2026 Watch

[Sportista]

As the year goes on I figure we’ll have a bundle of 2026 topics to discuss and it will make sense to keep them separate to the ongoing season news.

First thing of note is that in order to prepare for the new rules, we get 3 test sessions next year.

The first runs from 26th to 30th Jan in Barcelona - teams can choose three of the five days to run. This is a behind closed doors event.

Two more traditional sessions then in Bahrain, 12-14 Feb and 18-20 Feb.

Power units have to be Homologated by 1st March.

 

[TopClass]

As the year goes on I figure we’ll have a bundle of 2026 topics to discuss and it will make sense to keep them separate to the ongoing season news.

First thing of note is that in order to prepare for the new rules, we get 3 test sessions next year.

The first runs from 26th to 30th Jan in Barcelona - teams can choose three of the five days to run. This is a behind closed doors event.

Two more traditional sessions then in Bahrain, 12-14 Feb and 18-20 Feb.

Power units have to be Homologated by 1st March.

Good shout to have this thread!

The PU chat in particular will be key- do we know what the rules are around improving engine performance after they are homologated?

My admittedly light reading across the web in the last year or so seems to suggest…

Red Bull power trains- lots of talented people have joined, but Horner has said it might have teething problems before bearing fruit. It’s an enormous project for RBR. They’ll definitely get it right at some point but question is can they deliver first time up? If they do it will be very impressive but Horner has played it down.

Audi PU is apparently behind the others. I suspect that they will be a slow burner and is why Sainz turned them down.

Mercedes HPP- confidence does appear to have been emanating from there in recent months. I suspect they’ll be close to if not the benchmark.

Ferrari- I haven’t heard much yet on this front.

Honda- some media reports I think misquoted the boss and suggested they were behind. However- a very trusted -Honda source over at the F1 Technical forum quashed that and indicated they are pretty advanced now and on track. He’s been an awesome source of info since they were fixing the original PU problems with the McLaren back in 2015 and was very confident ahead of 2021 and 2022, so il keep an eye out for further rumblings!

 

[Sportista]

I’ve not done the best job of remembering to post here, but so far everything has largely been speculation rather than data based. Saw this video today, which has some good data based summaries of how current performance is varying.

You must log in or register to see media

 

[Sportista]

Few more things I’ve picked up recently.

Fuel/lubricant supply. Because the current fuel is effectively “pump fuel” fuel sponsorships are effectively badging the fuel linked to the engine supplier. In 2026 it’s expected that many teams will develop their own fuels, so e.g the Petronas and Gulf fuels used in Merc and McLaren may differ leading to potentially significantly different performance for the same engine.

Chassis regs have been loosened up a bit to allow more exotic materials and also to specify the outcome rather than the solution. Means teams can innovate to pass the crash tests, rather than the current situation where there’s e.g. a design for the side impact prevention structures that just has to be integrated to pass. The aim is to allow weight to become a bigger variable with the competition driving the weight down, whilst maintaining safety. Expect to see a lot more use of additive manufacturing (3D printing type technologies).

 

[Big Ern]

Few more things I’ve picked up recently.

Fuel/lubricant supply. Because the current fuel is effectively “pump fuel” fuel sponsorships are effectively badging the fuel linked to the engine supplier. In 2026 it’s expected that many teams will develop their own fuels, so e.g the Petronas and Gulf fuels used in Merc and McLaren may differ leading to potentially significantly different performance for the same engine.

Chassis regs have been loosened up a bit to allow more exotic materials and also to specify the outcome rather than the solution. Means teams can innovate to pass the crash tests, rather than the current situation where there’s e.g. a design for the side impact prevention structures that just has to be integrated to pass. The aim is to allow weight to become a bigger variable with the competition driving the weight down, whilst maintaining safety. Expect to see a lot more use of additive manufacturing (3D printing type technologies).

Wasn't the difference in fuels McLaren's original problem when the regs changed in '14 and why they changed to Honda?

 

[Sportista]

Wasn't the difference in fuels McLaren's original problem when the regs changed in '14 and why they changed to Honda?

You might be right originally, although I understand nowadays, the fuel is standardised by the engine manufacturers - it might have changed at some point to keep costs down (engines only have to be validated with one fuel) and/or as the FIA clamped down on stuff like oil burn. Although I think things are still a bit more varied when it comes to lubricants because some of the customer teams do their own gearbox.

I’d thought it was more to do with the advantages that Works status was giving Merc in terms of integration, but also in terms of access to the different PU modes and Ron thinking they needed to be a works team to get back to the front.

 

[ched999uk]

Expect to see a lot more use of additive manufacturing (3D printing type technologies).

Williams just put out a vid on this:

You must log in or register to see media

Not much info but interesting.

 

[TopClass]

Wasn't the difference in fuels McLaren's original problem when the regs changed in '14 and why they changed to Honda?

My understanding is that the fuel was a differentiating factor in performance yes, but that in the early days of hybrid the manufacturer (Merc) were not obligated to share all software details (engine modes). So whilst hardware was the same, I don’t think everyone knew how to mine the performance through the software settings.Obviously the manufacturer did.

There’s a story somewhere from a guy at Lotus who told a tale on the missed apex podcast of being given an engine mode by a Merc HPP support guy so they could challenge Vettel for position in a race, that felt so much better than anything they’d used or been given before and then weren’t allowed to use again.

