Which PU do you consider to be the best at the moment? My educated guess: rated power differences will be comparatively smaller (between the suppliers that don't mess it up)
I believe them. The entire electrical system, particularly the batteries will have to get much bigger to support that kind of power output. I despise that teams are running bare carbon just to get down to the minimum weight. It was so much better when teams added ballast to meet the minimum weight.
Your opinion. You have a very pessimistic view of the future, and you reject change. I always thought that adaptability was a virtue. I have no desire to go back to the past.
Still too long, but with all the junk that they have to install, it's a small improvement. I honestly don't know how it will be. I agree with the previous comment, after half a year, all the short-comings will be surmounted and speeds will recover. The big question: will there be a "reset" for the mid teams or the hegemony of the big three (four?) will continue. And I guess the second best is will overtaking be easier. We'll have to wait.
2400mm isn't too long, compared to 3000mm at the moment. That would mean a total repackage of the components within these limits, and franfly, it's a lot to ask compressing a car so much. ICE + electric motor, battery and fuel tank, plus the cockpit with its minimum dimensions, all would have to fit inside 2400mm. I guess the driver would be sitting in the car, rather than laying in it, they can save a lot that way. But the external dimensions would have to be reduced too. The width from 2000mm to 1800mm, as it was, and the total length to 4500mm max, with a limit on front and rear overhangs which the aerodynamicists use so much in their design.
McLaren: F1 2026 draft rules make cars too slow in corners, too fast on straights McLaren team boss Andrea Stella has warned that Formula 1’s draft 2026 rules risk cars that are too slow in corners and too fast on the straights.
F1 team bosses to meet amid 2026 rules concern Formula 1 team bosses are to meet at the Canadian Grand Prix to discuss concerns that have emerged about the new 2026 rules, Autosport has learned. Just a day after the FIA published concept images and outline plans about the car revolution that is coming from 2026, worries about some of the ideas being implemented have emerged. With an online meeting of the FIA’s Technical Advisory Committee having exposed some of the issues at stake on Thursday, sources have revealed that team bosses have asked for the topic of 2026 to be central to a gathering that will take place in the Montreal paddock on Saturday morning. This will form part of what is a semi-regular meeting held with F1 CEO Stefano Domenicali and other senior stakeholders to discuss the latest issues in F1. Currently central to the concern is the fact that some teams feel the FIA has pushed on with elements of the rules which they do not think will work in the way they are intended. This includes the overall aerodynamic concept, with some teams suggesting that the new cars could be especially slow because they will be lacking downforce and frequently run out of battery power. Another element that teams want to talk about is the weight reduction plans, with an outline idea being for the cars to be 30kg lighter than the current machinery despite a likely overall increase in the bulk of the batteries. There are fears that teams will find it impossible to get anywhere near close to that and will end up spending an enormous amount of money in trying to find marginal gains. Teams also want more details about the state of the active aero plans, with the FIA having said it intends to introduce a dual-state system – with wings in a Z-mode for high downforce and a low-drag X-mode for the straights. FIA deadlines Although concerns about the state of the regulations have been bubbling away for a while now, it is the FIA’s publication of its plans this week that has thrust the matter centre stage. The FIA's actions have effectively shown to the teams that a lot of decisions about what is coming for 2026 have now been made, and highlighted that there is no holding back on plans to get things finalised by the end of this month before it gets more complicated to make changes. Under the FIA’s International Sporting Code (ISC), any regulation change that the FIA considers is “likely to have a substantial impact on the technical design of the Automobile and/or the balance of performance between the Automobiles” needs to be published on 30 June, a year and a half before it comes into force. After that period, revisions require support from the competitors – which could prove troublesome as it is understood that not all teams are on the same page about what should be done. There are some teams who would like to delay the publication of the rules until October, to give the FIA more time to fine-tune them – which makes some sense because teams are not allowed to work on the aerodynamic elements of the cars properly until January next year anyway. Nevertheless, it is understood that a proposal to allow that to happen was blocked by one team that felt it important the FIA stuck to the June deadline. Article 18.2.4 of the ISC states that a shorter notice period for the publication of rules than the June 30 deadline is only possible with the unanimous agreement of the teams – something that does not appear to be on the cards. However, one source suggested that the FIA still has the opportunity under 18.2.4 to act with the support of just the majority of teams in going for an October release if it feels that there are justifiable reasons for doing so. The rules states: “In exceptional circumstances, and if the FIA considers that the change in question is essential for the safeguarding of the Championship, cup, trophy, challenge or series concerned, the agreement of the majority of the Competitors properly entered shall suffice.” In its presentation documents on Thursday, the FIA said that the rules were anticipated to be ratified by the World Motor Sport Council on June 28.
