Why Red Bull has some big questions to answer in 2025

Writing off Red Bull rarely ends well in Formula 1. Those assuming its acquisition of the failing Jaguar team at the end of 2004 would result in failure learned that the hard way, as did Lewis Hamilton who, in his younger days, ill-advisedly dismissed it as merely “a drinks company versus McLaren, Ferrari history”. Tempting as it is to extrapolate last year’s slump from crushing dominance early on to winning just twice in the final 14 races, it’s risky to assume the Red Bull RB21 will extend that troubled trajectory. Amid last week’s focus on pre-season favorite McLaren’s launch, and Lewis Hamilton and Ferrari set to dominate the headlines around Tuesday’s F1 75 event in London, low-profile Red Bull will lie quietly in wait ready to reclaim what it sees as its rightful place at the top of grand prix racing. There are some big questions to answer if it is to give Max Verstappen the machinery capable of a record-equaling fifth-consecutive drivers’ championship. First and foremost, has it really recovered from the loss of Adrian Newey, a process that started long before his departure was announced last May? He’s admitted he felt increasingly marginalized, the consequence of a technical team that was frustrated F1’s biggest design name inevitably got the lion’s share of the credit for the squad’s success wanting to make a name for itself. Among the reasons he gave for leaving last year was a revealing comment on the High Performance Podcast that “they needed to show that they could do it on their own, so I thought well OK let’s give them the chance”. Newey also recognized underlying problems with the car even during the all-conquering 2023 campaign, in which Red Bull won 21 out of 22 races, that the brilliance of Verstappen masked. “That carried into the first part of ’24, but the car was still quick enough to be able to cope with it,” said Newey in a recent interview with Germany’s Auto Motor und Sport. “It was something I was starting to become concerned about, but not many other people in the organization seemed to be very concerned about. From what I can see from the outside, and this is no criticism, but I think they just, perhaps, through lack of experience kept going in that same direction. And the problem became more and more acute, to the point that even Max found it difficult to drive.” Newey combines design genius with a pragmatism that can elude brilliant technical brains. One of his great strengths is accepting real-world problems and taking corrective action to eliminate limitations without being too wedded to the existing pathway. Red Bull’s failure to take heed of what Newey saw, even when he was still in the fold, is a lesson in the value of not ploughing the same furrow in the belief that philosophy trumps reality. There were other problems, including an ageing windtunnel facility that team principal Christian Horner likes to point out is a relic of the Cold War – well-equipped internally, but temperature-sensitive and in the process of being replaced with a new facility – but Newey highlights a weakness in mindset. The key to Red Bull’s initial success under the current ground effect regulations from the start of 2022 was a suspension design – Newey’s work on the Red Bull RB18 – that gave a significant degree of platform control. These cars need to run low and relatively stiff to create significant downforce from the venturi tunnels without running into porpoising problems, and Red Bull achieved this brilliantly. Harnessed to a bodywork design that maximized the sidepod undercut, in stark contrast to the bulky outwash geometry of the Ferrari at that time, and complex underfloor ‘topography’, this gave it a significant performance advantage. But as the car evolved and downforce was added, balance limitations increasingly manifested themselves in the middle stages of 2023. This carried over into the following year. A combination of Red Bull’s ride problems and the tendency of this generation of cars to have low-speed understeer and high-speed oversteer, meant it was pushing up against a ceiling of performance, becoming trapped in the maelstrom of chasing a workable balance. In ’23, and early, ’24, Red Bull had such a performance advantage that this wasn’t a problem. Compromises could be made to compensate for that, but the limitation still existed. Running the car softer sacrificed significant downforce, and therefore performance, but as rivals closed in, Red Bull no longer had that margin to play with. And when McLaren introduced its major upgrade at Miami last May, the game changed. It took a long time for Red Bull to come to terms with how its seemingly impregnable position had been breached. Not until Monza in September did the penny drop, leading to a corrective package for October’s United States Grand Prix that helped Verstappen to victories in Brazil