It’s one of the reasons I utterly detest 2014 and 2015 in particular. Totally biased rules that favoured a manufacturer, given them a total edge over customer teams and then the stupid token rule that prevented other manufacturers from improving their initial engine product (eg Honda). An utter farce - as we saw when Mercedes went 3 seconds a lap quicker than anyone in Bahrain when they let HAM and ROS fight.

If you remember Ron Dennis’ interviews - and whilst he was lately mocked for jumping to Honda too early- he basically said you couldn’t win a championship without “access to the source code”- and in 2014 when he signed with Honda that was true.

Unfortunately, Honda weren’t ready and latterly the rules changed to allow customers the same PU performance and access, which is a key reason why McLaren have been able to take the fight to Mercedes in recent years.


Heaven only knows what we’re gonna get in 2026 engine wise.

 

[Sportista]

You must log in or register to see media

Audi had a concept livery reveal event yesterday, some details from the event.

• Audi engine is on track and they’re expecting to be competitive, but not the best.
• The engine going to the tests is a “safe” version which is intended to ensure they are reliable (seems sensible, but also risky)
• Their aim is to be competitive in 26/27, compete for wins in 28/29 and be ready to go for the championship in 30 (classic 5-year business plan).

 

[Sportista]

Also, here’s an interview with Binotto which is positive about the new rules: https://www.motorsportweek.com/2025...g-to-enjoy-the-challenge-of-2026-rules-reset/

There does seem to have been a lot of concern in this area, but increasingly positive stories are emerging, so that’s hopefully a sign we won’t be watching a lottery next year.

 

[ched999uk]

New rule for 2026, cars have to have 55% of the visible surface painted or stickered!

 

[Number 1 Jasper]

New rule for 2026, cars have to have 55% of the visible surface painted or stickered!

Read that somewhere . Good !

 

[Number 1 Jasper]

Also, here’s an interview with Binotto which is positive about the new rules: https://www.motorsportweek.com/2025...g-to-enjoy-the-challenge-of-2026-rules-reset/

There does seem to have been a lot of concern in this area, but increasingly positive stories are emerging, so that’s hopefully a sign we won’t be watching a lottery next year.

James Vowles said a while ago the Williams drivers were coming around to the idea .

 

[Sportista]

New rule for 2026, cars have to have 55% of the visible surface painted or stickered!

That doesn’t seem like a lot - even given the floor would seem to be included? How much do you think is generally covered today?

 

[ched999uk]

That doesn’t seem like a lot - even given the floor would seem to be included? How much do you think is generally covered today?

I was thinking the same. I'm surprised they didn't go for 75% especially with 2026 being such a massive change in car and pu regs. I'm guessing that 2025 the average is about 55% and they didn't want too many black cars with logos as teams will probably have trouble getting to min weight.

 

[Number 1 Jasper]

That doesn’t seem like a lot - even given the floor would seem to be included? How much do you think is generally covered today?

There aren’t currently any rules that I can find .

This set of rules is for the top and side views .


The FIA will require teams to ensure at least 55% of their cars’ surface area will be painted or stickered, when viewed from the side or above, next year. This is being done as teams have increasingly left areas of their cars blank to save weight.

This was a particular problem in 2022, the first season following the last major change in technical regulations, when teams found it difficult to get their cars down to the minimum weight limit. That limit is due to fall next year, raising concerns teams may limit the extent of their cars’ liveries as a weight-saving measure again.

“It was agreed by Commission representatives that a minimum of 55% of surface area (when viewed from the side and above) must be covered by painted or stickered liveries as opposed to bare carbon fibre surfaces,” said the FIA in a statement. “The objective of this measure is to increase visual differentiation between cars.”

 

[TopClass]

Just an important one for next season- engine manufacturers with a 3% or higher performance deficiency will be able to develop the engine.

I’ve no idea how it’s policed etc. On the face of it, it’s better than the horrific inequality of 2014-15, but also seems to me like there could be gaming/exploiting the system.

For example, if I thought I was marginally behind the competition, could I somehow present as if 3% or more in order to make a bigger jump in performance?

One to see unfold next season.

 

[Sportista]

Renault is probably still about 3% behind after 11 years! One of the problems in 2014 was the Merc had about 2 years of development already on concepts the others hadn’t pursued/thought of, so they were refining and adding durability whilst their competitors were trying to work out how to even launch initial versions of the same. Everyone has a decent understanding of hybridisation now, so I hope we won’t be seeing engines with the “wrong architecture” this time around.

 

[TopClass]

Hadjar gets the Red Bull seat.

Gasly

Albon

Perez

Lawson

Tsunoda


Is he genuinely better than those? Soon find out.

New regs demand different driving styles too which could flip things

 

[Sportista]

Hadjar gets the Red Bull seat.

Gasly

Albon

Perez

Lawson

Tsunoda


Is he genuinely better than those? Soon find out.

New regs demand different driving styles too which could flip things

If history repeats itself, then maybe this is the best time to move, before the car gets optimised into something tricky.

I’ve been impressed with Hadjar (vs. what weren’t huge expectations based on F2), but equally recently Lawson has got back to a level where he’s been competing with him regularly and so I do worry for his current readiness for the big team (no slight on him, but I suspect he’d be best served with another 1-2 years at RB). However, I don’t see what else RedBull could have done.

I hope it works out better than this - because I’ve grown to like Hadjar this year - but I wouldn’t be surprised if in a few years he’s another Albon/Gasly - steamrollered by Max, but talented enough to rebuild somewhere else.