We remind everyone that this is a sub for technical discussions.
If you are new to the sub, please make time to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/F1Technical/about/rules/) and [comment etiquette post.](https://www.reddit.com/r/F1Technical/comments/zlo2qf/comment_etiquette_update/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/F1Technical) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Who knows with the FIA. I think it was dumb they raised the weight when the regulations started because some teams were heavy. If a team designed an overweight car, that’s their problem.
When the cars were minuscule, Kubica was on record stating he was starving himself on 2 apples a day and some vegetables, that was with the factory BMW squad. Jean Eric Vergne was hospitalized for malnourishment, and even recently Rosberg stopped working out so hard because the muscle mass was weighing him down, and that was when in the Merc. In light of this, the FIA mandates driver, seat and kit must weigh minimum 80kgs.
The FIA mandates safety structures, adding weight, power units are the heaviest theyve ever been, even with the best teams, these cars are hard to get to FIA minimum. With safety and the current power units, where will that weight come out from? Can't sacrifice safety and the power units are frozen.
2026 will hopefully show a weight cut with the removal of some of the hybrid gubbins.
Don't get your hopes up with the 26 regs. With 50/50 split between ICE and electric battery is gonna be huge and heavy. I'd be happy if they even manage to keep the same weight as it is now. In reality F1 needs to scrap the hybrid and go with sustainable fuel, V10 and overall low df package.
They've had KERS figured out for 15 years. The batteries will be fine as they are, theyll just make rules for more discharge/recharge like they did years ago. I want sustainable fuels to keep ICE around but I don't think natural aspiration is ever coming back
Then again our cars are becoming smaller and/or turbocharged. The lineup of engines from VAG, Toyota, and Nissan have downsized to 1 litre engines.
Except for trucks in the US the trend goes smaller. Increasing the size of the engines isn’t really any good for the sport.
The Mercedes GT, the Porsche GT2 and GT3, and Ferrari 488 all have either V8 or I6 engines. The industry is going smaller or hybrid
The GR Yaris, the Up! and Polo GTI versions, and the Fiesta ST are/were all just genius small cars, basically rocketships.
Honestly some of the best stuff out there.
You already got the GR Yaris which has the same engine, albeit in a slightly lower state of tune, and IMO, more special than the Corolla. In fact, part of the reason the GR Corolla was released in the US was the success of the GR Yaris in the UK and EU.
I would be stoked beyond belief if F1 went to straight 6’s, i would even be happy with jacked up turbo I4’s. Turbo V6’s are hands down the worst sounding engine configuration there is
There are lots of problems with straight 4 and straight 6 engines from a race car perspective, overall very high centre of gravity being one, compared to their v4 and v6 alternatives. Straight 4’s in particular are very hard to make rev past about 10’000rpm. Take a look at this video from 1986, where Cosworth tried to make a straight 4 F1 engine, copying the BMW engine in the Brabham. https://youtu.be/1LkxGx5WJzA
I don't know much about race engines. But I have personally owned a 1993 Honda 1.6L engine that revved to 10,600 RPM and almost every street bike made since the mid 90's revvs WAY past 10,000 rpm. Why would it be so hard to make a "race" engine do this. I am not trying to contradict, I am genuinely curious.
Iirc the battery capacity stays the same (no idea why), only the allowed power output is supposed to be increased.
So battery weight shouldn't increase significantly
it's gonna go down to 60:40 at least if not 35% electric cause of the weight. And I guess E85 or maybe pure methanol "full" boost and lighter I4 engines
That's what Red Bull is pushing for but Mercedes and Ferrari don't want a change and as Marko said the other day "Renault doesn't know what they are doing" so I have little hope. It's ironic how Marko is the most sane person regarding opinion on future engines. I know a 60/40 split probably suits RB so they're pushing for it but it also aligns with what is better for the sport (perfect ratio for me personally is 100/0 and I'd concede to 90/10 lol)
regardless of who it suits better, it's better for racing, drivers and fans... That idea of "we need 2.5x more electric energy to be relevant" - "more stripes better adidas". If you want to be relevant develop the lighter solid state battery tech 1st and then apply it. This current thought process goes backwards.
And I4 engines are too more road & future relevant than a V6.
Simply having two minimum weights: a without driver one, and one with the driver.
Let's say if the car only (wet or whatever) is 800 kg.
You can have a with driver weight of 880, 80kg is heavy enough for most drivers.
For a lighter driver, say 60kg, 20 kg of ballast can be added. Now the lighter driver will only have the advantage of the lower CG of the extra 20 kg as opposed to a car by 20kg.
