Is the 2026 Regulation going to achieve it goal?

[Nitrodaze]

Let's summarize the issues with the 2026 Regulation:-

1. Battery capacity may not sustain electrical power supply over a full lap at most circuits
2. Driver operations in the cockpit are said to be too complex
3. Race start may be tricky at most circuits, even with an extended starting time sequence
4. Front wing replacement may add a few more seconds to the typical pitstop
5. Safety threshold may have dropped due to points 1 to 3 above

All of these are typical of the inception period of any new regulations. The development war would certainly bring about better batteries with longer charge retention and lighter composition. Drivers would build muscle memory that would make those cockpit operations second nature before mid-season. However, the learning curve for new drivers entering the formula would be considerably steeper than at any other time in F1 history. As far as race start goes, every team would strip out their big turbo and put in Ferrari type turbos in a few races.

Therefore, what we are seeing are merely teething problems one would expect. But is the racing as dire as Verstappen is making out? I don't think so. Racing everywhere is changing due to the advancement of technology. The natural adoption of these technologies to enhance the tools of racing is essentially organic. Racing cars simply reflect the time it is in. And this regulation has done its job of sensibly adopting the technologies of this day and age.

The use of sustainable fuel is inevitable. F1 must demonstrate its awareness of global warming. The enjoyment of motor racing should not be at the expense of the well-being of our planet. ICE to EP parity is also inevitable, as this is the trend of current high-performance road cars. There would be challenges, but they would be easily overcome, as these are also real-world issues.

We like the lighter, more nimble cars. We like the improved sound of the cars. I think by the last quarter of this season, the teams will produce cars with speed comparable to last season. The gap from the fastest time at testing seems to be about 3 seconds off the fastest qualifying times of last season.

My personal verdict is that F1 and the FIA have got this regulation reasonably right.

[Steve Boyd]

The development war would certainly bring about better batteries with longer charge retention and lighter composition.

The battery capacity is limited to 9 MJ. Development might make them smaller and/or lighter but it won't make them last longer unless the energy limit is increased.

[Nitrodaze]

The battery capacity is limited to 9 MJ. Development might make them smaller and/or lighter but it won't make them last longer unless the energy limit is increased.

I think inherently, they are trying to reduce bulk by that limit. If the same battery dimensions can hold twice as much at the same weight, the FIA may allow an increase in the power limit. Currently, an increase in MegaJoules translates to an increase in size and weight.

Besides, a smaller, lighter battery producing 9MJ would decrease car weight and thus increase energy deployment range as a consequence. Probably not enough to solve the current problem.

[airshifter]

Battery weight, harvesting allowed per lap, and deployment per lap are all controlled by the regs. They aren't likely to just allow more energy stores when the regs intended to cause a reset in performance, along with reducing the chances of all out development wars on the battery front.


Going back to your points.

1. Battery stores were never intended to allow all out speeds at all circuits. It was known early in the reg changes that drivers would have to manage energy stores.

2. Placing more on a driver is a good thing in my opinion. The best will overcome it.

3. Agreed, but if it becomes an issue I suspect the FIA will allow changes.

4. Most teams have found solutions that make it just another front wing change, maybe very slightly different but no major hassle.

5. I see this mostly due to starts at this point, and as stated above I suspect the FIA will allow changes if it becomes a safety issue.


As for just swapping to different turbos, it can't happen without FIA approval due to the homologation process. The same for energy stores.



I think they have already shown to be meeting their desired goals. The fastest lap in testing was only a couple tenths slower than the fastest test lap in 2022, which was the last major changes. The cars are lighter and more nimble even with the smaller tires, and more importance has been placed on drivers being able to manage the energy stores better.

[Matthew]

I am most curious about how the energy deployment rules will affect racing. Smarter battery use sounds great but if drivers have to lift and coast a lot to stay within limits, it could hurt the close racing the rules are trying to create. The movable aero balance could also lead to big performance differences early on while teams figure it out, which might mix up the order at first.

[Nitrodaze]

Battery weight, harvesting allowed per lap, and deployment per lap are all controlled by the regs. They aren't likely to just allow more energy stores when the regs intended to cause a reset in performance, along with reducing the chances of all out development wars on the battery front.


Going back to your points.

1. Battery stores were never intended to allow all out speeds at all circuits. It was known early in the reg changes that drivers would have to manage energy stores.

Sorry buddy, l kinda disagree. The max horsepower of F1 cars in recent times has been 1000HP. This new regulation has split that to 500HP on ICE and 500HP on EP. On tracks where energy harvesting is difficult, most cars, if not all cars would effectively see their powertrain output drop to 500HP until they are able to charge it back up somehow.

The battery allows the car to operate at 1000HP on the straights, where maximum power is required. Therefore, the battery power only brings the power output to normal and historical power output. What it is not doing is boosting the power output above 1000HP to provide even higher speed.

All the teams are asking for is for FOM and FIA to ensure that the full power of 1000HP is available over the length of the straights on every track. Which is not unreasonable.

[Nitrodaze]

I am most curious about how the energy deployment rules will affect racing. Smarter battery use sounds great but if drivers have to lift and coast a lot to stay within limits, it could hurt the close racing the rules are trying to create. The movable aero balance could also lead to big performance differences early on while teams figure it out, which might mix up the order at first.

On tracks where harvesting is poor, the racing shall be done mostly at 500HP. Tracks like Melbourne, Monza, Jedha, Montreal and even Silverstone, most cars on the grid would run out of battery juice before the end of the first lap. They would be unable recharge the battery due to fewer slow-speed corners on these tracks. The entire race would be at F2 speeds.

From this perspective, Verstappen is right to say it is not exciting. It is like giving MotoGP racers scooters to race.

[Steve Boyd]

decrease car weight and thus increase energy deployment range as a consequence.

No it wouldn't. A 9MJ battery will run a 350kW motor for 25.7 seconds. The only choice is where to use that 25.7 seconds worth of charge.