2026 F1 CAR - the ULTIMATE Scarbs Guide by Peter Windsor
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 06. 2024
- Craig Scarborough details the new F1 car for 2026. Lighter, smaller and more electrified than its current counterpart, the '26 car also features active aerodynamics front and rear. On the other side of the coin, only the rear brakes will be regenerative and there's no active-ride suspension system. His verdict overall? Scarbs reveals all in conversation with Peter Windsor.
With thanks to Jetcraft, the world's largest buyer and seller of executive jets:
jetcraft.com
And to OEM Exclusive, the passionate suppliers of OEM upgrades for exotic and high-performance vehicles
Images: the FIA; Wikimedia Commons; and Grand Prix Photo (Peter Nygaard)
grandprixphoto.com
Alpinestars:
alpinestars.com
Follow Peter on X and Instagram:
@peterdwindsor
And follow our Short Corners podcast - now on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts and Amazon Music
We support the Race Against Dementia:
raceagainstdementia.com
#standwithukraine
Nick: you're always with us - Sport
I'd like to send Scarbs a nice microphone for his birthday. His analysis is always so great it deserves better quality audio!
And a new camera!
I’d say it has a lot to do with the room having no sound absorption material on the walls.
It’s a laptop. I think it gives him an authentic vibe.
@@Chief_Sitz_On_Bowl_TNSAGDWGCat Yes and no you can hear its a bouncy room but that toppy mic sound with no body to it is definitely the microphone.
It’s part of his charm I think
No one does F1 car technical rule analysis like Scarbs! Always a pleasure to watch these.
Think Scarbs should be the FIA technical delegate that deals with the 2026 rule etc.
F1: we want to be more green and recover more braking energy.
Also F1: We don't want to allow front brake energy recovery because we're afraid someone might have an advantage.
Making F1 clean is like trying to make Pizza healthy. Some things should just be what they are .
so we delete mgu h we could burn more carbon neutral fuel😂
Not F1, the existing teams that make the power units.
I want to send Scarbs a HD camera and Microphone.
Maybe we should have a whip round 🤣
Windsor has a pretty good camera & mic (and whatever interface to get it into a computer), he could always send Scarbs the same setup and then replace the webcam camera and mic with the high quality audio and video in post?
Send it then
Glad so many ppl are complaining this
The only two people in f1 worth listening to.
Rocketpoweredmohawk
Max and Lando from the cooldown muppet show.
They should have changed to 16” tires instead of making the 18s skinnier.
Would lighten the car, speed pit stops and give drivers better view of corners.
And the handling over the curve would be way better, transfer of load, absorption, etc
They were going to in the first iteration of 2026. These cars will be less tban 10kg lighter than 2022 cars
Probably have lower unsprung mass. So suspension should be more effective.
fronts 15" + hub motor, 16" rears
You just built a super heavy GoKart
Scarbs operates on a different level to the general populous. Big respect for this and his ability to fully comprehend and then distil complex details down to a level where we can all get a much more rounded, clearer understanding of F1's Jedi-level complexities.
Just in time for my break at work, lovely edit, looks like scarbs is holding a toy car
Windsor and Scarbs, the best analysis team!!!!
Excellent discussion of the 2026 car from an excellent guest. Good to see the developments being discussed based on real information as today without wild speculation. Like you, I wonder how an increased battery load will work with the new car weight. As a retired contractor, I always had to account for any applications of battery banks and storage equipment. Everything has to be increased to weight supports and space requirements. The car is not much smaller and drivers can't be reduced in weight much more. Thank you.
if there is anyone I trust to explain ANY tech in F1 its Scarbs!!
Always an insightful conversation with Scarbs. Thank you gentlemen.
I totally agree with Scarbs on the inwash concept part, for me it's probably the most promising part of this entire new concept and it's hardly ever talked about. With cars "eating" their own turbulence, they will be designed to run in turbulent air. Add the narrower wake they create and narrower cars, this part of the concept will have a big impact on close racing and overtakes.
Peter, with your pedigree it’s a pure joy listening to you and scab! Hands down, you don’t need more source… and if, it only underline the point !thank you!
