2026 Scuderia Ferrari HP F1 Team

[CHT]

I think it's unreasonable to make any predictions about the pecking order this early. I myself will only comment on the teams' positions after the last day of testing in Bahrain.

Comments based on an initial test, where one team didn't even run, another only did 65 laps in low-power mode. Teams with different engine modes and test objectives, almost all teams running with a initial-spec car and supposedly with fossil fuel instead of synthetic, are 100% guesswork. I believe almost nothing from the tests in Barcelona gives any insight into what the pecking order will be.

Ted and Craig's opinion, with their "sources," has exactly the same value as the opinions of the users here on the forum, in the Pecking order predictions thread, where some people are even basing their predictions on the appearance of the cars, correlating more developed to faster.

Pecking order is based on data collected from Barcelona, its not prediction for how the season why start at Melbourne or end. What is obvious is that some team have already tick the boxes on engine reliability and race simulation run, while some have yet to complete a single lap (Williams) or full race distance.

The last time Ferrari started very strong in the season was 2022 with it SF1-75, topping the time sheet on day 1 and day 2 at Barcelona. For 2026, both Hamilton and Charles also finished very strongly on Day Five.

However due to the controversy surrounding the engine compression ratio, it is possible that some teams may not be running their engine at full potential

[dans79]

However due to the controversy surrounding the engine compression ratio, it is possible that some teams may not be running their engine at full potential

Honestly, I think this rumor is nothing but a bunch of hooey made up by people with too much free time. Then the teams and FIA ran with it as free publicly and hype during the quietest part of the year.

linear thermal expansion, has been known about for almost 2000 years, so the belief that only 2 manufactures have magically found a way of manipulating it to gain a meaningful advantage is just dumb.

[venkyhere]

There is so much talk of 'not running full potential' , 'conservative engine mode' , 'fake aero bits' etc in all team threads. The fact of the matter is, teams try to do 'as much as possible' by bringing 'as many parts as possible' for shakedown/testing events in such a 'fully revamped formula'. They want to know not just about what they have, but mostly to form a crude idea about what 'development path' to take over the next few seasons, when they sweep through different PU modes, different cooling settings, different tyre pressures, different ride heights etc etc. Hence every hour of the 9 days of 'test time' is super important. The focus has to be more (more than ever before) on themselves than 'fooling others'.

Turn up the engine to 11, run with low(high) fuel load to sim quali(race), test the limits of the car and still produce a 'sandbagged laptime' so as to not show their hand fully (if you have been watching the FP2/FP3 sessions by Mclaren & Verstappen over the past 2 years (most recent example), you will know how they do it).

[Schumix]

However due to the controversy surrounding the engine compression ratio, it is possible that some teams may not be running their engine at full potential

Honestly, I think this rumor is nothing but a bunch of hooey made up by people with too much free time. Then the teams and FIA ran with it as free publicly and hype during the quietest part of the year.

linear thermal expansion, has been known about for almost 2000 years, so the belief that only 2 manufactures have magically found a way of manipulating it to gain a meaningful advantage is just dumb.

Things aren't that simple, which is why technical experts are discussing the matter. We all agree that F1 is the pinnacle of automotive engineering. This would mean that engineers should be working to keep the compression ratio within an acceptable range around the specified value (16:1 ratio). And that's what at least three engine manufacturers have managed to do. For an internal combustion engine operating with a compression ratio of 18:1, engine experts are talking about a gain of almost 30 horsepower, or three-tenths of a second. That's huge.

[dans79]

Things aren't that simple, which is why technical experts are discussing the matter. We all agree that F1 is the pinnacle of automotive engineering. This would mean that engineers should be working to keep the compression ratio within an acceptable range around the specified value (16:1 ratio). And that's what at least three engine manufacturers have managed to do. For an internal combustion engine operating with a compression ratio of 18:1, engine experts are talking about a gain of almost 30 horsepower, or three-tenths of a second. That's huge.

