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.

 

[Sulland]

I think the new regs have not slowed the new cars enough.
Whn a new cartype is coming in, they need to cut at least 5 sec a lap on average on all tracks.

The very capable engineers will cut the aprox 2-3 sec a lap we see now will almost be gained in 2026.

The easiest way to easy cut more is to make tyres harder. Not sure how many shore this years C1 and C5 tyre are. But he easiest is to tell Pirelli to make all tyres 3 seconds slower.
Little cost for the teams, and will give the the needed effect.

In addition will harder tyres will give a bonuseffest by showing who are the best drivers, since cars will become harder to drive!

 

[Steve Boyd]

I think the new regs have not slowed the new cars enough.
Whn a new cartype is coming in, they need to cut at least 5 sec a lap on average on all tracks.

The very capable engineers will cut the aprox 2-3 sec a lap we see now will almost be gained in 2026.

The easiest way to easy cut more is to make tyres harder. Not sure how many shore this years C1 and C5 tyre are. But he easiest is to tell Pirelli to make all tyres 3 seconds slower.
Little cost for the teams, and will give the the needed effect.

In addition will harder tyres will give a bonuseffest by showing who are the best drivers, since cars will become harder to drive!

I'm not sure that will be an "easy sell" to Pirelli, who will have visions of every driver at every race complaining about how bad the tyres are, worst grip I've ever had &c &c. Not what the marketing people want to hear.

 

[airshifter]

I think the new regs have not slowed the new cars enough.
Whn a new cartype is coming in, they need to cut at least 5 sec a lap on average on all tracks.

The very capable engineers will cut the aprox 2-3 sec a lap we see now will almost be gained in 2026.

The easiest way to easy cut more is to make tyres harder. Not sure how many shore this years C1 and C5 tyre are. But he easiest is to tell Pirelli to make all tyres 3 seconds slower.
Little cost for the teams, and will give the the needed effect.

In addition will harder tyres will give a bonuseffest by showing who are the best drivers, since cars will become harder to drive!

I agree that maybe they have not slowed them down as much as some expected, but think part of it is a byproduct of the regs and the aero improvements. They can now trim the cars to the fastest possible laps and fight the downforce shortcomings if they have to. So they now have that option to run higher than usual downforce for a given track, knowing they can make some of that time back in the straights with both wings flattened. Cornering speeds still seem fairly solid considering the smaller tires.

I haven't seen much about tire compounds for the year either. So I'm not sure if they carried over the same compounds to the new sizes or not. But it would be an easy way to slow then down more, but as Steve says above, Pirelli wouldn't want everyone moaning about the crap tires, so they would push back.

 

[Nitrodaze]

I think the new regs have not slowed the new cars enough.
Whn a new cartype is coming in, they need to cut at least 5 sec a lap on average on all tracks.

The very capable engineers will cut the aprox 2-3 sec a lap we see now will almost be gained in 2026.

The easiest way to easy cut more is to make tyres harder. Not sure how many shore this years C1 and C5 tyre are. But he easiest is to tell Pirelli to make all tyres 3 seconds slower.
Little cost for the teams, and will give the the needed effect.

In addition will harder tyres will give a bonuseffest by showing who are the best drivers, since cars will become harder to drive!

At preseason testing, the best time was 3 seconds from the 2025 quali time. That was surprising, knowing the top teams were sandbagging. In the last three races, some people have found evidence that Mercedes is sandbagging. Hence, they may be capable of 2025 times already.

Is hard tyres the best way to slow them down? I don't think so. Even with hard tyres, Mercedes would still be within 3 seconds of 2025 times. And it is possible now for the FIA to implement, as Pirrelli tested harder tyres for 2026 but chose not to use them for the races we have seen so far. Introducing harder tyres than was agreed with the teams at this point would not go down well with the teams. It will only increase criticism of the regulations, which are taking a battering at the moment.

The funny thing is that the cars are not actually that fast. It is the battery deployment that gives the impression that they fast relative to other cars without battery. Compared to the 2025 cars, the 2026 car drive power fluctuates from 500HP to close to 1000HP. On average, they probably top out at around 800HP on the straight due to battery levels and tyre wear. In reality, they are slower than the 1000HP 2025 car on the straight but faster at the corners.

 

[airshifter]

The funny thing is that the cars are not actually that fast. It is the battery deployment that gives the impression that they fast relative to other cars without battery. Compared to the 2025 cars, the 2026 car drive power fluctuates from 500HP to close to 1000HP. On average, they probably top out at around 800HP on the straight due to battery levels and tyre wear. In reality, they are slower than the 1000HP 2025 car on the straight but faster at the corners.

This is a gross twisting of reality. On very long straights, the cars from last year might go slightly faster, but the acceleration curve of the new cars and initial speed advantage gets them down the straight in less time.

https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/1rar9hq/2025_vs_2026_preseason_telemetry_traces/#lightbox

You can clearly see where the new vs last era cars have advantages. The new cars accelerate hard, but might lose out at the end of the straight. There is not a single corner trace that shows the new car quicker in a corner. The same was true in China and Albert Park. On the tracks that don't allow much harvesting, the older car might make it down a straight slightly quicker, but those tracks are fairly rare.


