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

JustinePaula said:
It is like Oprah, everyone gets a car, truly a sad day when we give points for just showing up... It should be points to 5th place, 5 4 3 2 1.. 1 point for the winning constructor...

Time to stop treating F1 like a child's egg n spoon race,where everyone is a winner.. This is F1, peak of the "sport" if you cannot build a decent car, and hire decent drivers and engineers, tough, go and run a padel team...


I grew up in a era where the winner got a certificate and a cup of hot chocolate for winning the race, 2nd to last, got nothing, lucky if you got a glass of warm orange squash.. We did not mollycoddle or baby, winners got prizes.. We turned out ok... Why we need prizes for 10th??? Why not a prize for finishing? Stop treating f1 like it is kindergarten sports.. Adults need to be adults.. Or we ban children from F1, by child that anyone younger than 36... That seems to be the age children mature now..
Click to expand...
Some of us did anyway ...😛

I almost agree on the points.

I'd give 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1

The tie breaker would be a comparison of finishes.

If drivers are tied at the end the first tie breaker would be how many wins? Then how many 2nds... etc etc etc...
I feel like the current points system is an attempt, for some odd reason, to keep up with nascar and indycar.
 
Last edited:
JustinePaula said:
I totally agree with the conmee sentiment, it does not make a lick of sense, but then nothing in F1 does...
That means Kimi won 5 races running a superior EV than the rest of the grid? The Mercs have a better EV than anyone else... But what this ADUO says is that it is ok to have a poor engineering team, it is ok, we still love you, and forgive you for hiring crappy PHD's, not their fault, but to make it fair, you can have 1 upgrade, others can have 4... We as the FIA/F1 want a fair system, so punish 1 team and reward incompetence of others..
Click to expand...
atvx8d.jpg
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Non-Euclidean, JustinePaula and pachyderm
conmee said:
Yeah, I'm aware after doing a bit more reading and watching some videos. But if electric is so important and makes such a difference it should be part of the evaluation. Just from PR/optics, it makes no sense that the team that has won all the races to date gets ADUO while in that same span the team that has barely scraped together two P3 podiums would get none.

Just look at the current standings. Based on ADUO, the top three teams are going to get some amount of upgrades, bench time, and additional cash. Any normal person would look at this list and conclude Red Bull is the team that needs the ADUO the most. Mercedes is leading RBR by 172 f**k**g points after just six races and somehow THEY get upgrades and Red Bull gets nil?!??!

P.S. I'm just yelling at the clouds lol. F1 is such a circus. I try to focus on just the racing (I don't watch DTS), but MBS shenanigans, ADUO nonsense, steward inconsistencies, rules/penalty inconsistencies make it hard to watch sometimes.

View attachment 2636545
Click to expand...
My understanding is that all teams are able to extract the full allowed power from the electrical systems, so there's little reason to issue any upgrades there. The differences that exist are with the ICE, software, and chassis. McLaren and Red Bull have both been struggling with their reliability and the Red Bull drivers have been complaining about their chassis since day one. Their issues are not a lack of power.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glideslope, CWallace and pachyderm
headlessmike said:
ADUO only assess the ICE and not the hybrid system. Mercedes advantage appears to be in their harvesting and deployment of electrical energy. The peak power is capped, but each team is able to control how it is used, and that is where Mercedes is leading the pack. We've seen McLaren show signs of catching up with Mercedes as their mapping as improved, but their reliability has been awful.
Click to expand...
You have a pretty good grasp on this for a guy without a head...
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Non-Euclidean, CWallace and headlessmike
headlessmike said:
I do have a PhD… Fighting words around here.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I question the PHD's of the engineering that is clogging the lavatories at the various factories of F1 teams.. You see they claim to be the best of the best, but cannot make a decent 1600 CC engine of any kind.. So where do they get this PHD? From a cereal box, send 5 tokens and you get a free PHD??
 
headlessmike said:
My understanding is that all teams are able to extract the full allowed power from the electrical systems, so there's little reason to issue any upgrades there. The differences that exist are with the ICE, software, and chassis. McLaren and Red Bull have both been struggling with their reliability and the Red Bull drivers have been complaining about their chassis since day one. Their issues are not a lack of power.
Click to expand...
My understanding as well. All teams except RBR and VCARB, though, are receiving ADUO benefit due to "lack of power" (not reliability) as all manufacturer engines have been rated lower than RB (which should make the established works teams embarrassed that they've been out-engineered by a drinks company - yeah, I get it, they poached a lot of Merc engineers and had a strong Honda base to start, etc). And if that's the case, if the electrical systems are equal (other than the algos that determine regeneration and deployment), then give RBR some cheddar to hire some southeast Asian vibe coders to improve their electrical system software. 😉

