2025/2026 Hybrid Powerunit speculation

[mzso]

The tone isn't different. How loud, i.e. audible it is - to me - sounds different. You're welcome to your opinion and i'm welcome to mine.

And you're judging that based on low quality recordings? That's very much impossible.

[Vappy]

The tone isn't different. How loud, i.e. audible it is - to me - sounds different. You're welcome to your opinion and i'm welcome to mine.

And you're judging that based on low quality recordings? That's very much impossible.

We can keep going back and forward, but as i'm not here to convince you, i'll simply respect we are at a respectable difference.

[TeamKoolGreen]

The sound of these engines is being overrated. Presumably because everyone's expectations were so low, since it is 50% Formula E after all.

If the MGU-H wasn't made illegal , everyone would be running them. Because the system weighs 8kg and allows the battery to be smaller. The lack of MGU-H also makes the car less efficient.

So there's a little something for nobody. The environmentalist fans get a less efficient car. And the purist racers get something heavier.

[wuzak]

The sound of these engines is being overrated. Presumably because everyone's expectations were so low, since it is 50% Formula E after all.

If the MGU-H wasn't made illegal , everyone would be running them. Because the system weighs 8kg and allows the battery to be smaller. The lack of MGU-H also makes the car less efficient.

So there's a little something for nobody. The environmentalist fans get a less efficient car. And the purist racers get something heavier.

But the battery wasn't a lot smaller, if at all. 4kg difference for ES enclosure, though they may not be directly comparable, due to what was counted in the weight.

And even if it was, it would be because the output power was lower.

[vorticism]

Tidbits:
-Rotational speed limit of the 2025 MGUH: 125,000rpm
-RS limit of the 2026 turboshaft: 150,000rpm
-RS limit of the 2025 MGUK: 50k rpm
-RS limit of the 2026 MGUK: 60k rpm

[mzso]

Since it always comes up, I wonder how the sound would change if there were more exhausts (and such turbos)?
Since the H was dropped there's no strong reason to use one exhaust. And wouldn't it be advantageous to have multiple, smaller turbos anyway? (I'm guessing 2 or 3 might be viable with a V6)

[FW17]

Why did the rules go backwards on the variable length intakes?

[dren]

Why did the rules go backwards on the variable length intakes?

I'd wager cost/complexity.

[diffuser]

Why did the rules go backwards on the variable length intakes?

I'd wager cost/complexity.

If you rephrased that to "The rules went backwards to lower complexity in a effort to curb costs and entice other PU manufactures" you'd be bang on!

They're also using "100% sustainable fuel", which they're interpreting to be ok to put that CO2 back into the air.

[diffuser]

The sound of these engines is being overrated. Presumably because everyone's expectations were so low, since it is 50% Formula E after all.

You could still argue that 100% of the power comes from the fuel... The battery is charged either by braking or by the ICE spinning the MGU-K, neither of which you can do without fuel to get you moving in the first place. It's not like you can finish a race with 50% of the power if you ran out of fuel!

[mzso]

You could still argue that 100% of the power comes from the fuel... The battery is charged either by braking or by the ICE spinning the MGU-K, neither of which you can do without fuel to get you moving in the first place. It's not like you can finish a race with 50% of the power if you ran out of fuel!

Well, as far as I remember they can charge the batteries for the start, so it's 99.x%

[Marble]

Hello !

Question for everyone : if my understanding is correct, the 8.5 MJ figure is regarding the maximum of energy which can be harvested by lap.
Does it mean that for a qualifying lap, if you start the lap with battery charged, then you can theoretically use 4MJ (stored in battery) + 8.5 MJ (assuming they can recover such an amount of energy).
I know it's really theoretical but I really want to understand if there is any limit on the electric energy which can be deployed (as opposed to harvested) during a quali lap.

Thanks for your contributions !

[BorisTheBlade]

Question for everyone : if my understanding is correct, the 8.5 MJ figure is regarding the maximum of energy which can be harvested by lap.
Does it mean that for a qualifying lap, if you start the lap with battery charged, then you can theoretically use 4MJ (stored in battery) + 8.5 MJ (assuming they can recover such an amount of energy).

Correct.
There is no deployment limit in the regulations. So you can deploy the 4 MJ from your full ES at the start of to lap plus whatever you are allowed and able to recover in the specific session on the specific track, as the 8,5 MJ are just a base value and not valid every time and everywhere.

[saviour stivala]

The term 'no deployment limit' is a simplification or potentially a misunderstanding of F1 2026 regulations. The system is designed to make energy management a critical strategic element of the racing, not a system with 'unlimited' power available at all times. There is no 'unlimited' deployment in the sense that the car can use maximum electric power at all times. Teams and drivers must carefully manage the available 4 mj battery capacity and the energy they can harvest each lap to optimize performance and prevent the battery from draining completely.

[BassVirolla]

Since it always comes up, I wonder how the sound would change if there were more exhausts (and such turbos)?
Since the H was dropped there's no strong reason to use one exhaust. And wouldn't it be advantageous to have multiple, smaller turbos anyway? (I'm guessing 2 or 3 might be viable with a V6)

Packaging and, to a little amount, turbo lag is somewhat better to have twin turbos. But a single larger turbo is more efficient.