2026 Drama: Alleged engine loophole

[Matt2725]

I dont think this is the case. Toto went out quite angrily 2 days ago commenting “fix your damn car” and there were reports yesterday of Merc boss saying he would take it to court. If Merc has the trick, its season over and other manufacturers will not let it slide and get embarrassed by someone loopholing their way into dominance if they feel its not by the rule.

I bet if it is that severe, there will be a TD quickly. I do not see any other levers FIA would have and it was clearly stated, that they will not allow a 2014 situation.

I don't understand that stance really. Sure it's not desirable commercially to have one team run away with it, but that is largely down to other teams not crapping the bed on development. They had no issue with Red Bull running away with it for much of 2022, all of 2023 and part of 2024. To have an issue with it now, would be asinine and against the idea of competition.

[venkyhere]

For fun sake, let's assume that on evidence of Toto & Merc chairman, both huffing & puffing, the trick/defeat-device 'secret chamber' (that behaves open only for FIA test and will behave shut during engine operation) indeed exists. Two questions arise :
1) did the CAD files submitted to FIA for homologation /rules-compatibility-test , have it ?
2) do the engines supplied to customer teams have the defeat-device secret chamber ?
There are more and more questions, and no answers.

[gearboxtrouble]

For fun sake, let's assume that on evidence of Toto & Merc chairman, both huffing & puffing, the trick/defeat-device 'secret chamber' (that behaves open only for FIA test and will behave shut during engine operation) indeed exists. Two questions arise :
1) did the CAD files submitted to FIA for homologation /rules-compatibility-test , have it ?
2) do the engines supplied to customer teams have the defeat-device secret chamber ?
There are more and more questions, and no answers.

1) It would be impossible to differentiate between (hypothetically) what looks like some higher manufacturing tolerances around the spark plugs and a deliberate attempt to create a thermally isolatable chamber because the exact material spec and thermal properties would be unknowable. You'd need someone on the inside who knows exactly whats going on to figure it out.
2) Yes - any differentiation is strictly prohibited under the rules. This would not fly.

[AR3-GP]

For fun sake, let's assume that on evidence of Toto & Merc chairman, both huffing & puffing, the trick/defeat-device 'secret chamber' (that behaves open only for FIA test and will behave shut during engine operation) indeed exists. Two questions arise :
1) did the CAD files submitted to FIA for homologation /rules-compatibility-test , have it ?
2) do the engines supplied to customer teams have the defeat-device secret chamber ?
There are more and more questions, and no answers.

Red Bull has been recruiting from Mercedes-HPP on a rolling basis since 2022. The last defector switched to RBPT in January. There is nil chance that Mercedes has a "2nd combustion chamber". It would be a bigger scandal considering the insider knowledge that RBPT has acquired.

[AR3-GP]

I dont think this is the case. Toto went out quite angrily 2 days ago commenting “fix your damn car” and there were reports yesterday of Merc boss saying he would take it to court. If Merc has the trick, its season over and other manufacturers will not let it slide and get embarrassed by someone loopholing their way into dominance if they feel its not by the rule.

I bet if it is that severe, there will be a TD quickly. I do not see any other levers FIA would have and it was clearly stated, that they will not allow a 2014 situation.

I don't understand that stance really. Sure it's not desirable commercially to have one team run away with it, but that is largely down to other teams not crapping the bed on development. They had no issue with Red Bull running away with it for much of 2022, all of 2023 and part of 2024. To have an issue with it now, would be asinine and against the idea of competition.

The conclusion of the Barcelona test is that we don't have a 2014 situation. Therefore, I see no reason to saber rattle over rumors. That applies to everyone.

About 20 days ago, the RBPT boss said the rumors were nonsense and rival teams are simply paranoid because they fear being beaten. That's probably all this is, just like the asymmetric braking, watergate, and bibgate. He should know as he has employed over 150 engineers from Mercedes-Benz HPP with the latest recruit having joined last month. Is it possible to increase compression ratio through thermal expansion? Yes. Is Mercedes reaching 18:1? Unlikely based on what we know from credible sources who should know (RBPT). Ludicrous ideas like second combustion chambers are also out of the question. RBPT would know about it, and it would be a much bigger scandal.

