F1 | 2026 rules: more petrol to avoid engine wars?

The blanket is short. Regarding the 2026 regulations, what was predictable is clearly emerging: to convince Audi to enter F1 and Honda to return to the Circus, concessions were made on power units which now risk being very expensive. The FIA ​​staff directed by Nikolas Tombazis tried to work miracles to avoid seeing Frankenstein single-seaters in a couple of years, as Red Bull team principal Christian Horner had provocatively defined them.

Andrea Stella, a McLaren colleague, after the publication of the draft chassis and aerodynamic regulations, took matters further, fearing that there could be F1 cars that were “…too slow in corners and too fast in a straight line”.

The idea of ​​equalizing the power of the internal combustion engine with the electric one was a leap forward which is creating more problems than development opportunities, since limitations in the fuel flow have been introduced in the regulations to prevent the internal combustion unit from was used as an electricity regenerator if the battery ran out prematurely.

The lighter (around 30 kg), shorter (20 cm wheelbase), narrower (10 cm) single-seaters were designed with the aim of reducing the aerodynamic load by 30% (with a partially flat bottom and a less diffuser). extreme), aiming for a 55% reduction in aerodynamic resistance thanks also to the adoption of X-Mode.

Despite all the alchemy (the progressive reduction in the flow of electrical energy as speed increases), it seems increasingly clear that on very selective tracks in terms of consumption there remains the risk of seeing single-seaters that only exploit the cavalry of the 6-cylinder turbo (around 550 horsepower), while they will have zero electricity, perhaps having to fight against machines capable of exploiting the thousand horsepower.

Nikolas Tpmbazis, FIA manager of the single-seater sector, candidly admitted in the press conference for the Canadian GP that “…if some changes were necessary, I am quite confident that the manufacturers would help me work on the PUs and would be collaborative”.

The engine standards were approved in 2022 and reworking the engines to find that performance balance that the cars are not able to guarantee is an essential step. The only way to get out of the corner is to increase the range of e-fuel to reduce dependence on the battery (which will have triple the energy compared to today (350 kW versus 120 kW).

To change the regulatory terms on the 2026 power units it will be necessary to find a unanimous agreement between the manufacturers (Mercedes, Ferrari, Renault, Honda, Audi and Red Bull Powertrains).

Toto Wolff immediately wants to make Mercedes’ role count. La Stella was the brand that opposed delaying the rules on chassis until October, to give the FIA ​​a chance to address and resolve the critical issues that emerged.

“From an engine point of view we have been at sea for a couple of years. There are teams that feel they are lagging behind and there are other teams that think they have done a good job with the OEMs. I believe that on the chassis side we can study of the changes, but on the engine side the process is already too advanced.”

Bruno Famin, head of Alpine, thinks the same as Wolff, while Christian Horner, CEO of RBPT seems to be more open to possible changes: “There are always those who don’t want to change – explained Christian – but it’s not too late. The choice depends on the FIA ​​which has all the data and simulations. We need to look at what will be best for F1. We should rely on the International Federation and the FOM to make the right choices.”

Today the regulation allows 100 kg/h of fuel to power the internal combustion engine to which 120 kW of electrical energy is added when the MGU-K is able to supply it. In 2026, however, the total energy available must not exceed 3,000 Mj/h. With these flow rates it would be emerging that in at least three tracks of the world championship there would be serious problems with electric charging.

Engineer stuff. To make the concept more informative we can tell you that the 2026 engines are running on the bench with a maximum rotation speed of up to 11,000 rpm compared to the current 12,500 rpm of gear change. With an increase of 5/8 kg of fuel available in the tank we could get out of the difficulty, but the engines will have to be recalibrated to run higher than the values ​​for which they were designed. We are talking about very low revs compared to the era of naturally aspirated engines (20,000 rpm!), considering the limits road engines are now capable of reaching.

It is easy to foresee that a point of compromise could be found by reworking the PU2026, rather than just having to revolutionize the concept of the next single-seaters, perhaps granting something on the aerodynamic level to facilitate the task of the legislator who seems to have got into a sort of cul de sac.