F1 has announced some HUGE changes to the 2026 F1 cars...
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 04. 2024
- It may seem like we've just received a new generation of F1 car... but there are BIG changes coming for 2026. What do you think of these changes?
SUBSCRIBE to WTF1 bit.ly/WTF1Subscribe
JOIN Team WTF1 www.wtf1.com/teamwtf1
---- Follow WTF1 ----
On Twitter: / wtf1official
On TikTok: / wtf1official
On Instagram: / wtf1official
On Facebook: / wtf1official
On our website: www.wtf1.com
---- Music provided by ----
Epidemic Sound
www.epidemicsound.com - Sport
If the FIA want to focus on making F1 more eco- friendly, am I the only one thinking they need to look again at the race calendar? Already this season we've had AUS to ITA to USA and now heading back to Europe for SPA, MON & AZB, before going back over the Atlantic for CAN and then back again for British GP. Instead of hopping back and forth, surely it makes more sense to just start in Bahrain and then head east or west around the globe. We get European races back to back, so why should the Americas be any different?
In theory yes but the tracks want certain dates, so it will be a blow for fans that can't see the races,
For example the British race always falls on a long weekend, in the summer.
If they were to travel around we would end up with dark races earlier times worse weather less fans etc etc, there is a method to the madness
Exactly. Majority of F1 carbon footprint comes from the logistics
A lot of it can be saved by optimising the calendar and not making multiple trans-oceanic trips.
@@kristoph7606 Understandable, but the calendar could still be optimised.
They don't use the same stuff on every race, but have about 3 "sets" of everything! Do you really think, they can take entire buildings from place to place with sometimes only about half a week to disassemble, transport and reassemble them?
If America was done in one stint either Canada would be a snowy race or Texas would be too hot
6:30 not really, the cars are only responsible for 0.7% of the total carbon door print of F1.
All cars combined burn 150 000 liters of fuel in one season, the equivalent of a boeing 747 making a single 10 hour flight.
The should have put miami and Canada races as a back to back or just without the trip to europe inbetween but no, it's really frustrating to see...
@@nielsleenknegt5839 events already scheduled at said places prevent that as well as weather and accommodations availability at those times
I think that -65% is related only on cars emission, not total emission
All cars combined carry just 20 people, a 747 can carry more than 10x that
@@trance9158 zig zagging across the world because of dates lining up makes no sense. Going from Europe to Australia to Europe to Middle East to USA to europe makes no sense from a cost point, scheduling point and basic common sense.
And then they’ll go ahead and slightly compromise the sport while jetting 20 cars and thousands of people around the world.
There is one problem with the lowering of emissions, well not a problem, but something that should be said...
99% of F1 emissions are the logistics, the plains, trucks etc... To transport everything outweighs the emissions of the cars themselves by A LOT.
I read something somewhere that said all 20 F1 cars produce less emissions over an ENTIRE season than a large passenger plane flying from the US to Europe ONCE (if that's accurate or not I dunno, but if it is that's insane)
LMAOOO
So how do you propose they get to the races?
To add to this, transport and cargo only make up 17% of total global emissions.
@@matta2738 instead of going from the US to Europe and back to Canada maybe just stick to the left side of the map until those races are done.
@@matta2738 for starters, there shouldn't be a race in Europe, the next race in the US and the next race in Europe again. Introducing ECO-bullcrap to the cars which is more often than not detrimental to the fan enjoyment of the sport, while also burning metric tons of fossil fuel to move their circus over the big pond and back again just screams PR and hypocrisy.
My main concern with all this is the F1 puts all it's environmental focus on the cars and none of it on the transport where the real impact is.
It all comes across as PR facade with the added side-effect of (potentially) worse racing.
Agreed, people who watch F1 don't exactly have the cars environmental impact being high on their list of concerns regarding the sport. not saying we dont care about the environment but this is not exactly making a big impact, and just seems like PC PR wankery
They just try to sound eco friendly to get the Gen Z and Gen Alpha kids on the TV
A large part of F1 development eventually gets passed down to road cars, so I'm assuming that, despite the low initial benefit, it will eventually help smoothen the transition to electric cars by making gas cars more efficient. It may be just for PR, but that was my initial thought.
I suspect it's because F1 wants to be seen to be eco-friendly rather than actually try to be eco-friendly.
@@hlidskjalf3050 This is exactly it. The entire comment section is missing the point. Construction, Efficiency, and Technology lessons are often applied to road cars by the manufacturers in F1. Formula E has made huge strides for EVs, with the varied operating temperatures/power flux/etc. between locations.
I'm really interested to see how active aero goes. It should make them less reliable, but a lot faster
I really love the idea of active aero and the benefits of the cars being able to carry less fuel/be lighter/be smaller. It's actually a feature that many road cars are already using. Hell even my 2014 Mazda 3 has active air shutters that close off part of the grill when I reach highway speeds for better fuel economy.
I think they will need to make sure that if the active aero fails, it fails to the high downforce position. That way cars don't go flying off the track by losing all the downforce while in a corner.
Agreed. Setups being altered in a race will be interesting to see
They've had practice with DRS, and that isn't 100% reliable. Looking forward to it
Just be like Max Verstappen this season, win or DNF.
i think less reliability might actually be a good thing. Its getting boring seeing almost all cars finish lol. Reliability issues can add a lot of drama and heartbreak, i think it would be interesting
One thing F1 needs to improve is planning world travel better. There's no logic in going from Australia to Europe, to the US, to Europe for 3 races, to Canada, and back to Europe again. It's much more logical to band all races in a gepgraphic region together. Plus it would open F1 up for a seperate championship within the championship, the European championship.
