Alpine

F1 2026Overall Rating: 4.4/10

Pierre Gasly

Current +0.52 · Form +0.05

Franco Colapinto

Current -0.06 · Form -0.05

Qualifying Base

5.6

Race Base

5.2

Car Attributes

Qualifying Pace

5.6

Race Pace

5.2

Peak Downforce

4.3

High-Speed Corners

4.0

Low-Speed Corners

4.5

Straight-Line Speed

5.2

Active Aero Efficiency

4.1

Tyre Degradation Mgmt

4.6

Traction

4.2

Braking Stability

4.0

Ride Quality

4.5

Energy Recovery

4.5

Reliability

5.0

Alpine has a car with a meaningful split between what it can do in qualifying versus what happens in race trim. The A525's single-lap pace is the team's standout attribute, notably above where their broader package might suggest. But braking stability, active aero, and traction all fall below grid average, and those weaknesses surface over a full race distance when tire management and consistent braking references become critical. Gasly brings enough driver craft to extract value from the qualifying strength, while Colapinto's near-zero offset keeps expectations aligned.

Detailed Analysis

The braking instability is worth specific attention for prediction work. Circuits with multiple, heavy braking zones, particularly street circuits and technical circuits with slow hairpin sequences, will expose Alpine more than lap data from smooth, flowing tracks suggests. The traction deficit compounds this: drivers who cannot trust the braking point also struggle with the subsequent power application, meaning the losses accumulate in the same parts of the circuit. Gasly's experience should help him find setup compromises, but there is a limit to how much the driver can compensate for a structural mechanical weakness.

Alpine's strongest prediction window is qualifying at smooth, medium-speed circuits with good aerodynamic consistency. The car's above-average qualifying pace can produce grid positions that overstate its ultimate race pace, leading to the characteristic Alpine result: a strong start from a decent qualifying position, followed by gradual degradation and a final finishing position a few places lower than where they started. The practical implication is that Alpine qualifies better than they race, and the gap between their predicted qualifying position and their race finish will be wider than for most cars of a similar overall rating.

Development Timeline

Round 0Pre-Season

5.2

Pre-season baseline — biggest 2025-to-2026 jumper, Mercedes customer

race Pace 0.0traction 0.0quali Pace 0.0reliability +0.5ride Quality 0.0peak Downforce 0.0energy Recovery +0.3low Speed Corners 0.0tyre Degradation +0.3braking Stability 0.0high Speed Corners +0.2straight Line Speed +0.3active Aero Efficiency +0.2

Alpine made the biggest jump of any team from 2025 (last place) to 2026 midfield by switching attention early to the new regulations (The Race, F1.com). Mercedes customer team — third-best Mercedes-powered team behind works and McLaren. Gasly set 1:33.421 (+1.429s), which adjusted for his +0.4 driver offset suggests the car is ~1.8s off pole pace, consistent with upper-midfield positioning. 1,034 total laps with decent reliability. Expected to be 'within regular striking distance of Q3' (The Race). SANDBAGGING/PU CONTEXT: As a Mercedes customer, Alpine ran the same de-tuned PU mappings as McLaren and Williams during testing — 'more basic specification with simpler mappings' than the works team (Autosport). This means energyRecovery (5.3) and straightLineSpeed (5.3) are artificially depressed relative to the actual Mercedes PU hardware capability. The Mercedes compression ratio loophole (protested by all rival manufacturers) means Alpine has access to what is arguably the strongest PU on the grid, but the works-vs-customer knowledge gap and testing detuning mask the true potential. Alpine sits furthest from the works team in the optimization hierarchy.

Australian Grand PrixBaseline

4.3

Round 1 baseline — disappointing despite Mercedes PU; front wing 'injury' and deployment gaps

race Pace -0.5traction -0.8quali Pace -0.5reliability -0.5ride Quality -0.5peak Downforce -0.8energy Recovery -0.8low Speed Corners -0.5tyre Degradation -0.8braking Stability -1.0high Speed Corners -1.4straight Line Speed -0.3active Aero Efficiency -1.2

Underperformed expectations. Gasly P14 in quali (+1.983), scraped P10 in race. Front wing 'aerodynamic injury' causing high-speed understeer through Turns 9-10. Deployment 'messy', worst of 4 Mercedes-powered teams. Race pace 85.633 (+2.135) — 8th of 11. Colapinto 10s stop-go penalty (unsafe release). Gasly sustained front wing damage from Ocon contact. Sources: The Race, Motorsportweek, FIA speed trap PDFs, Formula1.com.

Chinese Grand PrixWeekend Final

4.4

Round 2 — dramatic improvement, double points, Gasly ahead of both Red Bulls

race Pace +0.6quali Pace +0.5

Alpine's biggest jump of 2026 so far. Gasly qualified P7 (ahead of both Red Bulls) and finished P6. Colapinto scored P10 — first points since 2024 US GP. Race pace 1.256s off Mercedes is on par with Haas and dramatically better than the 2.135s gap at Melbourne R1. Mercedes PU switch clearly paying dividends. Both qualiPace and racePace show confirmed multi-session improvement across sprint qualifying, qualifying, sprint, and race. Sources: Formula1.com, The Race, Alpine.

Japanese Grand PrixWeekend Final

4.4

Round 3 — Gasly P7 beats Verstappen, highest speed trap on grid, 3 upgrades

race Pace -0.0quali Pace +0.1peak Downforce +0.1tyre Degradation +0.1high Speed Corners +0.2straight Line Speed +0.2active Aero Efficiency +0.1

Gasly P7 held off Verstappen in a straight fight — significant given Red Bull's pedigree. Speed trap 333 km/h (tied 1st on grid, Mercedes PU). Upgrades: front air deflector, rear wing actuator revision, rear wing endplate redesign for more local load. Colapinto P16, over 0.5s off Gasly in qualifying. Good deg rate (-0.0177). Race pace +1.260s. Sources: Formula1.com, ReadMotorsport upgrades, FastF1 data.