WHAT THIS 24 HOURS OF LE MANS REALLY TELLS US

Let’s say it right away: the latest 24 Hours of Le Mans was a great race. Close battles, intensity from start to finish, and barely any interruptions (just one safety car in 24 hours). It was all about pace and strategy. Spectacle? Definitely there.

But let’s get to the point. Looking at the performance hierarchy, it was clear Ferrari came in as the favorite. I’d said it repeatedly—even to those worried or confused after practice and qualifying about the 499P’s lap times. The truth? They had no reason to show their cards. They were already ahead. And that’s exactly how it played out.

The outcome? Outstanding. Three consecutive wins at Le Mans, undefeated in every round of the 2025 World Championship so far. But the race execution? Honestly, no. It didn’t live up to the dominance the record might suggest. In fact, at times it seemed like Ferrari was actively trying to make things harder for themselves. And they succeeded.

Too many mistakes. Some avoidable, others just baffling. Speeding into the pits after days of practice? Team radios full of bickering about position swaps? Maybe understandable once or twice—but not for entire stints. Not in a race where every tenth counts and rivals are ready to pounce. Not even Toyota, when they were running basically uncontested, fumbled like that.

In the end, the #83 took the win. But let’s be honest: without someone like Robert Kubica behind the wheel, we’d probably be telling a different story. Ye and Hanson were solid, sure—but only Kubica had the pace. And with the #51 in trouble and the #50 held back by the team, the risk of losing was very real. It would’ve taken just one more slip, and Estre could’ve walked away with it.

Speaking of Porsche: in the pre-race analysis, I said the #6 could trouble Ferrari—even from the back of the grid. I suggested watching their onboard, convinced their first stint would be spectacular. And it was. Starting Estre instead of Vanthoor was the right call. The Frenchman was in the zone. And when he’s like that, he’s one of the best in the WEC. No doubt about it.

The difference between Ferrari and Porsche? It’s in the data. The 499Ps had a more balanced, more drivable setup. In sectors two and three, they were clearly faster. Ferrari went for a complete car. Porsche gambled on top speed. But without any power upgrades since 2024—just like Peugeot—the gap showed. And it played out predictably: the #5 and #4 started strong, then gradually faded. The #6? Flawless. No mistakes, no penalties, three drivers always on pace. And still, not enough. If that’s not proof Ferrari had the superior car, I don’t know what is.

Cadillac and BMW had their moments, but only in flashes. Cadillac, in particular, lacked top speed—a dealbreaker at Le Mans, especially with such a competitive field. Toyota did what it could with the #8, but simply didn’t have the tools. Maybe it’s time to stop treating the GR010 like it’s a second-per-lap faster than the rest.

Alpine disappointed. That said, Schumacher did a fantastic job—faster than his teammates, consistent, effective. Aston Martin showed glimpses of pace. Peugeot, with a more favorable BoP, could’ve done more.

And that brings us to the real issue: the Balance of Performance. After four races, it’s hard to deny that something isn’t working. Sure, everyone sees what they want to see. But if someone can consistently predict how races will go just by reading the BoP—without waiting for a single lap to be run—then maybe it’s fair to question the system’s current balance.

This isn’t an accusation. It’s not a conspiracy theory. It’s a fact-based observation. If a tool meant to level the playing field keeps producing predictable outcomes and clear imbalances, then maybe it’s time to rethink it. No blame. No drama. Just a necessary conversation.

© Simone Marchetti Cavalieri

Race Frame