That's what they did in the 80s and 90s; there was Brazil, Mexico, USA and Canada, then all the European races, finishing off with Japan and Australia. Of course, those were the days when the main focus was on countries with a motorsport heritage rather than simply those that had money
if they did that people who work for the teams wouldn't see their families for a long time. most teams are based in Europe so thats why that go back and forth from there, so employees dont get home sick
@@acatinatux9601 Then maybe don't bring the whole circus over with them? Just have less races and give the teams a break to go home and rest.
@@nerd_nato564 what do you mean with "don't bring the whole circus"
Should they leave employees at home for the heck of it?
@@gandalf_thegrey "for the heck of it" LOL not seeing your family is not "for the heck off it"
these people work 24/7
There's already an automatic crash system in F1. It's called Latifi.
That automatic crash system is gone next season though 😢
@@dormi_torio no more red flags? 😢
@@ValenGR86 There’s always Stroll
@@dormi_toriogo easy on stroll, he is definitely better than latifi
@@BirrDetonator1989 True. But that isn’t a hard benchmark to surpass
5:58 Fun fact: apparently if F1 did want to go fully electric they wouldn't be allowed to until around 2040 (or so) at the earliest because the FIA has agreed to not sanction any electric open-wheel series competing with Formula E until at least 2039
I highly doubt that'll make it that long, by the early 2030s I wouldn't be surprised if F1 manufacturers demand a change sooner and the FIA would have no choice but to agree as they can't let F1 die.
@@gandalf_thegrey Formula E would probably the same speed as F1 in 2040. That's a long-ass time.
Good
Or they could merge f1 and fe in future.
they can just increase hybrid power bit by bit over the years
I really love the idea of active aero and the benefits of the cars being able to carry less fuel/be lighter/be smaller. It's actually a feature that many road cars are already using. Hell even my 2014 Mazda 3 has active air shutters that close off part of the grill when I reach highway speeds for better fuel economy.
I think they will need to make sure that if the active aero fails, it fails to the high downforce position. That way cars don't go flying off the track by losing all the downforce while in a corner.
DRS is active aero
2014 Mazda 3 crew 😎
@@aizzaddanial2951 This kind of active aero is the kind where DRS wouldn’t be round.
Seve, you're absolutely correct about active aero being on road cars. One of the reasons active aero is still banned is to prevent teams from spending their way to a title. But now that we have the cost cap in place, it's time to loosen the rule book some and allow things like active aero, active suspensions, etc.
Let the teams spend their limited budget where they think it will have returns, and if they strike on something really good, it may trickle down to road cars (some sort of mesh network between cars to help prevent accidents could be an interesting idea.)
@@aizzaddanial2951 DRS also should fail into a high downforce position. That did fail the wrong way for Ericsson in Monza a few years back tho.
only thing i really hoped f1 would do with the change to sustainable fuel was to open up engine development options. like if a team wanted to build a flat 6 or a v10 or something then they could. if theyre using syustainable fuel then why not allow more engine options?
Im guessing because everyone would switch to lighter engines and ditch the heavy batteries/hybrids
@@jichaelmorgan3796 theres no reason they couldnt keep the hybrid system as far as i can think of. i mean the laferrari is a v12 hypercar hybrid and the porsche 918 is a v8 but the same thing.
i just thought it couldbe interesting to see i dunno an naturally aspirated v10 or v12, then i dont know a 4 cylinder twin turbo or flat 6 turbo or something.
Might be that they're much harder to regulate, making situations like the 2019 engine difficult to prevent.
Would be cool though if they say "this is the max. fuel flow, fuel weight, battery capacity, etc.: build whatever you want
It was called Group C.
@@duckrutt also late 80s and most of the 90s f1. they had v6 turbos, v8s, v10 and v12s in that period.
I’m no expert but it seems to me that going from America to Europe, then back to Canada, then to Europe again and then from Asia to America is much much more hurtful for the environment than unstandardized parts. I can imagine this also makes the sport less attractive for manufacturers as they have less room to display their innovations. Active earo and smaller cars are really exciting though.
I understand they’re trying to make for closer racing by introducing a budget cap and standardising parts. But I feel like they’re taking away ingenuity, initiative and creativeness, making all the cars almost a carbon copy of each other. They’ll just be slapping different badges and liveries on the same cars soon
Plus engines with horsepower effectively capped and the tech rolled back to be easy for everyone to build. Trophies for everyone.
I mean if u wanna see teams like alpine and Williams win again that’s what u gotta do
yea we have road cars that can go 400kmh plus easily and f1 is still stuck around 350kmh. Pretty boring to say the least. I feel like it's becoming more and more like Indycar
@@maxluthor6800 almost none of those cars will reach those speeds on the straights of a race track. None of those cars have the downforce an F1 car has. Downforce reduces top speed, they could easily make a 400kmh F1 car, it would just be shit in corners
@@maxluthor6800 🤪🤣🙈
seems pretty crazy but i am absolutely against the standardising of more parts. f1 isnt really a racing series, its a flippin cool science project. i feel limiting designers and engineers even more would be a massive shame and an injustice to the motorsport world, as who knows what whacky feature on one car might become quite common a few years later. not too sure about the basically 50% hybrid either. goes hand in hand with the stock parts for engines i guess. thank you for coming to my ted talk
Yeah F1 brought so many cool features to the road cars in the last 40 years
Rn we are starting to approach the peak efficiency we can extract from combustion engines. There is just simply too much energy wasted on friction, drag, and simple physics that are seeing less and less returns every year, add on top budget caps to level the playing field.