I must not be the only one that wants re-fueling brought back. They currently "manage" their racing to ensure the tyres and fuel last the whole race. Bring back re-fueling and then they will be able to push the whole race and come in for splash and dashes. Anyone watched an Indy car race recently?
I agree!
Amazing interview! You guys make F1 a real joy to follow.
Appreciate the clarity
Now that’s well informed info about F1 is going👍😊. Always great to hear these two gentlemen talking motorracing. Greatly appreciated
From my understanding X mode and Z mode are available regardless of car position and the extra electric power will be the new “DRS” not a compound effect like you were discussing
You're right. The low drag mode is used to keep the speed up since there's a big chance the electric power runs out before the end of the straight. Suddenly losing 470 hp with a regular aero setup would cause some embarrassing scenes.
@@dylansmit3883 All the cars, regardless of the position, will be using z and x modes. Then, if the car following behind is "in the DRS zone" (I think they didn't specify if it will be the same (1 sec)), they be able to press "push to pass"-like system, that will deliver electric power for longer.
@@alpha007org I am aware. But that's still assuming there will even be electrical power to deploy at that point. The main function of the X and Z modes is to patch up the compromises in the power unit.
Scarbs analysis is informed and so interesting. Unlike 1/2 the comments here.
F1 will still be an engineering challenge.
Limiting the total fuel and enabling efficiency to be turned into extra power is good reward for effort.
F1 will still recruit the best drivers. It’ll still be worth watching.
thanks Scarbs, thanks Peter
'26 is still a mystery of how they will perform, but now I know a little of how they'll work.
We need more of Scarbs!
We don’t a poser who thinks he is the messiah as far is interpreting the new rules.
@@MartiniPinball Send me the link for your interpretation; I will compare it to his. 😉
@@MartiniPinball Name someone who is better. There are very few at his level.
@@procatprocat9647 there are many, but at his level means self indulgent.
Thank you; all very clear and very informative.
We need the boys to start a campaign to get tires and refuelling sorted out . I am so feed up of different compounds for different tracks. Just have a soft a medium and a hard end of.... 😮 and if different tracks affect it then the teams have to pit more . Be like back when Schumacher was fighting for titles we never knew what or when he would pit.
It would be interesting to know what the new battery capacity will be (compared to the current one)
Per usual, F1 social media is poo pooing the new regs for clicks. This sounds like an improvement. Thank you Peter and Scarbs.
Scarbs, thank you for the sane, rational take on the new regulations. Far, far too many people just seem to hate change and over romanticize the past. I would love for F1 to somehow have the sounds of V10s from the past, but I'd much rather it say at the leading endge of technology and more competitive racing.
Nonsense. I was a huge supporter of the 2022 regs and bow they are scrapping them. Scarbs works for F1. He's not being fully objective
@mvd4436 F1 has always been about evolution. I also think the 2022 regs have been great by in large. Considering the 2026 regs aren't even complete, let's not hate on them for no reason. What is so terrible about them compared to 2022?
@@specialK319319 Because they are going back to an Indycar style floor. With small tunnels. Instead of evolving from the 2022 rules, they are basically scrapping them. They say it is to raise the ride height but its probably to reduce drag because the new power unit cant handle it.
@mvd4436 Without actual data, it's hard to speculate too much, but it looks like in addition to reducing drag they are trying to reduce how much people outwash via the floor as well which in theory should make it easier to follow. I still think it's way too early to freak out over this. If they are marginally slower, but racing is closer, I'm personally fine with that compromise. I'm sure teams will claw back some of that downforce.
It isn't peak technology when they aren't recovering energy from brakes.
These arent the fastest cars possible. Just complicated to make it hard. You can have an advanced V10, but it wouldn't be 'muh green tech'
Best quality analysis as always, can wait for the concept art
How much power will cars have available for the last part of the baku straight? Will the whole 1000 hp still be there with the restrictive hybrid stuff?
