2026 Fail - New F1 Drivetrain Already In 2030?

Since it's obvius that the 2026 drivetrain regulations are far from ideal, there are discussions coming up about new drivetrain rules in 2030.
How did we get to the 2026 rule set?
How could a potential 2030 drivetrain look like?
Let me know your thoughts in the comments below!
F1 2014 - The UGLIEST F1 Cars Ever - How did this happen? (Technical Summary)
• F1 2014 - The UGLIEST ...
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @bsport320
If you want to work in F1 Aero Design, check out my Career Accelerator Programme:
motorsportengi...
(Please mention you found it through my KZbin channel)
If you want to learn more about Aero Design in F1 check out my online course:
www.motorsportengineer.net/aero-design-in-f1
If you are interested in how to design complex F1 aero parts, check out this course:
www.udemy.com/...
Check out my eBay Shop for customized aero parts:
www.ebay.de/us...
Check out B_Sport merchandise and support the channel:
buchan-motorsp...
Twitter:
/ b_sport320
Instagram:
/ b_sport320
#f1
Pictures:
www.auto-motor-sport.de
www.motorsport-total.com
www.motorsport.com
www.autobild.de
www.audi-mediacenter.com
www.automobilist.com
www.bleacherreport.com
2010 Getty Images
www.ecofriend.com
www.autosport.com

[@defnotatroll]

I wish the rulemakers were competent enough to pick up on your 'cylinder count freedom' idea

[@garchompy_1561]

yea, if theyre limiting 1) Fuel tank Size, 2) Emissions, 3) the physical dimensions of the engine, why does the cylinder count matter? if it can only use 150L of fuel over a lap, why force it to be a 6 cyl instead of an 8, or a 2. theyre not 2-stronkes or wankels that burn a bunch of oil oil and thus get more energy from it effectively getting more than 150L to play with, so why not.

[@RCmaniac667]

Interesting if manufacturers will use the same formula in couple of seasons

[@miguelcebriancarrasco1907]

@@RCmaniac667 thwy probably will, this isnt the wec where ther cars have BOP

[@Apexseal1]

@@garchompy_1561 development costs are the most likely reason why not.

[@TassieLorenzo]

@@garchompy_1561 Everyone will choose a 800cc V-twin with a turbo (or whatever) as it's most efficient, but is having motorcycle engines like that (and not the high-revving NA kind with silly amounts of cylinders like Honda used to make) what FOM or FIA are going for? [I assume that's a typo and you meant 1.5L per lap not 150L per lap!]

[@tedsmith6137]

Why not go fully renewable? Extend the roll hoop, about 6 metres higher, and tack a mainsail and jib from it?

[@GearzMonkey]

I think the idea of using the ICE to energise the ERS in 2026 can be summed up by this Jeremy Clarkson quote: "Using conspicuous consumption to solve the global problem of conspicuous consumption is muddle-headed and foolish"

[@somethingfunny6867]

at that point why not use a CVT.

[@johnjones928]

Building a 600 plus HP engine, governing it down to 500 by using the excess to charge batteries and calling it "green" is exactly what wrong with the sport today' It's just a traveling marketing gimmick.

[@bwatt1383]

​@@johnjones928lol the fia thinks theyre gonna arrive at perpetual energy after enough investment

[@DonLee1980]

@@johnjones928 because by using 100 of the horses of the ICE engine to charge up the batteries, you can deploy an extra short burst of 500hp at the beginning of the next straight, is a lot faster than just running the 600hp. The math checks out. It's faster because you use less fuel, means you also need to carry less fuel, which means a lighter car, which means a faster car. BUT. It's terribly boring for normal folks who don't get it. I think it's an extra element of overtaking and strategy. However, I agree there's nothing green about it. the flights, the traveling, the whole circus, nothing of that is green, even if you save 50kg of fuel for the race.

[@benburris4735]

Was (distantly) hoping the 50% split would be at current power levels, or that they’d raise the fuel flow limit to utilize the full 15,000rpm the V6 is supposedly capable of. I think they’re also wary of the front motors being capable of extremely precise traction control (which also could mean ABS). Seeing what WRC Rally1 is going through right now, they really need to come to a decision quickly about what they want F1 to be…

[@SlyGuyJay]

Out of the loop, what's going on with WRC Rally?

[@axelode45]

ABS and TC would kinda ruin the excitement of F1

[@benburris4735]

@@SlyGuyJay Rally1 category is abit of a failure manufacturer wise, and they’ve been testing updated Rally2 cars, even considering the current top class with no hybrid system. Seems like even the standard hybrid components are still quite expensive, and having 2.5 manufacturers (msport runs the puma basically as their own car) is not drawing any new blood.

[@somethingfunny6867]

they could get more RPM out by making it a 1l engine .

[@RockSolitude]

@@axelode45 F1 used to have TC (not ABS though) in the 90s and 2000s. They were wanting to get rid of it but they were scared that it would start a development war in differentials instead so they decided TC was tacitly allowed since it's cheaper. But yeah, having TC and ABS would not ruin the excitement of F1.

