Charles Leclerc delivered a stunning upset at the Hungarian Grand Prix, snatching pole position from a seemingly dominant McLaren outfit. This unexpected triumph on the final lap of qualifying left many questioning how the Ferrari driver managed to outmaneuver the pre-quali favorites, Oscar Piastri and Lando Norris, who had shown blistering pace throughout the session.

McLaren’s performance in Q2 hinted at a strong challenge for pole, with their cars dipping comfortably into the 1m14s range. However, this formidable speed appeared to dissipate when it mattered most in Q3, leaving analysts and fans alike wondering about the sudden evaporation of their competitive edge on the Hungaroring circuit.

Early indicators of McLaren’s struggles emerged during their initial runs on fresh soft tires in Q3. While their times in the 1m15.4s still kept them at the top, a lack of significant improvement on subsequent attempts, particularly in the crucial first sector, signaled that something was indeed amiss with their qualifying strategy or car setup.

A deeper dive into the GPS data reveals where Charles Leclerc gained his decisive advantage over Oscar Piastri. Leclerc exhibited superior straight-line speed in the first sector, being 7kph faster before Turn 1 and a remarkable 10kph quicker on entry into Turn 4. This substantial gain contrasted sharply with their Q2 performances, where Leclerc’s speed benefit was marginal.

Conversely, Piastri demonstrated strength in the uphill Turn 5, gaining nearly two tenths on Leclerc, and maintained an advantage through the subsequent technical sections. His approach involved more direct throttle application and less braking, whereas Leclerc subtly managed his throttle and used corrective braking, setting up a better exit from Turn 9.

Further analysis of the braking zones shows Leclerc gaining over a tenth at Turn 12, even as Piastri momentarily clawed back a hundredth with less braking. However, Piastri’s increased braking into Turn 13, leading to a more cautious throttle input, narrowed his lead to a mere 0.01s, indicating a complex interplay of technique and track conditions.

The climax of Leclerc’s pole lap came at the final corner exit, Turn 14. His technique of longer braking combined with maintaining a touch of throttle proved crucial. Drivers faced a tailwind on entry, demanding more braking, followed by a headwind on exit for acceleration. Leclerc’s previous “sighter lap” provided vital information, allowing him to optimize his exit where Piastri faltered, especially in the wind-affected areas.

Ultimately, Oscar Piastri’s best Q3 lap was almost half a second slower than his impressive Q2 pace. The prevailing headwind significantly impacted his performance, costing him up to 10kph into the braking zone for Turn 1. While a tailwind out of Turn 2 offered a slight push, it wasn’t enough to compensate for the broader losses.

McLaren’s overall dip in pace through Sector 1, perhaps a strategy to conserve tires for the latter half of the lap, did not pay off. The consistent linear loss of time throughout the lap, primarily due to the wind upsetting the car’s balance, culminated in Piastri needing to take the final corner with 10kph less through-corner speed, necessitating prolonged braking to maintain rear stability.