They are talking like low downforce mode still be used as a substitute for DRS to aid overtaking, but my understanding is that the cars can use it at any point within the designated zones, which equilizes all the car speeds. I believe it is just the power boost that will aid overtaking.
Great analysis Scarbs. I do disagree with refuelling, I loved the refuelling and I'd like to see more changes allowed during pit stops.
When the rules were the top ten started how they qualified, tyres, fuel etc. made for more excitement during the race as no one knew the strategy at the start.
I am in agreement that active suspension (at least shock absorbers) would be very beneficial & awesome. Considering the different computational processes, power etc. as well I wonder if X & Z modes are variable or on/off?
Thx Peter and Scarbs. Most informative
I know the trend is to shit on the 2026 regulations. But maybe, just maybe, they got it right this time, and we won't see one team run away for the whole duration. I'm optimistic. I'm a little skeptical about 50:50 power unit, because if you know anything about physics, you can't have 50:50 running at max power for multiple laps, let alone the race. But since these cars will be less draggy, they will be able to charge the battery on the straights, without losing speed, which is a really clever solution. And if we get at least 2 teams competing from the start of the season, it will be a huge success.
Oh, please. A half-electric engine.
Nuff said.
Those are two separate arguments, one is how “good” will the regulations be, the other is how close the competition will be, I don’t think the FIA has any control over the latter. The teams will engineer and compete and there will usually be one or two who get it right quicker than the others, that just how the sport works. I’ve seen a lot of comments where it seems people conflate the two when they are very separate. It doesn’t matter how close cars can follow if one team is already down the road because they have badass engineers who interpreted the regulations better quicker.
Clever meaning
Let's commit to a huge electric engine so we can claim 50-50
But we can't charge that battery fast enough
Oh so let's use the ICE unit to charge it
But then wait we will not have enough power to go fast
Oh so let's loose lots of drag so we can still seem fast
But we also lost aero
Yeah never mind
As long has we compromised everything to have that 50-50 claim accomplished
@@mongoose4960 What do mean? If I say, you can have Spec chassis, how that not regulations driving competition closer?
(I don't disagree with you that someone will get it more right, but I hope 2 will get it more right than others. In 2022, we got only 1 got it right and no one still haven't closed the gap.)
@@eden5260 Yeah, that's basically what happened. But we have to live with this now.
Fantastic analysis Scarbs and Sir Windsor 😊
Cheap active ride with spec parts.
Love the idea !
Maybe for the next regs ....
We Love ❤️ you peter all the way from africa, thank you for bringing scrabs!!
I have an issue when Craig notes that a 'return' of V-10 or V-12 would necessitate a 240 liter fuel tank. I guess the internal combustion advances made in the past twenty years (of which there are many) would not apply then in Craig's argument.
Brilliant overview of the new regulations. Please have more scarbs whenever possible
Thank you guys for this. This has brought great clarity to my view on these new cars.
Great video guys, can't wait for you to have a round table with Sam and Bernie Collins, and a few other heavies when the full regs are released! Can't wait for this new era, go Honda!
I do disagree about refueling, if they can do it countless times in WEC/IMSA with nearly zero incidents F1 should be fine. Also the much smaller fuel tank (refuel 2-3 times a race?) will really help shrink the car even more and the longer pit stops will add more strategy ("hands off" refueling and before tires). Also, they do have a fuel flow rate limit to control energy expended.
What will the revs be like on the engines? Keeping everything at 10,500rpm is a big reason the sound is so dull. If they hit 15,000, they'd sound much better.
The main reason of the "dull sound" is the turbo. not the combustion engine, The turbo recovers exhaust energy, and boosts the inlet pressure at the cylinder heads. So on both sides, inlet and exhaust the harmonics and resonances are dampened and replaced by the high frequencies of fast spinning blades.
The only moments this ins't the case is when the wastegate is open, and exhaust bypasses the turbine wheel.
On the current spec MGU-H, that doesn't happen too much, because the turbo is loaded electrically when the compressor wheel is running faster than wanted. In '26 spec, that won't be possible, so the waste gate will be open a bit more.
One can argue the noise is a waste of energy, so a quiet workhorse is/should be more efficient.