[@StarFox85]

what?? because of audi they didnt want front ev...man..that is incredible sad and wow..1st time hearing of recovery system in 98 mclaren..thx👍 quality content!

[@Sonnell]

The same shameful behaviour as not letting Andretti in.

[@StarFox85]

@@Sonnell 100%👍

[@JoshuaC923]

What a loser mentality to do that

[@AwkwardGhost706]

Its really pathetic isnt it

[@tturi2]

are they meant to be the best racing and engineering teams or the best anti competition teams

[@rassiracing5104]

The entire thing is a joke. Every end of rules cycle we get good battles at the front and bam back to massive field spread.

[@TassieLorenzo]

Ford RBPT and Audi won't be able to compete in 2026 without the new engine (and subsequently low drag chassis) rules though as they don't have a current generation engine.

KERS (capacitor instead battery), 2 hub motors in front wheels, airflow limit (not displacement or NA/turbo), or only limit power like WEC.

[@FredsRandomFinds]

Perhaps they could just remember that F1 was supposedly the pinnacle of performance? not an endurance class? And do away with fuel flow/capacity limits, Bore/stroke/cylinder limits and a swathe of other items that just make the cars heavier and less wieldy?

[@sbrader97]

NeT ZeRo meanwhile the jets there flying all over the world are putting out far more co2 than these f1 cars the engines are so efficient there hardly producing that much co2 for the power they make

[@Vamanos46]

​@@sbrader97 🤣it's called Virtue Signaling - typical insecure behavior by the elite, at the expense of common sense

[@Vamanos46]

🤣it's typical insecure behavior by the elite, at the expense of common sense .

[@Vamanos46]

​@@sbrader97yes, typical insecure posturing at the expense of common sense

[@Vamanos46]

@sbrader97 yes, typical posturing at the expense of common sense

[@Bourne246]

We fans just want close racing again.. hybrids or not..

[@JohnH100-ih3he]

Agreed, but I think the racing is close enough now Red Bull have been caught. The big problem is that the drivers can't race each properly

[@Bourne246]

@@JohnH100-ih3he yeah.. yet there are no plans reduce the overall length by a meter at least.. these cars are like pigs now tbh

[@gerogyzurkov2259]

Ground effects are supposed to help racing have aged so poorly.

[@v4skunk739]

@@gerogyzurkov2259 Racing is closer than ever under these rules. There is just over 1 second difference splitting the entire field in lap times.

[@gerogyzurkov2259]

@@v4skunk739 yeah after few yrs of RB domination.

[@charleshulsey3103]

3L NA engine, any cyl arrangement to the rear and electric motor to the front!!!!

[@tturi2]

I like the idea of 1000hp total and a fuel tank size

[@pikminologueraisin2139]

displacement isn't as importent

[@Lucas-ck1po]

FIA: mgu-h is too expensive, tricky and will never find its way into the roads. Porsche: Yeah, whatever. So, this is our new 911 with mgu-h

[@benedictroberts678]

With the amount of times ive seen front wheels get hit, i dont think a hub motor putting extra cost and mass into the wheels is a good idea; a front motor running through halfshafts to the hubs sounds safer

[@DonDahlmann]

They should take the rules from the WEC and take a closer look. FIA/ACO created an interesting set of rules, that uses energy per lap as a set number. You can use a V12 or V4-Turbo or whatever you want.

[@Patrique2001]

oh hell yeah give me that big V8 from Cadillac, for real

[@TassieLorenzo]

One of the engines is the literal Formula 2 engine. It's not exactly the height of technology, especially LMDh, but there are road car engines like the Ferrari V6 in LMH too. Is that really a good look to be using road car engines, F2 engines and 20 year old LMP2 engines with turbos added? BOP is used to compensate the likes of Porsche and BMW for having big, bulky engines compared to the compact Honda Acura 2.4L engine -- whereas in F1, they would be (IMO rightly) disadvantaged by the aerodynamic implications of trying to package such a big, bulky 4.0L twin-turbo V8 and (most likely) would not attempt it.

[@gerogyzurkov2259]

​@@TassieLorenzo Probably to lower costs. Altough shows their intent on how stretch the BOP by running such an unoptimise car.

[@somethingfunny6867]

thats what they have done. 70kg tank limmit means a 70 lap race is limited to 1kg of fuel. and energy recovery is going to be limited by the braking zones so wont change lap to lap. cars must average nearly 3mpg

[@cademckee7276]

@@TassieLorenzo Wait till you hear that one of the greatest racing engines of all time was from a boat. Or that old BMW F1 engines where just the road engines as well. There is nothing wrong with using road based engines in race cars and infact it’s likely a draw for manufacters because they can say “look this is the same engine you can buy in our cars”

[@kerimca98]

There's probably another reason for no loud engines: Noise complaints from cities, which could get F1 in trouble, I wonder how that went in the past

[@andrewburgin-wild7052]

Perhaps have recovery on all 4 wheels but only allow deployment at the rear

[@tonyy.8852]

I really don’t like the 2026 rule atm, like the current v6 sounds the best pre 2022, but they decided to lock the waste gate rules lol

[@TheGabe92]

2L V8 with MGU sounds like a good idea. So naturally I do not expect them to go with it.