I was trained as a physicist, and we are talking about high school level physics and math. Not to mention every team will be pushing the limit of what they are allowed to do when it comes to the static compression ratio.

The ICE component that would effect the compression ratio the most due to thermal expansion would be the connecting rods because they are the longest part. Connecting rods must be manufactured from iron or titanium-based alloys.

If a manufacture was willing to eat the numerous penalty of not using titanium connecting rods. the best thermal coefficient they could get would be roughly 19x10^-6 m/m°C. The titanium alloy with the lowest thermal expansion coefficient they are allowed to use is 8.4x10^-6 m/m°C. That yields a delta of 10.6x10^-6 m/m°C.

Note the rods must be between 119.5mm and 120.5mm in length when measured across the journal & pin bores. If you take the delta above, and the longest pin length of 120.5mm a manufacture would have to have the connecting rods running ~78°C hotter than their competitors to get the connecting rod to grow in length by 0.1mm (and this is using the most extreme case).

The above is incredibly unlikely for a lot of reason imo. Teams are more likely to find gains with fuels, better combustion efficiency, and keeping the inlets charge as cool as possible.

[sucof]

Things aren't that simple, which is why technical experts are discussing the matter. We all agree that F1 is the pinnacle of automotive engineering. This would mean that engineers should be working to keep the compression ratio within an acceptable range around the specified value (16:1 ratio). And that's what at least three engine manufacturers have managed to do. For an internal combustion engine operating with a compression ratio of 18:1, engine experts are talking about a gain of almost 30 horsepower, or three-tenths of a second. That's huge.

I was trained as a physicist, and we are talking about high school level physics and math. Not to mention every team will be pushing the limit of what they are allowed to do when it comes to the static compression ratio.

The ICE component that would effect the compression ratio the most due to thermal expansion would be the connecting rods because they are the longest part. Connecting rods must be manufactured from iron or titanium-based alloys.

If a manufacture was willing to eat the numerous penalty of not using titanium connecting rods. the best thermal coefficient they could get would be roughly 19x10^-6 m/m°C. The titanium alloy with the lowest thermal expansion coefficient they are allowed to use is 8.4x10^-6 m/m°C. That yields a delta of 10.6x10^-6 m/m°C.

Note the rods must be between 119.5mm and 120.5mm in length when measured across the journal & pin bores. If you take the delta above, and the longest pin length of 120.5mm a manufacture would have to have the connecting rods running ~78°C hotter than their competitors to get the connecting rod to grow in length by 0.1mm (and this is using the most extreme case).

The above is incredibly unlikely for a lot of reason imo. Teams are more likely to find gains with fuels, better combustion efficiency, and keeping the inlets charge as cool as possible.

As discussed before, the size difference of a few tenth of a millimetre is enough to make the 18:1. And never underestimate the engineers to come up with something that can do 0.2.
But hopefully this is not as a big deal as they make it. Though the reaction of the teams and FIA tells a different story to me.

[wowgr8]

I'm going to read entirely too much into Ocon's comments since Ferrari and Haas' performances are usually similar in their respective performance classes, especially early into new reg cycles.

"I think there will be a midfield group close to the top ones that will be VCARB, Alpine and us [Haas]"

"Further back Audi and Cadillac"

If Haas are at the top end of midfield it would mean to me that the engine is competitive, so either RBPT and Ferrari did an outstanding job, or Mercedes were overhyped, or Mercedes are hiding performance. If the engine itself is competitive, what about the report from AR that they were having trouble with the fuel and that even Q3 in Australia would be a good result?
Would Ferrari really dupe themselves and everyone else by bringing vastly different fuel to Barcelona to fake performance? I hope not. I'm very puzzled. Haas being at the top end of midfield is a good sign assuming no large swings in engine performance.

[deadhead]

Just wait for the long runs from the second week in Bahrain if you want any sort of indications about pecking order

[MattLightBlue]

I'm going to read entirely too much into Ocon's comments since Ferrari and Haas' performances are usually similar in their respective performance classes, especially early into new reg cycles.

