Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

2026 Formula One Season Thread

The-Real-Deal82 said:
I think there is also the possibility that Max has no intention of retiring from F1 and is using his status within the sport to force a change of engine regs, as the BBC have questioned in an article this morning. There is talk the FIA are not happy with the state of the current racing and the fans/drivers reactions to it, but approaching a group of engine manufacturers and telling them those billions they have invested over the past 3 years developing their PU's might have waste, would not be an easy task. Wasn't there talk about changing the engine regs again in 2029 and Mercedes threw a fit and blocked it? I may have imagined that.
Click to expand...

I’m not familiar with any Mercedes opposition to something in 2029. I understand both sides of these ICE issues. I’m not one who feels Mercedes should be penalized for doing the engineering required to have a superior PU given the regulations they have. F1 has always been about innovation. I think most agree with this.

I’m just not satisfied at all with the 50/50 split. F1 did a poor job listening to drivers and implementing the Hybrid System. I think there are serious safety concerns right now. Hopefully this will allow some changes to improve racing under the umbrella of safety. I’m not confident though.

Miami might be interesting, might not. It’s definitely my least favorite circuit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The-Real-Deal82
The-Real-Deal82 said:
Wasn't there talk about changing the engine regs again in 2029 and Mercedes threw a fit and blocked it? I may have imagined that.
Click to expand...

Audi was adamantly against a non-electric engine formula and were the biggest supporter of the current 50/50 configuration (well, until Toto learned that his team had aced the formula like they had in 2013 😛).

So when the FIA president floated the idea of a return to V8s or V10s and to do so two years earlier than the next planned engine formula change (2029 vs. 2031), Audi balked hard. And 2029 was when Cadillac was planning to deliver their PU, so a change that early would have been pointless. I also think Mercedes, RBFPT and Honda would have been against a 2029 change, even if they were okay with a formula change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glideslope and The-Real-Deal82
So Mercedes and Red Bull Ford have found a way around the power reduction demands of the new engines at the end of qualifying laps. Normally, the MGU-K will ramp down from the 350mW maximum in 50kW increments towards the end of a lap.

In the case of Mercedes and RBF, they are able to deploy the full 350kW through the end of their lap, at the cost of the MGU-K then being "locked out" for one minute afterwards. This explains why some cars with those PUs (Verstappen, Antonelli, Albon, Colapinto) run either extremely slowly or even have to stop on track for a short period after their qualifying lap to wait for the MGU-K to recover.

It does not change how much energy they can spend, so running at 350kW will mean they deploy for less time compared to running at gradually reducing power levels, but it can be a small net laptime gain overall.

The rules allow for such, but the FIA added the 60 second penalty in the hopes it would prevent teams from using it during normal racing conditions, which is why we do not see it happen in Free Practice or the Grand Prix/Sprint. But since teams need to recover their battery and manage their tire temps after a flying lap in qualifying, the MGU-K penalty is an acceptable trade-off.

www.the-race.com

The new Mercedes engine trick that's annoyed Ferrari

There's another F1 2026 engine trick that Mercedes and Red Bull are exploiting, which has only been exposed by a weird side-effect
www.the-race.com www.the-race.com

 
  • Like
Reactions: Glideslope and The-Real-Deal82
CWallace said:
So Mercedes and Red Bull Ford have found a way around the power reduction demands of the new engines at the end of qualifying laps. Normally, the MGU-K will ramp down from the 350mW maximum in 50kW increments towards the end of a lap.

In the case of Mercedes and RBF, they are able to deploy the full 350kW through the end of their lap, at the cost of the MGU-K then being "locked out" for one minute afterwards. This explains why some cars with those PUs (Verstappen, Antonelli, Albon, Colapinto) run either extremely slowly or even have to stop on track for a short period after their qualifying lap to wait for the MGU-K to recover.

It does not change how much energy they can spend, so running at 350kW will mean they deploy for less time compared to running at gradually reducing power levels, but it can be a small net laptime gain overall.

The rules allow for such, but the FIA added the 60 second penalty in the hopes it would prevent teams from using it during normal racing conditions, which is why we do not see it happen in Free Practice or the Grand Prix/Sprint. But since teams need to recover their battery and manage their tire temps after a flying lap in qualifying, the MGU-K penalty is an acceptable trade-off.

www.the-race.com

The new Mercedes engine trick that's annoyed Ferrari

There's another F1 2026 engine trick that Mercedes and Red Bull are exploiting, which has only been exposed by a weird side-effect
www.the-race.com www.the-race.com

Click to expand...