[@perfectman3077]

2L v8? wtf? Where do you people come up with these things? Smaller engines have to rev higher, which is worse in every way.

[@kidpagronprimsank05]

Or absurdly of 1.5l V16 and I not joking

[@TheGabe92]

@@perfectman3077 That's a good point. For that reason a 19000rpm limit was implemented in F1 in 2007 already. Since 2014 it's 18000 rpm, but because of fuel flow restrictions teams do not use it fully any more.

[@perfectman3077]

@@TheGabe92 Yes, with the fuel flow restrictions, the 2014 engines won't ever rev past 12500 (IIRC). They don't need to rev higher to make power anyway, due to forced induction.

[@omallykaboose]

front electric, rear ICE and refuelling during pitstops to bring back strategy.

[@Dario01]

The whole problem consists in thinking that 20 cars that run like 30 times a year are the main problem in terms of pollution. Forget about planes and boats, surely those are very clean.

[@RobFalfa]

The question is if there were no regulations and you wanted to design a drive system with as much performance and as low weight as possible for F1, what would it look like? I like the hypercar rules with limit on 671hp for the petrol engine and 268hp electric motor. However it would be much more interesting if the regulation didn't dictate the relation between these and just stated 700kw output as a whole package and full freedom on generating power. I think the hybrid part would likely be more of an assistance with less storage. Porsche just released the new 911 with a MGU-H (eTurbo). The car also has a motor/generator integrated in the the transmission. Mercedes M139 also use EAT in their new 63 S E performance cars. It often take years for advanced technology to make it to road cars but that doesn't mean that it doesn't have any current relevance.

[@leonhe3290]

Can you send this to F1 themselfes please? Thank you!

[@lukasaa1079]

i think the large batteries can be used strategically to have an edge when overtaking. if everyone is equally fast there wont be any overtakes

[@chrisbrowning360]

What do I think? I think B Sport should be in charge in charge of future regulations.

[@ravishkasilva2851]

To me MGU-H was the biggest advancement WTF GO NA be at the most advance hybrid systems.

[@v4skunk739]

They say MGU-H has no commercial viability. Yet many cars are hybrid and turbo charged.

[@somethingfunny6867]

MGU-H is an electric supercharger

[@PistonAvatarGuy]

​@@v4skunk739The MGU-H would be a huge deal for long-haul trucking. Volvo already uses a less efficient mechanical version of the device on some of its engines.

[@captainobvious9188]

The current drivetrains are technologically the neatest I.C.E. of all time - They are essentially an optimized gas turbine and piston engine put together in a synergistic way. It’s too bad that doesn’t translate too well to a spectator of a race. If we are dumping the MGU-H then just go back to V10s please. After this video came out, Porsche unveiled the new 911 hybrid that is the closest example of using this turbo technology.

[@goodtimeblimp]

Seeing as road relevance and impact on the environment are both at historic lows, F1 needs to decide whether it wants to continue pursuing relevance or go the horse racing route and focus on what made the sport itself great. Either go full electric or go back to open engine formula with a bop like system with V8/V10/V12 hybrids and non hybrids. However, what you proposed sounds like a great middle ground. If only the rule makers were actually competent…

[@waynec3563]

The MGUK in the current regulations is restricted to 120kW (161hp) regardless if it is getting power from the battery, the MGUH, or both. The MGUH allows the MGUK to deploy for longer periods.

[@shawn3595]

Letting the Teams decide wich Engine size sounds Exciting i think of something like the Cadillac LMDH Car wich is Amazing

[@somethingfunny6867]

the problem with it is that no car will be over 10,000 RPM. love the sound of the caddi but f1 should be high RPM

[@douglasberg2881]

I think an electrified axle maces so much sence in recovering energy we cant ignore it.

[@narrowistheway77]

Honestly, biofuel fed V10 engines driving the rear with electric front axles that use torque vectoring in the corners sounds like the future of pinnacle Motorsport and road going vehicles too. If F1 is supposed to be about the spectacle alongside trickle down engineering, then this is the only way to go!

[@timsautovision6145]

Go back to the v10s. These current cars are horrible

[@joetapson9583]

6:10 do you think that you could make a video that goes into some more of the details regarding hub-driven motors?

[@BSport320]

Could be interesting. The racing series with most experience in this field is Formula Student😁

[@wiegraf9009]

F1 struggling desperately to figure out how to recreate LMP1 cars

[@knarfxd4071]

I will keep repeating it: Front regen, and maybe some kind of front power mode to get out of gravel traps. And make engine manufacturers compete on battery and electro motors...