It’s barely getting to that point that engines are at peak “eco-friendly” regs and power output. And with a stronger push for more eco-friendly racing, u can only get so much power while meeting green emissions.
This is where the traditional F1 innovation comes in, every single other piece of the car will be squeezed for every second saved and is gonna be it’s own arms race just like the engines in early F1 days. Engine standardization is best for everyone and has very little negatives to warrant not doing it sooner.
The introduction of hybrid engines should have been your sign that traditional engine arms races were on a decline.
Unfortunately I agree. ICE are becoming less relevant these days, but engine better lmao. Also if engines are reaching their peak that surely means we should push new technologies and materials in order to make them more powerful and efficient. Like matt says aswell, there could still be a development route for hydrogen. But for sure some valid points made my guy.
@@dscorpio1626 and another thing (not trying to sound like a whining lil bitch) but f1 should be all about creating new parts, methods, philosophies etc. Let teams create new consepts in freedom rather than force them to have all the same parts. Obviously some parts either for safety or keeping it fair sure thing. At this point I'm reminiscing about memories I dont even have. Started watching f1 properly 11 years ago, but I yearn for the days a v10 may grace our ears once again.
Exactly. If I ever wanted to see standardised cars race, I'd just watch Indycar.
F1: We need to reduce the costs of racing.
Also F1: **trying to introduce active aerodynamics, which is a rather complicated and therefore expensive concept**
Personally I think they’re doing it because of Mercedes complaints about porpoising
they can be standardised and are already on plenty of road cars which are orders of magnitude cheaper and F1 cars are all ready very complicated so nothing new, overall it'll likely be cheaper or similar
@@floding22 Road cars are not analyzed to an extent of F1 car. Most road car aero is just marketing, including active elements on sport cars. Look cool, gives 2% more downforce, 20% more drag and separation but no one will ever use it on track so who cares.
@@armadillolover99 that's active suspension
@@lukebennett. Active suspension is banned specifically because of the ban on active aero. Also even if the ban on active suspension stays, active aero would fix the issues Mercedes is having
"Toto's new headphones" at 5:42 was amazing.
This is really cool, as long as we can have more than 2 drivers fighting for a championship in a year. Also, it's such an irony that the FIA and F1 want to be "More Eco-Friendly" by any means, but they just had to go and get one of the biggest sponsorships with a Crypto related business.
yuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuup!
1. Make 'em lighter.
2. Make 'em smaller.
3. Let the teams figure out how to do this without compromising safety. They are the best in the world for a reason.
U right
Letting the teams self regulate? what a horrible idea.
They already cannot get to minimum weight with reasonable budget, your proposal would be terrible.
Right now with budget limits no one would like that, without limit one team would spend billion dollars and dominate every single race. Ligh materials are crazy expensive, even for F1 standards.
lmao. you actually believe that?
very strange indeed
Unfortunately I think we’ve seen from the history of f1 that a lot of teams are more than willing to compromise driver safety for more speed, so leaving it up to teams might get a bit dicey for some of the grid
FIA really got bored so kept redesigning the car.
no difference to what they usually do then, it happens every regulation change
That has always been a part of F1 though.
F1 is always evolving wdym
This has been happening for decades bro
You must be new to the FIA and F1.
If active suspension is added, William’s team will be probably back in it’s glory
A lot of standardisation and spec-parts. I can see the teams or at least the top ones being resistant to it. The FIA will have to be careful not to neuter the ability for teams to innovate.
If the fuel companies start advancing in carbon capture technology for F1 that will be a big game changer overall in general.
Synthetic or bio fuels are the only way to get fully carbon neutral cars in a realistic way and f1 is going to help that development so much. Electric cars have a place but they won't be carbon neutral
@@geekedslotter7948 this or going down the hydrogen route could be very interesting
@@sandalffpv7442 It will never be that unless refueling comesback
@@sandalffpv7442 The hydrogen route is very possible because Toyota has done massive investment in hydrogen combustion they made a hydrogen GR Yaris combustion engine that has been competing in in a races Toyota has also made a V8 hydrogen combustion engine, and Yamaha, Mazda, Subaru and Toyota partnering up together on the potential of Hydrogen combustion.
@@TheHabsification I talked to a McLaren Engineer back in 2019 about a solenoid engine which isn't the same thing but its along the same lines. While it sounds great it just makes no sense. Its wasteful of hydrogen which could be used to make kinetic energy in way more efficient ways. It doesn't matter how efficient you make it it will never be as good as a fuel cell that powers an electric motor.
The best alternative is bio-fuel, its technology we know. We've been burning natural "bio-fuel" since the industrial revolution. Bio-fuel is a fancy term but all we've done is essentially speed up the process of fossilising plants to make oil. We then capture those emmisions in plants or as pure carbon and shoving it back in to fuel.
While yes this method is a lot less efficient than electric power because electric power is used to make the biofuel and there are losses as no transfers are 100% efficent when working with heat. What this process does do is make the energy we can capture wayyyyyyyy more dense than that of hydrogen or batteries which is useful to us because it means we can save weight and volume making it easier to store and transport. If petroleum was so ineffective we wouldn't have been using it for so long. Making petroleum sustainable is vital in human civilisation no matter what Elon Musk tells you to sell more Teslas.
Hydrogen is cool and 100% has a place in semis and transport of heavy goods and will be seen a lot more in the coming years as perhaps a lower weight alternative to batteries in Formula E. There's a lot of potentials but to deny synthetic petroleum its place as the key to performance applications and to be the immediate future to replacing natural petroleum before high quality public transport is implemented that can be more appealing (by being faster and cheaper) is looking for a magic bullet in a really complex situation where we know what works.
