2026 Aerodynamic & Chassis Regulations

[karana]

The power units will weigh 30 kg more. Where is this 60 kg reduction going to come from ? The lower weight limit will just be put in the rules and nobody will be able to hit it.

The graphic is wrong, the battery is currently not included in the minimum mass of the PU.

[TeamKoolGreen]

The power units will weigh 30 kg more. Where is this 60 kg reduction going to come from ? The lower weight limit will just be put in the rules and nobody will be able to hit it.

https://i.postimg.cc/XqG3gVd7/f126.jpg

The graphic is wrong, the battery is currently not included in the minimum mass of the PU.

That doesn't make the weights wrong. The 2026 battery and power unit will weigh 30+ more than the current battery and power unit.

[JordanMugen]

The power units will weigh 30 kg more.

That table is wrong.

[Sulman]

We have seen that DRS was a failure. At least in my opinion. It rarely worked as intended. Either you flew by at the speed of light, or you were incapable of passning.

DRS worked amazingly well. But then the FIA got a little drunk with the thought of how much overtaking they could create if they just put DRS zones absolutely everywhere! Two zones per track! Now, how about THREE zones per track! Let's put DRS zones even on long straights where overtaking was possible without DRS! Everybody gets a DRS zone!

So little effort was spent on ensuring that DRS was used when and where appropriate. Balanced well, DRS was fantastic and did everything it needed to do. Yes, there were blowby passes, but when the driver before was gonna be able to pass no matter what, then yes, DRS will just make it even easier, but the fact that it enabled overtaking opportunities where it would have previously been impossible or super difficult was a big win.

You're describing the pitfalls of the overtaking metric.

Like any measurement, people (management, usually) become obsessive about it, and suddenly it's more important than anything else.

All DRS really achieves is guaranteeing, as long as the circuit layout permits it, that the fastest car will get to the front. When you have five 9s reliability, that results in a very predictable race. Verstappen last year could start his race practically anywhere on the grid, and he'd get to the front.

Can you imagine Hungary 1989, or even 1990 with DRS? What about Imola 2005, or Argentina 1997? If the slightly quicker car (at that point in the GP) can sail by at +30KPH, is that really a motor race?

It's a bad solution and it really ought not to have lasted this long.

[karana]

The power units will weigh 30 kg more. Where is this 60 kg reduction going to come from ? The lower weight limit will just be put in the rules and nobody will be able to hit it.

https://i.postimg.cc/XqG3gVd7/f126.jpg

The graphic is wrong, the battery is currently not included in the minimum mass of the PU.

That doesn't make the weights wrong. The 2026 battery and power unit will weigh 30+ more than the current battery and power unit.

Sorry, I was maybe a bit unclear, the current minimum mass of the PU according to the regulations is 151kg, but the battery actually doesn't count to this number according to Appendix 3 of the technical regulations. So the actual weight of the current PUs is closer to 171-176kg (probably higher if you count the battery ancillaries).

[JordanMugen]

Some folks are complaining of the meagre nature of the wheelbase reduction.

Should the 2026 rules have mandated a transverse gearbox to enable a more significant (500mm?) reduction in wheelbase?

Or even mandate that the gear cassette be outside the wheelbase, instead of inside, like older racing cars (I'm unsure of the implications to the rear crash structure)?

Those calling for significant reductions in size or weight don't seem to discuss how those would be achieved while keeping 2026 crash safety standards (+20 to +30% on crash test severity from 2024 IIRC)?

[LionsHeart]

Some folks are complaining of the meagre nature of the wheelbase reduction.

Should the 2026 rules have mandated a transverse gearbox to enable a more significant (500mm?) reduction in wheelbase?

Or even mandate that the gear cassette be outside the wheelbase, instead of inside, like older racing cars (I'm unsure of the implications to the rear crash structure)?

Those calling for significant reductions in size or weight don't seem to discuss how those would be achieved while keeping 2026 crash safety standards (+20 to +30% on crash test severity from 2024 IIRC)?