[@ambergris5705]

Three thoughts: First, even though I know that the MGU-H is the most complicated part of the drivetrain, I can't help but mourn its disappearance, since from what I understand it plays a key part in the extreme efficiency of the current F1 engines. Even though there are reasons for this, it feels a bit backwards to scrap the most innovative part of the engine. Then, I believe that the 2026 engine specs are just underwhelming. Basically, it's the mainstream LMdH powertrain, but slightly glorified. Otherwise, nothing more interesting or special, and more importantly, not more power. In a world of 1100 hp Tesla Model S Plaid, 1200 hp Lucid Air, 800 hp BMW M5, 1900 hp Rimac Nevera and 2000 hp Lotus Evija, Formula One sounds and feels outgunned. And it shouldn't, it should command respect. 1500 hp should be the goal, with 750 hp from both sides of the powertrain. Finally, the increase in electric power in the mix should open for more creativity. I wish F1 (and roadcar manufacturers for that manner) would start to approach cars differently: build a tiny (1L, 1.5L, 2L) but emotive ICE (with 10, 12 or more cylindres, N/A or supercharged), and combine it with a huge electric motor. You get a crazy gem of an engine, with an appetite for revs, along with big, instantaneous power everywhere, everytime. And by scaling down the engine you reduce the need for cooling and uprated components, so you can have a lighter car, reverting the inflation cycle of the cars' weight. And you get the most interesting engines you can imagine in an F1.

[@muxiku]

I also don't understand why they ditch the MGU-H is probably the greatest thing these engines have and even Porsche in the new 911 is going to implement something similar and I think it's the future I'm sure most future turbo hybrid supercars are going to have something similar, it increases efficiency and eliminates turbo lag, and if the new f1 cars don't have an MGU-H their better by naturally aspirated at lest they will sound better now their gone get the worst of both worlds bad efficiency and bad sound.

[@ambergris5705]

@@muxiku Your last point of being both inefficient and underwhelming is very true, thanks for that

[@protosevn]

Maybe they should focus on electrifying the transport from race to race instead of making a half-assed package. Shame about the teams not wanting an electric front motor, it would have been a lot better.

[@lucasmoraes3787]

With the budget cap and renewable fuels, I think f1 teams should have more freedom designing the drivetrain, they’ll still be incentivized to make an economical car because of the fuel tank size

[@GeorgeDaGamer_]

Hey I have been a long time watcher of your content and have been intrigued by your intro. I am wondering what engine can you hear In when your intro plays with your name and logo at the start of videos?

[@Magurae]

1 Electric Motor in each wheel, a limited gas tank and the manufacturer is free to choose what type of motor he uses to generate the electricity.

[@MostViewedTop40]

the MGU-H is the best bit. They should have just made it a standard part. Should have Kept it because it makes the combustion engine amazingly efficient. I generally did like the idea of going to 50% elec, but they seem to have messed it up. They should have maybe set a target powertrain horsepower number and a battery weight and allowed the battery to deliver more power through the years as the battery energy density improved. Then reduced the fuel flow each year to balance off the new elec power. So say they start with a 25% elec / 75% combustion, and then each year or 2 change the ratio towards more elec. Carbon neutral fuels are good to have. It's important though not to pretend they will ever be cheaper than fossil fuels or electric cars. It's hard for them to be economical. For them to succeed the world of basically needs abundant free renewable energy. We are going in that direction, but it won't happen during the next 10 years. Most likely fuels F1 use will eventually be used in planes and not cars.

[@slevingaius]

Bsport... Im not an engineer but what are the figures for electric motor up time and charge rates like per lap for the current configuration and the newer incoming rules? Feels like the current configuration allows aleast 2 laps of "overtake" usage before the battery gets zero-ed.

[@Mati03x]

I don't understand how the 2026 engine decision was reached, it seems like a boring regulation without imagination and worrying about an issue whose countries where Formula 1 travels are the most polluting on the planet. As for 2030, from what the WEC taught us, everything depends on cost reduction. Today electric is in doubt due to the lack of raw materials, we know that we cannot escape oil, which is why I am in favor of Domenicalli, the problem is always the brands, who will continue wanting to sell the story that electric is the future.

[@Dakkyun]

They should open up energy storage methods so the teams have better solutions just for rapid charge and discharge of energy. Like the older LMP1 cars, you have flywheel, capacitors, hell if someone wants the old toy car with spring storage, they can (and of course front axle deploy to use all available tires). For me the V6 can stay but make it NA, they will sound like V12 with different exhaust headers.

[@Dakkyun]

Also much more road relevant with the rapid storage and deploy since it will save the Battery in EVs from long term degradation.

[@AwkwardGhost706]

@BSport320 you seen the new 992.2 engine announced today?

[@obtrunco]

It'll be weird if they do go the 50/50 route. It will look as if they're using nitrous.

[@malakiblunt]

making F1 cars 'eco' is the most insulting dumb bullshit - if you serious about making f1 eco get all the aircraft and trucks it takes to fly and drive to tracks all around the world - eco and put 20000rpm v10's back in the cars !

[@andredeketeleastutecomplex]

FIA: we want to keep fans Fans: V10? FIA: huh?

[@willjones2954]

It should be all combustion engines

[@v4skunk739]

Agreed. But also the current hybrid units are far superior to what is happening in 2026.