The automatic crash system is kinda overdoing it.
If they're looking to shorten the cars, they should consider looking back a couple years, maybe take somethings and remix them.
If think that here they just wanna be innovative and try different solutions out, which is different from taking ideas from the past since security is the only thing that has constantly improved since F1 was born
Is it really overdoing it though? All it entails is that if there's a car stationary/going slowly on track, it directly tells nearing cars that this is happening. Drivers can miss marshals or flag boards, their steering wheel is a lot easier to see.
@@Slimmeyy If its limited to that then it's OK, but anything more, like a proximity alert is too far.
Long as they're alerts and like points to where the crash is about to happen, I'm down. Like if a car is coming in from the back left there's a warning sign and an arrow pointing down and left on the dash. The driver still needs to be in control 100% of the time though. I don't want to see cars avoiding crashes with each other
@@adysun I get where you're going, but doesn't that make mirrors obsolete?
They need to bring back active suspension next to active aero to bring the F1 cars into the modern age. Even simple road cars have active suspension nowadays. Also having two active systems to juggle at the same time makes for programming and setup challenges for the teams that could see massive performance games if executed correctly.
@@gandalf_thegrey I am a fan of Verstappen. So I don't care about what those cry babies want to be honest.
Also improving suspension control via better programming will be beneficial to road cars, including autonomous vehicles of the future. Controlling the suspension during emergency braking would for example shorten the braking distance whilst reducing the discomfort for the people in the vehicle. Now an F1 car doesn't do an emergency stop but it does have the braking performance during normal braking to get up to identical forces a road car would at best meet.
So no, I fully disagree and I think the future road car development might benefit from it.
Also if you think active suspension will make it easier on the drivers than you are wrong, because that car might turn but the driver's body is still in essence that loose sack of potatoes trying to hold on for dear life. They still need to endure those now even higher G-Forces. Which is the reason why it got banned... as they didn't want the drivers to pass out mid corner and see something bad happen.
@@gandalf_thegrey unless you limit the engine to being a 3 in-line engine like most road cars. Try to get 390kph out of that. 🥲
Top speed can be easily dealt with by limiting engine size. Besides, if they go hydrogen combustion (not hydrogen electric) it remains to be seen how much power they can extract.
Where there is a will there is a way. Also racing suits can be active racing suits that inflate like that of a jet fighter, so the blood is always pushed to the brain. Give that some active control with continues blood pressure sensors and blood oxygen sensors and you have an amazing innovative suit that improves the human capabilities.
Can't get over the loss of the MGU-H. Removing is also going to bring back turbo lag and make the cars less drivable, which defeats their safety measures-although I'm sure the teams will sink tons of money in R&D to find a way around it... when we already had one... which kinda defeats the cost argument.
0:46 yes, since the "new era 2022" is the current era.
I don't know what they intend to accomplish with the "sustainable race fuel", unless they can produce enough to run every teams transportation fleet, power the planes they use to fly equipment/cars/people across the globe, and have enough left over to top off the tanks of all any spectators who drive to each race it just doesn't come close. They could save more emissions for less money by just subsidizing public transit to each event. But it's not about sustainability, it's about the image of sustainability.
Well, forcing the fuel suppliers to produce high quality sustainable fuel might power innovation within the fuel market.
@@TheRuni215 opec only cares about making money. They would never adapt an F1 development unless it was more profitable.
I feel like that's a very shortsighted outlook. I believe what F1 is trying to do is to make the engine manufacturers, and gas companies look into the alternative as a potential long term solution. Similarly to how F1 has impacted a lot of car-related changes over the years
Agreed. If environmental effects were the concern, then F1 would just be formula E (but worth watching). Those race cars don’t put out near the emissions the semi-truck and the aircraft they use to fly around do.
They should just the manufacturers go tf off and let them build the best race car they can, really flex the technology that’s available to them right now. 1100hp v10’s vs twin-turbo v6’s or whatever wild combinations Ferrari/Honda/Renault can come up with.
@@TheRuni215 it could do IF the the amount of energy used to make the fuel was less than the amount of energy the fuel produced 🤔
To me it's just the usual corporate BS of misdirection, the amount of extra carbon they produced flying the whole shebang from Italy to the US and back to Spain instead of just going from Italy to Spain is pathetic quite frankly 😤
But could they make the cars V10 as well?🥺
I miss hearing the roar going around the tracks
I think before trying to remove all greenhouse gas emission from the F1 cars, the FIA should really look at the schedule to optimize traveling and minimize distance travelled, the current one is an economic and ecological disaster
"Toto's new headphones" is a hilarious one... 🤣🤣🤣
🤣🤣🤣👍
If they install that crash avoidance thing its honestly notracing anymore, its good they think about the safety of the drivers but this would be a bit too much.
There's a fine line between safety and overprotection. No one wants to see drivers get hurt, but like it or not crashing is a part of racing.
If there's a warning that pops up on their dash if someone crashes / unexpectadly slows down in front of them they're suddenly not racing? I'm really confused as to how.
The more F1 changes, the more I appreciate MotoGP. The bikes look like spacecraft, sound amazing, and the pilots are still protected by leather and a helmet.
dude one is car and another one is a bike both are a different thing
Well said, completely agree. F1 lost me when DRS came in. The racing, which is the main point, is far greater over at MotoGP.
I like the idea of exploring hydrogen as a possible fuel, although idk how well that would translate into the road car development business since the limitation there isn't really engine technology as much as hydrogen infrastructure and how difficult and expensive it is to build.