60sec of no MGU creates dangerous deltas. This needs to be addressed before Miami.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paul1964
Glideslope said:
60sec of no MGU creates dangerous deltas. This needs to be addressed before Miami.
Click to expand...

Since it is legal under the rules, it would require a unanimous decision by the teams to change and I cannot see any team with the benefit letting it go.

Yes, the FIA could conceivably change it on the grounds of safety, but we have yet to see any dangerous incidents because of it.

Now that it is publicly known, the teams can inform their drivers when following a Mercedes or RBFT-powered on a hot lap that they can expect it to slow down significantly once past Start/Finish. Those drivers also need to pull well off the racing line once they have completed their hot lap until the MGU-K is back online.
 
While this was posted by The Race on 1 April, other media were running the report earlier in the week so this seems legit.

Aston Martin has apparently developed at least a significant partial fix for the chassis vibrations at least being transmitted through to the steering wheel to the driver. They ran it on Friday, but removed it overnight so Alonso was surprised when he did his first laps on Saturday to find the vibrations back.

Chief trackside officer Mike Krack confirmed that they tested it during FP1 and FP2, but chose to remove it for the rest of the weekend as it was a new part and they were not confident of the reliability. As it is believed to be part of the steering column, honestly a wise choice, IMO.

www.the-race.com

Why Aston Martin removed vibration fix and how it confused Alonso

Aston Martin removed a component that cured most of the discomfort its F1 drivers have suffered and did not race it at the Japanese GP
www.the-race.com www.the-race.com
 
CWallace said:
While this was posted by The Race on 1 April, other media were running the report earlier in the week so this seems legit.

Aston Martin has apparently developed at least a significant partial fix for the chassis vibrations at least being transmitted through to the steering wheel to the driver. They ran it on Friday, but removed it overnight so Alonso was surprised when he did his first laps on Saturday to find the vibrations back.

Chief trackside officer Mike Krack confirmed that they tested it during FP1 and FP2, but chose to remove it for the rest of the weekend as it was a new part and they were not confident of the reliability. As it is believed to be part of the steering column, honestly a wise choice, IMO.

www.the-race.com

Why Aston Martin removed vibration fix and how it confused Alonso

Aston Martin removed a component that cured most of the discomfort its F1 drivers have suffered and did not race it at the Japanese GP
www.the-race.com www.the-race.com
Click to expand...
I can see Adrian Newey being VERY cautious about modding a steering column. We all know what happened last time they modded a steering column for a driver.

Edit: It wasn't him doing the actual mod but he was in court in Italy over it. He was acquitted along with other Williams staff. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Ayrton_Senna
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Glideslope and The-Real-Deal82
Paul1964 said:
I can see Adrian Newey being VERY cautious about modding a steering column. We all know what happened last time they modded a steering column for a driver.

Edit: It wasn't him doing the actual mod but he was in court in Italy over it. He was acquitted along with other Williams staff. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Ayrton_Senna
Click to expand...
It wasn't the mod that was the problem from what I remember, as the snapped steering column had sheered about 100mm under the weld point. The welded part was actually the strongest part lol. The problem was the type of tube used appeared to be a piece of mild steel ERW tube and not high enough in tensile strength to be used as a steering column. Almost like someone had nipped to a nearby hardware store at short notice and bought something with a close enough diameter 🤦‍♂️
 
  • Like
Reactions: pachyderm and Glideslope
The Race chimes in on six areas that the teams, FOM and FIA might work to address at their strategy session during the current downtime between races.

 
  • Like
Reactions: pachyderm
CWallace said:
The Race chimes in on six areas that the teams, FOM and FIA might work to address at their strategy session during the current downtime between races.

Click to expand...
Cutting the amount of energy recovered in a lap will result in the cars dying out even earlier on the straights than they do now. They need the capacity to increase so that they can get to the end of the straight - not decrease and make the problem worse. Also - let them recover at the higher rate, and even higher if that's possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pachyderm
Took a trip to Silverstone Museum yesterday. Pretty good and nice relaxing afternoon.
IMG_1689.jpeg
IMG_1685.jpeg
IMG_1668.jpeg
IMG_1696.jpeg
IMG_1694.jpeg
IMG_1651.jpeg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Pezimak, CWallace, pachyderm and 2 others
Spanish engineer and F1 pundit Toni Cuquerella has offered suggestions for Miami that would eliminate the need for super-clipping while only adding about 1.5 seconds to the lap.

