The evolution of the 2026 F1 engine regulations is prompting apprehension regarding the potential misdirection of the sport.
F1 is poised to implement significantly altered regulations for 2026, encompassing revisions to the power unit rules that will consequently impact chassis regulations, which are still in the process of finalization.
In the upcoming 2026 season, F1 will maintain the utilization of 1.6-litre turbocharged V6 engines, albeit with an augmentation in electrical power to achieve a balanced 50/50 ratio between the hybrid component and the internal combustion engine.
Nevertheless, the intricacies of the engine regulations necessitate thorough consideration of the chassis regulations, as the sport endeavors to incorporate movable and dynamic aerodynamics to uphold the cars’ overall performance standards without compromising them significantly.
Yet, with the chassis regulations yet to be conclusively determined, recent simulator simulations have hinted at potential challenges.
The simulations indicate that the cars could exhibit significant instability solely with active rear wings, suggesting the imperative for a more elaborate solution involving both front and rear wings. However, with merely 20 months remaining until the 2026 season commences, the regulations remain in a state of flux.
In a recent episode of the Sky F1 podcast, Karun Chandhok and Martin Brundle voiced their concerns regarding the prevailing uncertainty among teams regarding the specifications they are expected to adhere to.
Additionally, they expressed apprehensions regarding the direction of the regulations themselves, suggesting the possibility of a misguided trajectory.
“Well, first of all, the regulations haven’t fully been defined yet. What we do know is that the internal combustion engine – the amount of power from that will be reduced compared to the battery,” Chandhok stated.
“F1 has been hybrid since 2014. The amount of hybrid power from the electric side is going to be now equal to the amount of power from the ICE. So 50/50, which is a big change to the power unit side.
“Now, from what we understand, there are still a lot of conversations going on about how they’re going to make that work. Because, in order to harvest the amount of energy and to get the amount of energy you need to deploy, you have to take a significant amount of drag off the car.
“So there are a lot of conversations going on between the teams and the FIA and F1’s technical department on just what the best way is for that. So, at the moment actually, there’s a lot of conversation but no definition yet in terms of what the chassis rules are going to be.”
The scenario regarding the regulations is rather uncommon. Typically, chassis regulations take precedence, with the engines playing a secondary role. However, Chandhok highlighted that in this instance, the chassis regulations are being influenced by the engine regulations.
“I think this is the first time I could recall where the chassis rules are being dictated by the engine rules,” he stated.
“We’ve been used to, in the last 75 years of the World Championship, the engine is the engine – it is whatever it is, plugged into the back of the regulations designed for the chassis with aero, wings, and active suspension coming and going and all that sort of stuff.
“But this is the first time where the PU rules have been defined, and then they’ve gone ‘Oh, hang on a second, we’re going to have to adapt the chassis rules to make sure that the cars aren’t lifting and coasting halfway down the straight’. So there’s still a lot to be defined.”
Brundle concurred with his colleague, expressing agreement with the observation. The former F1 racer emphasized that the challenges confronting the teams are accumulating rapidly, all without any discernible guidance or direction on how to proceed.
“You have to be really concerned about this, because here we are, 22 months away from these cars running, and it’s not defined,” he stated.
“It’s going to have active aerodynamics as well, with a lot more wing movement than we currently see with the DRS Drag Reduction System and a lot more battery power.
“So the cars are probably going to be heavier, and more complex. They’ve got to get the harvesting and deployment sorted out. It feels to me like these regulations should have been cast in stone a good year or so ago.
“Then you’ve got a new team coming in, Audi, that is aiming at them, and Red Bull Powertrains is a start-up, albeit with Ford assistance. But there’s a lot of unknowns. I hope we were getting that right.”
Brundle also expressed his hope that a scenario akin to the one in 2014 does not repeat itself, where a single manufacturer gains a significant advantage over others, proving challenging to overcome for an extended period.
“I expressed in commentary recently that I felt these hybrid engines were perhaps the worst decision that Formula 1 ever made in terms of the cars have become so big and so complex but, my goodness, they’re fast and impressive,” he said.
“We’ve kind of sorted it out now but, in the early days, it was a pain. We don’t want to go through that again, like we had in 2014, where one power unit was massively dominant, or maybe one team with the aero gets it absolutely right. It’s a shame.
“I think what that also means is, what you’re seeing in 2024, will be largely locked in for 2025. Because who’s going to have the resources, the budget, and the time to do a lot of work on that 2025 car and update that through the season, when it’s such a set change for 2026?
“The teams will be getting quite edgy and angsty about ‘What are we aiming at? What are the regulations? We need to start putting some things to bed’.
“But, luckily, with the incredible resources and ingenuity in F1, they’ll sort it out, they will get it sorted out. In the pandemic, it was F1 who came up with the ventilators – designed and created and got them out to market faster than anybody else could even dream up.
“So we have the capability to do it. But I don’t know why we put ourselves under so much stress here.”
Although the power unit regulations have been outlined in the FIA’s rulebooks, the chassis regulations remain undisclosed. Chandhok disclosed that, to the best of his understanding, the teams are keen to have these regulations finalized by June of the current season, which is only a few weeks away.
“I think there’s a balance there,” he commented when questioned about the ideal timing for informing teams about regulation changes in advance.
“Because, if you give them too much time, then they simulate everything to death and spend a whole lot of money on it.
“So we do want some sort of control over that. But we’re getting to a point now where it has to be defined. The teams have all, from what I understand from everyone I spoke to – some of the technical people in the teams in Jeddah – they were hoping for the rules to be locked in 100 percent by June.
“But the feeling from the paddock is that they’re not going to get that and this conversation could rumble on into later this year. They think that’s just a bit too late.
“They would like a solid 18 to 20 months before the start of the first test to have the rules set in stone. Then there’s going to be some clarifications, there’s going to be some amount of questioning along the process.a
“But you want to have the bulk of it sorted out, which is getting tight. Now we’re in early April already, you’re only talking six to seven weeks away. And they still haven’t got any firm clarity in terms of what these mobile aero bits are going to be and how they’re going to make it all work.”