There's a hydrogen combustion engine that were put in a Yaris that competed in a 24h race or something. So having F1 improve upon that concept would be cool. The real problem with hydrogen is that it requires too much energy to be produced to make it a worthwhile investment (at this point in time, before people stop pretending every ICE can be replaced with a large battery pack that wont be refurbished)
Active aero would be amazing ... especially for efficiency plus it’s up to the driver to decide how often to be in low drag and high speed which adds even more spice to it
2022: simplify
2026: add lightness
🤔🤔🤔
Surprise lotus debut in 2026???????
I think they have achieved a really good standard of racing this year. It’s important to keep these three variables balanced; Car engineering, tactics/teamwork and driving ability. If you remove the car engineering aspect and they all get specd the same you end up like other motorsports which have become painfully close together. There’s nothing cooler than seeing a slow corner car struggle to defend the corners and then absolutely flog it down the straight line. The same can be said for all the other variables. Right now the balance seems very good and is making for a great spectacle.
ditch the turbo, and make the mguk even bigger also increase the revs. and manually deploy by the driver.
more and better exhaust sound, and i think it could lead to better racing???
F1 gonna be looking like tron cars soon
I'm intrested in 2026 Toto's newer and more reliable headphones
All sounds really good. Even active aero sounds awesome! I have been thinking about this already for a while that it would be a cool feature.
However, what I was missing in this video was WHY there would be even more closer racing. Active aero doesn't produce it according to my understanding of aerodynamics. It should mostly make the slip stream less effective and therefore increase the need of artificial help systems. Are they thinking to keep DRS or are they thinking to use some of the electrical power to some sort of KERS/Overtake mode system, similar to what was earlier in F1 or t what is in IndyCar nowadays.
I'm hoping for a kers/overtake mode system in combination with a smart algorithm steered DRS system that uses "Big data" from earlier races + live data of the amount of overtakes at the moment vs. "too easy DRS passes" to adjust the strength of the DRS dynamically throughout the race to make sure the race is always in the sweet spot for allowing overtaking but not making it too easy. As long as it's the same for everyone I can't see why this would be a problem. Ofcourse the teams should not be in control of this software, but F1.
Just some of my thoughts. I have been able to predict the future before with sprint races, cost cap, better aero rules for easier following, active aero, sustainable fuels a.s.o. so maybe I'm right again? ;)
I also wanna add in that as soon as the engines are fully sustainable then I'm sure we will go back to high reving V8s! Maybe smaller, but still with a beautiful sound :)
Amazing man!!! Awesome changes and great explanation👍
I dont like the safety crash alerts. That means drivers wont have to pay attention and can just rely on the computer to keep them from making a mistake. I do like the the shortening of the cars, iv been saying it for years. Cars will be more nimble that way
They are turning f1 cars into airliners, soon they will add Car TCAS
My issue to add, these cars are going at 200 mph *everywhere*... everything is a crash and safety hazard
“I don’t like seatbelts, it makes it so drivers won’t have to pay attention and can just rely on the belts to keep them from dying”.
What an absolutely moronic take. Making the sport safer without knocking the sport is always a plus. They’re still driving at 200mph. Of course they’re paying attention lmao
What a moronic comment. As if they magically won’t look on the road then. Having a system where there is less confusion and more safety in blind corners for the drivers is a plus, and you can’t argue against that.
Guys I don’t mind avoiding fast cars going straight into slow cars. They are scary moments. They can still spin out they can still spin each other out they can still kamikaze into barriers. It just stops a car barely moving getting smashed by a car going 360km
Imo, the FIA should stop making so many parts mandatory. F1 should have lots of innovation from different teams as that's how we got the carbon fiber chassis, ground effect and active suspension. Restricting the amount of creativity of engineers and designers won't do much good for anyone.
I can understand making things such as the rear lights and driver radios standardized, but there comes a point where it's doing more harm then good.
@@Dat-Mudkip stuff like that and safety equipment like the halo and crash structures as well as other things I can understand but I agree that there is a point where it's too much
Isn't the standardised parts concept all to do with the cost cap? It's a way to keep spending down for teams
@@caesaraugustus3749 It's a difficult thing to balance. You want the teams to come up with innovative and interesting ideas that they actually put onto the track, but you also don't want them to spend billions of dollars on something to reduce lap times by 2 tenths a lap.
5:42 sidelining some money towards "Toto's new headphones" haha class ;)
Love the Channel.... Always keeping Up to date.... With everything F1 related... 🇿🇦👋🏽
Saw that wrist watch while talking about driver safety... sneaky, lol. Yet subtle.
So if there is a freeze on engine development, does that mean that the teams with the best engines right now will have the best engines until 2026? Like RB have a better engine than Ferrari so they will have an advantage until 2026. That’s mad.
It is ..
In september 2022 the engines will be frozen!!
Ferrari still has the better engine, and all the engine suppliers knew that only reliability upgrades are allowed until 26
@LeslieS Yeah, but RB have been 8km on average faster on the DRS detention zones in the 5 races this year. That gap is pretty big so I don’t think Ferrari will catch up on that because RB are developing too.
Yep. Starting this year engines cannot be developed anymore until the next regulation change
Although i wouldn't say Red Bull have a better engine than Ferrari, its mostly the car philosophies that are giving us the difference in straight line speed which is proven by Ferrari always running higher downforce than Red Bull
The eco-friendliness doesn't come from reducing the environmental impact of the F1 cars themselves, but from innovating more sustainable engines, fuels, materials etc.
Some of these innovations will eventually end up in commercial vehicles and that's where the eco-magic happens.
