honda for its handling of switching allegiances from Formula 1 rivals Red Bull.

Despite officially pulling out of F1 at the end of 2021, Honda has continued to power the two Red Bull-owned teams and offer technical support.

However, in 2026, Honda will be the official works engine provider for Aston Martin with Red Bull embarking on an in-house project in collaboration with Ford.

Speaking to select media, including Motorsport Week in Japan, Cowell hailed positive meetings with Honda.

“I visited Honda on Wednesday and I’ve got meetings with Honda tomorrow and Tuesday,” he said last weekend.

“The collaboration is great and the progress is positive. 

“There are always issues to work on at this point in the development process. It’s an enjoyable group of people to work with.”

Honda keeping work divided between Aston Martin and Red Bull

Honda has to juggle helping Red Bull through the final year of its power unit partnership, one that was celebrated with a special livery at Suzuka, while also developing Aston Martin’s power unit for next year.

A hard task perhaps, but Cowell explained how Honda is approaching it with diligence.

“I don’t think it’s divided. I think they’ve got some people left on this year’s project,” he said.

“They’ve got some people straddling but not too many. They are exceptionally respectful of the journey they’re on this year with Red Bull and the journey they’re on with us beyond. 

“When I was in the test facility on Wednesday last week, the Aston Martin group are there running a powertrain and they’ve got it all divided off with Honda personnel only through this area. 

“They’re being respectful to both teams.”

Max Verstappen gives Honda the perfect send off in Japan

Honda and Red Bull celebrated their partnership with not only a special livery at the Japanese marque’s home circuit, which it owns, but with victory courtesy of Max Verstappen.

“Honestly, the relationship that we have had with Honda has been amazing,” the Japanese GP victor said.

“I’ve really enjoyed my time with them, how they also work, how professional they are and how dedicated they are. 

“They’ve given me so much and, you know, together to win four Drivers’ Championships and two Constructors’, you know, it’s been unbelievable. And those, of course, are things that you will never forget. 

“It did cross my mind while driving as well. I said it would be, you know, insane to win here today. Also for Honda on their track as well. So maybe gave that extra motivation to try and stay ahead. But yeah, it’s a proper send-off.”

READ MORE – Christian Horner tips Aston Martin to rival Red Bull with ‘competitive’ Honda engine

The post How ‘exceptionally respectful’ Honda is managing Red Bull to Aston Martin F1 transition appeared first on Motorsport Week.

There’s a narrative doing the rounds, a persistent drone in the background noise of every post-race debrief on a classic circuit: ‘These tracks just aren’t suited for modern Formula 1. They need to change.’ I’m calling time on that fallacy: It’s the cars, stupid.

We’re witnessing a paradox. F1 is booming, attracting new audiences, selling out grandstands, and posting record revenues. Yet, beneath the gloss, the core product – the wheel-to-wheel racing, the heart-stopping overtakes that define the sport’s legends – often feels stifled, particularly on the hallowed grounds where history was made.

Think about it. After races at Suzuka, Spa-Francorchamps, Imola, Montreal, Zandvoort, and even Albert Park – circuits woven into the very fabric of F1 – the same tired discussion ignites. Calls for modifications, reprofiling corners, and extending runoff areas. Why? Because the current generation of F1 cars, magnificent technological marvels though they are, often struggle to put on the show these tracks deserve. Meanwhile, other top-tier racing series lap up the challenge, delivering thrilling contests on the same layouts.

This isn’t about romanticizing a bygone era of terrifyingly unsafe machines. It’s about critically examining why the pinnacle of motorsport often looks less racy than its counterparts on tracks that have proven, time and again, to be superb tests of driver skill and machine performance. The data trail leads directly to the design philosophy and, crucially, the sheer physical size of modern F1 cars.

The incredible shrinking F1 racetrack

Let’s rewind. F1 cars haven’t always been the land yachts they are today. Regulations, driven by safety, performance, and sometimes flawed attempts to manage competition, have dramatically evolved car dimensions.

In the early days (1950s), regulations were loose, focusing more on engine capacity than physical size. Cars like the Alfa Romeo 158 were comparatively petite: around 3.9 meters long and 1.5 meters wide. The 1960s saw minimum weights introduced, but cars remained nimble – a Lotus 18 from that era was just over 3.4 meters long.

Through the 70s and 80s, safety improvements and the dawn of serious aerodynamics, including ground effects, began to increase size and weight. A 1980 Williams FW07 measured roughly 4.46 meters long and 2.13 meters wide.