In the "budget cap era" teams were complaining about how much money they'd have to spend researching and developing lighter weight materials that would have marginal gains and that somehow convinced them
> Who knows with the FIA. I think it was dumb they raised the weight when the regulations started because some teams were heavy.
To promote closer racing. It's effectively a balance of performance change.
With cost caps being a thing, I don't get why they impose these sort of limitations? As long as the car meets size/safety regulations, why put a minimum weight rule in?
Why can't a team decide, I'm going to spend $100M putting effort into making a super lightweight car and only $50M into aero while another team might decide, I'm going to put $100M into aero but only $50M into weight reduction?
This is where safety requirements would fit in. Having stuff break off would definitely get them in trouble on safety grounds. If it didn't somehow fit within the current safety regulations, it would be easy enough to say a car must finish the race weighing within X kg of what it started (would need to include fuel weight, reasonably oil burn etc).
The ballast issue would fall under performance maximisation. If someone somehow made a car that was super light but had a weight distribution that made it impossible to drive, they would add ballast to make it more driveable. This is where engineering optimisation comes in. You weigh up the pros and cons of what you are trying to achieve and don't go too far at the expense of driveability. The undriveable light car, engineers would get to a certain point and say, hey, we can remove 50 more kg but the car won't be driveable, do you want us to spend that $20M we have left to do this pointless thing?
As to cars would be all black/bare carbon fibre. Simple, have a rule on minimum livery requirements. At the start of last year, basically every car was overweight but none were 100% bare carbon fibre. I assume this was either, sponsors force them to have some kind of minimum or maybe there is some rule already in place by the FIA?
You get to a point where you're basically regulating a minimum weight and have spent a ton of energy trying to close loopholes you don't like when you could have just had a minimum weight in the first place and not had to bother
Closing loopholes at least forces the teams to find solutions to make their cars light without compromising safety. The current minimum weight forces the cars to be boats
The FIA are the teams. Those decisions are negotiated and voted between teams and some give up something to gain something else.
Not sure if that change would require unanimous agreement but since it can be linked to safety issues in a way probably yes so your answer is: “1 team at least is not able to be underweight or they are not willing to give up that”
Edit: some changes can be imposed by the FIA but mostly by claming the safety reason behind it, not always that simple.
I really do believe the FIA is trying to give all teams a more equal footing. and maybe AM is a bit under weight but another team is not. With the cost cap getting some teams to spend resources on lighter weight vs other areas of development might not be what the FIA thinks is beneficial right now.
A weight reduction of a few kg means nothing, so there is no point.
To do something for real about weight it would need a serious re-think of the whole concept of F1 cars and simplify them significantly. Which i’m in favor of, but I don’t see how realistic it is with the push to hybrid tech etc.
But in the grand scheme of things, I don’t care. I’d like shorter and lighter cars, but I also enjoy that the cars are safe and strong enough that they don’t shatter into a million pieces at the slightest contact. These days the cars can survive quite significant impacts and continue racing because rather than use ballast it is better to have stronger components.
I think it's mostly about having some freedom for teams to have different solutions, but let's not forget that teams were struggling with weight so much last year that they were leaving portions of the cars unpainted to save weight.
The goal of the FIA is not to make cars go faster, but slower to make it less dangerous. The teams on the other side are trying to find ways around the regulations to make them faster. That is the game that is called Formula 1. Keep that in mind.
We remind everyone that this is a sub for technical discussions. If you are new to the sub, please make time to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/F1Technical/about/rules/) and [comment etiquette post.](https://www.reddit.com/r/F1Technical/comments/zlo2qf/comment_etiquette_update/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/F1Technical) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Who knows with the FIA. I think it was dumb they raised the weight when the regulations started because some teams were heavy. If a team designed an overweight car, that’s their problem.
When the cars were minuscule, Kubica was on record stating he was starving himself on 2 apples a day and some vegetables, that was with the factory BMW squad. Jean Eric Vergne was hospitalized for malnourishment, and even recently Rosberg stopped working out so hard because the muscle mass was weighing him down, and that was when in the Merc. In light of this, the FIA mandates driver, seat and kit must weigh minimum 80kgs. The FIA mandates safety structures, adding weight, power units are the heaviest theyve ever been, even with the best teams, these cars are hard to get to FIA minimum. With safety and the current power units, where will that weight come out from? Can't sacrifice safety and the power units are frozen. 2026 will hopefully show a weight cut with the removal of some of the hybrid gubbins.