Constructing and driving F1 cars have insignificant carbon footprint themselves, but it's the eco-friendly technology innovation that F1 and the automotive industry (F1 teams) want.
I can get behind the crash prevention if it's specifically for dangerous speed differentials, but if it goes as far as eliminating driver error in close combat then no. You want to see the drivers mess up their passes when they make a mistake, even if it means they take someone out, that's what penalties are for. Then how good do you make it if they do put it in? Gone will be the excitement of pin point accurate passes if computers take over within a foot and prevent it.
Dont standardise power units, you want to see what the manufacturers can do. A major part of the reason F1 is what it is is because of the development side of things. We got lucky in this new era that there is still loads of room for aerodynamic development.
Active aero isn't a good thing either. DRS is as far as it should go. It's up to the engineers and developers to make a car that suits most tracks as possible. Their philosophy is everything when it comes to winning a championship.
it feels like they are gradually removing the brains of the team, giving them less and less to do. The put crew will soon be bigger than the rest of the team combined if they keep going.
F1 needs to leave American ownership. Sure they are doing a lot for attracting more fans and giving it more exposure and that's great in the short term but when they finally gut everything fundamental and integral to the racing, the loyal fan base that's been there for decades won't be there anymore.
I feel like these regulations are also a snapshot from what our society is going to look like in the future.
A future in which everyone turns soft because the system doesn't allow us to get dirty, do dangerous things. Having an element of risk added to life is what makes life all the more precious, not always having the guarantee to get old because it can be over within a tenth of a second.
Added risk can make people more mindful about their future and also focus a lot more on the present moment. I think that's also what made F1 in the early 90s great.
Yes, there was a much greater risk of getting killed in a crash, but it wasn't like the 60s where a crash was a guaranteed death.
There's a scene in John Frankenheimer's Grand Prix in which the character Pete Aaron explains how he thinks about being so much on the edge of life and death and it's really inspiring.
Highly recommend looking it up or giving the film a watch.
I can imagine the crash prevention will turn out to be more of an automated white and yellow flag trigger for drivers on their steering wheels. It couldn't be advanced and responsive enough to operate in wheel to wheel racing without significant risk of creating even worse flow on impacts caused by automating braking/power lift off/steering etc.
Active aero could make passing more difficult. As people have noticed with the current generation of cars, the effect of drafting is substantially reduced this year as the focus making sure the cars can keep their downforce in the turns when behind a car inevitably means they have that downforce on the straights too.
If you allow the cars to remove downforce on the straights then they poke a smaller hole in the air, reducing the effectiveness of drafting.
It could also run into issues where there are no longer aero compromises to setting up a car for a grand prix. Every track will be max downforce for the turns and minimum downforce for the straights. This is dependent on how exactly active aero is implemented.
I doubt they would allow active aero to completely manage all tracks as that would involve a very sophisticated and complex system which would beat the point of financial sustainability. It also can't be a spec system as every car would use different aero designs and require tweaks to it. So I'm pretty confident the innovation and aero compromises would still exist
@@beaku3 maybe I worded it poorly. I meant that you would not make a different compromise based on the track because no matter how much downforce you have you can just remove the drag for the straights. I am afraid there would be no setup difference between Monaco and Monza.
There would still be compromises in design that would affect the drag and downforce for both the high downforce and low drag modes
How about sorting out the race calendar to avoid criss crossing the globe
Eg Imola to Miami to Spain to Canada back to Europe then back to America
They go where the weather lets them. If they did Canada in November, when they're in Texas, Mexico & Brasil, there would probably be snow on the ground.
Texas in June during the Montreal visit? Tornado 🌪️ season
Miami in November? Hurricanes.
@@AndrewGeierMelons Yeah. Add to that having to negotiate the calendar with the tracks (who have other races to fit in). Plus, planning the logistics of transporting the huge load of "non-essential" equipment between non-European races. All these things make the situation much more complicated than the "just don't travel so much lol" type of comments suggest.
Lighter cars also give less stress to the tires, thus softer compounds can be used and potentially the temperature window issues can also minimize. Increased laptime and grip by tires might be huge. :)
1) weight
2) higher revving, sick sounding engines
3) weight
All cars should use 100% synthetic Fuel so that us petrol heads can enjoy cars for as long as we live.....
Its much expensive and it wont be mainstream.
4:25 but they will get less energy into the battery, so this extra power is of no use
not necessarily, the increase in power also comes with the increase of regen.
Making the engine will be less expensive and the engine itself will be easier to project
@@ricardohenriques6472 but the ammount of regen isn't limited.
And now, with other things roughly being equal, 1 source of regen is lost.
The PU will get less efficient
The MGU-H’s heat recapture has always contributed significantly less energy than the MGU-K’s brake regen. With a larger MGU-K, they can probably run more aggressive brake regen settings, which will easily make up for the difference lost by the MGU-H
@@vascop3642 this is not the point.
The point is, that except for single lap shootouts (aka Quali) the energy recovery/regen is the bottleneck and this will get smaller by removing the MGU-H.
Put the eco-friendly focus on the logistics and bring back the lovely sounding V10 engines.
5:43 Toto's New headphones, im dying 🤣🤣
Freeze development...
Standardize parts....
Cost caps everywhere...
F1 really is the pinnacle of motorsport and innovation I guess
true that.
As long as the races are entertaining I’m down with that
5:37 toto's new headphone
That sounds phenomenal, Im hyped up already. Extremely interesting! Thanks for the video
F1: We are sustainable!
Also F1: Middle east - Australia - Europe - US - Europe - East - Europe - Canada - Europe....
Why doesn't F1 optimise logistics not to travel back and fourth 30 times a year?