The downforce reduction alone will make these cars slower in corners until they manage to claw it back. But the aero drag reduction makes them accelerate much quicker than before.


Another trace on China qually laps. Notice where each car has an advantage. In particular notice the final straight starting at about the one minute and five seconds mark. Kimi and Oscar are at the same speed, and you can advance and see how quickly Kimi accelerates vs Oscar until it reaches about a 15 kph advantage. At the end of the straight Kimi is out of energy and Oscar takes a lead of a similar advantage, but it's much more brief. Overall Kimi makes up time on the straight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XN2gnrHaLSs


Australia should be one of the worst tracks for harvesting, and quite a few are significantly better. China should be at or near the top 3-4 as well. So the season opening races already gave a fairly solid look at worst and best case scenarios for harvesting and energy deployment.

 

[Nitrodaze]

This is a gross twisting of reality. On very long straights, the cars from last year might go slightly faster, but the acceleration curve of the new cars and initial speed advantage gets them down the straight in less time.

https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/1rar9hq/2025_vs_2026_preseason_telemetry_traces/#lightbox

You can clearly see where the new vs last era cars have advantages. The new cars accelerate hard, but might lose out at the end of the straight. There is not a single corner trace that shows the new car quicker in a corner. The same was true in China and Albert Park. On the tracks that don't allow much harvesting, the older car might make it down a straight slightly quicker, but those tracks are fairly rare.


The downforce reduction alone will make these cars slower in corners until they manage to claw it back. But the aero drag reduction makes them accelerate much quicker than before.


Another trace on China qually laps. Notice where each car has an advantage. In particular notice the final straight starting at about the one minute and five seconds mark. Kimi and Oscar are at the same speed, and you can advance and see how quickly Kimi accelerates vs Oscar until it reaches about a 15 kph advantage. At the end of the straight Kimi is out of energy and Oscar takes a lead of a similar advantage, but it's much more brief. Overall Kimi makes up time on the straight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XN2gnrHaLSs


Australia should be one of the worst tracks for harvesting, and quite a few are significantly better. China should be at or near the top 3-4 as well. So the season opening races already gave a fairly solid look at worst and best case scenarios for harvesting and energy deployment.

I agree with your assessment. Due to the power boost from the electric motor, the 2026 cars accelerate from a standstill faster than the 2025 cars. Over a straight, the 2025 cars would catch and pass the 2026 cars before arriving at the corners. At the corners, the 2026 cars are considerably faster through the corners. But over a full lap. The 2025 cars would be ahead by a sizeable margin at this stage of development. I fully expect this to change as we go deeper into the season and the regulation era.

 

[Nitrodaze]

This is a gross twisting of reality. On very long straights, the cars from last year might go slightly faster, but the acceleration curve of the new cars and initial speed advantage gets them down the straight in less time.

https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/1rar9hq/2025_vs_2026_preseason_telemetry_traces/#lightbox

You can clearly see where the new vs last era cars have advantages. The new cars accelerate hard, but might lose out at the end of the straight. There is not a single corner trace that shows the new car quicker in a corner. The same was true in China and Albert Park. On the tracks that don't allow much harvesting, the older car might make it down a straight slightly quicker, but those tracks are fairly rare.


The downforce reduction alone will make these cars slower in corners until they manage to claw it back. But the aero drag reduction makes them accelerate much quicker than before.


Another trace on China qually laps. Notice where each car has an advantage. In particular notice the final straight starting at about the one minute and five seconds mark. Kimi and Oscar are at the same speed, and you can advance and see how quickly Kimi accelerates vs Oscar until it reaches about a 15 kph advantage. At the end of the straight Kimi is out of energy and Oscar takes a lead of a similar advantage, but it's much more brief. Overall Kimi makes up time on the straight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XN2gnrHaLSs


Australia should be one of the worst tracks for harvesting, and quite a few are significantly better. China should be at or near the top 3-4 as well. So the season opening races already gave a fairly solid look at worst and best case scenarios for harvesting and energy deployment.

I agree with your assessment. Due to the power boost from the electric motor, the 2026 cars accelerate from a standstill faster than the 2025 cars. Over a straight, the 2025 cars would catch and pass the 2026 cars before arriving at the corners. At the corners, the 2026 cars are considerably faster through the corners. But over a full lap. The 2025 cars would be ahead by a sizeable margin at this stage of development. I fully expect this to change as we go deeper into the season and the regulation era.

 

[airshifter]

The 2026 cars are slower in corners. I've yet to see a speed trace of any competitive lap that shows the new cars faster in cornering. In very slow corners they might come fairly close due to the advantage of the cars being smaller and thus having the ability to use different lines.In some cases the new cars do look fast in corners, but I think this is also the size and driver style changes as much as the cars being fairly nimble. Any corner with a straight long enough to deploy on after has many of the cars "squaring off" the racing line more than in the past, so they can get on full power again.