The pendulum swung back slightly in the 1990s, particularly concerning width. Following the tragedies of 1994, safety intensified. Still, car width was notably reduced from a maximum of 2150mm (2.15m) down to 2000mm (2.0m) in 1994 and then, significantly, down to 1800mm (1.8m) from 1998 onwards, a dimension that held until 2016. Lengths continued a gradual creep, but the narrower profile was a defining characteristic of this period. A 2000 Ferrari F1-2000 was about 4.4m long and 1.8m wide.

Then came the modern era, especially the hybrid era, which started in 2014 and the major regulation shift in 2017. Safety structures became more complex, hybrid power units demanded space, and aerodynamic obsession pushed designs outwards and lengthways. While maximum height (95cm) and width (200cm) were defined, length was largely unconstrained by explicit rules, ballooning to accommodate aero concepts and powertrain packaging. Cars routinely exceeded 5.5 meters. A 2019 Mercedes W10 hit 5.73 meters long. Today’s cars are around 5.6 meters long. The most impactful change, however, was the deliberate increase in maximum width back to 2000mm (2.0m) in 2017. The goal was faster lap times through increased downforce and mechanical grip via wider tires and wings. Faster they became, but racier? The evidence suggests otherwise.

Overtaking under the microscope

Tracking overtaking statistics in F1 is complex and influenced by myriad factors: refueling bans, tire degradation philosophies, circuit characteristics, and the controversial Drag Reduction System (DRS) introduced in 2011. DRS undeniably boosted raw overtaking numbers, creating artificial speed differentials on straights. But looking beyond these artificial boosts, particularly at key regulatory transition points, reveals a compelling story about car size.

Historical data shows fluctuating overtake averages. The mid-1980s saw relatively high numbers, often averaging over 30 passes per race. The refueling era (1994-2009) generally saw a dip, with averages often in the teens or low twenties, as a strategy often trumped on-track battling. The removal of refueling in 2010 saw a slight uptick.

The arrival of DRS and high-degradation Pirelli tires in 2011 led to a massive spike, with averages soaring temporarily. But let’s focus on the width change.

The 2017 smoking gun? 

In 2016, with 1.8m wide cars, F1 witnessed a high number of overtakes, averaging around 41.2 per race across 21 races (866 total overtakes reported by Pirelli). In 2017, the cars expanded to 2.0m wide. The result? Overtakes plummeted. Pirelli reported 435 overtakes across 20 races, averaging only 21.75 per race. That’s a staggering drop of nearly 47%, coinciding directly with the dimensional change. While other aerodynamic factors were at play, the correlation is too stark to ignore. Drivers immediately reported increased difficulty in following closely.

Even the 2022 regulations, designed specifically with ground effect aerodynamics to improve close racing and reduce dirty air, haven’t fully overcome the challenges posed by the cars’ sheer bulk, especially on narrower, traditional circuits. While overtaking saw some recovery post-2017, it hasn’t consistently reached a level that silences the critics, and DRS remains a necessary if debated, crutch.

Drowning in dirty air

It’s not just about two wide cars physically fitting side-by-side through Copse or Eau Rouge. It’s about the invisible wall they create: the aerodynamic wake, or “dirty air.”

Modern F1 cars are aerodynamic wonders, designed to generate colossal amounts of downforce, sticking them to the track at physics-defying speeds. But this comes at a cost. The complex wings, bargeboards, and floor designs required to achieve this performance spew incredibly turbulent air behind them.

A following car driving into this wake suffers a significant loss of its own downforce and grip. The bigger and more aerodynamically powerful the leading car, the bigger and more disruptive its wake. Today’s long, wide cars, optimized for performance in clean air, create aerodynamic potholes that make it exceedingly difficult for a pursuer to stay close enough through medium and high-speed corners to launch an attack on the next straight, even with DRS assistance.

The 2017 regulations, prioritizing outright downforce via wider surfaces, almost certainly exacerbated this wake effect, contributing to the overtaking drought observed that year. While the 2022 ground effect rules aimed to clean up the wake, allowing cars to follow more closely, the fundamental physics challenge posed by displacing such a large volume of air at speed remains.

Classic F1 Circuits: Victims, not villains

This brings us back to the classic circuits. Tracks like Spa, Suzuka, Monza, Silverstone, Interlagos, Montreal—these are the cathedrals of speed, demanding bravery and precision. They were largely designed when cars were smaller, nimbler, and less aerodynamically sensitive.

