Lawson details 'biggest challenge' of Red Bull switch: Two cars, one goal, and the adaptation puzzle

ZANDVOORT, Netherlands – When Liam Lawson received the call on Wednesday morning, he knew he would not be driving the Racing Bulls at Zandvoort. Isack Hadjar, the young French driver, had suffered a wrist injury during a practice session, and Red Bull needed an immediate replacement. Lawson, who had been demoted to the junior Racing Bulls team after the Japanese Grand Prix earlier in the season, was called up. But what he did not anticipate was the sheer degree of difference between the two cars he would have to master in less than a week.

"The biggest challenge is not the speed, but the difference in how the car behaves," Lawson told reporters at Monza, where he will continue driving the Red Bull RB21 for this weekend's Italian Grand Prix. "These two cars are different everywhere, except for the engine. The driving feel, the feedback from the steering wheel, the way the car moves through the corners – all of it is completely different."

This is a rare and candid observation from a driver in a unique position: Lawson is one of the few drivers in modern F1 history to have the opportunity to drive both cars of the same corporate group in the same season. He completed the Zandvoort race in 7th place, scoring points for Red Bull, but the journey to that result was far from easy.

Context: An unusual chain of upheaval

To understand Lawson's situation, one must look at the entire chain of events in the 2026 season. Lawson started the season at Red Bull, but after the Japanese Grand Prix, he was demoted to Racing Bulls to make way for Yuki Tsunoda. This decision sparked considerable controversy among fans, with many arguing that Lawson had not been given enough time to prove himself.

Then, at Zandvoort, Hadjar suffered a wrist injury. Lawson was called up as a replacement, but he only knew for certain on Wednesday – three days before the first practice session. "I was preparing for both possibilities," Lawson explained. "I talked to both teams' engineers to stay ready for every scenario. But when the confirmation came, it still felt a bit late. However, there was enough time for a simulator session and normal preparation."

This dual preparation is precisely what Lawson calls the "biggest challenge." He not only had to learn to drive a new car, but also had to maintain readiness for both cars – a mental and physical burden that few drivers have to face.

Technical analysis: The difference between the two cars

The key point in Lawson's analysis is the structural difference between the Red Bull RB21 and the Racing Bulls car. Both use the same Honda RBPT engine, but the chassis, suspension system, and especially the aerodynamics are completely different.

"The most impressive thing about the Red Bull is its high-speed grip," Lawson noted. "This car generates downforce very efficiently in fast corners. The balance of the car is also very different – it demands a completely different driving style."

This observation aligns with Red Bull's design philosophy under the ground-effect era that began in 2026. The RB21 is optimized to generate downforce through the floor and diffuser at high speed, a characteristic that has helped Max Verstappen dominate at high-speed circuits. However, this also means the car has a narrower "operating window" – it is fast when set up correctly, but harder to drive when not in the optimal zone.

In contrast, the Racing Bulls car appears easier to drive at the limit but has a lower performance ceiling. This is the classic trade-off in F1 car design: a car with a wider operating window (more forgiving balance) tends to sacrifice ultimate downforce. Lawson confirmed this when he said that "the feedback through the steering and the way it moves around" are completely different between the two cars.

Signals from the simulator

Another important detail Lawson revealed is that the difference between the two cars can be felt even in the simulator. "Even in the simulator, the two cars are very different to drive," he said. This confirms the high fidelity of Red Bull's simulator program – a crucial development tool that helps the team optimize performance without needing to run too many on-track tests.

For an analyst, this is valuable data. A simulator that can accurately reproduce differences in car characteristics is a major competitive advantage. It allows engineers to test different setups and train drivers more effectively, especially in emergency situations like Lawson's.

Contrarian view: P7 at Zandvoort may understate the RB21's potential

Lawson's P7 result at Zandvoort can be seen as a success, but it may also be hiding an important truth: the RB21 could be much faster than what Lawson showed. With only three days of preparation and having to adapt to a completely different car, Lawson may not have extracted the full potential of the car.

This raises an interesting question: If Lawson had more time to get familiar with the RB21, could he have achieved a better result? And more importantly, does this P7 result reflect Lawson's true level, or is it just a glimpse of what he could do?

At Monza, with three practice sessions instead of just one as at Zandvoort (which ran a Sprint format), Lawson will have roughly two additional hours of track time to adapt to the RB21. This, as he himself admitted, "should be easier to adjust" and represents "another good opportunity."

The Monza challenge: Different track characteristics

Monza is a track with completely different characteristics from Zandvoort. It is the lowest-downforce circuit on the F1 calendar, with long straights and high speeds. This means the RB21's strength – high-speed grip – will be less relevant than at Zandvoort, which has many fast corners.

However, the RB21's aerodynamic efficiency should still translate to competitive straight-line speed. The bigger issue may lie in tire management. Monza is known for high tire degradation, particularly on the front-left under braking. A driver still adapting to a car's balance may struggle more with tire management than with raw lap time.

Strategic implications: The evaluation for 2026

This driver shuffle is not merely a temporary measure to address Hadjar's injury. It could be part of a larger Red Bull strategy to evaluate drivers for the 2026 season, when new technical regulations come into effect.

With Lawson driving the RB21 and Tsunoda demoted to Racing Bulls, Red Bull is creating a direct comparison between two drivers in two different cars. This is a smart but risky approach: it can help the team determine who deserves the official race seat, but it can also damage the morale of the drivers being shuffled.

Tsunoda, who was promoted to Red Bull after the Japanese Grand Prix, now finds himself back at Racing Bulls. This is the second time in the season that the Japanese driver has faced this change. It sends a clear signal that Red Bull is not fully confident in his abilities, and Tsunoda's long-term future within the Red Bull program is now genuinely uncertain.

Conclusion: A test not just of speed

The Monza weekend will be a crucial test not only of Lawson's speed, but also of his adaptability, pressure management, and situational handling. With three practice sessions, he will have a better opportunity to get familiar with the RB21 and show what he can do.

But the bigger question remains: Will Lawson's performance at Monza be convincing enough for Red Bull to offer him a full-time race seat in 2026? And can Tsunoda use his opportunity at Racing Bulls to prove he deserves another chance?

In the world of F1, where every decision is made based on data and results, this weekend could be a significant turning point in the careers of both drivers. And as Lawson has pointed out, the biggest challenge is not speed, but the ability to adapt to what cannot be measured by a stopwatch.