 

[Nitrodaze]

The 2026 cars are slower in corners. I've yet to see a speed trace of any competitive lap that shows the new cars faster in cornering. In very slow corners they might come fairly close due to the advantage of the cars being smaller and thus having the ability to use different lines.In some cases the new cars do look fast in corners, but I think this is also the size and driver style changes as much as the cars being fairly nimble. Any corner with a straight long enough to deploy on after has many of the cars "squaring off" the racing line more than in the past, so they can get on full power again.

A few websites with the traces for Australia and china show that the 2026 cars drop power on approach to the corners due to clipping, while the 2025 cars can carry speed well up the apex of the corners. The 2026 cars rotate around the corners more efficiently and rocket out of the corner faster than the 2025 cars due to the electric motor boost. I have looked at the traces for Russell and Leclerc for both years at both tracks and they show that the 2026 cars recover lost ground through the corner, but lose out to the 2025 cars on the straight and through fast corners.

 

[airshifter]

A few websites with the traces for Australia and china show that the 2026 cars drop power on approach to the corners due to clipping, while the 2025 cars can carry speed well up the apex of the corners. The 2026 cars rotate around the corners more efficiently and rocket out of the corner faster than the 2025 cars due to the electric motor boost. I have looked at the traces for Russell and Leclerc for both years at both tracks and they show that the 2026 cars recover lost ground through the corner, but lose out to the 2025 cars on the straight and through fast corners.

Corner entry and corner exit are not cornering speed. If you have any telemetry showing a higher apex speed with the new cars, I'd love to see it. If they exist most likely very low speed where aero isn't in the picture, as I've stated in the previous post. Japan was close at the final chicane and Degners, but 2025 was still quicker.

Almost the entire delta between the 2026 and 2025 cars at Suzuka was through the S's.

 

[Whyzars]

I saw a post somewhere that has Colapinto doing 170km/h, 10364 RPM in 4th, and Bearman doing 262kn/h, 9843 RPM in 7th. I don't know if this is legit but those speed differences are mad if true.

Was Colapinto clipping or did he have a problem?

If this accident was result of the new regulations then there is a lot to discuss by the teams over the break. It looked bad. Bearman limping away was a credit to the vehicle safety no doubt.


Aside from this, the pole lap was 2 seconds slower than last year and there were no "edge of the seat" corners like we normally see in Japan.

If it isn't faster then its a backward step - to me.

The 2 Degna (sic) corners looked boring to me instead of seeing cars on the fine line of destruction as per usual.

I read a thread, on the F1 site I think, that had Kimi's pole lap cut away from the onboard at Spoon corner. People are saying it is done so as not to show the clipping at 130R. The replies are nuts.

The peasants are grumbling and that is never a good sign...


My personal verdict on the new regulations is that they need work, much work. As much as the commentators try to make it interesting, the racing is not better and looks visually too gentle. I don't want to hear how many megawatts a driver managed to dig up from going slower. That should be the domain of combine harvesters under lights. I was never a fan of KERS or DRS or grooved tyres - I remember them like a toothache. I am slowly getting that same toothache from these latest electric marvels.

There is an old saying - Just because you can, doesn't mean you should...

 

[Nitrodaze]

Corner entry and corner exit are not cornering speed. If you have any telemetry showing a higher apex speed with the new cars, I'd love to see it. If they exist most likely very low speed where aero isn't in the picture, as I've stated in the previous post. Japan was close at the final chicane and Degners, but 2025 was still quicker.

Almost the entire delta between the 2026 and 2025 cars at Suzuka was through the S's.

Far a change, we are saying the same thing haha. How weird is that???

 

[Nitrodaze]

I saw a post somewhere that has Colapinto doing 170km/h, 10364 RPM in 4th, and Bearman doing 262kn/h, 9843 RPM in 7th. I don't know if this is legit but those speed differences are mad if true.

Was Colapinto clipping or did he have a problem?

If this accident was result of the new regulations then there is a lot to discuss by the teams over the break. It looked bad. Bearman limping away was a credit to the vehicle safety no doubt.


Aside from this, the pole lap was 2 seconds slower than last year and there were no "edge of the seat" corners like we normally see in Japan.

If it isn't faster then its a backward step - to me.

The 2 Degna (sic) corners looked boring to me instead of seeing cars on the fine line of destruction as per usual.

I read a thread, on the F1 site I think, that had Kimi's pole lap cut away from the onboard at Spoon corner. People are saying it is done so as not to show the clipping at 130R. The replies are nuts.

The peasants are grumbling and that is never a good sign...


My personal verdict on the new regulations is that they need work, much work. As much as the commentators try to make it interesting, the racing is not better and looks visually too gentle. I don't want to hear how many megawatts a driver managed to dig up from going slower. That should be the domain of combine harvesters under lights. I was never a fan of KERS or DRS or grooved tyres - I remember them like a toothache. I am slowly getting that same toothache from these latest electric marvels.

There is an old saying - Just because you can, doesn't mean you should...

Agreed, the 2026 regulation looks great on paper but not so great in practise. We are set up for some very interesting politics and wrangling over the next few weeks. The FIA and FOM. are on their back foot now. They would not be able to explain away Bearman's accident for sure.