Why do the regulations change just when the field is beginning to close up in competitiveness? The new regs for 2026 seem like a lottery for teams who either nail or fail them, leading to a dominant team and those lagging behind. Stable regs = competitive racing. – Matt
F1 has always changed its regulations from time to time. It’s an inevitable and necessary part of the sport.
Often in the past, it has been because the governing body felt the need to intervene in some way.
Perhaps because the cars were getting too fast or dangerous, such as at the end of the last ground-effect era in 1982, or when Ayrton Senna was killed in 1994. Or to change an aspect of racing that was no longer considered desirable, such as when refuelling was banned for 2010. Or to add an aspect that was felt to be lacking, such as when wider, faster cars were introduced in 2017.
And the engine rules have also often changed, again for various reasons.
This time, the starting point was the engine rules. F1 and the FIA wanted to make the sport more attractive to new manufacturers. So they set up some working groups involving the manufacturers and came up with the 2026 rules.
These retain 1.6-litre V6 turbo hybrids, but simplify them by removing the MGU-H, which recovers energy from the turbo and is highly complex and was considered a barrier to new suppliers.
They have also upped the electrical capacity so that about 50% of the total power output will come from the electrical part of the engine, and will run on 100% sustainable fuel.
It has worked. Audi came in – which was the idea behind changing the rules. Porsche in the end did not. But Ford has come back, in partnership with Red Bull. Honda is staying when it was going to pull out. And General Motors is entering next year, too, although its engine won’t be ready until 2029.
There was already a desire to refine the chassis rules, to fix some of the issues that have arisen with the 2022 ground-effect regs. But the new engine rules required further changes.
It became clear that recovering sufficient energy to supply the batteries was going to be a problem. So the rule-makers turned to moveable aerodynamics, reducing drag on the straights so the cars were in the braking zones for longer.
Wrangling is still going on about this topic, although the rules are not expected to change significantly – for example by limiting the electrical deployment in races, as some are pushing at the moment – as there is a blocking majority preventing it.
Yes, this might open up the field, but that often happens with new rules. But it will close again. It also provides opportunity for a shake-up of the competitive order, which is often regarded as a positive.