Weather. Going to certain countries at certain times isn't possible, such as Miami in November due to Hurricanes.
Could you do an episode on the positions and duties of the pit crew?
They already did. A while ago.
@@hdr_diamondz o ok ill have to look back. I'm fairly new to the channel and the sport.
"Toto's New Headphones..." Had me on the floor
My guy literally put the trackmania 2020 car on the thumbnail 💀
I feel bad for the drivers. I just saw a video about how much drivers (bottas specifically) actually do during a quali lap. The amount of buttons and modes they need to go through while driving is already crazy. I couldn't imagine how much responsibility would be put on them with active aero
It will be handled automatically or by the team
Active suspension used to be automatic and tuned by teams to bs perfect around a lap.
Cam-less valve trains please!
They’re already running solid state batteries and incredibly complex combustion, going cam-less would complete the power units
2stroke oppoesed in HCCI 8 cylinder eqv 16 cylinder ,camless, advanced igntion, smart fuel injection, solid state battery, condessed electric motor in axle, synfuel or hyrdrogen, active aero, 4 wheel steering, full cockpit car design like figther jet. that would be mad bro *my daydream.
5:44 "Toto's new headphones" you got me right there a good laugh
5:45
Toto's New Headphone
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Nice one LOL
Hi guys 👋 love your content 😍
hydrogen power would be awesome. I'm personally hoping street cars go this route rather than electric, so it being in F1 would be a huge step in that direction.
Hydrogen will never be the main fuel type for transportation, it just doesn’t make sense in the economic level, not even for trucks and semis. Hydrogen is just a way for big oil to continue with their business model of producing/extracting transporting fuel and then selling it at whatever price they want, plus having people buy car parts and pay for maintenance which are still needed for hydrogen engine whereas evs give you the option to create energy locally and independently plus all the other benefits they bring like v2g
@@henryvalera3480 I know electric is most likely the way it is going to go, but hydrogen gives better range and faster refueling right now. Not that that can't change, but as of now that is the case. Also, you still have to buy parts and replace batteries for electric, that's always going to be a problem.
@@TheSickboy35 Even with slower charging times evs are more convenient than hydrogen, also can we drop the myth of evs batteries needing to be replaced even after 10 years of use which is the advertised battery life you still get ~80% of capacity and that is with old battery tech something that is rapidly changing to provide even longer lifetime.
The “Toto’s new headphones” was perfectly placed😂
They also need to be able to reuse engine parts bc rn once you move on to the next ICE none of those previous parts are allowed to be reused like the block and crank.
shorter? fine, but will they be narrower as well?
I keep saying, I want to have all 20 drivers on one shared radio channel during the race a la F1 online racing! Getting to hear Max and Charles talking smack while racing for the lead...
That would be hilarious but also probably disastrous
Proximity chat might be the best crash avoidance system. “Stroll, I’m on your left”.
I'd like to see them make a giant track in the middle of a salt flat and have 300mph cars with corners designed to be taken flat out
Take Indy car for that. F1 was never about straight line speed.
Money for Toto's new headphones got me good :D
Yeah ok. Being sustainable seems like an oxymoron when you consider all the traveling back and forth these F1 teams do; especially with the increased schedule of this season. So I take it the jets that fly all the teams all over the place will be using sustainable fuels as well, along with the transportation from the hotels to the race tracks, etc. It sounds good on the surface until you start digging into all the details.
They said that just the car will be sustainable by 2026m with the transport means by 2030
2:49 - Safety has NOT been a journey F1 has been on since the beginning. In the early decades many drivers died with no action taken.
I believe Jackie Stewart spear headed the safety revolution in the late 60's making it what it is today.
Not true.
I love this eco-friendly stuff. Everytime it's come to discuss, the FIA say something fancy like renewable fuel, but never talked about the chaotic season schedule with flying back and forth around the planet
if they are indeed going down the fully sustainable fuels route then I hope they consider bringing back V8/V10/V12s
They are gonna kill the historic feel of f1, there used to be many different cars engines and tech popping up throughout f1 and if they move to standardised parts it's gonna be like a euro Indy Car set up.
it's just gonna be the next spec series
@@theveyron164 exactly bud. I loved it when you had front teams off laps ahead then a mid bunch of cars fighting and then the back of the grid and your wildcards and privateers. Like 3 classes all in one race. Cars varied massively in shape and power train, and the levels of innovation before CAD etc, using hand drawn designs, was unbelievable.
Not saying today's cars aren't innovative, but they're already so close in basic design it's not like that old style any more.
I don’t want to see standardised parts, that would kill the evolution and development of the pinnacle of motorsports
we already have standardised parts
@@fkez0510 standardised parts that don't affect the car's speed are fine like lights and the fuel flow meter etc but I don't want standardised parts like wings and certain parts of the bodywork as they should be open for design. I don't agree with the wheel covers being spec parts this year as that can effect the car's speed. For example in MotoGP the wheel covers vary hugely from team to team and I think F1 designers should be allowed the same design freedoms
then the end has already come for you ig, there are dozens on standardised parts on the cars, imo a few more won't hurt too keep costs lower
They are killing our sport for the money(like what they did to their motorsport)
@@floding22 standardised parts that don’t explicitly affect the performance like the fuel flow meter. Wings, bodywork etc are a whole lot different
F1 in 2050: It's all the same cars but with differents brand name, I said car ? sorry I meant kart, they now have V4 engine with the world tiniest tank, also they are made of cartboard.