and Qatar late on. Red Bull wasn’t back on top then, but the losses had been stemmed. Crucially, it was McLaren’s flexible front wing, which allowed significant front load for slow corners but used the deflection to back off the wing when at higher speeds, that made all the difference. After all, without that flexibility, significant load for slow corners means even more for faster corners – doubly so, given the front wing itself runs in ground effect owing to its proximity to the ground. So a car with a strong front end at low speed will have problems with the front of the car being pinned in the fast stuff and the rear not having the grip to balance it up. Red Bull ended up with big problems in achieving a workable balance. McLaren, meanwhile, could run low with a quick car that was the most convincing all-rounder for the balance of the season, not hitting the ride or balance problems Red Bull did. Red Bull tried to fight the political battle, but this was unsuccessful. The team felt that the flexi-wings of McLaren and Mercedes, which also made gains in this area, were outside of what was permitted as a result of its own past experiences with such designs and FIA clampdowns. Red Bull has long set standards for working in these grey areas, but the line it understood had been drawn appeared to the team’s top brass to have moved. There was a feeling inside the team this was a convenient reinterpretation given the damage inflicted on F1 by its unrelenting dominance. Whatever the reason, within the cost cap, Red Bull couldn’t exploit what it saw as the redefined limit last year. This year it can, albeit with the caveat that the FIA has issued a technical directive that slashes the permitted front wing flexibility by 50% –from 15mm to 10mm – from the ninth round of the season in Spain onwards. It remains to be seen whether that will help or hinder Red Bull. Red Bull therefore has clear potential for improvement with its new car in this area, meaning it should be able to unlock more performance and modify its suspension characteristics to have something closer to what McLaren achieved. There’s no reason why it shouldn’t be in the thick of the fight, provided the lessons of last year have been learned and applied. If not, then the questions about whether it really can thrive post-Newey will resurface. Even if the Red Bull RB21 is a potential title winner, there are other concerns. Liam Lawson’s arrival in place of Sergio Perez is an unconvincing move, as with just 11 F1 starts over two stand-in runs under his belt he has yet to demonstrate he has the potential to be the strong number two Red Bull needs. The team banked on him as an upgrade on Perez, and he probably will be, but whether that’s enough to make Red Bull a constructors’ championship threat in what’s expected to be a close fight is up for debate. An effective teammate would also be a useful ally for Verstappen’s championship push, especially given the strength of McLaren and Ferrari’s line-ups. There’s also the question mark over Verstappen’s future. He flirted with a move to Mercedes for this year, and is a target for Aston Martin, where he could link up again with Newey and Honda in ’26. While under contract until the end of ’28, there are always ways to escape and Red Bull risks losing its prize asset if this year is anything like the experience of much of ’24. And even if the car offers Verstappen regular wins, the looming rule changes in ’26 and the introduction of Red Bull’s first in-house power unit – and remember, it doesn’t have any of Honda’s IP to use for this – creates another question mark that could persuade Verstappen to defect to a Mercedes-powered team. The worst-case scenario for Red Bull is alarming: struggles in ’25, the loss of Verstappen, difficulty in bringing in a new top-liner to replace him and the potential for a struggle for engine performance in ’26. Add to that the unsteady political situation that manifested itself at the top of Red Bull last year and it’s easy to foresee another long fallow period for Red Bull, as it endured in the seven years after its first spell of dominance in which it could only snipe for the odd win here and there. There’s even a doomsday scenario some have floated that if Red Bull struggles next year, Verstappen could even walk away during the season for some time off – not out of the question, given the power he yields in the driver market. The alternative is Red Bull thrives this year, the new power unit is a triumph, Verstappen stays and the struggles of the second half of last year become a long-forgotten memory. That’s what makes the next year or so a significant inflection point in the Red Bull story. As history shows us, it has a knack for confounding negative expectations, so amid the excitement about McLaren, Ferrari and Mercedes pre-season, don’t disregard what is still F1’s incumbent dominant force.