[@Silverhks]

I'm for whatever setup they want that meets the power target AND allows the cars to be smaller and lighter. I'm here for the development race and the on track racing. I'm not here for the aesthetics

[@waynec3563]

Firstly, FOM do not make the rules. Secondly, if you're GM and have spent 4 years developing a PU to the 2026 rules for 2028 entry, you would be so thrilled to have it changed by 2030! I think what they'll do, possibly before 2026 is change the energy an power outputs. They've already lowered the threshold for maximum MGUK deployment (from 300kph to 290kph) and reduced the per lap energy recovery (9MJ to 8.5MJ). They could increase fuel flow by 25%, raising the ICE power from around 535hp to around 670hp, and reduce the MGUK output from 350kW (470hp) to 250kW (335hp). But energy recovery could still be at 350kW, meaning that there woudl be less need for fuel burning to generate electricity. The fuel flow increase could be the same curve, or the maximum fuel flow point could be moved to a higher rpm. The recent rules update allowed for an override of the MGUK output, so that the maximum MGUK output could be maintained to a higher speed. But this only starts being a benefit above 290kph. By having the normal maximum output of 250kW the override could be 350kW and be available at a lower speed. The batteries on these are still quite small - about 1/15 or 1/20 the capacity of a Formula E battery. They should have made more effort in to making the package lighter - the 2026 PU is pretty much the same weight as the current PU, but is much weaker.

[@wololo10]

Not having an MGU in the front is so stupid

[@jedjohnstone3340]

I think what you propose here is very interesting and does seem to balance all the various priorities that F1 is bound to, but power to all four wheels doesn't feel like f1 to me :/

[@dhkdlhdyodyoclydtkd96494]

i honestly don't understand why the FIA had to comply with teams saying they don't want front electric motors. so what if audi has an advantage? let other teams catch up no? it'll only take a few months

[@wild_lee_coyote]

I really like when the Hypercars roll out of the pit boxes and fire up their gas engines. Each engine manufacture sounds different and behaves different. F1 all sounds the same. I would like to see a front electric drive with more open regulations in the engine department so we can get a rumble of a V8 or a scream of a v10. F1 it’s very close to just being a spec class and not a more open class of racing.

[@tturi2]

I like all of your ideas, but also F1 should only have a power restriction for the engine, fuel type requirement, hybrid power requirement, maybe a thermal efficiency or even emissions requirement etcetera

[@camrsr5463]

Manufacturers are getting ready for engine commonality between racing series. One motor for a variety of uses. it could be called "engine convergence" I am willing to tolerate a lot of changes as long as one of the goals is to reduce cost.

[@mvd4436]

Front electric sounds to complicated too. Just run V8 or 10

[@eoincassin4265]

This is the first ive heard of the 1998 McLaren "ERS" PLEASE explain

[@Dakkyun]

In an ideal world, Formula 1 would be just limited amount of energy and make the powertrain however you want, it forces the car to be really efficient and hence less drag and dirty air. Engineers are free to be wild within energy consumption limit of a race, not a lap like lmp1, but a race.

[@Dakkyun]

And add to that don't expect v10s though, but i am happy to see the true pinnacle of combustion engine available, The Gas turbine engine.

[@eden5260]

Time to open a new series Or make super formula it . Light small V8 powered ,high revving No electricity

[@avada0]

I think they should: 1. Either admit that electric drive is superior. More economic and delivers power better. So move to a fully electric drive with fuel cells and/or ICE generators. Add an electric power limiter at the input of the power electronics to motivate efficiency, ban cryogenics, just in case. And leave everything else pretty much unregulated. 2. Or abandon all eco pretenses and use something exotic and interesting. Rotary engines or opposed piston engines.

[@johnk190]

The whole efuel thing is a green-washing pipe dream, there's no shuch thing as a free lunch. It requires more energy synthesize than the energy it contains as no process will ever be 100% efficient. I may be in the minority but F1 should stick with the efficiency drive, it should be pinacle of motorsport engineering and squeeze as much as possible from the fuel, it's not NASCAR. Keep the fuel flow limit/energy allowance but allow front motors and allow manufacturers to choose whatever engine they think can get the job done.

[@mick1189]

The idea of efuel is to use wind and solar power to capture carbon out of the air, so that the carbon emitted from the F1 cars are from carbon in the air, not carbon pulled from the earth, to then be released into the atmosphere through combustion.

[@nanatzaya]

Also i think wasting the little amounts of synthetic fuels we can produce on racing is ridiculous. Airplanes cant be carbon neutral without synthetic fuel for at least the next 50 years so if we still want to be able to travel should we really waste e fuels on racing when there are already carbon neutral alternatives? We dont even have enough green energy to satisfy the base line demand for electric energy so there wont be any excess green energy to synthesize e fuels or make hydrogen via electrolysis in the next 20 to 30 years. This whole e fuel thing is a pipe dream pushed by rich people who are the only ones who can afford it and petrol companies.

[@tom6493]

4:46 the sound (or lack there of) is nothing to do with the engines themselves or the layout, it’s the hybrid bullshit. OG turbo v6’s from the 80’s sound mental.