But that exactly what we want !! A noticable difference of velocity between straights and corners. F1 would benefit from the cars being more spectacular, and see the drivers struggling with their cars. At the moment, the cars are too easy to drive, and corner on rails !!!
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/fia-open-to-changes-amid-team-fears-over-f1-2026-rules/10621062/#comments-block-anchor FIA open to changes amid team fears over F1 2026 rules The FIA is ready to listen to team concerns about Formula 1’s 2026 car plans, and will likely make changes to the rules over the next months to improve them. Jonathan Noble Jun 8, 2024, 6:32 PM In the wake of the FIA issuing its outline plans for the 2026 rules revamp earlier this week, a number of teams have expressed fears about numerous aspects of what is on the table. Some of the worries surround the performance of the cars and their lack of downforce, with early simulation running suggesting they could be slower than F2 cars in the corners. As McLaren team principal Andrea Stella said about the draft rules in Canada: “The cars are not fast enough in the corners and too fast on the straights.” Furthermore, teams are not happy with how restrictive some of the rules make development – which risks minimising their own ability to make improvements. But while the current draft regulations are to be put to the FIA’s World Motor Sport Council next week ahead of a likely ratification on June 28, the governing body has made it clear that it is open to working with teams to address any improvements that need to be made. Speaking about the varied reaction that the FIA had had to the rules from teams and drivers, its single-seater director Nikolas Tombazis said: “The World Council discussion and hopefully approval is the first step. “We are not in the final set of regulations yet and we do have quite a few things that we need to find and discuss with the teams. We are equally conscious of some of the concerns regarding downforce with the cars or straightline speed, and these are things that we class as refinements that still need to take place. “So between, let's say, the end of the month, when these regulations would hopefully be published, and the start of 2025 when teams can start aerodynamic development, because they cannot start earlier, we do expect a reasonable amount of extra work to be done in full consultation with the teams, with FOM and everybody else. “Hopefully that will lead to some refinements that will be submitted to the World Council, maybe a bit later in the year and hopefully approved.” Tombazis accepted that team concerns about the performance of cars being so slow based on the current state of the regulations were justified, but he said things will be very different when the 2026 cars eventually roll out. “I think the fears are accurate, because people are taking a snapshot of what the regulations are on a piece of paper now, and are making comments on the basis of what they see," he explained. “I don't have any concern about these issues raised by people, but clearly we have full expectation to make some steps up for performance. And that's exactly why we've set the bar reasonably low to start with, so we can build up on that with collaboration with the teams. To increase the downforce of these cars is actually quite easy. “So I understand the comments, but I don't think there's any concern these cars will be not faster than F2 or anything like that. I think that will be 100% resolved when we are in the final regs.” Some of the compromises being made for the chassis regulations are a consequence of the fact that F1 has committed to new turbo hybrid engines that have a 50/50 power split between the ICE and battery components. One of the best ways that some competitors suggest the cars could be made quicker would be by lifting the power that can be produced by the ICE element – which would be achieved through not restricting fuel flow as much. While previously such an idea has been dismissed, Tombazis suggested that it was not out of the question to go down that route if the power unit manufacturers were in favour. “There's a slightly different position in terms of governance with the power unit, because we are already under governance agreement in relation to the power unit regulations, which means that any tweaks that may be necessary would still need to be agreed with the power unit manufacturers and cannot be done, let's say, unilaterally,” he said. “But because there's, generally speaking, a very good spirit of collaboration, if there are some tweaks needed, I'm quite confident the PU manufacturers would help and be collaborative.”
