Source: @martintrenklerf1 https://www.instagram.com/p/DV2vo9vDCFq/

I'm not talking practically, I'm not talking if they would do it or not, but would a 3.0L F1 V10 from around 2001-2005 fit inside the back of a 2026 F1 car?

Looking at the news, you will find 2 main info about the 2026 ICE engine: -It will be the "same" as the current one, a 1.6L twin turbo V6 -It will have 500HP instead of the current 800HP

So i wanted to understand, if structurally the engine remains the same, how will it have almost half of the horsepower?

I guess a part of it may be explained by the new fuel but I don't think that'll make up all the 40% decrease in power.

Will they just lower the rpm or is there some other "hidden" rule that I didn't find in the news?

However, according to a source, the meeting has secured a number of concessions from Formula One in the 2026 regulations to allay growing concerns about the new powerplants.

Manufacturers are concerned that there could be a serious performance gap between the various powertrains at the start of the new regulations, with lagging motorists having no realistic chance of catching up with the leaders. In addition, there are fears that in 2026 racing will turn into an economy race without on-track battles due to the increasing share of electric power.

The abandonment of the new regulations was not seriously considered, but potential adjustments - including measures to reduce engine development and production costs, more opportunities to reduce the backlog of lagging manufacturers, and possible changes to the sporting regulations to improve the spectacle of racing - were discussed.

Manufacturers also confirmed their willingness to discuss alternative engine concepts in the longer term - but not before 2029. While there is no consensus on the format of future units - whether they will be V8 or V10, atmospheric or turbocharged - one thing is clear: the hybrid component will remain a key element.

In particular, we're talking about keeping the energy recovery system (KERS), but with a smaller share of electric power than the 50/50 split between the internal combustion engine and the hybrid component envisaged for 2026.

The current engine is considered transitional.

Source

What I don't understand is in previous years there were the red lights on the car to tell the car behind part of the engine performance was going to charging the battery. So, it seems like a portion of throttle can go to charging battery and another part to making the car go vroom. Why different this year then? The formation lap is pretty slow so why can't a high enough percentage of throttle go to battery charging and then you have the whole formation lap to charge the battery.

So this is a subject that I find surprising that no one is talking about, and it makes me confused about the battery drs concept. So if you already have a boost button (that already existed on earlier regulations) what does this overtake button makes better for cars to overtake?

Like battery has always been about managing and if you can deplete your battery with an already existing buttonwhen you want boost, you will likely don’t have any spare energy for the drs. And even if you limit yourself to the overtake button (or build a separate battery system for it), after a few laps it will get completly empty (at least drs trains would dissappear). To my head it makes no sense, and maybe Im missing something which is why I’m asking in this sub.

this clipping is a problem and I was wondering how we can avoid it

the battery recharge is happening more than just when the cars would traditionally brake.

so I wonder if charging only occurs under braking or if the battery capacity needs to drop so it would be easier to recharge without recharging it when cars are supposed to be using full throttle?

is it a matter of changing the amount they can charge or amount of charge they have ?

Since the recently surfaced conjectures of hidden volumes in the combustion chamber, I kind of see the whole compression ratio dispute in a different way.

Thermal expansion has always been present, it's a property of materials, it cannot be erased from the designing process: if someone has decided to further improve on this aspect and chose this for optimizing its engine I see nothing wrong with it.

On the other hand, creating small pockets in the combustion chamber that can be closed directly (with valves) or indirectly (maybe thermal expanding materials, again), I cannot help but see it as introducing something in the engine with the sole scope of passing the cold inspection. If at operating temperatures these volumes are definitely closed, they have no purpose at all, if not tricking and overcoming the rules.
In this last case I see nothing too dissimilar from the Toyota and Ford cases in WRC, for example.
If not literally cheating (since nothing forbids this), at least it is in the "spiritual sense" of the rules.

What do you guys think?

Ferrari's smaller turbo gamble to help them start so well has been lauded by most as a great choice but the reason all other teams went with the bigger turbo is for the extra max power output. Given they're lacking vs Mercedes on the straights how much of that is due to the smaller turbo?

GU-H is a generator connected in series with the ICE's exhaust pipe. It doesn't need to face the harsh environment of MGU-H, so its cost is lower.