[@swecreations]

Think the best regulations would be something like a 2-liter V8 revving to 18 000 RPM, with one of the extremely lightweight 32 kilogram (comprising motor, inverter, differential and transmission all combined!), 469 horsepower front electric drive units Lucid makes for Formula E in the front. Shrink down the width to 1.8 meters to make for better racing, the length a bit as well, and as such make the cars lighter and with less aero for better racing. I mean if manufacturers don't want to use an engine with more cylinders even just using a V6 and letting it rev more would make it sound a lot better, I've seen simulations of people testing this at 18 000 rpm and it definitely sounds very good even while not being a V8 or V10.

[@TassieLorenzo]

"1.8 meters ... with less aero for better racing." Ironically, when F1 cars were 2.15m wide from 1972 to 1992, *the tyres were further away from the body of the car,* therefore the bargeboards used to direct the tyre wakes away from the body of the car were not so sensitive to dirty air.. Something to ponder. I prefer the 2.15m width as it looks correct for Formula 1 IMO.

[@swecreations]

@@TassieLorenzo I just look at Formula E and the videos of them running 3-wide at Monaco and wish Formula 1 could have those moments too. Honestly the racing in Formula 1 is so bad in comparison to there. Width is super important for good racing.

[@TassieLorenzo]

@@swecreations Formula E is 6 seconds per lap slower than even Formula 3 at Monaco though. Formula Ford and Formula Vee produce the best racing, but they are not fast compared to other formula cars... (They are still very fast compared to most road cars or even GT cars of course.)

[@Endorfinjunkie]

Audi uses an e-turbo in their recent models so the mgu-h does have relevance for real life. More than n/a v10s anyway (i don't like it as well but that's just reality)

[@francisvaughan7460]

Torque vectoring would open up the whole question of driver aids again. This seems to be a constant problem with F1 cars being "relevant". Road cars are in many ways more technologically advanced than F1 already. So how you sell relevance isn't easy. If manufacturers all want to align their F1 presence with their corporate direction we have a problem. It isn't as if there is a consistent view of corporate directions. With even more engine manufacturer brandings appearing, this will only get worse. How you align a Ferrari, McLaren or Aston Martin corporate direction with a Ford, Renault, or Honda direction isn't clear. Audi and Mercedes get caught in the middle. And you have to ask, who actually cares other than the corporate flaks? The fans don't. In the end the flow of money will determine outcomes. The switch from teams needing external sponsorship income to deriving most of their income from participating in the championship means the need to put on a good show will become ever more important. That means a good TV presentation.

[@chrisbackhouse5730]

F1 should just make a cost cap and remove all the other rules. Just don't spend more than this through the season, and you're good to go. Limiting (controlling) what the manufacturers can and can not do in terms of engine design/performance is barbaric - let the manufacturers manufacture

[@VykronianF1]

F1 is no longer at the forefront of technology, that title is now Formula E’s. F1 is not as road relevant as marketing would make you believe otherwise every manufacturer would try to be in F1. That means F1 doesn’t have to cater to the car market and can do what it wants. If a manufacturer wants hybrid or electric front axles, let them. If an engine manufacturer like JUDD, Cosworth, and many others want to make a high revving or low grunting engine let them. I don’t see why the rules are such a narrow stream when if we look to WEC manufacturers can do what they want, therefore more want to join. As long as the engines use sustainable fuels it shouldn’t matter how many cylinders it has.

[@somethingfunny6867]

for engine tech it hasn't been for 30 years. 2009 to 2016 the hybrid developments were transferable. in the first year they cut a hybrid weight by 80% but nothing since then.

[@User-dd2xv]

2.6 litre NA V6 rev to 12000 to 15000 rpm, Manufacturers are not going to support V10 Add electric motors to front wheels 50 litre fuel tank, all other Motorsport have been functioning with refueling so bring it back, rules must be of your are stopping you must change tyres so no dash go refueling Fuel first then change tyres

[@somethingfunny6867]

f1's refueling problem is that they were dumping 80l in 5-6 seconds. tyre changes are 2-3 seconds.

[@User-dd2xv]

@@somethingfunny6867 apply WEC refueling rules

[@x_aquatix_x]

the manufacturers and the sport itself are dependent on WEF politics and the goal of these politics is that in the future cars will be a thing of the past. Controlled demolition of the system.

[@User-dd2xv]

@@somethingfunny6867 that is why I suggested the WEC refueling rules with adjusting the minimum fuel to be added and tyres should be changed after fuel is added

[@peteregan3862]

F1 cars will sound a whole lot better without the turbocharger and motor. Can't see V8s coming back due to cost. F1 wants to be affordable, so lots of engine detail will remain specified. Further braking energy recovery is surely on the agenda. Brake heat is used to heat the tyres and get them in the zone. An insulated from the brake axial flux motor for each wheel would do the job. MGU-K is on the crankshaft so it slows the engine down and the rear wheels when gears are not being changed. Braking motors add weight. However, cars need to be hybrid. Could reduce the battery size and fuel mass allowed to say 80kg. Less fuel, five electric motors is the way forward as kerb riding means the front would need separate motors to brake each wheel or wheel-lockup will result. Boost is a concept that has lots of appeal for overtaking, but DRS is a visible sign of boost.