Thanks for explaining what a turbo does. I asked a different question, though. Perhaps your next answer could explain spark plugs.
@@timquerengesser1561 And I explained why the 15K engine revs won't change the noise levels, if the noise is absorbed by the turbo... Being rude might make you feel good, but do you understand what I explained?
@@G33RTJEH I don't think he's on about amplitude....but more on the 'quality' and pitch of the sound produced. The lower rev limit means that the pitch is necessarily lower, you only need to listen to a Honda on or off V-tec to notice that. As the revs rise, the pitch naturally becomes more "shrill" and is generally considered more "exciting" to listen to.
But they can't run at those high RPMs with the low fuel flow limit as they can't inject enough fuel to keep the engine running at those speeds without running ridiculously lean.
@@lankyboy90 The "quality" and "pitch" of an engine is a function of the number of cylinders, the rotation frequency and, dare I say most important, the pressure fluctuations on intake and exhaust ports. The V-tec you mentioned is increasing these fluctuations greatly by moving the valve timing, which negates the dampening by the turbo and exhaust system. On race engines, the exhaust dampening is close to non-existant...
Ever heard the sound coming from a Scania V8 on full load, and compared this to a similar sized inline Volvo FH16 (6iL) that runs in the same RPM range?
Not enough energy for 1 lap so we kich out the longer circuits?
Nah, the car will brake 100-150m earlier and rev up the engine to charge the battery. Audi used to do this with their LMP1 cars by braking early, charge up the battery, and have big boost of power coming out of the corner
I can not even imagine how bad this racing will be. Slow in the corner after braking early, lots of downforce with the new active aero, and super fast on the straighta, making us miss the more exciting drs trains .
What would be the percentage change in unsprung weight if the current wheels were reduced in diameter by 2-3 inches?
As a F1 fan since the late 70's here's my dream F1 car. Smaller cars, V10 engine, traction control, active suspension, unrestricted fuel or electric boost. Bring back refueling pit stops and use zero emission fuels. Also bring back the 90's qualifying.
Hell yes.
time to find a new sport after 2026.
Well done Pete,very interesting on active suspension 2,nice shot of the Camel Lotus.
It's a shame we can't see V10 for the time being,so much love from the f1 fans lately.
From the refueling standpoint it's an issue.
Maybe one day,GAS??
This is absolutely excellent (both of you.) It makes me wish the powers that be might watch it with interest, but I know enough about bureaucracies to not delude myself...
Scarbs brilliant as always and on the ball. I am still trying to grasp what the current weight penalty would be to move from 100kw to 500kw though. Scarbs mentioned 20,30-50kg within the regs, but we are still talking about potentially a 5x increase in output. How much does the battery/capacitor weigh??
Can we use f-duct inspired manifolds and simple electric or mechanical valves to adjust drag, downforce and balance instead of moving wings?
Ducts are extremely inefficient and ineffective compared to wings.
Think about the comparative size and the drag through the convoluted duct compared to an elegant wing.
It seems to me, the ICE and ERS-system will be used a lot mid corner, just to replenish the batteries. I think we might hear the cars downshift, but also the ICE staying on partial to full throttle from the braking point, all the way to the reacceleration.
Personally, I really would prefer that they brought back refueling. It adds to the strategy needed. That makes the race more interesting.
Will everyone be able to make the full distance with the smaller fuel allowance? I remember how at the start of the no refueling era, for the first several races there were cars that simply ran out of fuel. Or had to run so slow they were non-competitive.
Bring back tire heaters/tire blankets.
Bring back active suspension.
Very interesting to listen to...
Do we think we could all donate £1 each and buy Scarbs a better webcam?
Don't send him money. He will buy F1 car part from eBay.
Thanks boys ☘️
I've never been less excited with a new F1 regulation
Positives for me:
I like the looks - Looks better than current gen.
I like the move to active aero and less dependence on ground effects.
I like that HOPEFULLY this trend of shrinking the cars will continue.
Negatives for me:
30kg weight reduction is not enough
Rims should be smaller than 18"
No regen on front wheels is dumb
I'm worried that this will be an economy race and not an all out race
I hate that the teams have so much to say in regards to the regulations.