It may be weird but the safety crash should be when the spin and crash horizontally on the barrier, there should be a sensor airbag. A huge air bag. It detects a barrier or wall and automatically opens and blows and the impact may be less on the driver
As for driver safety for the future, drivers are already hooked up with all sorts of stuff including a heart rate monitor.
So now hear me about, what about an emergency engine shut down button and automatic braking controlled from the pits by the teams? If a driver falls unconscious for whatever reason, they can shut off the engine by the push of a button and apply brakes remotely to prevent the drivers going into barriers at high speeds while they're unconscious. I honestly think I came up with a pretty good idea here. Let me know what you guys think.
thats actually pretty good
When was the last time you heard of a driver randomly passing out in the middle of a race?
@@ninetailedfox579121 felipe 🫡
@@ninetailedfox579121 last i remember was Massa when he got hit by a screw and passed out. But then he didn’t fall unconscious randomly
I like the idea, but this obviously shouldn't be active at all times. A team member could make a mistake and now you've sent your driver through a corner at slower speeds than that of they could've gone through it. I think that to activate these systems it should be confirmed by 3 top members present on the pit wall/in the garage. Really nice idea though, however I do think that the technical side of the pit wall would have to be updated, as I am pretty sure that the latency between the car and the pit wall is high.
thinking back to 1992 Belgian gp.
H2 fueled combustion power units would be so insane! It would be such a feat of engineering. I hope H2 combustion engines takeover the alternative fuel market in the future, but it’s unlikely it’ll happen :/
Its not good. Better to go with EV in future than H2.
2:06
sounds like Future Granprix Cyber Formula's Super Asurada 01 and beyond
I think it would be interesting if the regulations were 6 cylinders in any given configuration, you could do flat six, in-line, 45° V or circle if you’re into that sort of thing
I think the flat 6 wouldn't be in favor of the ground effect setup since ferrari had problems before when they try to run a flat 12 with it. Plus the engine is a fully stressed member so inline layouts wouldn't be ideal as well. Would be interesting how the cars would sound if the v6 config was 60 degree instead of 90.
@@vickramgangaram2925 would be funny to see Porsche attempt an F1 boxer 6 tho
Wait so they're getting turn signals????
That would be awsome!!
@@Gongi55 bruh that would literally be like when you turn on all assists to max
Imagine Lewis Hamilton leaving his turn signal on for 12 laps before someone has the guts to ask him about it.
Hello Matt
The Concept are really nice in theory... Hope they translate well on track...
More exciting races is good for the sport...
i like how zero substance this comment is
U forgot Cruise Control, Blinkers, Airco, Hidden compartment for nails under the car, Automatic parallel parking and most important one they gonna use square tires.
Essentially they're aiming towards making it a one-make formula with one standard chassis and one standard engine, aren't they.
Unfortunately, no more days of the innovative Newey’s, Brawn’s or Chapman’s, sad to see really, that’s what I believe the sport is all about.
Thats a massive overexaggeration from both of you. A few spec parts isnt remotely close to being a full spec series.
Those rain lights are so critical to engineer for yourself that F1 is ruined if we keep them standard.
Eco friendly fuel sounds great until you realise that the carbon footprint caused by the racecars is less than 1% of the carbon footprint created by all the logistics behind Formula 1 - ships and planes going around the world unnecessarily. Miami to Spain to Canada ? Optimising the calendar would have been WAY more eco friendly than changing to "eco fuel"...
and you think that when F1 car can run with 100% eco friendly fuel that wouldn't start a change into making roadcars/planes/trains and more all use such fuels?
I didn't say that eco fuel is a bad thing - of course it is a good thing that F1 is going in this direction and it might trickle down to road cars or planes eventually. I'm saying that if they really did care about the environment they would start with a environmentally friendly calendar, they could do that right now, not in 4 years time. When you think about it for a second you know that it's a marketing stunt. "carbon neutral" everywhere, F1 is a business, they don't care about the environment, but they want people to think that they do, and it's a sad because I love the sport. Look at this year's race in Jeddah and say to me that liberty media cares about anything other than cash
@@kubakubicki4014 enviromentally friendly calendar means? to have races in places that can't be raceable due to weather conditions?
@@FaceFish9 Most roadcars, trains, trucks arent going hybrid, they are going full ev. So developing more efficient hybrid engine doesnt solve much. So do efficient fuels. Producing them in small quantity for f1 is one thing, for whole world to be mainstream is another.
@@frankreynolds9930 oh i dunno, most cars are fueled by fuel, making cars that are more efficient with that fuel would make sense no? Electric cars are a stupid gimmick and wont work in places like Finland because of how for example winters are here
"Toto's new HEAPHONES" LMFAO 🤣🤣🤣🤣
I think enviromentally it would make sense to make GP tickets cheaper, if you travel there by train etc. this would probably be more eco-friendly than just switching car fuel... Also an optimised race calender, for less flying and logistics hours would be a very good idea.
Bringing back refueling might be cool too. Extra strategy
Refueling is bad for racing, as all overtakes was just timed to be don with pitstops.
never happening. no need for it.
I guess. Maybe mandatory refuel, so the cars are lighter across the race? You can only refuel once, so timing it would be important and could lead to carnage
@@nert-13 That would be the worst idea, that would garantere 100% of all races would be 1 stop from every team. Just drop the refueling thing, it made racing worse and will not come back. Just watch a endurance race and see that refueling adds nothing.
More chance of quick charging if they go electric in the future than refueling.
Squidward: “FUUUUUUUTTUURREEEEEEEE”
If they go active aero, then DRS can actually switch to an electric aid similar to attack mode/Fan boost in FE or push to pass in Indycar.
5:43 “Toto’s new headphones” 😂😂😂😂