[@321-Gone]

I often think if they could make the cars considerably lighter than they would need less crash structure. I.e.- smaller cars. Lighter and smaller cars accelerate better with less power. Lighter cars need less brakes, which means lighter and simpler. Lighter cars turn better with less downforce which means less which are lighter. Just like smaller cars have less aero load at top speed so again, less power needed. When cars get heavy they need to be even heavier to make them work. Just like lightening cars feed back into becoming lighter. It all makes sense with road courses becoming the norm. Best way to make cars lighter is less battery and its peripherals. Less is not equal to none. It in no way would effect road car electrification development. It might actually develop even smaller batteries. I care far less about the sound as I do about making the cars smaller.

[@321-Gone]

Not to mention less cooling required which again means smaller. Also cheaper to build and more importantly to ship. Heavier is a negative feedback loop. Lighter is positive.

[@a_witcher94]

those are all great ideas .. we will see none of those :)

[@zelcpavle5494]

I would put a V8 engine make it lightweight car and synthetic fuel 💪🔥 But i gues they will electrified it somewhere heh

[@RCmaniac667]

Considering what automarket is right now I don't believe they'll return to pure combustion drivetrain ever again, but also many thought that manual gearbox would be extinct by now, yet now more and more manufcaturers offer them again so who knows.

[@somethingfunny6867]

the ev market is in full reverse.

[@Dario01]

The more the electric power the less race pace as you will need to manage the energy . With sustainable fuels why push electric ? Makes no sense. Go internal combustion only. It's lighter, faster and cheaper

[@RCmaniac667]

Manufacturers want EVs. I suppose it's cheaper to build a large battery than design an engine and gearbox

[@Dario01]

@@RCmaniac667 even known I believe fully eletric road cars also make no sense, what do road cars have to do with F1 ? F1 should be the absolute top of motorsport, pushing for faster and better cars, not less emissions and stuff.

[@TANGYHATCHY]

@@RCmaniac667 that’s the thing, though buddy even the manufactures are starting to bail on the EV‘s or question them more and push back against the government mandated timelines. Tell me again wasn’t every car sold in the UK supposed supposed to be electric by 2026? Good luck with that.

[@swecreations]

From what I've seen more electric power certainly doesn't mean less pace. They're generating all that extra power when they're braking, so their power would not be limited by how much fuel they have in the tank. Also, currently the best racing of any Formula series is found in Formula E, know many people are going from Formula 1 to Formula E just because the racing is so much better, there can be over 100 overtakes in a single race.

[@swecreations]

@@Dario01They're incredibly nice for commuters, you get a car that'll easily do half a million kilometers without any drivetrain maintenance and running on electricity you can charge at home almost for free. For that it's a complete no-brainer, especially as the drivetrain in general is so much nicer to use with instant throttle response, no gears and with the engine spinning in reverse for going in reverse switching directions can be done in an instant, you can floor it from cold and in the winter the built-in heat pump provides warm air in 15 seconds so you never have to wait for an engine to warm up. Some of the more lightweight models like my Zoe for example can be really fun to drive too, a bit like a NA Miata with their nice weight distribution and instant response.

[@TANGYHATCHY]

Only way f1 becomes more open with the engines rules is if WEC gets HUGE commercially.

[@daviddickson7253]

I’ve been saying this, I believe this will happen. If the biggest stars in F1 like Hamilton, Verstappen, Vettel etc decide to pursue WEC, they’re gonna take a large chunk of the F1 “fan base” with them

[@TassieLorenzo]

​@@daviddickson7253 Why would they want to go to WEC so they can be BOP'ed to the midfield at a whim? As it is the likes of Hamilton and Verstappen already get cranky if they are in the midfield season-to-season due to their own's teams poor efforts (leaving from Mercedes to Ferrari despite past success for example), would they accept being pushed down to the midfield as quickly as on a race-by-race basis due to ACO meddling with their team having no say in the matter?

[@explodingrabbit51]

4:07 does anyone have a source for this? When there was the talk of cars losing full charge at Monza, I was wondering if they couldn't just implement a motor at the front given the 2014-2019 LMP1s never had that problem at Le Mans. Also, aren't most of the people who were involved with Audi Sport gone? How much tech transfer could there possiblely be?

[@Dario01]

Make F1 great again

[@geniferteal4178]

Make the cars louder and you will have an easier time selling the electric front wheel idea to most f one fans.

[@gngl7142]

If engine manufacturers want to apply technologies from F1 to road cars, the future of road cars is electric. What will they do? Will they convert F1 to Fe?