The track effectively shrinks when you place a modern F1 car—nearly as long as a Chevrolet Suburban and two meters wide—onto these layouts. Braking zones become tighter relative to the car’s length, corner apexes are harder to contest side-by-side, and straights are effectively shorter as the aerodynamic penalty for following negates slipstreaming advantages until DRS can be deployed.

Monaco is the most extreme illustration. It’s always been a processional race, but with the current dimensions, meaningful on-track passes are virtually legendary events. The cars are simply too big for the streets. But the problem isn’t confined to Monaco. Watch footage from the 80s or 90s (even the early 2000s) at tracks like Imola or the Hungaroring, and you’ll see overtaking that looks improbable today, not because the track changed, but because the cars could physically and aerodynamically navigate the challenge differently.

Why should these iconic venues, beloved by fans and drivers alike, be constantly pressured to bulldoze their character to accommodate ever-more cumbersome machines when the core issue lies with the machines themselves?

The business case for better racing

F1 is entertainment, a global business built on spectacle. Close racing and daring overtakes are the lifeblood of that spectacle. They generate excitement, drive viewership, engage fans, and deliver value to broadcasters, promoters, and sponsors.

When classic circuits host parades, when overtaking heavily relies on the artificiality of DRS, and when fans lament the challenges drivers face in truly battling wheel-to-wheel, the core product is diminished. It impacts the narrative, the perceived excitement, and potentially long-term fan loyalty. Ensuring that cars can race properly on all types of circuits, particularly the classics, isn’t just about sporting purity; it’s about safeguarding the commercial appeal and health of Formula 1. Tinkering with legendary tracks is a costly, often unpopular band-aid; addressing the car regulations treats the cause.

A glimmer of hope? The 2026 F1 reset

Encouragingly, the FIA and F1 have recognised the issue. The regulations planned for 2026 explicitly target smaller, lighter, and more “agile” cars. The maximum wheelbase is set to reduce from 3600mm to 3400mm, and the maximum width will shrink from 2000mm to 1900mm. A target weight reduction of 30kg is also planned.

This acknowledges that the current dimensions are suboptimal for close racing. The stated aim is to improve “raceability”. It’s a step in the right direction, a potential course correction away from the era of the land yacht. The question remains: do these changes go far enough to fundamentally alter the dynamic, especially on the classic tracks? Will a 10cm width reduction be sufficient?

Refocus the lens

Let’s end the charade. Stop blaming the legendary circuits that have tested the best for generations. Instead, start focusing on the cars themselves – the paintbrushes.

The data points overwhelmingly indicate that the size and aerodynamic complexity of modern F1 cars are the primary inhibitors of close, natural overtaking, especially on space-constrained classic tracks. The substantial decline in overtakes following the 2017 width increase is critical evidence.

F1 needs cars that promote, not hinder, wheel-to-wheel action across its diverse calendar. The solution isn’t to endlessly sanitize historic venues but to mandate cars that can genuinely race on them, vehicles that don’t depend solely on aerodynamic brute force in clean air, or artificial mechanisms like DRS for excitement.

The 2026 regulations offer hope, but the philosophy must be embedded: F1 cars should be designed to race first and lap quickly second. It’s time to prioritize agility over sheer size and racecraft over raw pace in isolation. It’s time to create cars worthy of the circuits, not demand circuits bow down to them. The future health, excitement, and business success of Formula 1 depends on it.

READ MORE – Motorsport Week’s F1 2025 Japanese GP Driver Ratings

The post How F1 cars ate the circuits appeared first on Motorsport Week.

Max Verstappen‘s triumphant Formula 1 Japanese Grand Prix victory was built on a Red Bull strength that could threaten to trouble McLaren this weekend in Bahrain.

Verstappen took a surprise pole position in Japan and, with limited tyre degradation, held the two McLarens at bay to take victory in the race.

Red Bull started the 2025 season on the back foot to McLaren, who won the chaotic season opener in Melbourne with a victor in Lando Norris.

The opening two rounds of the season hinted at an instant McLaren dominance, with Oscar Piastri clinching the win in China with a nine-second margin over his teammate.

It’s clear the McLaren has many strengths, especially in high-speed corners, but Norris pointed out Red Bull’s proficiency through low speed was on show at Suzuka.

“I think after today [Japan], our weakness was the slow speed compared to [Red Bull],” he told select media, including Motorsport Week.

“There’s a lot less high-speed, so we’re kind of losing some of our strengths, and we’re going more into our weaknesses.