It would involve reducing the energy store to 200kW from 350kW while still allowing the full 350kW harvesting and lowering the energy recharge to 6MJ from 9MJ. This would shift the MGU-K/ICE balance from 50/50 to 36/64.

I presume this would result in the battery never getting more than 50% depleted during a lap so that the cars never run out of electrical energy and they can top them off just through regenerative braking.

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/f1-engin ... s-for-good
 
  • Like
Reactions: pachyderm
CWallace said:
Spanish engineer and F1 pundit Toni Cuquerella has offered suggestions for Miami that would eliminate the need for super-clipping while only adding about 1.5 seconds to the lap.

It would involve reducing the energy store to 200kW from 350kW while still allowing the full 350kW harvesting and lowering the energy recharge to 6MJ from 9MJ. This would shift the MGU-K/ICE balance from 50/50 to 36/64.

I presume this would result in the battery never getting more than 50% depleted during a lap so that the cars never run out of electrical energy and they can top them off just through regenerative braking.

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/f1-engin ... s-for-good
Click to expand...
They should defiantly super clip Miami. Clip it from the calendar altogether!
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Love
Reactions: Glideslope, fmenard and CWallace
CWallace said:
Spanish engineer and F1 pundit Toni Cuquerella has offered suggestions for Miami that would eliminate the need for super-clipping while only adding about 1.5 seconds to the lap.

It would involve reducing the energy store to 200kW from 350kW while still allowing the full 350kW harvesting and lowering the energy recharge to 6MJ from 9MJ. This would shift the MGU-K/ICE balance from 50/50 to 36/64.

I presume this would result in the battery never getting more than 50% depleted during a lap so that the cars never run out of electrical energy and they can top them off just through regenerative braking.

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/f1-engin ... s-for-good
Click to expand...
They need to go the other way and increase the capacity of the battery. Who wants slower cars?

15MJ or 18MJ should do it.
 
Paul1964 said:
They need to go the other way and increase the capacity of the battery. Who wants slower cars?

15MJ or 18MJ should do it.
Click to expand...

The problem right now is being able to fully re-charge the battery during a lap. Hence why tracks like Melbourne and Suzuka lowered the capacity from 9MJ to 7MJ because you can't recover 9MJ unless you want every car to lap like an Aston Martin as drivers would have to constantly super-clip and LICO. 😛

Doubling the capacity means that during qualifying the cars would literally have to return to the garage after each hot lap and plugged in to a MW+ class charger to top them off and they would only have a full battery on the first lap from lights out because they could never recover that amount of energy while driving a competitive time. 😱
 
CWallace said:
The problem right now is being able to fully re-charge the battery during a lap. Hence why tracks like Melbourne and Suzuka lowered the capacity from 9MJ to 7MJ because you can't recover 9MJ unless you want every car to lap like an Aston Martin as drivers would have to constantly super-clip and LICO. 😛

Doubling the capacity means that during qualifying the cars would literally have to return to the garage after each hot lap and plugged in to a MW+ class charger to top them off and they would only have a full battery on the first lap from lights out because they could never recover that amount of energy while driving a competitive time. 😱
Click to expand...
We have an Electric formula, and Formula 1 is the ICE formula. It should be therefore mandated, that these cars should we powered by at least 2/3rds ICE.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glideslope, Paul1964 and Pezimak
The reason it's a joke is as the drivers say. The battery deploy whether they like it or not, they have no control over it on the straights. The entire thing is utterly stupid.

I agree with this video myself:


Also I think Max won't be the only one going if they don't do something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glideslope
Miami seems years away, and I hope that in that time, the teams and the FIA/F1/Liberty, can agree on some sort of compromise.. If no one is happy, then winner winner chicken for dinner..

I wonder if anyone thought of slapping an alternator to the car battery, that only charges if you top out at 300 km/h.. As long as the foot is to the floor, you putting electrons in storage.. Then when you need a boost, you have boost...

Maybe the idea is to limit the number of boosts per race.. But then maybe that is a bad idea.. I get the impression "the brains" running the sport are a bit confused, scared, what I hate personally is a dilemma, a choice of 2 options.. 3 or more options, I feel safe..

But then "the brains of F1" have a dilemma.. Hybrid or no hybrid, and what to do.. Teams with an advantage will want hybrid, teams that are struggling might want to go back to older tech..

The Ferrari 156, maybe is the answer.. Something like that, modern, maybe without the $2m computer server rack.. Drivers drive the car alone and unaided... Miami is years away... hopefully something changes!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back