2026 Pre-Season Testing

[Jambier]

.
The teams are using synthetic fuel from the start of the Australian GP.

What would be the benefit not to use synthetic fuel since the start of testing ?

I'm of the opinion everyone (or at least most of the teams) used real 2026 fuel as it makes sense to do in testing, especially behind closed doors. All the rumors about the fuel seem to be just speculation because FIA allowed the teams options to not use 2026 fuels.

But, to steelman this argument, if the team is unsure of reliability of their engine and are worried it will cause their car to break down, by using non 2026 fuels they can check off everything else. For example they can check aero, integration, gearbox, test how these cars drive with the electrical energy, etc. You could theoretically leave the fuel check for a second or third test, especially if you are behind schedule.

I'm wondering what result would be to run "old" fuel rather than the synthetic one, I mean, those engines are build around the synthetic one, so using old one would cause more risk/ damage I suppose.

I think it was just a rumor.

[FittingMechanics]

I'm wondering what result would be to run "old" fuel rather than the synthetic one, I mean, those engines are build around the synthetic one, so using old one would cause more risk/ damage I suppose.

I think it was just a rumor.

From my basic understanding, problem with the new fuels is that they don't burn as clean or uniformly as previous gen fuels. So your engine needs to be able to tolerate more. I'm sure they could deliver them a better fossil based fuel that would cause less reliability concerns for the engine. Probably why the exemption was given for the test.

But I really doubt many teams are using this exemption. This is a key area of the 2026 regulations and just using "illegal" fuels during tests will only cause you issues when the season starts.

[nitrotech]

I am curious to see if FIA nerfed McLaren for their trick tyre cooling last year. They lost chunks of performance relative to Red Bull in the second half. From having close to a second advantage on race pace, to going a couple tenths deficit. If they did, then they aren't coming with any advantage to Melbourne. I would be interested in their long run sims.

There is a lot of talk from drivers about easing into the corner (LICO) to recharge batteries and not going overtly aggressive on exits, to avoid tyre degradation as the tyres are smaller this year, but engine is capable of delivering more power than last year on exits. Also, drivers saying, the cars are easier to drive and possibilities of different ride height setups, without having to conform to riding the car as low as possible like in GE era. Lot to look for in the testing.

[Emag]

I am curious to see if FIA nerfed McLaren for their trick tyre cooling last year. They lost chunks of performance relative to Red Bull in the second half. From having close to a second advantage on race pace, to going a couple tenths deficit. If they did, then they aren't coming with any advantage to Melbourne. I would be interested in their long run sims.

There is a lot of talk from drivers about easing into the corner (LICO) to recharge batteries and not going overtly aggressive on exits, to avoid tyre degradation as the tyres are smaller this year, but engine is capable of delivering more power than last year on exits. Also, drivers saying, the cars are easier to drive and possibilities of different ride height setups, without having to conform to riding the car as low as possible like in GE era. Lot to look for in the testing.

There's some "refined" wording on tire/brake cooling for this year, but nothing about last year as far as I remember.
In general McLaren didn't really lose performance though, they just stagnated while RedBull continued improving. The other 2 rivals who also stopped developing their cars like McLaren remained a similar distance away from them.

Also if you want to believe McLaren, I think Andrea Stella has mentioned that there's some things about last year's car that they can take into this year, in spite of the reg change. So make of that what you will.

[woocasz]

we will have two more weeks of testing in Bahrain. 11-13 and 18-20 Feb. niicee

[bananapeel23]

Based on what precedent? The difference between pole and testing last time we were in Barcelona in 2022 and 2020 was negligible. The cold track helps if anything. Pole this year is going to be in the 1:15 range would be my guess.

They wont be 4s a lap slower. Track temps do matter when it is cool right now and the c3 will probably be the medium or even hard come race weekend. That plus the natural steep learning curve these teams will be on by then would suggest a decently faster ceiling around here by race weekend.

All those arguments could apply to 2022 as well. C3 is traditionally the soft in Spain.

You could argue that the tyre cooling on straights due to the lack of downforce will force them to run a softer tyre range at Catalunya in 2026. I could see C4 being the soft.

[FrukostScones]

Interesting how every driver talks about how incredibly different the cars are. Not surprising, but really emphasizes adaptability this year. Which drivers will be able to completely adapt their style to the cars strengths? The better the adaptation skills, the better the lap times will be. Sensitivity to torque and feeling the rear tires on the road will be a premium blend. /4oMTMngrsh0?si=7cYquMRSkixo6LaQ

yeah, the acceleration phase this cars must be really difficult...

well the MGU-K has a big 'driver aid' effect
it cannot be otherwise

I thought of this (now explained? in the article you might have read):

