Magny-Cours GT3 2026 FP1 FP2 Results: Fastest Cars, Full Times & Early Takeaways

The official FP1 classification covered 44 cars. Every starter recorded a classified time, and the session included one full-course-yellow phase. The timing sheet listed wet conditions at both the start and finish. However, the fastest laps arrived late, which suggests the surface improved enough for the leading cars to approach normal dry-lap pace.

FP2 was more clearly shaped by rain. The session began at 8:45 p.m. local time and ended at 9:34:27 p.m. Only 38 cars started, 26 set classified laps and 12 remained without a time. Therefore, FP2 cannot be treated as a complete dry-form ranking.

FP1’s top three were all Mercedes-AMG GT3 EVOs. Gounon led Dienst by 0.231 seconds, while Lucas Auer and Maro Engel’s #48 Winward car sat another 0.021 seconds behind. Championship leaders Weerts and van der Linde followed in fourth with the #32 Team WRT BMW.

FP2 mixed every class into the top four. A Silver Cup Aston Martin led a Bronze Cup Mercedes, a Pro Mercedes and a Gold Cup Porsche. Consequently, the wet order offered useful evidence about driver confidence and tire preparation rather than a simple forecast of the qualifying grid.

FP1 ran from 1:30 to 2:50 p.m. local time on Friday, July 31. The official record showed 24.1°C air and 23.9°C track temperature at the start. By the finish, air temperature had risen to 29.2°C and the track reached 26.1°C. The timing document described the surface as wet at both ends of the session.

Gounon recorded his best lap on lap 16 at 2:42:31 p.m. The next four fastest cars also completed their benchmarks within the final eight minutes. Therefore, the closing order reflected the improving circuit more strongly than the early session.

How close was FP1?

The top 10 sat within 0.631 seconds. Moreover, 20 cars were covered by 1.009 seconds, and 39 cars finished within 2.077 seconds. The gap from first to 44th was 3.321 seconds.

That density made traffic and lap timing crucial. A driver who missed the best surface window could fall several rows without a major setup problem. As a result, FP1 position alone did not prove that a team lacked qualifying pace.

FP1 class leaders

The #3 Mercedes-AMG led Pro and the overall order. Dienst and Salikhov’s #87 Mercedes led Bronze from second overall. The #10 Boutsen VDS Porsche headed Gold in fifth, while the #30 Team WRT BMW was the leading Silver car in eighth.

Three class leaders finished inside the top five. In addition, the Silver leader was inside the top eight. That mixed order showed how little separated the strongest amateur-class and professional entries on the improving surface.

FP2 began at 8:45 p.m. local time and ran until 9:34:27 p.m. The official sheet recorded wet conditions from start to finish. Air temperature fell from 23.9°C to 21.6°C, while the track dropped from 25.7°C to 24.0°C.

Jamie Day set the fastest lap at 9:29:10 p.m. on the #34 Aston Martin’s seventh lap. Dienst answered 97 seconds later but missed the benchmark by 0.065 seconds. Auer and Engel completed the top three at 1:54.643.

Why did FP2 contain so few classified cars?

Only 38 of the entered cars started FP2, and 12 of those did not record a classified lap. The timing sheet listed no safety-car or full-course-yellow phase. Therefore, limited running came from the wet session plan and teams’ decisions rather than a recorded neutralization.

Several headline Pro cars remained unclassified. The list included the FP1-leading #3 Mercedes, the #46 Team WRT BMW of Hesse and Rossi, both Garage 59 McLarens, and the #50 AF Corse Ferrari. Their absence makes direct session-to-session position comparisons unreliable.

FP2 cars without a classified time

Twelve starters appeared in the final document without a classified lap. This does not mean every car suffered a technical problem. In a wet practice session, teams may choose not to chase a representative time when the risk or data value is low.

Bronze Cup: the #87 Mercedes was Friday’s clearest signal

Dienst and Salikhov did more than lead Bronze. They finished second overall twice. In FP1, the car missed Gounon’s time by 0.231 seconds. In FP2, it came within 0.065 seconds of Day.

That consistency suggested a broad setup window. The Mercedes-AMG worked as the surface improved in FP1 and remained competitive in heavier wet conditions later. However, practice pace still required clean qualifying execution.

Gold Cup: Boutsen VDS repeated its class lead

Magnus and Knutsson ranked fifth in FP1 and fourth in FP2. Therefore, the #10 Porsche was the only Gold car to lead its class in both sessions. It also stayed within 0.512 seconds of the overall benchmark on each occasion.

Silver Cup: two BMW and Aston Martin reference points

Lismont and Montenegro led Silver in FP1 with eighth overall. Day and Villagomez then took the class and overall lead in FP2. Walkenhorst’s wet performance was especially relevant because the second race weekend session took place near the Saturday night-race window.