FIA says F1 2026 low-drag 'X-mode' will be driver-activated The FIA has allayed concerns from Formula 1 teams about the activation process of its active aerodynamics package, and expects to use similar parameters to current DRS.
More renditions Tweet— Twitter API (@user) date Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
Via GPBlog - Why Toyota won’t return to F1. Audi didn’t read this lol! WEC is growing stronger! Porsche do not need F1. After leaving Formula 1, Toyota Gazoo Racing has emerged as the absolute best in the World Endurance Championship (WEC). The team won the 24 Hours of Le Mans six times, Toyota Gazoo's drivers became world champions in the WEC's premier class five times, and they won the constructors' championship six times. While Audi opted for a new challenge after all their success in other classes, Toyota has no plans to switch to Formula 1. "First you then have to wait and see if you get a place," Leupen says. "Also, you have to prepare for years, like Audi does. And I think we have a lot to prepare here [in WEC]. Toyota has earlier goals to achieve in this championship than in Formula 1." What has F1 given Toyota? According to Leupen, as a brand you have to ask yourself which championship suits you best. In addition, the Dutchman says: "What did Formula 1 bring Toyota at the time, apart from a nice factory? A lot of money went through to make Toyota's name better known. I think in WEC we can show more what Toyota does, what the brand stands for." Here, Leupen is referring in particular to Toyota Powertrain; developments that you find in the Japanese manufacturer's normal street cars. "We have Toyota cars on the road that were originally developed for racing. Thanks to motorsport, we should be able to make better cars for our customers. We are working on cars that are co-developed in Cologne, and then the information is passed on to Japan and the consumer in five years. In Formula 1, that bridge can no longer be made." Moreover, Toyota enjoys the WEC as it currently is. "I think with the manufacturers we are creating a very nice series here. Hopefully, we will continue here with the next generation of cars, where only water comes out of the exhaust."
The v10 era looked and sounded good but the actual racing was **** - very little overtaking due to the massive amount of turbulence coming off of the cars - one car dominating (at least it was Ferrari for a large part of it), the whole tire gate at Indy etc. They played games with the rules to try to make the racing better as well - remember the entire race tires, grooves in them, one lap qualifying (to try to mix up the grid), points extended down the grid to 8 and then 10 cars etc? All of that was to try to get around the abysmal racing that the aero rules created. Every era had it's issues - in the 'golden' era the cars were actually extremely slow compared to now and killed their drivers at an extremely alarming rate. And they broke WAY more often. It wasn't out of the norm to not even have 6 cars (that made up the points at the time) finish the race. Rose colored glasses to think the v10's had better racing, they were awful for on track action, worse than the current cars. Go look how many passes in a dry race occurred at places like Suzuka compared to what we had this year. They passed in the pits or not at all back then (or when a car blew up).
A non secret revealed lol -- Alpine could abandon Renault engines and become F1 customer team in 2026 French manufacturer in talks with rivals about customer engine deals amid suggestions it could abandon Renault works unit
You are thinking track, I an specifying the length between F and R wheels. They are currently in the 3300 range--so I am shortening the cars by 1000mm (40") I do not disagree.
Very strange. That announcement contradicts the long standing rumours that Renault would only sell the Alpine F1 team IF the Enstone facilities in UK and the Viry-Chatillon engine department near Paris were to kept together. In other words no "pick-and-choose" for the potential buyer. Renault Engines at Viry-Chatillon is also the R&D department for powertrains outside racing. Renault and Geely (China) recently created a company, called HORSE, to manufacture ICEs for both, presumably until the end of their life in France. That may signal that Renault Engines will become redundant ?
The investment needed for the new PU is not worth it given the results. With the budget limit now why spend the resources when its more cost effective to gain an engine deal with a more likely better PU. Given the lack of results they have zero to lose at Alpine lol!
In purely practical terms, you are probably right. But for a major car manufacturer like Renault (or Mercedes, Audi, Honda, etc ..) in F1 presumably to boost the image of the brand, it doesn't look good rebadging engines from another manufacturer, does it ? Something is truly wrong in that team ... Would you imagine Ferrari putting Cosworth DFV V8 at the back of his cars when Ford was dominating F1 ?