That’s why engineers will try to create recovery opportunities elsewhere, within tight regulatory limits. One method is partial-throttle harvesting: when the driver goes back to throttle in a corner but is still far from demanding full power, the V6 isn’t at 100% either. If the MGU-K harvests only the excess crankshaft power above the driver’s requested wheel torque—without reducing what the driver asked for—then it can be legal. In practice this is micro-harvesting at the start of exits, typically only 40–80 kJ depending on corner type and grip, because once you need ERS propulsion, the MGU-K can no longer operate as a generator. The upper limit for partial-throttle harvesting will be around 100–120 km/h, so not all corners are suitable for it.

https://wgmotorsport.hu/cikk/total-reset


Maybe you could tell me what you think of this and what exactly this means "If the MGU-K harvests only the excess crankshaft power above the driver’s requested wheel torque—without reducing what the driver asked for—then it can be legal." and if it is correct and what might be the consequences/challenges fro the driver. Honest question.

[basti313]

yeah, the acceleration phase this cars must be really difficult...

well the MGU-K has a big 'driver aid' effect
it cannot be otherwise

I thought of this (now explained? in the article you might have read):

That’s why engineers will try to create recovery opportunities elsewhere, within tight regulatory limits. One method is partial-throttle harvesting: when the driver goes back to throttle in a corner but is still far from demanding full power, the V6 isn’t at 100% either. If the MGU-K harvests only the excess crankshaft power above the driver’s requested wheel torque—without reducing what the driver asked for—then it can be legal. In practice this is micro-harvesting at the start of exits, typically only 40–80 kJ depending on corner type and grip, because once you need ERS propulsion, the MGU-K can no longer operate as a generator. The upper limit for partial-throttle harvesting will be around 100–120 km/h, so not all corners are suitable for it.

https://wgmotorsport.hu/cikk/total-reset


Maybe you could tell me what you think of this and what exactly this means "If the MGU-K harvests only the excess crankshaft power above the driver’s requested wheel torque—without reducing what the driver asked for—then it can be legal." and if it is correct and what might be the consequences/challenges fro the driver. Honest question.

The big and not yet answered question is if they can trade fuel for electrical energy, if this gives any advantage. In the past you started the race rather short on fuel to avoid the weight penalty by adding more fuel.

In the end this is just a mapping thing...ICE stays on more power than the driver request, MGU-K generates and the sum is the driver request.
I think we will rather see strong regen in LiCo before the corner than usage in corners in the race. This sounds more like an option to get more power in Q.

[Jambier]

Regarding qualy laps, Ocon just said that.... Batteries can't even hold for one lap.
Not enough.

So they will lift and coast during qualy lap
Absolutely ridiculous.

That was expected with the stupid 50/50 split in power (which is useless since they use carbon neutral fuel), but this really hurt.

Managing in race make sense, in qualy it is just stupid

[FittingMechanics]

You can use 8.5 MJ of energy per lap but you can store only 4 MJ.

Some of the energy will be retrieved through normal braking.

Not sure Lico will be needed on qualy laps.

[fourmula1]

You can use 8.5 MJ of energy per lap but you can store only 4 MJ.

Some of the energy will be retrieved through normal braking.

Not sure Lico will be needed on qualy laps.

Ah this is super informative. Is there a skill/tech gap to recovering that much energy on a lap? Or can all teams do it fairly equally/efficiently? If it is difficult to do and one team is able to do it at no lap time cost while other teams are losing loads of time this is going to make for some serious field spread over the race.

[BorisTheBlade]

This will IMHO be one of the biggest topics and performance differentiators in the beginning.
Also, there might be a very different pecking order for qualy pace compared to race pace.
If done right, energy storage SoC differences between directly competing cars could lead to lots of interesting situations.
Hopefully, FOM can transport this to TV well through some nice visuals.

[FittingMechanics]

You can use 8.5 MJ of energy per lap but you can store only 4 MJ.

Some of the energy will be retrieved through normal braking.

Not sure Lico will be needed on qualy laps.

Ah this is super informative. Is there a skill/tech gap to recovering that much energy on a lap? Or can all teams do it fairly equally/efficiently? If it is difficult to do and one team is able to do it at no lap time cost while other teams are losing loads of time this is going to make for some serious field spread over the race.

On some tracks (Baku for example) you have big braking zones so you can recover that amount.

On others you may need to work for it, probably by lift and coast or full throttle harvesting (clipping) at end of straights.

It is a big unknown for us fans at the moment.

[djos]

Regarding qualy laps, Ocon just said that.... Batteries can't even hold for one lap.
Not enough.

So they will lift and coast during qualy lap
Absolutely ridiculous.

That was expected with the stupid 50/50 split in power (which is useless since they use carbon neutral fuel), but this really hurt.

Managing in race make sense, in qualy it is just stupid

Yep, and they made it even worse by limiting the compression ratio, instead of leaving it the F alone!

Apparently that was an Audi demand.

[AR3-GP]

7 days away from Bahrain day 1. Cars will have to be shipped in the next 2-3 days I think?