Since, as you point out, ICE-Software-Chassis, are all important, those should be the three areas ADUO evaluates. Merc gets some ICE cash, RBR gets some Software-Chassis cash, AM gets cash for all three, and so forth. Having said that, I'm not even a fan of ADUO. F1 should be about the world's elite engineering teams putting the best car on the grid. The FIA shouldn't be trying to tip the scales one way or another. As Christian said in the past, "Fix your f**k**g car" (and this goes for all teams) rather than cry about being out-engineered. I would not be upset with a dominant team if it were due strictly to engineering/elite driving and not politicking and gamesmanship and rule-bending behind closed doors with the FIA. But with Liberty Media now in the mix, the race needs to be a spectacle with an equitable distribution of wins, podiums, and points... participation trophies on the cards for all participants even if they produce a ***** powertrain or chassis.

Can't speak for anyone else, but I also want to be clear on where Liberty Media and the FIA have been touching me. lol

Touch.png
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Non-Euclidean, fmenard and pachyderm
conmee said:
My understanding as well. All teams except RBR and VCARB, though, are receiving ADUO benefit due to "lack of power" (not reliability) as all manufacturer engines have been rated lower than RB (which should make the established works teams embarrassed that they've been out-engineered by a drinks company - yeah, I get it, they poached a lot of Merc engineers and had a strong Honda base to start, etc). And if that's the case, if the electrical systems are equal (other than the algos that determine regeneration and deployment), then give RBR some cheddar to hire some southeast Asian vibe coders to improve their electrical system software. 😉

Since, as you point out, ICE-Software-Chassis, are all important, those should be the three areas ADUO evaluates. Merc gets some ICE cash, RBR gets some Software-Chassis cash, AM gets cash for all three, and so forth. Having said that, I'm not even a fan of ADUO. F1 should be about the world's elite engineering teams putting the best car on the grid. The FIA shouldn't be trying to tip the scales one way or another. As Christian said in the past, "Fix your f**k**g car" (and this goes for all teams) rather than cry about being out-engineered. I would not be upset with a dominant team if it were due strictly to engineering/elite driving and not politicking and gamesmanship and rule-bending behind closed doors with the FIA. But with Liberty Media now in the mix, the race needs to be a spectacle with an equitable distribution of wins, podiums, and points... participation trophies on the cards for all participants even if they produce a ***** powertrain or chassis.

Can't speak for anyone else, but I also want to be clear on where Liberty Media and the FIA have been touching me. lol

View attachment 2636718
Click to expand...
I too wish that F1 was an all out engineering sport. The FIA on the other hand wants to implement an engine freeze much like the one we experienced between 2020 and 2025, and want to ensure that there is minimal performance deltas between the various power units going forward. This is the first step in that direction.

JustinePaula said:
Yeah, I question the PHD's of the engineering that is clogging the lavatories at the various factories of F1 teams.. You see they claim to be the best of the best, but cannot make a decent 1600 CC engine of any kind.. So where do they get this PHD? From a cereal box, send 5 tokens and you get a free PHD??
Click to expand...
I doubt many on the engineers in F1 teams have a PhD in the first place. Maybe that’s the real problem!
 
headlessmike said:
ADUO only assess the ICE and not the hybrid system. Mercedes advantage appears to be in their harvesting and deployment of electrical energy. The peak power is capped, but each team is able to control how it is used, and that is where Mercedes is leading the pack. We've seen McLaren show signs of catching up with Mercedes as their mapping as improved, but their reliability has been awful.
Click to expand...

Mercedes and Audi both ran Formula E teams and Mercedes, especially, has leveraged this knowledge to maximize the effectiveness of their harvesting and deployment. And they don't need to share that with their customer teams (much to the annoyance of McLaren).

And the truly ironic thing is Toto was very concerned about Ferrari and Audi being able to use ADUO to improve their ICE in 2026 and 2027 and become more competitive, but now that advantage has been halved with Mercedes also getting ADUO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glideslope, headlessmike and conmee
My concern is simple. Given that Liberty Media has so much influence in F1, I'm worried that they will push for regulations that point toward equalizing cars' competitiveness, a la NASCAR. This would negate having a true manufacturer's championship, being very nearly a spec series. The driver's championship would have a much more ability based champion. For me this scenario would be the death knell of F1 as the pinnacle of motorsport.
 