"I think there will be a midfield group close to the top ones that will be VCARB, Alpine and us [Haas]"

"Further back Audi and Cadillac"

If Haas are at the top end of midfield it would mean to me that the engine is competitive, so either RBPT and Ferrari did an outstanding job, or Mercedes were overhyped, or Mercedes are hiding performance. If the engine itself is competitive, what about the report from AR that they were having trouble with the fuel and that even Q3 in Australia would be a good result?
Would Ferrari really dupe themselves and everyone else by bringing vastly different fuel to Barcelona to fake performance? I hope not. I'm very puzzled. Haas being at the top end of midfield is a good sign assuming no large swings in engine performance.

It is probably both: Mercedes is doing a great job with their PU, at the same time though everyone is expecting them to dominate because of what happened in 2014. Something similar, surely to a less extent, happened in 2022 when everyone thought the zero-pod W13 was going to be a rocketship.

[sucof]

I would be surprised if even the teams could create a pecking order based on last weeks test.... Only perhaps claiming Audi and Cadillac is behind sounds believable, but to be honest, that is not a bad bet even without any measurements...

[woocasz]

Ocon confirms that the Ferrari engine reached 350 km/h on the start straight during the shakedown:

"Reaching 350 km/h at the end of the straight on one of the runs was something that had never happened before."

is this true?

[edu2703]

Ocon confirms that the Ferrari engine reached 350 km/h on the start straight during the shakedown:

"Reaching 350 km/h at the end of the straight on one of the runs was something that had never happened before."

is this true?

Sky Sports said that Mercedes reached 347 km/h, so it should be true.

[Juzh]

Magnussen did 348 kmh in 2023 so 350 should be doable.

[CHT]

Things aren't that simple, which is why technical experts are discussing the matter. We all agree that F1 is the pinnacle of automotive engineering. This would mean that engineers should be working to keep the compression ratio within an acceptable range around the specified value (16:1 ratio). And that's what at least three engine manufacturers have managed to do. For an internal combustion engine operating with a compression ratio of 18:1, engine experts are talking about a gain of almost 30 horsepower, or three-tenths of a second. That's huge.

I was trained as a physicist, and we are talking about high school level physics and math. Not to mention every team will be pushing the limit of what they are allowed to do when it comes to the static compression ratio.

The ICE component that would effect the compression ratio the most due to thermal expansion would be the connecting rods because they are the longest part. Connecting rods must be manufactured from iron or titanium-based alloys.

If a manufacture was willing to eat the numerous penalty of not using titanium connecting rods. the best thermal coefficient they could get would be roughly 19x10^-6 m/m°C. The titanium alloy with the lowest thermal expansion coefficient they are allowed to use is 8.4x10^-6 m/m°C. That yields a delta of 10.6x10^-6 m/m°C.

Note the rods must be between 119.5mm and 120.5mm in length when measured across the journal & pin bores. If you take the delta above, and the longest pin length of 120.5mm a manufacture would have to have the connecting rods running ~78°C hotter than their competitors to get the connecting rod to grow in length by 0.1mm (and this is using the most extreme case).

The above is incredibly unlikely for a lot of reason imo. Teams are more likely to find gains with fuels, better combustion efficiency, and keeping the inlets charge as cool as possible.

As discussed before, the size difference of a few tenth of a millimetre is enough to make the 18:1. And never underestimate the engineers to come up with something that can do 0.2.
But hopefully this is not as a big deal as they make it. Though the reaction of the teams and FIA tells a different story to me.

Will 17:1 ratio give any meaning advantage over 16:1? Does it have to be 18:1

[sucof]

Will 17:1 ratio give any meaning advantage over 16:1? Does it have to be 18:1

Of course. Every engine manufacturer are aware exactly how their engine changes when at temp, and probably most of them increase the compression a bit and of course they like it till it is not over some limit.