The Italian media know nothing. They are just Ferrari cheerleaders and their behavior is that of spoiled children who will do anything to smear the competition for reasons...This is a fishing expedition being propagated by paranoid F1 teams and their cult of journalist.

The FIA may go on to clarify the testing procedures just like they did with the assymmetric braking, tire water, and other ideas so that the current paranoid teams don't actually go through with this ahead of next year.

[gearboxtrouble]

For fun sake, let's assume that on evidence of Toto & Merc chairman, both huffing & puffing, the trick/defeat-device 'secret chamber' (that behaves open only for FIA test and will behave shut during engine operation) indeed exists. Two questions arise :
1) did the CAD files submitted to FIA for homologation /rules-compatibility-test , have it ?
2) do the engines supplied to customer teams have the defeat-device secret chamber ?
There are more and more questions, and no answers.

Red Bull has been recruiting from Mercedes-HPP on a rolling basis since 2022. Their last hire switched to RBPT last month. There is nil chance that Mercedes has a "2nd combustion chamber". It would be a bigger scandal considering the insider knowledge that RBPT has acquired.

Not really. They could have well attempted to do the same thing and decided it was too risky and only then switched sides while still maximizing the thermal expansion route to ensure they still had a defensible advantage. They could have even deliberately let it get this close to the season before making it more widely known to disrupt Mercedes even more than if they had enough time to build a legal engine pre season.

[AR3-GP]

For fun sake, let's assume that on evidence of Toto & Merc chairman, both huffing & puffing, the trick/defeat-device 'secret chamber' (that behaves open only for FIA test and will behave shut during engine operation) indeed exists. Two questions arise :
1) did the CAD files submitted to FIA for homologation /rules-compatibility-test , have it ?
2) do the engines supplied to customer teams have the defeat-device secret chamber ?
There are more and more questions, and no answers.

Red Bull has been recruiting from Mercedes-HPP on a rolling basis since 2022. Their last hire switched to RBPT last month. There is nil chance that Mercedes has a "2nd combustion chamber". It would be a bigger scandal considering the insider knowledge that RBPT has acquired.

Not really. They could have well attempted to do the same thing and decided it was too risky and only then switched sides while still maximizing the thermal expansion route to ensure they still had a defensible advantage. They could have even deliberately let it get this close to the season before making it more widely known to disrupt Mercedes even more than if they had enough time to build a legal engine pre season.

If a team has a 2nd combustion chamber designed to circumvent the geometric compression ratio test, that would be flagrant cheating. Unlikely that Mercedes would risk themselves and 3 customer teams for something like this and they would know that it is impossible to keep it under wraps given the people transfers.

[bluechris]

I dont think this is the case. Toto went out quite angrily 2 days ago commenting “fix your damn car” and there were reports yesterday of Merc boss saying he would take it to court. If Merc has the trick, its season over and other manufacturers will not let it slide and get embarrassed by someone loopholing their way into dominance if they feel its not by the rule.

I bet if it is that severe, there will be a TD quickly. I do not see any other levers FIA would have and it was clearly stated, that they will not allow a 2014 situation.

I don't understand that stance really. Sure it's not desirable commercially to have one team run away with it, but that is largely down to other teams not crapping the bed on development. They had no issue with Red Bull running away with it for much of 2022, all of 2023 and part of 2024. To have an issue with it now, would be asinine and against the idea of competition.

Oh new word "Development", i thought "innovation" was the correct wording for anything MB does and always passes the current year that is implemented and it's banned from the next year

[bonjon1979]

I think it's a big risk for any manufacturer to ignore the first sentence of this rule and try to game the rules.

No cylinder of the engine may have a geometric compression ratio higher than 16.0. The procedure to measure this value will be detailed by each PU Manufacturer according to the Guidance Document FIA-F1-DOC-C042 and executed at ambient temperature. This procedure must be approved by the FIA Technical Department and included in the PU Manufacturer homologation dossier.

The final line is important as well. The FIA has to be happy with how the manufacturer plans to prove they comply as part of the homologation process. If they feel that the team have deliberately tried to get around the rule by cleverly engineering parts to comply with the testing but not the rule then I can see them saying sorry but no. I'm not even talking about the spirit of the rules here - the first line of that rule is clear. If it's clearly provable that they are exceeding 16.0 as set out by the rule then they are in breach.

[kptaylor]

I thought motors wouldn't be homologated until 1 March. So I doubt the FIA has designs/CAD files of the final versions of any of the constructors' motors.