“Clearly, they’re quick. You know, I feel like between Oscar and myself, we got a lot out of the car yesterday.

“It was probably a little bit more, yes, but both our theoreticals were not that far ahead. So Max is doing a good job and Red Bull seemed to maybe have caught up a little bit.

“But they’ve also not been that bad the whole season. When you look at Australia, he was fighting for a win.

“When you look at China, he wasn’t miles away. And this weekend he’s done very good. So I expect him to be challenging us every weekend.”

What fate lies ahead for McLaren and Red Bull in Bahrain?

McLaren Team Principal Andrea Stella had a similar interpretation to Norris, saying, “Well, certainly we know that these two points were for our car in general, I think we had most of the time loss. I would say perhaps Lando a bit more than Oscar.

“We have seen this also in qualifying, especially the last chicane is where Lando loses all the time.

“Otherwise, it’s a pretty straight drive to pole position, so some work to do, which is in terms of improving the car and some work to do also for Lando in this braking zone, where we have something to polish.”

The RB21’s advantage through the low-speed traction zone of Suzuka’s final chicane was enough to fend off McLaren in both qualifying and the main race.

McLaren’s fate in Suzuka may follow it to Bahrain, somewhat of a bogey circuit for the team and a layout that is heavily comprised of low-speed traction zones.

However, McLaren was the pacesetting outfit at Bahrain during pre-season testing, which Stella at the time said could be a sign the team has made progress at the venue.

“Bahrain [was] one of the tracks in which we have struggled to perform in previous years,” he said.

“Looking at the track layout, looking at some kind of demand associated with the low grip, for instance, and the [track surface] roughness, big demand on traction, we have a justification as to why our car wasn’t necessarily working very well at this circuit.

“We have worked over the last couple of years to try and improve on those requirements that are needed in circuits of this kind where you have tight corners, for example, and we think we have made some progress.”

It won’t be long to find out if Verstappen can capitalise on Red Bull’s perceived low-speed advantage in Bahrain, or whether McLarne can overcome this particular deificeny.

READ MORE – McLaren implies Max Verstappen F1 title bid unsustainable without improved Red Bull

The post Why a Red Bull Suzuka strength could threaten McLaren in Bahrain appeared first on Motorsport Week.

George Russell has said that turning off DRS is “part of the job” of a Formula 1 driver, after Jack Doohan’s crash at the Japanese Grand Prix sparked debate about whether an automated system should be introduced.

The Australian crashed heavily at Turn 1 in FP2 at the Suzuka circuit after his Alpine’s Drag Reduction System did not close.

DRS closes automatically when the brake pedal is applied, or if a certain amount of throttle engagement is introduced.

Neither of those occurred in Doohan’s case and he reportedly failed to engage DRS manually after experiments in the simulator suggested Turn 1 could be taken in such a manner.

The consequential crash has opened up discussion about whether automatic DRS closing should be more stringent.

Mercedes driver Russell told select media, including Motorsport Week, that this should not be the case.

“I mean, obviously what happened to Jack was a big shunt and very unfortunate,” he said, “but I think it’s one of those things that you see happen once, and everybody will recognise, and this is probably the only corner of the whole calendar that it’s a problem.

“I think as drivers, you have responsibilities. We’ve got to go flat out down the straight and turn into the corners, and clicking a button to turn the DRS off is part of the job.

“We don’t want it to be automated. We’ve got to leave it down to the drivers. There’s already too many gadgets, assistants.”

Russell’s fellow GPDA Director Carlos Sainz was quite vocal on introducing an automated system in the face of safety risks.

“I felt I was quite vocal yesterday, saying: ‘I am surprised this hasn’t happened more often’, because I’ve had moments where I’ve mispressed the DRS button and it has stayed open – it gives you a massive snap and a massive fright going into a corner like Turn 1 here, Shanghai Turn 1 or Australia Turn 9,” he said.

“We have too many of these corners where it is down to the driver to close it, down to the DRS to do a good job on the re-attaching, and I’m afriad there hasn’t been enough of these crashes in order to prove that maybe we need to work on this area of safety.

“But I hope the crash shows that we need to do something automatically, 50m, 100m before the braking zone so you don’t get a chance for the driver to make a mistake or the DRS to fail if it doesn’t close.

Leclerc believes automated DRS could be an option

Ferrari’s Charles Leclerc was on the fence regarding DRS, saying that perhaps a revised version of the current system could be considered.

The Moneqasque said: “I feel like if we have [an automated] system like this, I think we can maybe use it and have more DRS,” hinting at the fact that the system could be used on as many straights as possible.

