F1 2026 thread

The new rules don't look great do they? The fact that they are already talking about 2030 shows a lack of confidence and must also be a bit off-putting to any manufacturers.

I don't understand the need to keep changing the rules. It's a never-ending cycle:

1. Introduce new rules
2. 1 team gets it right and dominates
3. F1 panic about the domination so they come up with new rules
4. Other teams start to converge and F1 becomes interesting and competitive
5. New rules start (go back to point1)

Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

The status of Alpine and a PU supply for them if, they are appearing, to not make their own. --
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/what-f1s-rules-say-about-alpines-engine-choice-for-2026/10624547/

What F1's rules say about Alpine's engine choice for 2026
How Alpine will be guaranteed a Formula 1 engine supply deal if it elects to move away from its Renault works power unit
Jonathan Noble Jun 18, 2024, 12:23 PM
Upd: Jun 18, 2024, 12:24 PM


Image Unavailable, Please Login
Pierre Gasly, Alpine A524

Photo by: Erik Junius


The possibility of Alpine shifting its approach and becoming a customer team in 2026 opens up some interesting dynamics surrounding Formula 1's engine supply rules.

Any move to shut down Renault's F1 engine project would require Alpine to secure a supply from elsewhere – which is not the work of the moment with teams already quite locked down with their plans.

But, as part of the regulatory framework that F1 operates under, there is no risk of Alpine being left without a power unit deal because it will be guaranteed one for 2026 if no deal is in place by May 15 of next year.

The 2026 power unit technical regulations lay out the minimum number of teams that a manufacturer may be called upon by the FIA to supply.

This is based on a formula that is laid out in the regulations which demands that a manufacturer must be willing to supply the number of teams equal to 'T', as defined by a formula.

This is worked out as below:

T = (NTOT-A)/(B-C), where:

• T is rounded up to the next whole integer
• A = Total number of Competitors (including "works/factory" Competitors) having a supply agreement concluded for year N with a New PU Manufacturer.
• B = Total number of manufacturers of homologated PUs for year N.
• C = Total number of New PU Manufacturers for year N. -
• NTOT = is set to 11 and is related to the "total number of entered Competitors" for year N, which is not known until November of year N-1. This number may be reviewed if the number of Competitors exceeds 12.

Should Renault pull out as an engine supplier, leaving F1 with five manufacturers (Audi, Ferrari, Mercedes, Honda and RB), then the formula to work out 'T' is as below.

Eleven teams minus three (for Red Bull, RB and Audi) / five manufacturers minus two new entrants (Audi and Red Bull).

This results in 2.66, which rounded up to the next whole integer is three.

So, this effectively means a manufacturer has to be willing to supply up to three teams.

At the moment, Mercedes is the only one doing that for 2026, with its own works entry plus deals in place with both McLaren and Williams.

The rules state that in picking a manufacturer to supply a team without a deal, the first one to be chosen will be the one which is supplying the fewest competitors.

For 2026 - with Ferrari supplying Haas and Red Bull providing RB with power units - that leaves Audi and Honda as the only manufacturers delivering engines to one team.

However, a clause in the regulations states: "A New PU Manufacturer will not be required to comply with the obligation of supply as set out above."

This means that Audi would not be required to fulfil the criteria, meaning that Honda would have to sort a customer deal out alongside its current works arrangement with Aston Martin.

But this all depends on Alpine not getting a deal off its own back because there is now the possibility of Mercedes supplying the squad in 2026 if the German manufacturer wants to, even though it is currently at maximum capacity according to the regulations.

As part of the future engine rules, a limit has been laid down in terms of the number of teams that can be supplied.

Article 1.2.3 of Appendix 5 of the PU Technical Regulations states: "Unless agreed otherwise by the FIA, each of the PU Manufacturers of a homologated PU may not directly or indirectly supply PUs for more than (T+1) teams, with T as defined in Article 1.2.2."

