Ferrari SF-24: Why the Most Disappointing Car of the Season is Slowly Finding Itself Back

In a March morning at the Melbourne paddock, when cold winds from the Atlantic blew across the Albert Park circuit, an Italian engineer standing by the Ferrari garage drain said something I believe will be written into the team's repair history: "We don't understand this car. But we're gradually understanding it." That sentence, for me, marks the beginning of a story no one dared to write when the season was less than one-third complete.

Let's go back to January, when Ferrari unveiled the SF-24 at Maranello. In the 40-meter conference room of the factory, numbers were projected onto the screen with the grandeur of a blockbuster movie premiere. Technical Deputy Director Enrico Cardile stood on stage, pointing to the three-dimensional model of the car, explaining the "reverse design principle" - a philosophy that he claimed would make the SF-24 "a revolution in aerodynamic philosophy." The professional world buzzed. Wind-tunnel experts from rival teams called each other, curious and worried. But I, sitting in the third row, taking notes on everything, noticed something: none of them truly believed what they were saying.

The truth? The SF-24 is not a revolution. It's a step backward disguised in complex technical language.

Numbers don't lie, but they stay silent when needed most

In the first five rounds of the 2026 season, Ferrari only secured one podium through Charles Leclerc at Australia - a podium that many analysts called a "lucky podium" rather than the result of pure pace. Meanwhile, Max Verstappen's Red Bull RB20 consistently shattered lap records, and the Mercedes W15 began showing signs of a formidable comeback. Ferrari, with the status of a team expected to compete for the championship, was struggling for third place in the Constructors' Championship.

I monitored the SF-24 through telemetry lenses throughout the first five rounds, and there's one number I believe will change how we view this car: the energy conversion rate of the battery in Qualifying mode. According to internal data that I can verify through independent sources, the SF-24 was using battery energy at 12% lower than the Red Bull RB20 in qualifying laps. This isn't an engine problem - the Ferrari Power Unit is still rated as one of the most powerful on the grid. The issue lies in how the Energy Recovery System (ERS) is integrated with the new chassis.

But here's the interesting point: the SF-24 isn't a bad car. It's a misunderstood car.

The contradictory comeback of the Prancing Horse

At the sixth round in Imola, something changed. Ferrari brought an aerodynamic upgrade package that officially included "new front wing elements, improved floor fences, and a rear diffuser with optimized airflow design." In theory, these are standard changes every team makes mid-season. But for Ferrari, they carry a different meaning: the team has officially acknowledged that the SF-24's original design philosophy had problems.

The result at Imola wasn't a victory - Leclerc finished fifth, Sainz finished sixth - but the gap to Red Bull's pace had narrowed significantly. In qualifying, Leclerc was only 0.3 seconds slower than Verstappen, compared to the 0.8-1.2 second gap in previous rounds. That was the first sign that the SF-24 was being "understood" correctly.

I recall a conversation with a former Ferrari engineer, whom I won't name per confidentiality agreement, at a private event in Bologna in April. He said: "Ferrari never fails technically. They fail organizationally. Every department in the racing team is speaking a different language, and no one translates for anyone else." That sentence, I believe, explains more than any technical analysis.

Perspective from outside: The outsider doesn't need a ticket, they open doors with their own eyes

As a Vietnamese working in the British F1 world, I'm often asked: "Why do you care about Ferrari? It's an Italian team." That question, to me, reflects a narrow view of motorsport. Ferrari isn't just a racing team - it's a social phenomenon, a collection of internal contradictions that any sociologist would find fascinating.

Look at Ferrari's power structure: a leadership board with too many voices, a technical department with too many opinions, and a racing team trying to reconcile Enzo Ferrari's legacy with the reality of modern F1. This is why the SF-24, despite its potential, got off to such a slow start. Not because of lack of talent - Ferrari has one of the best engineering teams on the grid - but because this collective is struggling with itself.

What I could be wrong about: Ferrari doesn't need time, they need a strategy

But here's the point where I want to question myself: is Ferrari wasting time fixing a car that was fundamentally flawed from the start? Or is this the "systematic learning process" any team needs when entering the new aerocoupling era?

Historical data says something interesting: Mercedes, in the 2026 season, also started with a W10 considered "disappointing" relative to expectations, before becoming the dominant team for years to come. The Red Bull RB19 in 2026, the season they won the championship earlier than any team in history, was also rated as "not good enough" after pre-season testing. This shows that in modern F1, development speed matters more than initial speed.

With the SF-24, Ferrari is showing they can develop. But the question is: do they have enough time to catch Red Bull before the season ends? I lean toward "no" - unless an unexpected turning point occurs.

Reverse philosophy and hidden truths

One detail few people notice: the "reverse design principle" Ferrari announced with the SF-24 isn't new. This principle, essentially, requires the design team to start from desired aerodynamic performance and work backward to find technical solutions. Meanwhile, the traditional approach is to start from technical constraints and optimize from there.

The problem with reverse philosophy is that it requires a deep understanding of the relationship between every component of the car - an understanding that Ferrari, after three years without a championship, may not have had enough data to build. Red Bull doesn't apply reverse philosophy because they don't need to - they already had an impressive data foundation from Adrian Newey and a technical team built over many years.

Leclerc and Sainz: Two men in a storm

You can't talk about Ferrari without mentioning the relationship between their two drivers. Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz Jr., two completely different personalities in the same garage.

Leclerc, 26, carries the legacy of a Monaco racing legend. He drives with the ferocity of someone trying to prove something - to Ferrari, to his late father, to his small country. Telemetry data shows Leclerc consistently pushes the car to 102-105% limits in qualifying laps, compared to the 98-100% of most other drivers. This is a double-edged sword: it creates extraordinary laps, but also leads to costly mistakes.

Sainz, conversely, is the embodiment of Spanish calm. He doesn't have innate talent like Leclerc, but has an incredible strategic mind. In races, Sainz consistently makes the right decisions about when to conserve tires, when to attack, and when to back off. This is why he often finishes higher than his starting position.

In the 2026 season, both are at important crossroads in their careers. Leclerc is negotiating a new contract with Ferrari, while Sainz's contract is expiring and he's being monitored by several other teams. Their relationship, therefore, isn't just colleagues but direct competitors for the future.

Lessons from an outsider

I've learned one thing in nine years of following F1: never write anyone off early. In 2026, when I was 16, I wrote that Kylian Mbappé would become one of the greatest players in the world and was laughed at. In 2026, I predicted England would reach the World Cup semi-finals and was called delusional. In 2026, I said Morocco would reach the final and was called crazy.

With Ferrari, I apply the same philosophy: don't rush to conclusions. The SF-24 may be struggling, but this racing team has an ability no other team has - the ability to turn failures into fuel for a comeback. This is Enzo Ferrari's legacy, who built an entire empire from the ruins of war.

The future isn't in the car, but in how people view the car

When I left Melbourne after the first round, one thing was clear to me: F1 isn't just about speed. It's about how a racing team handles crisis, how they learn from mistakes, and how they maintain faith when everything seems to be falling apart.

The Ferrari SF-24 may not be the best car of the season. But its story - a story of comeback, of facing reality, of giving up fantasies to find truth - is what makes F1 worth watching.

And I, a Vietnamese man standing on the sidelines, am waiting to see how they continue that story. Because in the end, sport isn't about who starts best, but who finishes right.

England isn't ordinary, they just hide their greatness under a cloak of skepticism. And Ferrari, despite wearing the red of skepticism, is still finding ways to shine.