Differing from much of the Formula 1 field, Red Bull proceeded with implementing significant advancements to its RB21 – with Max Verstappen expressing that a revised undercarriage introduced in Monza “undoubtedly contributed,” even though the majority of recent enhancements stem from refined operational efficiency. Nevertheless, these immediate enhancements might impinge upon Red Bull’s extensive goals pertaining to its 2026 undertaking.
Principal engineer Paul Monaghan clarified that Red Bull had secured sufficient capacity “to incorporate” the Monza undercarriage enhancement, subsequently augmented by a novel front airfoil in Singapore, without excessively jeopardizing its 2026 progression.
While the updated components weren’t the primary catalyst behind Red Bull’s recent resurgence in performance, they undeniably assisted, and the team is now tasked with harmonizing the pursuit of performance in 2025 with establishing an optimal trajectory for F1’s forthcoming regulations in the approaching year.
Following the Singapore Grand Prix, team principal Laurent Mekies recognized that prolonging the RB21’s development might influence Red Bull’s 2026 endeavors – particularly considering the constraints imposed by the cost containment measures and the tiered aerodynamic testing framework – but he underscored that it represents the appropriate course of action.
“Indeed, from a Red Bull Racing standpoint, irrespective of observing rival teams, I believe it was [justified],” Mekies articulated post the Singapore GP. “It remains imperative for us to ascertain whether the project possesses additional performance capacity.”
“It’s essential that we delve into the fundamental aspects, as we will assess and refine next year’s initiative utilizing identical instruments and methodologies, notwithstanding the divergent regulatory framework.”
Laurent Mekies, Red Bull Racing Team Principal
Photo by: Sam Bloxham / LAT Images via Getty Images
Consequently, Mekies considers the initial phase to involve ensuring the reliability of these instruments and methodologies. The optimal approach to validate this involves verifying them with the current vehicle, rather than relying on them unconditionally as the team transitions into 2026.
“It’s vitally important to establish with this year’s vehicle that our data analysis methodology is precise and that our vehicle development approach is accurate. Should we attain this level of performance, it will instill confidence during the winter period as we prepare for next year’s vehicle.”
According to Mekies, this is a strategic determination reached internally at Red Bull.
“Undoubtedly, this entails a cost to the ‘26 project,” he acknowledges. “Nevertheless, we deem it the appropriate compromise for us, irrespective of the strategies employed by other teams.”
Andrea Stella, Mekies’ counterpart at McLaren, proposed that Red Bull’s protracted RB21 development – in conjunction with Mercedes’ – serves as a contributing factor to the recent reduction in the team’s competitive advantage.
“I believe there’s an evident trend,” Stella remarked. “We discontinued vehicle development some time ago, focusing entirely on 2026. We introduced minor components in Monza, but otherwise, we have been concentrating on 2026 for an extended duration. Concurrently, we’ve observed that certain competitors continue to introduce new enhancements trackside. Red Bull is unequivocally among these teams.”
Lando Norris, McLaren, Max Verstappen, Red Bull Racing
Photo by: Sam Bloxham / LAT Images via Getty Images
Nevertheless, for both McLaren and Red Bull, their respective strategies are logical given their differing circumstances. McLaren benefitted from possessing a constructors’ championship – still the most valuable title for teams, in terms of prize money and bonuses for personnel – safely secured for a considerable period. Given this advantage, it was reasonable to prioritize the major regulation modifications slated for 2026, particularly given the robust correlation between its virtual and on-track environment.
Conversely, Red Bull encountered a substantially distinct situation upon Mekies’ arrival. For approximately 18 months, the Milton Keynes-based team was effectively “operating with disparate benchmarks,” as former team principal Christian Horner characterized it – implying that its simulation tools (wind tunnel and simulator) were generating results inconsistent with on-track occurrences.
Within this context, it was imperative for Mekies and the team to resolve these discrepancies first, as failing to do so would represent a significant hazard as they transitioned into 2026 – especially as the development of the new car is even more reliant on the virtual environment than previously.
The existing vehicle functions as a benchmark for validating these tools, thereby justifying Red Bull’s continued development to ensure a solid foundation and comprehension. This strategy may require dedicating additional time and resources to the 2026 project, but remains preferable to commencing an entirely new regulatory era “uninformed” and risking another fundamental miscalculation.
We want to hear from you!
Let us know what you would like to see from us in the future.
Take our survey
– The Autosport.com Team