[gearboxtrouble]

I think it's a big risk for any manufacturer to ignore the first sentence of this rule and try to game the rules.

No cylinder of the engine may have a geometric compression ratio higher than 16.0. The procedure to measure this value will be detailed by each PU Manufacturer according to the Guidance Document FIA-F1-DOC-C042 and executed at ambient temperature. This procedure must be approved by the FIA Technical Department and included in the PU Manufacturer homologation dossier.

The final line is important as well. The FIA has to be happy with how the manufacturer plans to prove they comply as part of the homologation process. If they feel that the team have deliberately tried to get around the rule by cleverly engineering parts to comply with the testing but not the rule then I can see them saying sorry but no. I'm not even talking about the spirit of the rules here - the first line of that rule is clear. If it's clearly provable that they are exceeding 16.0 as set out by the rule then they are in breach.

Indeed which is why I still don't fully believe they went the whole hog on an extra chamber. They can't possibly be that stupid. That said I think there's no smoke without a fire and my theory is that Mercedes are doing something beyond just thermal expansion to increase the CR in an idiosyncratic way. Maybe it is not an extra chamber but some different materials around the spark plugs that allow them to pass the test at ambient but close a small volume at higher temps. Either way any device that exists solely for the purpose of passing the FIA's tests is illegal and should be banned.

[bonjon1979]

I thought motors wouldn't be homologated until 1 March. So I doubt the FIA has designs/CAD files of the final versions of any of the constructors' motors.

Yeh, quite. So it might be that they were never going to accept the engine in its current state or they might be completely happy with it come March 1st. But if they have deliberately tried to work around the rule, and are found out then I guess that's just what you risk in going for that extra margin. Hero or zero.

[Y-250.A]

but a few days ago before barcelona shakedown or during I can't remember , reports said that the FIA approved Mercedes Engine and its complied with the rules ; so what changed since then ? also who said they have such trick ? I mean no official release nor statement from FIA , all this choas based only on speculations and protests , what if mercedes also couldn't make the trick work as it didn't even pass the theoretical phase ; few days ago also TOTO said the engine is within the rules and they were working with the FIA with each step and got the green light for the next step , also the statements refered to Mercedes CEO are not true , a proved to be false

[dialtone]

but a few days ago before barcelona shakedown or during I can't remember , reports said that the FIA approved Mercedes Engine and its complied with the rules ; so what changed since then ? also who said they have such trick ? I mean no official release nor statement from FIA , all this choas based only on speculations and protests , what if mercedes also couldn't make the trick work as it didn't even pass the theoretical phase ; few days ago also TOTO said the engine is within the rules and they were working with the FIA with each step and got the green light for the next step , also the statements refered to Mercedes CEO are not true , a proved to be false

Those reports are from toto and that’s not how it works.

Teams don’t really reveal these tricks to the FIA, they may not even show CAD drawings sometimes for these situations, they ask questions around legality of aspects of what they want to do, on top of it the timing matters of course. Saying “we’ve worked with them all the time and they said it’s legal” can easily mean: “2 weeks ago we asked them if 16:1 is to be respected just at ambient and they said yes”. Then FIA updated the rules and everyone else was disappointed as the rule is very black and white at the moment, the interpretation issue comes from past norms that nobody ever challenged and the FIA being competence challenged on its own.

If you ever worked in a regulated competitive environment you probably did something like this with your lawyers or the regulator lawyers. Your questions imply what you are trying to do but don’t necessarily reveal it in full.

[nico5]

Saying “we’ve worked with them all the time and they said it’s legal” can easily mean: “2 weeks ago we asked them if 16:1 is to be respected just at ambient and they said yes”. Then FIA updated the rules and everyone else was disappointed as the rule is very black and white at the moment

To me this is the crucial issue. The fact the FIA rushed to update the technical regs after Merc asked them about it kinda makes them look complicit. There is no need to add such a detail in the regs. It's very common for this kind of measurements procedures to be detailed in appendices or technical directives, which, unlike the regulations:

1) can be enforced unilaterally and with immediate effect by the FIA
2) do not require unanimity among manufacturers to be changed

The very fact they've acted this way on wing bending, fuel flow issues, etc. and took precautions in order not to be able to the same here smells extremely fishy to me.