As Cameron says... This the GOATiest of GOATs
Has anyone thought about e-refueling ie re-charging? Surely this could be a way of reducing weight by starting cars with say half a race distance of race fuel meaning cars coming in to fill their batteries in order to finish the race. It could lead to so many different options for teams, those that were more fuel efficient could be allowed to charge faster etc. Thoughts?
No DRS for overtaking in the 26 Reg, does it? X-mode and Z-mode are universal for all cars not basing on the relative grid position or having to be within 1s gap to the front. All cars will have the "same" aero drag under the X-mode in the straight. The DRC overtaking function will be replaced by the "push-to-pass" mode of the PU of deploying extra electrical power boost.
Happy to hear the car will be smaller. Hopefully this means more overtakes will be possible and wheel to wheel racing too.
Scarbs, the current PU is 151kg, not including the battery.
The 2026 PU is 150kg, not including the battery.
The minimum weight of the battery for 2026 includes more items than the current rules, which basically only count the cells and the parts that connect between the cells.
But the 2026 ICE is too heavy for the power it produces.
ALWAYS the best 🎉🎉
yep but what about drag changes in the braking zones? lots of torpedos at the apex?
After watching for 52 years I am dreading this change . This tech is what FE is for, I dont see them having an ice engine too. As for these modes god help us. I recall Eddie Irvine when DRS was invented ‘the formula has never been in such a mess’ , look at it now Eddie it’s unrecognisable . This will send a good few older fans out the door once and for all bad enough with DRS, Hybrid and fans calling drivers GOATs .
Get my coat pleaee 😂.
The racing in Formula E is interesting to watch, and typically, the most intelligent drivers win. But not necessarily the fastest. Given that F1 was always about 'may the fastest win', if it's going to be 'the most efficient in a heavy car will be the winner', then that's just crap. I'm not an EV fan either. I'm dreading Indycar going to hybrid: there's been few issues with their racing on fuel, and their racing is arguably the best 4 wheel racing in the world. Even if some of the drivers at the rear aren't the most talented. Not that F1 can comment on that point: gosh, that category has some shockers too, even if the field is a mere 20 drivers!
Interesting talk. Thanks for the insights.
What's equally interesting to me and a little ironic - with the road relevance part - is that while F1 is moving away from MGU-H (which I thought was a fascinating thing), Porsche has used their
LMP1 (919 Hybrid 2012-2017) know-how to create their 2025 992.2 road engine with an MGU-H and an MGU-K coupled with an e-Turbo. It's LMP1/ F1 Tech!
Clearly, F1 is not moving away from it because the big three think Porsche will have an advantage when they have a better-funded MGU-H?
So, why is the MGU-H, which will have been in dev for 12 yrs (when 2026 will arrive) suddenly more expensive to run? They've already been "perfected", haven't they?
Is it to bring back noise? If so, these new racecars better sound racy!
11:00 You know how many fans care about efficiency? None... Absolutely 0% of us care about how efficient a race car is.
.
Good racing has nothing to do with it
You are 50% wrong. Racing is great. But the races are just as good at max 150mph as at max 200. There is no need to waste so much fuel.
Regs SHOULD be, smaller with more power. More power = more options = more risks to take = higher cost/reward for skill. If you make the potential to overdrive the car infinitely high, then driving just under the limit is harder to do this an infinite skill expression.
We absolutely want refueling to return. Adds so much more on weight and strategy.
That'll push costs up
@@FreeloaderUKwhy would that add cost?
You'll need to develop refuelling equipment (cost), you'll need to transport it around the world (cost), you'll need to hire extra pit crew & train them to use it (cost).
What is the likelihood of running the ICE continuously at a minimum of the highest fuel efficient speed to supply the battery and using a combination of hydraulic and electronic devices to control power to the wheels?
So it would sound like a diesel-electric train, or a moped.
Great idea.
they should only be able to carry enough fuel for a third race distance , and fuel rigs supplied to the teams by fia. indy races are awesome with some opting to save fuel to save a stop others going for it , but then again f1 races are just too short should be a third longer !!!
