There are, of course, multiple factors. And Spain was in decine, for multiple reasons, as the Industrial Revolution was starting to cook off in the 18th century -- whether you put the start date at the beginning, middle, or end of that period doen't much matter: Spain missed the starting gun, and never really got back in the game until the 20th century.

As to what country took title -- I'd have to check an authoritative source, possibly Maddison's data if it has sufficient granularity, but my money would be on France or the Netherlands, rather than England, at least through about 1755 (Seven Years War).

And by the 19th century, it was previously unorganised states such as Germany who'd utterly surpassed Spain, whilst the (now United) Britain benefitted hugely by avoiding the revolutions and wars that wracked Europe through 1848 (and somewhat beyond), as well as control of India (providing saltpetre for gunpowder) and China (general trade, once the Brits discovered the balance-of-trade leveling properties of opium), Canada, and Australia.

Even modest shifting of fuels away from wood gave compelling advantages. Smil credits Dutch use of peat for prt of that nation's success. Transport systems, ag productivity, attitudes toward invention and discovery (Catholic Spain vs Anglican England & Protestant Holland), canal building, political divisions, domestic resource access, colonial access, etc., etc., all played roles.

But after 1800, ability to access an utilise fossil fuels came to dominate, frequently a self-reinforcing process.

Smil, Weissenbacher, et al, make for fascinating reading (see previous).