At the moment, with Renault meaning there are six manufacturers, the T formula works it out to be 2 (11-3/6-2), so with Mercedes supplying itself, McLaren and Williams it is already at T + 1.

However, should Renault withdraw and reduce the manufacturer entrants to five, then T jumps to 3, meaning Mercedes could supply four teams if it wanted to.

All eyes are now on Alpine and Renault to see what they decide to do and feel is the best way forward from both a financial and competitive perspective.

 

Chasing noise is incredibly stupid imo. Noise is wasted energy, so basically they want to decrease efficiency for nothing other than noise?

 

What about Cadillac ? They may be willing to supply engines to Alpine in the future. LOL

 

10 years with this PU and these guys cannot get it right.....UNBELIEVABLE!!!

Pitiful really. No one else wants their PU either.

 

I have been saying that on this forum for years, against the vociferous "traditionalists" who would like nothing better than see a return of the high-decibels atmo V10 engines.
At the moment, we have the most efficient power units we ever had, but some would nothing of throwing away years of research and development in hybrid technology, simply to regain some noise. How stupid is that !!!

There are other aspects to consider.
First, if motor racing in general become noisy again, more circuits will become under threat of closure, since some are already quite restricted in their operations. It will become more difficult to obtain planning permission for new tracks.
Second, Liberty is toying with the idea of having more races in town, to solve the accommodation and transport issues when attending GPs. This may have to be reviewed if noise become a nuisance for folks living there. Excessive noise in cities will certainly raise objections.

 

You have very short memory.
Red Bull were glad to find Renault PUs in 2014, that allowed them to win 3 GPs!
They were also glad to keep them when Mercedes refused to supply them a few years later.
Fair is fair ...

 

So motorheads and fans around the world want some excitement with the premier form of motorsport and that is stupid? Are you going to say that a 12,000 horsepower nitro burning top fuel dragster is stupid because it isn't as efficient as a Prius hybrid?

You are also aware that most forms of racing are now louder than current F1 and they race on the same tracks? Even the support races are often louder than F1.

 

I present logic arguments; all you have to oppose is emotional denials.

Noise is seen as a pollution these days, in case you are not aware.
Excessive noise has been proven to be debilitating, but you choose to ignore that .
Many existing circuits have already lost their case in court against the locals asking for noise abatement.
They now have to respect strictly enforced noise limits, reduce their calendar and restrict the hours.
Some circuits have closed, unable to meet the requirement, or becoming unprofitable with the restriction of trade.
It's not only in UK, but several countries in Europe too.
But you think F1 should ignore all that because motorheads want noise at the expense of ordinary folks.

 

It's so sad to watch what Renault has become since the Alonso and Vettel days.

They need to just pull the plug and have some self-respect already. The brand taking an engine from Honda or Ford is just too far, unless they get some kind of kink out of degrading themselves to new lows.

Sell.

 

Those series are louder because they're running on ancient technology that none of the manufactures are interested in promoting now. WEC hypercars aren't much louder than F1, and the spectacle is still awesome.

I don't want a silent series like Formula-e, but we can't recreate the old days like this. It won't work.

 

Renault's PU is trash. So much so that they are willing to try someone's else's PU.

RedBull had no choice in the matter which is why Horner thru Renault under the bus for several years.

 

Before the hybrid era, Red Bull won 49 GPs with Renault engines, and later 3 more with hybrid PUs.
Everybody knew that Renault PUs were not up to the job, but Red Bull couldn't find an alternative for years.
In view of their long association, problems should have been dealt internally in a civilised manner.
Instead, Horner and Marko never stopped going to the media to criticise their PU partners.
I think Abiteboul (at the time) was quite patient with them.

 

Entertainment value and experience is a very real condition. Loud is part of the experience. People enjoy loud concerts, loud cars, etc. Its not dumb for fans to want to have an increased experience.