I'm very skeptical that the cars are going to work as the FIA intends. They're trying to make the power split 50/50 between the engine and the electric motor, but not allowing energy recovery from the front axle. How is the bigger battery supposed to be recharged from the rear axle only? The front brakes do 50% of the energy dissipation. Every race with the current formula, we hear that drivers are taking a lap to recharge their battery so they can mount an attack. The MGU-H is also going away, which also helps charge the battery.
If they're reducing the starting fuel allowance from 110 to 80 kg, engine power has to decrease. Then why aren't they reducing engine capacity? They might as well make the engine a 1.2L 4-cylinder, which would weigh a lot less than a DOHC V6. They are purposefully grandfathering in the old engine, but forcing a derating of it by decreasing the fuel allowance 27%. 30 less kg of fuel is not made up for by increasing the battery weight 30 kg. Not by a large margin. The cars will start the races with a lot less energy stored onboard. They will be slower.
Don't be too impressed by the fact that the electric motor produces 500 hp out of 50 kg. The big problem trying to make the F1 car 50/50 gasoline/electric powered is battery energy storage. Assuming the electric motor puts out an average of 250 hp (50%) for the 2-hour race duration, the battery pack would need 370 kW*hr of energy storage. That's 3.7 times the size of a Tesla P100d battery pack, which weighs 635 kg. The battery engineers in F1 may be good, but they're not going to build that much storage capacity into a 50-60 kg battery.
Weight will likely be a deciding factor for success in 2026. This is really why the OEMs participating matters, as this will drive battery tech forwards. The main problem with EVs, among many, is the excessive weight.
Absolutely no reporter got anything right about the reveals so far. The new car is radically different in concept, and everyone is trying to apply century old ideas. The CAD of the rear wing shows the wing opening to a flat or even lifting configuration, so the car will basically only have ground effect in high speed mode. The car should have ridiculous top speed even with battery limits, and some pretty great cornering given as Scarbs said they can run a lot of wing in the other mode.
The car overall might be able to equal or beat current laptimes depending on the circuit, and do it on less fuel, potentially with better racing due to a lot of thought on reducing dirty air when passing.
"What if aero fails" Have you seen the metal birds we call airplanes? Engineers have been doing this for a century. Flaps must be designed to fail in a safe manner. When DRS flaps failed to close, it was almost universally teams running thinner elements until they broke. The rules body can only do so much to prevent stupid.
"Why not burn synthetic fuel in NA engines"? Blower motors were on racing engines in the 1900s. NA has no special claim to racing heritage. In fact the modern era of NA racing has a lot to do with parts shortages during the world wars. Noise is wasted energy. Pipe that noise through a turbo, you just get more power. Why build a v8 or a v10, when you can build a turbo v4 that makes more power with less weight? The mythic BMW engine was a 4-cylinder.
"Max said the new car was slow" non-technical users are totally unable to understand how engineers run tests. Often, you need to crank the worst parts of a design up to 11 to draw out certain effects. Airplanes aren't tested in normal turbulence, they're tested in a great machine that bends the wings until they literally break off, in order to ensure no force of nature could break the plane. Max may have run a test making all the worst assumptions about the design in order to see what would really turn him off as a driver. Only the drivers at the very end of testing will get to feel the "real" car, in order to limit the driver's ability to spy on the new car and get ahead of development. For all we know it could be much faster. And the FIA don't want teams knowing that too early.
I hope the tyres are adequately improved .
The wings are going to look excellent. Visible innovation and ideas, rather than the existing hidden floor tricks
If F1 is going to have non-petroleum based sustainable fuel by 2030 what does efficiency matter? Other than designers will still be trying to get the most power out of the least fuel to save weight? Just think how much more efficient an ICE engine would be if it didn't have to drag around that lead weight called a battery (yeah, yeah I know, not made with lead), the electric motors and all of the extraneous parts...and lets not get into why you need three different tire compounds at each race with three sensors in each wheel.
