Over the course of three days of running in Bahrain, watching trackside from a wide range of corners allows us to build a picture of the performance and characteristics of the 10 Formula 1 cars.
Regardless of runplans, the way a car behaves on track can’t be hidden or distorted. And this is why we at The Race devote so much time to watching in order to tease out the nature of these unfamiliar cars.
Get exclusive extra trackside analysis videos and podcasts in The Race Members' Club on Patreon - join now for 90% off your first month
It’s an inexact science, but allows us to form a clear idea of the strengths and weaknesses of the machinery that will fight it out in 2025 – at least, as they are right now and at this particular track.
Click here to read our full ranking of all the teams in terms of their all-round performance, informed partly by trackside observations.
For the purposes of this examination of how the cars actually appear to each handle, we’re running through them in reverse 2024 championship order.
Sauber
The Sauber looked too stiff and troublesome throughout the three days of running, suggesting a narrow set-up window that doesn’t allow for the compliance that would make life easier for the drivers.
On the first morning, the car looked woeful with significant traction troubles and a lack of balance. That was improved by set-up changes, but the car never got close to looking like anything other than the worst car on track.
In the hands of Nico Hulkenberg, some semblance of consistency was achievable but with the car’s limitations very clearly containing him.
As for Gabriel Bortoleto, he was inevitably more lairy as he pushed the car to its limits.
Williams
From the off, the Williams looked usable and responsive but a little too often the drivers were caught out by moments of instability.
But as it was dialled in, so it became more consistent to the point where it was (marginally) the most impressive of the midfield group.
The car generally looked well balanced, meaning any vices were easily dealt with by drivers. Watching at Turn 11, the long, medium-speed left-hander, on the final day, there was a marked difference between the rotation achieved by Alex Albon and Yuki Tsunoda in the more understeering Racing Bulls car.
It’s that responsiveness that makes the Williams look like a good, usable car.
Racing Bulls
The battle was with understeer for Racing Bulls, chipping away at it with set-up work to the point where the car was consistent – albeit with a hint of the ever-present front limitation.
It looked a trickier car with the inexperienced Isack Hadjar at the wheel, which is to be expected, but Tsunoda could rarely be seen to be having big moments. Ideally, the car would be a little more responsive and it has a tendency to be slightly under-rotated, compromising throttle application at exit, but this was very much within normal parameters.
That should mean the Racing Bull is a handy midfield package.
Haas
Esteban Ocon and Ollie Bearman were the least likely drivers you’d spot having big moments simply because of the heavy-fuel, long-run focused strategy of Haas. That also meant that it was difficult to compare the car to its rivals at lighter weights, but despite that it looks like a good usable package.
There were signs of understeer in the slower corners, but it looked like a car that has carried over the traits of last year’s very effective machine.
Alpine
Particularly in the hands of Pierre Gasly, the Alpine looked like a confidence-inspiring midfield machine. While it never looked quite as planted as the top cars, it turned in well, rotated decently mid-corner and had decent traction.
There were, at times, signs of a little rear-end instability under braking for the slow corners but that was dialled out.
It looks like a car that not only lets the drivers attack, but also lets them produce good race runs without overworking the tyres.
Aston Martin
The Aston Martin generally looked consistent, but there were the tell-tale signs of rear instability that led to a brief hesitation on turn-in, sapping both time and confidence.
It’s not that the Aston Martin looked bad by any means - it’s certainly a far better car to drive than the Sauber - but it didn’t appear to be a night-and-day difference compared to last year. More benign, but not benign enough is the obvious conclusion.
Once into the corner, the car was generally reasonable enough although at times the power application was fractionally later than that of its rivals.
Mercedes
The Mercedes W16 ran like a metronome throughout testing. From the first morning, it looked well-balanced and consistent, and so it proved throughout.
While Kimi Antonelli had his moments where he overdid it and paid the price, generally he impressed.
With George Russell at the wheel, the car looked very responsive. Indeed, watching at the tight downhill Turn 10 on the final day, the Mercedes was the only car that could get the car hooked in on the apex kerb as effectively as the McLaren.
It remains to be seen whether the car really is this consistent given the unusually cool Bahrain temperatures, but on the evidence so far it’s a far more driver-friendly machine than its predecessor.
The only real concern was the number of front lock-ups, but those could be a result of the two downhill approaches to slow corners rather than a recurring issue.
Red Bull
The Red Bull is best described as rapid, but tricky. Early on, it looked like a well-balanced car but as the pace upped, so the limitations in rotation showed up. They never consistently went away despite Red Bull’s set-up experiments.
Max Verstappen had a run on the first day when he consistently struggled to get the car turned into the apex at Turn 10, while watching on the final day at Turn 4 the RB21 was never able to be quite as committed as the leading cars into the medium-speed right-hander at the end of the long straight.
The Red Bull isn’t slow and there were flashes when it looked like it was doing what the drivers wanted, but most of the time there was a hint of disconnected balance in the corners, delaying getting on the throttle.
Ferrari
Early on, the Ferrari sometimes looked responsive – but perhaps a little too responsive at times. On other occasions, the understeer kicked in. With the caveat that the final day was disrupted, the Ferrari still had moments when the front gave up and the rear slid more than hoped.
These traits weren’t overwhelming and it was a reasonably driver-friendly car, but the key question is whether it can be dialled in more or it doesn’t quite have the same consistency of grip and balance as its immediate rivals.
The Ferrari is promising, but needs a step dynamically if it’s to lead the way.
McLaren
The struggle with the rear end that Lando Norris talked of is clearly visible, but it’s best described as a controllable trait. You see the rear moving, particularly in the high-speed sweeps of Turn 5-7, but in many ways it’s beneficial on turn-in to slower corners.
Ideally, it would be dialled out but the McLaren right from the start looked like a very usable and responsive car. While others have lost that as they’ve zeroed in on their set-ups, McLaren has retained that look.
It’s not perfect and you can’t help but wonder if that instability will be a problem in qualifying trim on occasion, or overwork the rear tyres, but the McLaren otherwise looked the part on track.