Are you one of those people that move close to an established race track and ***** about the noise to the point it gets shut down? The tragic fact that race tracks get forced to close due to noise complains at the fault of people voluntarily moving close is not something to defend.

 

Not much louder is still louder. A lot of the GT3 cars remain a lot louder. The old Corvette C5R, C6R and C7R were fan favorites for being nasty loud. The Garage 56 Nascar in last years LeMans was again a fan favorite, much due to the noise.

There is nothing to say going back to some old formulas won't work. As far as increasing the spectacle and experience by having high revving V8 or V10s would absolutely work. The fuel Formula 1 cars burns is minuscule compared to other racing series and droplets compared to the transportation costs to move the F1 circus around the world. Plus there is zero reason why sustainable fuels and fuel restrictions can't be applied to V8 or V10s.

The vast majority of fans have been begging for louder, more exciting engines for a whole decade. The drivers and now even the teams are saying the newest PU formulas are not right. So maybe the old way did work and it's the new way that is wrong?

 

I am all for living in harmony and not disturbing the tranquility of others.
I don't see why a tiny minority can impose their "increased experience" on local residents.
Already during the pre-war, cars racing at Brooklands near London were fitted with efficient mufflers not to disturb the neighbours, and racing had to be between 8am and 8pm only 3 days of the week. Very civilised !

 

The world moves on, and some don't adapt to it, prefering living in the past.
This is the main issue with manking: some want to evolve, others prefer to regress.

 

Tiny minority? By far the vast majority want louder engines.

If the race tracks were built far away from residential areas, yet people chose to move in close to these race tracks fully aware of the racing that takes place. Why should the tracks be forced to close up? If you want peace and quiet, maybe don't move close to a race track? I mean, you are an advocate for logic right?

 

Absolutely
I was shocked by the Porsche GT3 cup race just before the 2022 French Grand Prix.
A pity for F1..

 

To evolve for what ?
Why generalizing ?
Beginning of 20th century was full of promising ideologies..

 

Don't kid yourself, motor racing fans are a tiny minority.

Regarding people moving near tracks.
Most circuits were built outside the suburbs, and as these grew became right in the middle of unhabited areas.
Others were created in the countryside, but couldn't resist selling their extra land to newcomers for profit.
20 or 30 years down the road, different folks live there who cherish their tranquility and don't want to be disturbed all week long by driving schools, testings, track days, plus racing at the weekend.
If people don't want to compromise, there is conflict.

 

Well, the tracks were already there, it's up to the others to adapt.

In any case, I think the problem is more about quality than about quantity of sound.

 

It's the same for factories, depots, warehouses which were once at the edge of towns and had to move to make room for more more accomnodations, develop new suburbs, etc ...
It also come to a point where some circuits cannot resist the commercial pull when the land value goes sky high !
If people around a circuit can "adapt" and see the benefit for them, OK, but there needs to be a compromise.

 

I'm pretty sure that, if asked, the majority of F1 fans would prefer louder cars. My preference would be for lighter, smaller cars. One way to achieve this would be to remove some of the electric gubbins in the cars. Motorsport stopped being 'road relevant' decades ago so even if most road cars are hybrid or ev that is no reason to expect f1 to be the same. If the cars and the trucks transporting them all ran on biofuel that might help, although that is pretty much a PR exercise. Like most sports the pollution is caused by the spectators and not the competitors.

 

F1 can obtain lighter and smaller cars and conserve its plan for the 2026 formula, if it reduces its goals.
Instead of aiming at 1000hp, F1 can still provide good racing with 500/550 hp only.
The ICE would be reduced from a 1600cc to a 1000cc 4 cylinder turbo, with a smaller electric motor and battery.
The chassis dimensions would be reduced accordingly (wheelbase, width), saving more weight .
Most of the suspension, brakes and transmission component could be scaled down and lighter because of the reduced power. The aero would be restricted, with a limit on downforce.
The cars would be smaller, lighter use narrower tyres, and more nimble, probably not losing much in performance terms.