It is funny, on Saturday, in Paris, there was a tennis match, and one of the players lost, and moaned very very loudly about the decision to not close the roof, the wind affected her too much and she lost the final...

Tennis is played outdoors, in wind. sun...

F1 is an engine powered sport, if you want to drive on batteries, I present to you E-Prix, for all the PHD nerds that were never loved in the way engine engineers are loved....

That is the problem, maybe that is the solution, engine engineering v PHD in Comp Science, as you are not so much an engine engineer in E-Prix as more of a electrical engineer..

What does F1 want to be? If Kimi A can win the title using a car that is for all intents and purpose a re-badged E-Prix car, why is he in F1????

It is confusing, cars that are doing well with their ICE get no updates, but teams with the faulty engine engineers, and the hot shot electrical engineers get all the updates...That says F1 wants to be E-Prix 2.0

Either go 100% into E-Prix 2.0, or 100% into ICE, not both... But that is for them to decide.. I hope they choose ICE, I hate E-Prix, a stupid silly clownfest.. Tne only benefit to E-Prix is that it bypassed the ban on racing in Switzerland...
 
fmenard said:
My concern is simple. Given that Liberty Media has so much influence in F1, I'm worried that they will push for regulations that point toward equalizing cars' competitiveness, a la NASCAR. This would negate having a true manufacturer's championship, being very nearly a spec series. The driver's championship would have a much more ability based champion. For me this scenario would be the death knell of F1 as the pinnacle of motorsport.
Click to expand...

Considering Liberty's goal is to encourage more manufacturers to enter F1, turning it into a spec series would mean the opposite since you would need, at most, two (one for the chassis and one for the PU) and possibly just one if it was someone like Mercedes or Audi that can easily handle both.

Yes, the 2026 PU regulations suck and yes, Liberty had a hand in them. As did the FIA. As did the teams and the PU OEMs. Especially Mercedes - even more so than Audi, IMO, who are the current target of most fan's ire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glideslope
CWallace said:
Surprising nobody, Red Bull has challenged the FIA's ADUO rankings and the FIA has announced they will conduct a fresh review of their findings.

www.the-race.com

Red Bull queries ADUO ranking as FIA pledges to review results

The FIA will review the results of its ADUO rankings in the wake of a clarification request from Red Bull, The Race can reveal
www.the-race.com www.the-race.com
Click to expand...
What you mean? Everyone and the family budgie was surprised that Red Bull got no love from Uncle FIA.. Now news about a review... You know, I try and give benefit to the FIA, but you have to have the brains of mushy peas to not realize that someone is going to moan about engines or anything in F1..
 
JustinePaula said:
What you mean? Everyone and the family budgie was surprised that Red Bull got no love from Uncle FIA.. Now news about a review... You know, I try and give benefit to the FIA, but you have to have the brains of mushy peas to not realize that someone is going to moan about engines or anything in F1..
Click to expand...

Yup. I expect legendary caterwauling from Toto Wolff if Mercedes is denied ADUO after this review.

That being said, many are speculating that both Mercedes and Ferrari have been deliberately holding back the performance of their respective ICEs in order to trigger additional ADUO upgrades and now that they have them, they can "turn up the wick". Will be interesting to see how both look at Barcelona this weekend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glideslope
Well if they have been holding back, then that is fraud, and that should see life bans, and at least 2 x $100m fines.. They have misled the FIA, the public, brought the system into a dishonest state, that is if they have been holding back, and of course F1 is 100% honest and fair and legal...No one has ever tried to scam...
 
The FIA and Power Unit Manufacturers have agreed to modifications to the PU regulations for 2027 and 2028, moving the current 53/47 ICE/MGUK split to 58/42 in 2027 and 60/40 in 2028.

F1_Engines.png


ICE performance will be improved through raising the fuel flow rate by 13% over this period. The reason for the staged approach is that some current 2026 and planned 2027 chassis do not have sufficient fuel tank volume to support an additional 13% fuel load (this can be addressed in the 2028 designs).

www.the-race.com

F1's 2027 engine rule compromise revealed

Formula 1 will introduce a two-step regulation change across 2027 and 2028 to reduce the role of electrical power in F1 engines
www.the-race.com www.the-race.com
 
7% over 3 years, that is epic fail... Really 12 grown ass humans agreed to this? Just in awe of the pathetic behavior of certain representatives of the human species.. 2% from 2nd to 3rd yr.. Talk about pediatrics...But a decision has been made..
 