Well, there is another option, when the differential axle of the gearbox is in its normal position, and the wheel axle is shifted forward. True, there will be certain mechanical losses. On the other hand, remembering the previous regulations and high rake, this did not bother the teams. In those years, the differential axle was much higher than the wheel axle. In general, there are different ways to fit within the wheelbase.

[wuzak]

The graphic is wrong, the battery is currently not included in the minimum mass of the PU.

That doesn't make the weights wrong. The 2026 battery and power unit will weigh 30+ more than the current battery and power unit.

Sorry, I was maybe a bit unclear, the current minimum mass of the PU according to the regulations is 151kg, but the battery actually doesn't count to this number according to Appendix 3 of the technical regulations. So the actual weight of the current PUs is closer to 171-176kg (probably higher if you count the battery ancillaries).

And the 2026 minimum weight of ICE + Turbo + MGUK is 150kg, so 1kg less than the equivelent in the current regulations.

[TeamKoolGreen]

It seems like a big departure from the current concept. There was a lot of research done into the current concept, have they discovered it was the wrong direction?

How's that ? The field has never been closer. The first half of 2022 was money.
Even now ,dirty air has increased. But cars can still follow without burning their tires off.

Ppl sure have short memories. Vegas 2023 would have been impossible without venturi floors

[bhall II]

After fifteen-plus years and untold millions spent on attempts to ease overtaking, the FIA arrives with a concept that looks an awful lot like the one it abandoned in 2009 in its first attempt to ease overtaking.





It's the circle of life before your very eyes

[langedweil]

We could talk forever about it, but this set of rules is just absurd and ridiculous for a series that's supposed to be the pinnacle of motorsports .. I'd say it's becoming more like an overdue strawberry.
We need a PU and car that wants to kill it's driver on every GP, we just need a power to weight ratio of 2:1

[TeamKoolGreen]

The 2026 cars will be heavier than the 2021 cars. With much less downforce.

A 2010 car with large venturi tunnels and less wing would be the best of both worlds. Now they are doing a 180 on venturi tunnels. And they will find out pretty quickly why they went down that road in the first place. Following cars will start to burn their tires off again.

The look of the 2022 had continuity from the front all the way to the back. The blended rear wing looks great imo. They just needed to be smaller. The 2026 car looks like a toned down 2022 F1 car with an old F2 rear wing bolted on.

[FW17]

New F1 floor

[arkbird]

Does the new front wing remind anyone else of the 2009 McLaren front wing? If they’re strongly encouraging inwashing front wing solutions why the appendages that increase front wing width?

[Vanja #66]

The active aero is really a disaster on paper.

The only thing wrong with active aero is the fact we didn't get it 15 years ago

Dr_obbs:

I need to correct one element in here that I mis understood initially. The driver does initiate the x mode with a push button, but then the control system opens the flaps, but then automatically closes it at the end of the straight. There is driver initiation for open, but no driver control for close. That is the concern. What happens if something fails and it won’t close? What is the safety override? There currently isn’t one.

Sorry for the confusion.

Clearly didn't even listen to FIA's presentation, wings will close just like DRS flap today is closed down when brake pedal is pushed

After fifteen-plus years and untold millions spent on attempts to ease overtaking, the FIA arrives with a concept that looks an awful lot like the one it abandoned in 2009 in its first attempt to ease overtaking.

An outcry for smaller and lighter cars has been made since forever, as long a they're making changes why not go back visually to a period when cars looked really good? If those pre-2009 cars had DRS, I bet racing would be better than today, even if they had fairly big barge boards and there were a lot of vortices generated all over the car.

2009 rules were a big step in the wrong direction, 2014 low nose rule was a big load of nothing and 2017 rules were literally made to make cars faster since they can't really race anyway... This period will probably be remembered as the Decade of Unraceable cars

https://www.usatoday.com/gcdn/presto/20 ... &auto=webp

New F1 floor

Not even remotely