Why Red Bull is still struggling to fix the RB22's "car degradation"

Red Bull has made progress with the RB22, but one of the car's most unusual weaknesses continues to follow Max Verstappen from circuit to circuit. He calls it "car degradation".

It has been a recurring theme this season, and the developments introduced at Monza and Madrid provide some of the clearest clues yet as to where Red Bull is looking for a solution.

What Verstappen means by 'car degradation'

The problem became especially visible at Monza.

Verstappen complained that components at the rear of the RB22 could deteriorate or stop behaving correctly during a session. After qualifying, he went as far as describing the car as being "made out of paper". This was not simply frustration over a difficult setup.

Red Bull has acknowledged that the RB22 suffers from a form of performance deterioration over time. Laurent Mekies later confirmed in Madrid that the problem is both real and complex.

"There is an element of car performance degradation that is happening through a session and through a race," the Red Bull team principal explained.

That is significant because Red Bull has already spent much of 2026 trying to broaden the RB22's operating window. The team's major Austrian Grand Prix upgrade reworked large sections of the floor, sidepods and rear of the car, producing a notable step in performance.

Yet the underlying inconsistency has remained.

The Monza updates offered the first clue

Red Bull's FIA submission for Monza contained two particularly interesting changes.

The first concerned the rear corner, specifically the gaiter around the suspension and wheel bodywork.

This flexible component helps maintain the aerodynamic seal around the suspension assembly. At Monza, Red Bull strengthened it because the existing version had a tendency to split around the wishbone.

The team also removed the winglet junctions normally attached in that area.

Removing those winglets made sense for Monza from a performance perspective because the circuit rewards low drag. But reducing the aerodynamic load acting on the component also helped reduce stress on the gaiter itself.

A damaged or distorted seal is especially problematic because airflow around the rear wheel is extremely sensitive. Once that flow begins behaving differently, the downstream effect can influence the rear floor, diffuser and ultimately the driver's confidence in the rear axle.

Red Bull had already experienced examples this season where Verstappen reported a sudden loss of rear aerodynamic performance, including the problems surrounding his Austrian Grand Prix qualifying crash.

Red Bull was also experimenting with the floor bib

The second Monza change was at the floor bib, the exposed forward section of the floor beneath the car. Red Bull revised its edge profile with the intention of generating more local load while improving aerodynamic stability. That appeared to be a conventional performance development.

One week later in Madrid, however, the description changed significantly. Red Bull modified not only the geometry of the bib but also its laminate structure, specifically addressing how the component behaved when it deflected under load.

According to the team's FIA submission, the objective was to reduce local strain and prevent deterioration of both the structure and the aerodynamic surfaces.

That wording is important. Formula 1 floors operate under enormous aerodynamic forces. Teams deliberately engineer a controlled degree of flexibility into components, but that movement must remain predictable.

If a section flexes differently after repeated loading, impacts or kerb strikes, the aerodynamic geometry presented to the airflow can change.

And with a car as sensitive as the RB22, a very small structural change can become a much larger balance problem.

Madrid strengthened the rear corner again

Red Bull continued working on exactly the same area at MADRING. The stronger rear-corner gaiter remained, but the team reintroduced winglets downstream of the suspension fairings.

The objective was to recover the aerodynamic load sacrificed at Monza while retaining the more robust sealing solution. The evolution is telling.

At Monza, Red Bull effectively simplified the assembly and concentrated on keeping it intact. In Madrid, it attempted to put the performance back onto that stronger foundation.

The images of the two specifications make the change particularly clear: the Monza version removes aerodynamic furniture around the rear-corner assembly, while the Madrid design restores additional elements around the reinforced component.

Taken together with the floor-bib revision, it suggests Red Bull is not merely searching for more peak downforce.

It is trying to make that downforce repeatable.

Why rigidity matters as much as outright performance

This is where the RB22 problem becomes more complicated than simply adding another aerodynamic upgrade. Every Formula 1 team faces a compromise between weight, flexibility and structural rigidity.

Make a component unnecessarily stiff and it becomes heavier. Make it too light or flexible and its geometry can change under aerodynamic load, vibration or repeated kerb strikes. The aerodynamicists then have a moving target.

A component may produce excellent numbers in the wind tunnel or CFD at a prescribed geometry, but that performance becomes irrelevant if the real car cannot maintain the same shape throughout a qualifying session or Grand Prix.

This could explain why Verstappen sometimes reports that the RB22 feels fundamentally different after several laps despite relatively little changing from the driver's perspective.

It also explains why there is unlikely to be a quick fix.

The problem may run deeper than one component

It would be tempting to look at Red Bull's Monza and Madrid submissions and conclude that the floor bib or rear-corner gaiter is the definitive cause. The evidence does not support going that far.

Red Bull itself has not identified the root cause publicly, and Mekies has repeatedly described the problem as complex. The RB22's entire aerodynamic package is highly interconnected.

Red Bull has already made substantial changes to the sidepod, cooling and floor architecture this year. The Austria package, for example, reworked how airflow travels around the sidepods and into the critical rear-floor region.

That development helped produce one of Verstappen's strongest performances of the year, but it did not eliminate the underlying sensitivity.

This is why Red Bull's continued push to turn the RB22 into a race-winning car is as much about understanding the platform as simply finding more downforce. The team needs a car that produces the same aerodynamic behaviour on Lap 30 that it produced on Lap 3.

Madrid showed progress, but not a solution

There were encouraging signs in Spain. Verstappen finished second at MADRING and reported greater confidence in the car than he had experienced at Monza. But the final classification slightly exaggerated Red Bull's competitiveness.

Lando Norris lost his chance to remain ahead through the unfortunate timing of the Virtual Safety Car, while Kimi Antonelli's Mercedes remained beyond Verstappen's reach at the front.

Red Bull had improved, but it had not suddenly matched Mercedes or McLaren on underlying pace. More importantly, Mekies confirmed after the weekend that the wider degradation problem remains. Red Bull believes it made some positive steps in Madrid, but solving the issue completely is another matter.

The real RB22 challenge is consistency

The Monza and Madrid updates reveal an interesting change in Red Bull's development priorities.

Earlier in the season, much of the focus was on finding outright performance. The team changed the floor, sidepods, rear wing and bodywork in an attempt to close the gap to Mercedes, Ferrari and McLaren.

Now, structural consistency appears to be receiving just as much attention as peak aerodynamic load.

The revised floor laminate, stronger gaiter and repeated work around the rear suspension all point towards a car that Red Bull is trying to make more robust aerodynamically, not simply faster in ideal conditions.

That distinction could be crucial.

The RB22 clearly has performance in it. Verstappen has repeatedly extracted podium results from the package and, on the right circuit, has been able to operate surprisingly close to the front. The problem is keeping the car in that window.

Until Red Bull can guarantee that the aerodynamic platform remains stable across an entire session or race, the RB22 will continue to be a car whose ultimate pace is more convincing than its ability to reproduce it.

And that may be the hardest problem of all to engineer out.