Is the 2026 Regulation going to achieve it goal?

[airshifter]

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.

The only thing you argue that you disagree with is something I never stated. It was well accepted early in the regulation set that overall power output would not increase, as well as energy stores being limited enough to not make it at full power through many of the demanding tracks.

As for cars often driving around with only 500 horsepower available, you are obviously not seeing the aspect of strategic energy deployment. Being these are lighter cars with greatly reduced aerodynamic drag, and equal if not slightly more power available, they will accelerate much more quickly when using full power. That means even if a driver reduces electrical power before the end of the straight, they can still see the same or higher top speeds. With both wings trimmed for speed, the ICE alone could sustain these cars upwards of 220 MPH estimated. And with wings trimmed, they can harvest easily at the end of the straights with some lift and coast, then the wings switch when mechanical braking is needed.

You obviously are also not considering that with less downforce due to loss of ground effect aero, along with smaller tires, cornering speeds will be reduced regardless of power available. This means for lower speed corners the off throttle and braking (thus possibly harvesting) time has increased. So the time considered "full throttle" for any given track will decrease due to less grip. Less overall power demand will exist due to the regs changes.



The times will be longer on most tracks, that was intended. But testing has already shown that the times in Bahrain are only very slightly off the 2022 times. Drivers and teams that manage energy properly will probably find similar results on many tracks. There will likely be a few tracks where the times increase more than expected with the old regs, but there may even be tracks that times are lower than 2022. It's just a matter of where they are fast, and the new regs will shave time on straight line performance.

[airshifter]

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.

25.7 seconds isn't long enough for most circuits - it's less than half a lap. They're all going to be trying to work out how long and where to deploy and where they can re-charge at multiple places around most circuits. I just hope that there's some sort of telemetry available to the viewer so we can see who's using what and where.

I don't think it's going to be nearly as bad as some predict. Simulations will show the teams fairly quickly where and when to deploy energy, and in any race the quicker lap time is desired. For that reason, all of them will look at where the deployment trims time the most, and many teams will end up with fairly similar strategies.

We also have to consider that even with the old regs, cars were only at full power 70-80% of the time and that was with greater downforce and cornering speeds. When you look at it track by track, you see the overall picture better. The 2022 pole in Australia was right about 1 min 18 seconds. If you factor full power time at 75% that is 58.5 seconds. That 25.7 seconds available energy store takes care of over half of that if they were pushing the cars with the same weight and aerodynamic drag,but they won't be. That power will be pushing cars with half the aero drag, along with lower weight, so the acceleration curves will eat up some time delta.

As for close racing, I'm also somewhat expecting that the boost mode will rarely be used. It would be next to impossible to factor into simulations, and might leave the car vulnerable to a quick attack to retake the position gained. What I do expect to see at some tracks is slower times in tighter sections with short straights and no real passing opportunities. Teams might decide it's not worth saving a tenth or two in a section of track where it isn't likely they could be overtaken even if slow. Think of Ricciardo with no MGU at Monaco, and still won the race. But if they can use that same percentage of energy stores and gain more on another section of the track, that's where they will use it.

[Nitrodaze]

25.7 seconds isn't long enough for most circuits - it's less than half a lap. They're all going to be trying to work out how long and where to deploy and where they can re-charge at multiple places around most circuits. I just hope that there's some sort of telemetry available to the viewer so we can see who's using what and where.

We are saying the same thing. You can see how this is going to be frustrating for the drivers. After the first three laps at Melbourne, l think they all would find it difficult to charge the battery up to a reasonable amount to elevate their speed.

I think from three laps onwards, they would be racing at around 550HP to 600HP at best.

[Steve Boyd]

You can see how this is going to be frustrating for the drivers.

Particularly in the cars that can only regenerate at 250 kW instead of 350 kW, like the Astons.

[Nitrodaze]

The Chinese Grand Prix has shown that Mercedes has a huge advantage over the rest of the field. And that advantage is in pure engine power supremacy. At a depleted battery, the Mercedes has considerably more power relative to the Ferraris in the same conditions. The concerns of the teams in preseason testing are real. But the three options proposed to address it are all unlikely to resolve the issue without a clear indication that the FIA has admitted that there is a fundamental flaw in the 2026 regulation or that Mercedes has cheated in some way. Neither of these outcomes is attractive.

But with the enormous power differential between Mercedes and the rest of the field, the FIA must take action to place a cap on power output from the ICE at 500HP max and the combined peak power of both ICE and Electric power at 1000HP max during qualifying and the race. This would resolve this issue as it leaves it to the teams to configure their cars to not exceed these thresholds but gives them the freedom to extend these max thresholds to achieve an advantage.

This approach would level the playing field somewhat. Races like China would produce a different outcome if Mercedes fumbles their race start, for instance. They would be appropriately punished for it.

The regulation is salvageable l believe.

[airshifter]

I don't think two races into the season tells much of a story, but I think overall the racing has been as good if not better than the last year or two at the same tracks. Being that the teams and drivers are still coming to grips with the best ways to manage these cars, that alone gives me a good impression that the change will end up not being for the negative overall. Sure the cars will often be slower at any given track, but that is also one of the reasons for the regs changes.

I personally don't think Merc have any big ICE advantage. I think they have done a much better job at the simulations and whatever else they use to know how and when to harvest best, as well as when to use the energy to maximum advantage. When comparing harvesting vs deployment they are often doing things much differently than the other teams. And being that the car is well balanced, they can open up opportunities for both harvesting and deployment that the other teams might not be able to exploit as easily.

I would be strongly opposed to any knee jerk "leveling of the playing field" such as suggested above at this early point in the first season of the new regs. Merc did a good job out of the box, but it isn't the first time this has happened. Though they did struggle out of the box with ground effect cars they aced it back in 2014 as well if not better than this year thus far. Short of any evidence of cheating or an advantage so big that the CFD and wind tunnel time won't put teams more in line as the season moves forward, I don't want to see any team suffer a penalty for being best. Ferrari took steps forward as well, and McLaren and Red Bull seem to be more on the back foot. Should we "level" them more in line as well?


Just food for thought on these cars that some wanted to tell us would be so terrible....... Pole for this year at China was over 6 tenths faster than 2024. Granted this is with the resurfacing that took place in late 2024, and last year set a new track record. But being the first year of a new regulations set vs two years into the last regs set is a disadvantage.

[Nitrodaze]

The FIA will meet after this race or the next to decide on the changes to apply to the regulations. The critics of regulations are many, including all the world champions on the grid and some team bosses. Hence, change is inevitable. It is a matter of what and how things would be changed.

Whatever the change, the racing would be better or equal to how it is at the moment. Chances are that Mercedes would still win the championships, but with closer racing l hope.

With the Bahrain and Jeddah races cancelled, chances are they are meeting over that period to work out which of the options suggested best appease all concerned.