  • Like
Reactions: pachyderm
CWallace said:
Considering Liberty's goal is to encourage more manufacturers to enter F1, turning it into a spec series would mean the opposite since you would need, at most, two (one for the chassis and one for the PU) and possibly just one if it was someone like Mercedes or Audi that can easily handle both.

Yes, the 2026 PU regulations suck and yes, Liberty had a hand in them. As did the FIA. As did the teams and the PU OEMs. Especially Mercedes - even more so than Audi, IMO, who are the current target of most fan's ire.
Click to expand...
I guess my logic was a little fuzzy. I really didn’t mean “spec” as much as “performance equalized”. It is certainly apples to oranges as far as comparing F1 to NASCAR, but the underlying principle is the same. Series owner (NASCAR or Liberty Media) looks at the economics of their sport and determines that what’s needed is a larger fan base. This is what started NASCAR on its current and continuing decline (and it IS in decline). So the marketing gurus opine that closer racing builds fan engagement, as does stringing the crowning of the series champion driver out for as long as humanly possible. Now it’s very possible for the driver with the most season points to lose (or not win) the championship to a driver with far fewer points. Well, let’s engineer this further and add a zero to the points awarded in the last few races. Takes care of that silly “bogus champion” fear. And don’t forget the performance based rules changes as far as aerodynamics and engine power (during the season) to equalize the playing field. And if that’s not enough, let’s break the races into 3 segments and award points to the result of each individual segment; since each segment is followed by a reset the car/driver with the lowest total time at the end of each segment doesn’t necessarily win the race (and you thought sprint races in F1 were crazy). All done for the real goal of boosting viewership and thus revenue. Think this can’t happen in F1? I’ve got this wonderful oceanfront lot for sale, just outside of Phoenix, Arizona.
 
And the hits just keep on coming...

In their hearing today appealing the speeding penalties handed to Pierre Gasly during the Monaco Grand Prix, Alpine submitted hard evidence that FOM and Tag Heur (as the Official Timekeeper of Formula One) were providing inaccurate information on the distance travelled by the cars in the pit lane which incorrectly calculated their speed as higher than the 60 km/h limit. They also provided telemetry showing that Gasly activated his Pit Lane limiter prior to pit entry and was traveling at 60km/h prior to reaching the first timing loop and maintaining that speed throughout his pit stop and pit exit. After presenting their evidence, they argued that this incorrect speed calculation was used to unjustly penalize Pierre Gasly and demote him from 3rd to 7th.

As a result, there will be a second hearing tomorrow (Friday) to determine whether the time penalties should be overturned, which would restore Gasly to 3rd place and shuffle Hadjar, Piastri, Lawson and Lindblad down a position.

Alpine also argued that the FIA and FOM were aware in advance that there was an issue with the timing loops in the pit lane, which the FIA and FOM "strongly refuted". However, the Race Stewards also submitted evidence that they were concerned by all the speeding penalties being applied during Free Practice and the race and engaged Race Control during the race asking if there was an issue with the timing loops in the pits and were told by FOM and TH that "there was no issue". So make of that what you will...

www.the-race.com

Monaco penalties being reviewed after shock error revealed

Alpine has won a review of Pierre Gasly’s Monaco penalties because F1 used an inaccurate pitlane distance to measure cars' speeds
www.the-race.com www.the-race.com

 
  • Haha
Reactions: pachyderm
fmenard said:
I guess my logic was a little fuzzy. I really didn’t mean “spec” as much as “performance equalized”...Think this can’t happen in F1? I’ve got this wonderful oceanfront lot for sale, just outside of Phoenix, Arizona.
Click to expand...

The FIA and FOM are limited in their ability to unilaterally make changes to how F1 operates through the Concorde Agreement, the Technical Regulations and other mechanisms. Witness the changes to the Power Units for 2027 and 2028, which required a supermajority to pass. The ADUO changes to provide extra benefit to Honda also required (unanimous?) approval of the teams prior to being implemented.

As such, neither the FIA nor the FOM could make any of the changes you suggested without the sign-off of the teams and PU manufacturers.

And the FIA has also been very clear that they have no interest in implementing a "Balance of Performance" mechanism like the one used in the FIA World Endurance Championship to create general performance parity within the HyperCar and LMGT3 categories.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glideslope and TheIntruder
I hope I had a fever dream or a bad pizza nightmare, but I am pretty sure I saw something about changing the fuel flow for 2028---> That this change of the fuel flow would require events to be of a shorter distance, to prevent cars from running low on the wet stuff that goes bang in the engine....

Is this in fact true, or just the nightmare from a frozen pizza???
 
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