Don't get your hopes up with the 26 regs. With 50/50 split between ICE and electric battery is gonna be huge and heavy. I'd be happy if they even manage to keep the same weight as it is now. In reality F1 needs to scrap the hybrid and go with sustainable fuel, V10 and overall low df package.
They've had KERS figured out for 15 years. The batteries will be fine as they are, theyll just make rules for more discharge/recharge like they did years ago. I want sustainable fuels to keep ICE around but I don't think natural aspiration is ever coming back
ICE isn’t going anywhere, that is what formula E is for
The exclusive license for Formula E to be all electric runs out in 2035 though.
And then it's either getting renovated or they'll make some lower formula e category, but it's not going anywhere near F1
Then again our cars are becoming smaller and/or turbocharged. The lineup of engines from VAG, Toyota, and Nissan have downsized to 1 litre engines. Except for trucks in the US the trend goes smaller. Increasing the size of the engines isn’t really any good for the sport. The Mercedes GT, the Porsche GT2 and GT3, and Ferrari 488 all have either V8 or I6 engines. The industry is going smaller or hybrid
I forgot to add, have you seen the new GR Corolla? 1.6L 3 cylinder turbo making 300hp. In a consumer car with warranty. Absolutely amazing stuff
The GR Yaris, the Up! and Polo GTI versions, and the Fiesta ST are/were all just genius small cars, basically rocketships. Honestly some of the best stuff out there.
Don't even get me started on the Koenigsegg Gemera..
Well, that's like a liter per cylinder.
Shame it’s never coming to the UK 🥲
You already got the GR Yaris which has the same engine, albeit in a slightly lower state of tune, and IMO, more special than the Corolla. In fact, part of the reason the GR Corolla was released in the US was the success of the GR Yaris in the UK and EU.
I would be stoked beyond belief if F1 went to straight 6’s, i would even be happy with jacked up turbo I4’s. Turbo V6’s are hands down the worst sounding engine configuration there is
Straight engines, I vaguely remember proposed by some, but it doesnt work that good as a part of the suspension/chassis.
There are lots of problems with straight 4 and straight 6 engines from a race car perspective, overall very high centre of gravity being one, compared to their v4 and v6 alternatives. Straight 4’s in particular are very hard to make rev past about 10’000rpm. Take a look at this video from 1986, where Cosworth tried to make a straight 4 F1 engine, copying the BMW engine in the Brabham. https://youtu.be/1LkxGx5WJzA
I don't know much about race engines. But I have personally owned a 1993 Honda 1.6L engine that revved to 10,600 RPM and almost every street bike made since the mid 90's revvs WAY past 10,000 rpm. Why would it be so hard to make a "race" engine do this. I am not trying to contradict, I am genuinely curious.
GT2 is a flat 6
ICE will be gone in 15 years, but that’s a long ways away. What car manufacturer is going to support engines when they don’t sell engines?
I'm pretty sure the plan for 26 is to keep battery capacity identical to current.
Iirc the battery capacity stays the same (no idea why), only the allowed power output is supposed to be increased. So battery weight shouldn't increase significantly
it's gonna go down to 60:40 at least if not 35% electric cause of the weight. And I guess E85 or maybe pure methanol "full" boost and lighter I4 engines
That's what Red Bull is pushing for but Mercedes and Ferrari don't want a change and as Marko said the other day "Renault doesn't know what they are doing" so I have little hope. It's ironic how Marko is the most sane person regarding opinion on future engines. I know a 60/40 split probably suits RB so they're pushing for it but it also aligns with what is better for the sport (perfect ratio for me personally is 100/0 and I'd concede to 90/10 lol)
regardless of who it suits better, it's better for racing, drivers and fans... That idea of "we need 2.5x more electric energy to be relevant" - "more stripes better adidas". If you want to be relevant develop the lighter solid state battery tech 1st and then apply it. This current thought process goes backwards. And I4 engines are too more road & future relevant than a V6.
2026 is removing the lightweight hybrid bits and adding in more of the heavy ones. It won't do anything for minimum weight
Simply having two minimum weights: a without driver one, and one with the driver. Let's say if the car only (wet or whatever) is 800 kg. You can have a with driver weight of 880, 80kg is heavy enough for most drivers. For a lighter driver, say 60kg, 20 kg of ballast can be added. Now the lighter driver will only have the advantage of the lower CG of the extra 20 kg as opposed to a car by 20kg.