Pro Cup: Mercedes led both useful comparisons

The #3 Verstappen Racing Mercedes led FP1, while the #48 Winward Mercedes became the fastest classified Pro car in FP2. Aston Martin followed closely through Thiim and Pauwels in fifth overall. Meanwhile, the Rutronik Lamborghini ranked sixth and provided encouraging wet data for the new Temerario.

The official documents label both sessions wet. Yet the lap-time difference shows that the phrase covers very different grip levels. FP1’s late 1:37 laps were close to the circuit’s established GT3 pace. FP2 remained substantially slower and produced a much smaller classified field.

Consequently, the two sessions answer different questions. FP1 gives the better clue about raw qualifying potential. FP2 shows which crews could create tire temperature, confidence and visibility in wetter evening conditions.

Why the leading teams appeared late

Many FP1 personal bests came after 2:38 p.m. This pattern supports a simple inference: the circuit became faster near the end. Gounon, Dienst, Weerts, Magnus and Marschall all set their best laps during the final minutes.

FP2 also improved late enough for the first two times to arrive after 9:29 p.m. However, the track remained wet and the session ended minutes later. Teams that delayed their run had little margin for traffic or a mistake.

Mercedes-AMG: strongest combined Friday

Mercedes occupied the entire FP1 top three. Moreover, the #87 and #48 Winward entries remained second and third in FP2. That repeated performance made Mercedes the clearest manufacturer winner from Friday.

The results did not guarantee pole because qualifying used short split sessions. Still, Verstappen Racing and Winward both demonstrated a competitive baseline across changing grip.

Aston Martin: the wet-weather headline

Walkenhorst’s #34 went from 10th in FP1 to first in FP2. Comtoyou’s #7 also ranked fifth in the evening session. Therefore, two Aston Martins appeared inside the wet top five.

The Vantage’s confidence under braking and traction out of slow corners appeared useful. However, the result was also driver-specific. Twelve cars set no classified time, and several dry-condition favorites were absent from the order.

Porsche: the #10 and #9 cars stayed visible

The Gold Cup #10 Boutsen VDS Porsche ranked fifth and fourth. Pure Rxcing’s Silver Cup #9 finished 18th in FP1, then improved to 10th in FP2. Lionspeed’s #80 sat only 40th in FP1 and 13th in FP2, a reminder that practice positions can hide race potential.

Indeed, the #80 crew later became one of the event’s leading race contenders. That hindsight reinforces a useful analytical rule: do not eliminate a proven team because one practice lap was unrepresentative.

BMW: solid FP1, incomplete FP2 picture

The #32 Team WRT BMW placed fourth in FP1, while the Silver #30 finished eighth. Rossi and Hesse’s #46 was 16th. Yet the #46 and #32 did not provide comparable classified FP2 reference laps.

Therefore, BMW’s Friday story came mainly from FP1. The car remained close to Mercedes on the improving track, but wet-session ranking offered less evidence.

Ferrari, Audi and Lamborghini

Ferrari placed two cars inside the FP1 top 12 through the #74 Kessel entry and #69 Emil Frey Pro car. Kessel remained ninth in FP2. Audi’s best FP2 result was the Saintéloc Bronze car in seventh, followed by the #66 Tresor Attempto Silver entry.

Rutronik’s Lamborghini made the biggest useful session gain among the new Temerario entries. It moved from 28th in FP1 to sixth in FP2 and became the third-fastest Pro car. That result suggested the package was comfortable in low-grip conditions.

1. Gounon had a real qualifying reference

The #3 Mercedes set the best Friday lap and reached 163.3 km/h average speed. Its late timing matched the fastest surface window. Therefore, Verstappen Racing entered qualifying with a credible one-lap benchmark.

2. Winward looked strong in both classes

The #48 Pro car and #87 Bronze car placed inside the top three twice. That consistency suggested both cars had stable setups. It also gave Winward useful comparison data across professional and amateur-driver programs.

3. Aston Martin gained the most from the wet evening

The #34 and #7 Aston Martins finished first and fifth. The result pointed toward good confidence in low grip. Nevertheless, the unclassified cars mean the brand’s advantage should not be projected directly onto a dry qualifying session.

4. Friday position did not equal race strength

Lionspeed ranked 40th in FP1 and 13th in FP2. Garage 59 was 20th in FP1 and unclassified in FP2. Both remained serious teams because long-run plans, driver allocation and interrupted laps can hide speed.

5. The class battles were close enough to affect the overall race

Bronze, Gold and Silver leaders all entered the overall top eight in FP1. The FP2 top four contained four different classes. As a result, Pro cars could not expect simple passes through slower-class traffic during the races.