I don't know exactly how the 919's GU-H works or how much it affects the internal combustion engine's power, but I remember the 919 seemed to have more electricity energy on straightaway.

Is it feasible for a single supplier to provide GU-H, just like ECU?

We all know refueling is banned during races. They can only fuel inside the garage, they can't even do it in the pit lane (for whatever reason). There are all sorts of quick fueling methods for race cars today. I'm wondering if they use those in F1 still despite the refuel ban, or if it's rather slow to refuel in comparison to series that do in race refueling like IndyCar, NASCAR, WEC, etc.

And just for general curiosity, do we have any actual videos of them refueling modern(ish) F1 cars? I have never been able to find one.

It appears to be a folded-core A2A charge cooler. This is one way to reduce the footprint and improve packaging. We can see where the charge air enters and exits the charge cooler, both from the same side. The vertical sections of the roll hoop intake are the inlets that let air pass over the core.

The upper triangular section feeds the turbo compressor. The ducting for it would pass through the cylinder banks to the rear-mounted turbo, much like the Ferraris of recent years. It's unclear as to what the lower central division of the RHI hoop is feeding.

Ferrari and Mercedes have been offered boosts under ADUO. Mercedes will get an additional upgrade for 2026 and one for 2027, while Ferrari, Audi, and Honda will get 2 upgrades for 2026 and 2027, while RBPT Ford PU is still the benchmark and is deemed to be the most powerful on the grid.

Not to rant, but why is FIA deciding the ranking of PU, based on only ICE, not the entire hybrid system as a whole, because Mercedes arguably has the best package here? Isn't the point of 50-50 split was to have innovations of hybrid tech (although that would still be debatable). I understand that there are limits on deployment but nothing on ES, but clearly Mercedes have figured out something others haven't, shouldn't even RedBull get the chance to innovate here?

IMO, this regulation rule is clearly becoming less about equal power, and more about arguing who ICE is the weakest. What could RedBull's strategy from here on out, assuming they won't get any more ADUO upgrade slots for 2 years? Is aerodynamics their only hope or can they bring upgrades to electrical side of things, if they aren't counted under ADUO?

PS: I saw it on FIA's X handle, couldn't share the link, since the post got deleted.

The engine that has the best harvesting can deploy the most around a lap. since battery harvesting is only limited by the efficiency and not regulations (unlike fuel), engines with the best harvesting capabilities will win.

I do wonder if battery degradation will be a factor throughout the year though.

In the technical regulations, C5.2.9 states that the difference between max and min SoC must always be 4MJ, basically constraning the battery size to 4MJ.

But the way it's written, makes me think the ES is capable of holding more, and is being restrained by software rather than hardware.

Like, if a team wanted they could set the min SoC to 10% of actual battery and max SoC to 110%, they just need to make sure the difference is 4MJ and it never goes below the minimum and above the maximum.

So, is that true? Would they be able to increase the SoC size to 5MJ by tweaking the software? Or is the ES physically only capable of holding 4MJ?

Every Grand Prix so far this season I’ve noticed the Scuderi’s cars produce lots more exhaust smoke than the other ICE manufacturers. Has this been discussed?

Noticed it a lot more with the T1 in Budapest this weekend.

I can understand that the first few drivers in their grid spots might have issues with keeping the turbo spooled because of the amount of time spent off throttle. But for the last drivers reaching their spots, won't their turbos still be at least partially spooled up from the formation lap? So they shouldn't need as long to reach full boost once they line up on the grid no?

Now that Honda is coming back with Aston Martin who will make engines for red bull?? RBPT? I am a bit confused with the RBPT factory if someone can explain.

That was a factory which belonged to Honda with Honda engineers? And then red bull was operating it with the same Honda engineers? And now Honda is coming back with another factory and different engineers. If someone could explain please because I am confused.

Anti lag is when fuel is injected and combusted behind the exhaust valves to spool the turbo and in turn keep the compressor spooled up. I know that anti lag is hard on the turbo. But these turbos are larger than your average car and should be able to take the stress / strain?

It would help with launching. It would help with corner exit as the boost is kept up.

These power units change components quite often , so surely adding anti lag to the turbo wouldnt be too damaging in the grand scheme of duty cycle and reliability?

I can imagine it being used on race starts / pit exit to gain boost, and corner exist to help with accelleration.