I have no doubt Aramco currently fund the palaver and likely the earlier technical nobbling.
Yea 130 kg for a tiny v6 turbo is insane. That would be the easiest place to lower the minimum weight
What do you think about refueling coming back once f1 has sustainable fuel?
Is high rake vs low rake back?
Doubt anyone's going to have rake considering these are ground effect cars.
Lower will be faster
How about the new synthetic fuel? Will that influence the power of the engine?
With the x and z mode, which will be the failstate? If the wing actuators fail and the wing sticks in z mode, the car may get quite dangerous.
Why would it be more dangerous in z mode?
@@procatprocat9647no downforce in corners? Or at braking? Guess it could make it nervous
@@AndrewTSq
You need to learn cartesian coordinates.
The downforce is maximum in z mode.
X is longitudinal
Y is lateral
Z is vertical
@@procatprocat9647 no FIA needs to name it downforce mode. I thought z was no downforce. "Lets bring out the calculator to check what mode they are on". Yeah that seems like a good fit for racing
@AndrewTSq
No?
so you haven't understood the y250 for all of those years either.
Wow.
Why do you think 130R is named like that?
Do you understand kW, MJ, kWh?
How do the MGU-H and MGU-K currently work?
How will the new regs fundamentally change this?
Boundary layers?
Wing stall?
Vortex generators?
CFD, FEA?.
Carbon layup directions
I could go on for ever.
These are a few of the fundamentals of f1.
F1 is a technical endeavour, and should only be dumbed down so far. DTS has dumbed it down to the point where most kiddo fans view it like a soap opera.
Having said that, we haven't even seen the draft regulations yet. A layer of cream can easily be spread over them to appease the non technical fans.
Will the cars be not only more efficient but also faster?
If bringing back refuelling helps bring back V10's, bring it on. If it's clean fuel, it's not sending a "bad message" to see cars refuelling. This whole situation is ridiculous.
Would be really nice to hear about this from someone who isn't employed by Formula 1, no one is going to bite the hand that feeds.
05:30 You missed bits like this where there was criticism
Excellent, thank you PW and Scarbs!
Great analysis of the unknown, whilst knowing the knowns, if you see what I mean.
PW's angular questions are typical and is why I continue to listen to anything he says.
We will see. The first race of 2026 season will be very interesting.
Legend
I don't think refueling undermines sustainability if they're using and topping up synthetic fuels
I'm afraid the active elements will remove or greatly reduce the art of balancing downforce vs drag.
I have been following F1 since 1976. If these changes are confirmed, 2025 will be the last year I will watch. The same for Moto GP.
Oh don't be so dramatic
Would it be completely insane to allow/mandate a 10 second recharge pit stop?
I remember back in the day, 10 seconds was considered OK for a pit stop.
Recharge? Feck off!
I am a 15 year semi obsessed fan. I think the direction of the sport is going to push me out. At this point drifting and time attack are more interesting
If heard correctly, Sam Collins said there will be less mechanical grip AND down force. Sounds like a car prone to spinning a lot.
Mostly the whole thing just sounds slower to me.
Scarbs for President... (FIA)
I cannot understand why they need a turbo with a huge increase in electric power coming. This was an amazing chance to go naturally aspirated and including big electric power. I want a 2 liter inline 6 personally. Super smooth and would sound epic at 16,000+ rpm
NA is incredibly inefficient.
NA is engine tech from the last millennium.
They would need fuel tanks that weigh 240kg full.
2L NA would make zero power. 2026 will be over 1000 HP !!!!
active ride！🎉🎉🎉
Respectfully saying its more efficient to not refuel is completely nonsensical, if you have one or two refueling stops then you're consistently carrying 50-60% less fuel, basic physics F=Ma so you naturally become more efficient by weighing less. I think we should have a regulation freeze for a few more years, now that everyone has caught up we're finally getting some exciting races again, why change the regs to appear "more green"
So, more active aero then.
How strict are those rules? Would they be allowed to have active aero in the ground effect tunnels ? I mean, they only really need the downforce in the corners , right?
Transformers-F1 edition 😂