[@rapidshot3033]

V8 turbo hybrid. There. everyones happy

[@Arsenic71]

Make that a V10 and you've got a deal 🙂

[@MGM85]

3.0 Litre V10 with carbon neutral fuel. No fancy DRS, no energy recovery systems.

[@Dario01]

That would be heaven

[@BurakBagdatli]

I understand why we care about translation to the road but it's only discussed when it's about engines. No one even thinks about how the ground effect technology will transition to road cars (spoiler: it cannot).

[@TassieLorenzo]

Plenty of road cars use a flat floor and diffuser to generate ground effect -- Lotus Exige, Ferrari 360, even the mass produced Alfa Romeo Giulia QV sedan. Even if this is just to reduce lift rather than generate significant downforce.

[@Ruylopez778]

I don't know why people in the comments want to give teams freedom over cylinder configuration - they won't ever agree to that, and they would all converge on the best solution anyway. It's not going to be like the 80s.

[@Targato_san]

@FIA hire this man for rule-making

[@PapotsGarage]

Why people are complaining about turbocharged engines ? Everybody liked them in the 80’s.

[@The_ZeroLine]

We don’t need the car manufacturers. They add nothing. Many would would still remain anyway because F1 is profitable for teams now.

[@tatimuryani1404]

Why do they have to scared audi will dominate??? Its better te generate power from front axle

[@LarryRiedel]

It never occurred to me that racing is so much about sound, but if it is, maybe they can put speakers in the cars to blast out whatever sound it is which is important for F1, and then focus on making a car that goes fast and handles well.

[@Dario01]

The f1 engine evolution is flawed by the beginning, there is no need to implement electric engines in f1. Makes no sense. From there on i feel like we are discussing something that shouldn't even exist in the first place. Just like DRS, but thats a whole other story

[@GenghisDaniel]

It is really stupid to change engine regulations that close to each other. The FIA needs to understand that under the cost cap when a new set of engine or aero rule is promoted then there is a long period of dominance from one team over all the other one, and that the cost cap prevent the other teams to be able to fill that gap sufficiently fast for the races to be interesting… whatever the rules they need to decide them and make them last for at least 10 years if the cost cap is supposed to be able to nurture better racing and not just one team dominating over all others… If no one is happy with the current 2016 rules, then, they should not be promoted, the current rules need to be prolongated, and more discussion should be happening (as there is only one new motorist coming on the grid in 2026, they should keep the current rules until something better is thought off.

[@gerogyzurkov2259]

Honestly the banning of unlimited testing did way more.

[@GenghisDaniel]

@@gerogyzurkov2259 Well cost cap or banning of testing in the end is more or less the same... The cap will prevent unlimited testing anyway, or will prevent the team to test new designs in those tests as the cost of fast tracking development will be preventing them to be able to reap the benefits of these testings...

[@insansiregar6158]

You should be in charge of making the new regulations instead

[@guillaume_Chr]

N.A . 3'600 cc . 18'000 rpm . Free to choose any number of cylinder as they want + the angle of their engine . Same fuel for everyone .

[@TassieLorenzo]

You mention cylinders, should rotary engines without cylinders be allowed in your scenario? The banning of rotary Wankel engines in F1 is conspicuous IMO.

[@jonihan33]

I prefer smaller and light cars (1998 size). Small hybrid and batterys, only engine size limitation between. 2-3l. Refuelling yes, clean fuel yes! Ground effect, yes! More room to let teams invent something great innovations and budget cap of course! Maby yes for electric front axle! More tire manufacturer competion! Let F1 be: every lap like is quali! Edit: let andretti race! 24 cars to grid

[@RCmaniac667]

2026 is the new 2016

[@defnotatroll]

it used to be 2021, then 2026, now 2030 lol

[@AlainBelanger-nd2eh]

Race without a trace simple

[@Shadowed007]

4.0 L V10 with higher fuel flow

[@somethingfunny6867]

you want to limmit the capacity as a 4l v10 would run 1000bhp at 15000rpm

[@ametti000]

What a joke. Burn fuel to convert and store electricity inefficiently.

[@TheNitrox88]

The whole e-fuel topic is just green washing nonsense. Today's F1 engines are amazingly efficient and wonders of engineering. It's a shame that liberty media wants to please cavemen who want louder engines. Why not make the engine regulation more loose again? Just limit the allowed fuel to 100kg and any extra energy to 1 kg. Perhaps we will see 2000rpm 4zyl or heavily boosted 1zyl or even Gasturbines. Hope F1 won't become some sport for casuals like football.

[@ravishkasilva2851]

4wd would kill it for me.

[@RCmaniac667]

What if they use the front motors for braking and recuperating energy only? Like some advanced future brakes of sorts

[@ravishkasilva2851]

Where are you gonna deploy the energy only Tyres got so much to give and and the halo probably needed to be strengthen for safty adding More weight. This is the biggest problem for F1 right now We are creeping upto LMDH cars. I think we should go for new Lamborghini layout with engine and electric motors then they can use electric motor for reverse also. High reves for high speed motor for low speed and launch.

[@defnotatroll]

It would make zero difference to the show

[@davidaugustofc2574]

​@@RCmaniac667 complete waste of weight.

[@ravishkasilva2851]

F the show.. F sprints.