Mercedes wonders: Why were some corners in Zandvoort “underground”?

– “Underground”: This is how Andrew Shovlin, Chief Engineer at the racetrack for Mercedes, describes the team’s pace in the fast corners of Zandvoort and looks for explanations as to why the overall performance changed so drastically during the Formula 1 race in the Netherlands between stints and drivers.

Read more «Financially makes no sense»: Why Toyota builds fun cars

After a strong start to the Zandvoort weekend with pole position and the sprint win by George Russell, Mercedes fell behind McLaren driver Lando Norris, who secured pole position and the win in the main race.

Although Mercedes still took second and third places in qualifying and the race, the team is puzzled as to why the initial pace could not be maintained over the entire weekend compared to its biggest rivals.

“We have some things on the performance side that we need to analyze thoroughly,” says Shovlin in the Mercedes broadcast Nu Silver Arrows Radio Show. “We will be working on this week to see what we can learn from it.”

“But there were a few corners where we were pretty underground, such as the combination of corners seven, eight, and nine. You could see that in the faster sections. And it also puts a lot of strain on the tires on the left side of the car. We still don’t fully understand what the cause is.”

Mercedes does have a few guesses, “but this is not a problem we have suffered from so far this year. And there are many racetracks with continuous corners in one direction.”

“In the fastest of these sections, we lacked some speed. And our problems worsened somewhat as the race went on. All other corners looked solid.”

Mysterious Pace Variations

What increased the confusion at Mercedes: Only minimal changes were made to both cars between the sprint race and the Grand Prix as well as during the race itself.

Read more WRC Rally Paraguay 2026: Pajari makes history with hat-trick

While Shovlin accepts a certain amount of expected pace variations depending on tire compound and age, the fact that both drivers struggled at different times during the race left Mercedes unclear about the cause.

Photo gallery: Zandvoort: The driver ratings by Marc Surer and the editorial team

“We didn’t change the car. Of course, we had different compounds fitted at different times. But we still need to understand that better,” he says.

“George’s first stint was somewhat conservative compared to his later ones. For Kimi, on the other hand, the first stint was good, the second dropped off a bit, and the third even more, before he recovered somewhat towards the end of the third stint,” says Shovlin.

“It wasn’t that we played around with electronic settings or constantly changed wing angles. And for him, the car balance was completely different from stint to stint.”

One Understeering, One Oversteering

Normally, both drivers would report similar things about the car at the end of the race, he says. But: “Regarding the perception of balance – and this probably corresponded to reality – George had a rather understeering car, while Kimi’s car tended more towards oversteering.”

“When we look at how the cars were set up, we still don’t know exactly why we had such a big difference,” Shovlin wonders.

Teamwork and Resistance: Mercedes supports Kimi, Hamilton angry at Leclerc I F1 Race Zandvoort 2026

“Still, it was extremely good to score strong points even though we were not at our peak performance. It was actually a lot of fun at the command post to have to make decisions under time pressure. I think the whole team enjoyed it and rose to the occasion. Given our conditions, that was definitely a good result.”

Read more IndyCar Milwaukee 2 2026: Mick Schumacher misses new best result

“But yes: We still have some headaches ahead in the next few days.”