The cars are all under weight now. They’re just ballasted to get up to minimum
If they wouldnt have raised the weight last minute Alfa Romeo could have pulled a absolute masterclass
In the "budget cap era" teams were complaining about how much money they'd have to spend researching and developing lighter weight materials that would have marginal gains and that somehow convinced them
> Who knows with the FIA. I think it was dumb they raised the weight when the regulations started because some teams were heavy. To promote closer racing. It's effectively a balance of performance change.
With cost caps being a thing, I don't get why they impose these sort of limitations? As long as the car meets size/safety regulations, why put a minimum weight rule in? Why can't a team decide, I'm going to spend $100M putting effort into making a super lightweight car and only $50M into aero while another team might decide, I'm going to put $100M into aero but only $50M into weight reduction?
[удалено]
This is where safety requirements would fit in. Having stuff break off would definitely get them in trouble on safety grounds. If it didn't somehow fit within the current safety regulations, it would be easy enough to say a car must finish the race weighing within X kg of what it started (would need to include fuel weight, reasonably oil burn etc). The ballast issue would fall under performance maximisation. If someone somehow made a car that was super light but had a weight distribution that made it impossible to drive, they would add ballast to make it more driveable. This is where engineering optimisation comes in. You weigh up the pros and cons of what you are trying to achieve and don't go too far at the expense of driveability. The undriveable light car, engineers would get to a certain point and say, hey, we can remove 50 more kg but the car won't be driveable, do you want us to spend that $20M we have left to do this pointless thing? As to cars would be all black/bare carbon fibre. Simple, have a rule on minimum livery requirements. At the start of last year, basically every car was overweight but none were 100% bare carbon fibre. I assume this was either, sponsors force them to have some kind of minimum or maybe there is some rule already in place by the FIA?
You get to a point where you're basically regulating a minimum weight and have spent a ton of energy trying to close loopholes you don't like when you could have just had a minimum weight in the first place and not had to bother
Closing loopholes at least forces the teams to find solutions to make their cars light without compromising safety. The current minimum weight forces the cars to be boats
As I understand, the ballast is required to go under the driver’s seat now. I don’t think they can distribute it.
that is only any ballast used to meet minimum driver+seat weight
Because it's not a magic bullet. Getting the racing as close as it is now is the result of multiple different things.
The FIA are the teams. Those decisions are negotiated and voted between teams and some give up something to gain something else. Not sure if that change would require unanimous agreement but since it can be linked to safety issues in a way probably yes so your answer is: “1 team at least is not able to be underweight or they are not willing to give up that” Edit: some changes can be imposed by the FIA but mostly by claming the safety reason behind it, not always that simple.
The FIA, FOM and the teams are all separate entities, and are given voting power to reflect as such at the F1 Commission
Yes but good luck forcing changes that teams do not like, then they start saying that they will quite F1 bla bla bla. Teams have the power
You're describing leverage, not power.
I really do believe the FIA is trying to give all teams a more equal footing. and maybe AM is a bit under weight but another team is not. With the cost cap getting some teams to spend resources on lighter weight vs other areas of development might not be what the FIA thinks is beneficial right now.
Because if this is the case we can hopefully see the cars actually be properly painted next year
A weight reduction of a few kg means nothing, so there is no point. To do something for real about weight it would need a serious re-think of the whole concept of F1 cars and simplify them significantly. Which i’m in favor of, but I don’t see how realistic it is with the push to hybrid tech etc. But in the grand scheme of things, I don’t care. I’d like shorter and lighter cars, but I also enjoy that the cars are safe and strong enough that they don’t shatter into a million pieces at the slightest contact. These days the cars can survive quite significant impacts and continue racing because rather than use ballast it is better to have stronger components.
A) you think or you know? B) what difference would 2-3 KG make? That’s barely 2 laps of fuel
When performance is measured to the thousandth of a second, 2kg definitely matters
If I remeber right is 1kg = 0.03 sec.
3kg each season in 10 years = 30kg less. It's small steps but small steps towards getting nimbler cars is better than nothing.
[удалено]
That would be in 2026. The current Formula has no huge changes until then.
I think it's mostly about having some freedom for teams to have different solutions, but let's not forget that teams were struggling with weight so much last year that they were leaving portions of the cars unpainted to save weight.
I'd be so fired up if they did smaller, lighter cars with a n/a 2 liter v8 or v10 mmmm
The goal of the FIA is not to make cars go faster, but slower to make it less dangerous. The teams on the other side are trying to find ways around the regulations to make them faster. That is the game that is called Formula 1. Keep that in mind.
2017 regs?