“Like before Turn 1 in Silverstone, I think it’s a good example, and here before 130R there’s a huge straight, and it’s a bit of a shame that we don’t use these kind of straights to do it,” he said.

However, he also considered that leaving DRS activation to the hands of the drivers is a worthy skill challenge.

“But I also feel like it can be up to us,” Leclerc added.

“Like Turn 1 in Silverstone when we had it, I thought it was quite cool because you had to be very brave in Turn 1 to keep the DRS, and there was something to gain out of it. But yeah, I don’t mind anyway.”

READ MORE – Alpine explains cause behind Jack Doohan’s Japan practice shunt

The post George Russell: Turning off DRS ‘part of the job’ after Jack Doohan crash sparks debate appeared first on Motorsport Week.

Haas experienced mixed fortunes with its fast-tracked floor upgrade at the Formula 1 Japanese Grand Prix at Suzuka.

At the season-opener in Australia, Haas was rooted to the bottom of the timesheets with the rest of the field enjoying a margin over the multi-national outfit that would have caused concern.

The VF-25 had a major weakness exposed, high-speed cornering.

This wasn’t an issue next time out in Shanghai as both Oliver Bearman and Esteban Ocon scored points in China, but the high-speed corners of Suzuka prompted action.

As a result, Haas fast-tracked a new floor to Suzuka to avoid a Melbourne repeat, and it looked to have worked – partly.

Bearman, who had the new floor from first practice, made a shock Q3 appearance in qualifying, which he converted into a single point, something that the pundits may not have predicted but could have seen it on an online betting website if they’d looked.

Meanwhile, Ocon, who received the new floor spec on Saturday, qualified and finished in 18th.

“Yeah, for me it seems positive, so I’m happy with that,” Bearman told select media including Motorsport Week.

“The team have done a great job bringing it so quickly after the upset of Australia. 

“So I think we did a great reaction, and for it to work as expected is a good feeling. And, yeah, let’s see how it performs on the rest of the tracks that we have in this triple header.”

Haas was plagued by aero oscillations but by forcing its new floor into an extreme setup Friday afternoon with Bearman, it found answers to its issues, and a refined setup on Saturday guided the young Briton to a strong result.

“For me, we just had a little bit less bouncing in those high-speed corners, which, anyway, I feel like I’m not super sensitive to,” Bearman said. 

“So, with or without the floor, I don’t complain that much about bouncing.,” Bearman said.

“I’m used to F2, which doesn’t have suspension, essentially, so, you know, anything’s an upgrade. And, yeah, the floor has definitely improved the bouncing, and it doesn’t really change the feeling for us, but it allows us to run the car a bit more aggressively and get a bit more performance out of it, which is good.”

Ocon didn’t note improvement with Haas floor upgrade

Ocon didn’t see the improvement Bearman noted, saying post-race, “we’re still lacking four to five tenths, I think.

“I think it’s good overall that the teams managed to bring this update this quickly and react this quickly. 

“It worked on one car, which is very good. We need to pick that up, understand the data from all sides and it’s good that [Bearman’s] managed to pick up a point. 

“We are very happy on that side now, it’s just a matter of turning it into our car as well. No doubt that this will come too.”

Haas Team Principal Ayao Komatsu talked through the set-up tweaks made to both drivers’ cars on Friday before putting Ocon on the same spec and set-up as Bearman on Saturday.

“We equalised the car on the Friday night,” he said. 

“So we pushed the car in FP1, but we didn’t see the clear difference [between floors], but we pushed it further in FP2, and then we saw it straight away. 

“So we had to, let’s say, go one step back on Esteban’s car on Friday FP2, so that proved that new floor was having a positive impact, making a difference on Friday night, so we put Esteban on a brand new floor, with the upgrade, so they had the same spec.”

Moreover, Komatsu discredited the notion that Ocon’s deficiencies were down to him not having the new floor on Friday, saying “[It’s] definitely not about getting used to it. No.

“The data’s pretty clear, it’s working, so we haven’t understood why Esteban couldn’t perform,” Komatsu added. 

“Yeah, there’s both cars, as far as we can see, are performing very close to each other, within the resolution of what we can measure. 

“Not to say there might be something that we cannot measure, but so far we haven’t found anything.”

READ MORE – Haas explains reasoning behind accelerating revised floor to F1 Japanese GP

The post How Haas experienced mixed fortunes with F1 Japanese GP floor upgrade appeared first on Motorsport Week.