2026 Drama: Alleged engine loophole

[AR3-GP]

Alonso:

"It's not good to start behind someone who is exploiting something that shouldn't be exploited, but this is also Formula 1, so you have to understand that everything that happens is controlled by the FIA and you have to accept the final decision."

"I trust the FIA to control and monitor this, and I trust Honda and Aramco to ensure that our engine is competitive enough."

[CHT]

Watching Tombazis' interview, my feeling is that they are desperately trying to find a way to let Mercedes engine teams race without upsetting too much other teams, since of course they cannot afford to DSQ 4 teams.

If they want to do that they can do lots of things like reducing amount of fuel that flows and things like that. They wont though, its not new for the FIA.

what do you think will happen ? Clearly Mercedes can't redo its engine at this point; if the majority of teams + FIA/FOM approve the hot test, and Mercedes PU can't pass it, how will they avoid to DSQ 4 teams ? that rage burst from Toto the other day makes sense now.

Merc could be using excessive engine heat to gain the advantage on thermal expansion. So technically, they still can run the same engine, just not as hot as they intended.

[gearboxtrouble]

If they want to do that they can do lots of things like reducing amount of fuel that flows and things like that. They wont though, its not new for the FIA.

what do you think will happen ? Clearly Mercedes can't redo its engine at this point; if the majority of teams + FIA/FOM approve the hot test, and Mercedes PU can't pass it, how will they avoid to DSQ 4 teams ? that rage burst from Toto the other day makes sense now.

Merc could be using excessive engine heat to gain the advantage on thermal expansion. So technically, they still can run the same engine, just not as hot as they intended.

These engines and the fuels are incredibly complex and are optimized to hit a very narrow set of operating parameters to make the combustion as efficient as possible. Changing even one of those parameters like temperature will probably lead to a cascading effect that makes the entire power unit uncompetitive. I'd say best case they can have a new power unit that is legal ready for the 2nd half of the season along with a new fuel optimized for it. If Mercedes are indeed running an illegal engine then they need to be given an exemption from homologation to ensure they're able to change the ICE to meet the regs. In the interim they would need to be allowed to race with the illegal engine thats equalized in some way either through a lower fuel flow or an electrical deployment handicap.

[AR3-GP]

I rewatched the FIA video. I don't think the FIA is just going to sit on this. Tombazi spent a lot of time justifying the reduction to 16:1. He said it was to simplify the engines and to help newcomers be closer, who would otherwise never catch up if the compression ratio was not reduced. There is nothing in that video which suggest that the FIA would allow someone to exceed 16:1 through a loophole. This was never on.

Mercedes might have asked questions, but it's clear that they haven't done it in a direct way. The answer would have been no. You cannot exceed 16:1 when hot. So it looks like Mercedes have only sought to clarify the testing process and have fooled themselves into believing they have found a loophole. Merc might actually have to bite a bullet here.

[CHT]

what do you think will happen ? Clearly Mercedes can't redo its engine at this point; if the majority of teams + FIA/FOM approve the hot test, and Mercedes PU can't pass it, how will they avoid to DSQ 4 teams ? that rage burst from Toto the other day makes sense now.

Merc could be using excessive engine heat to gain the advantage on thermal expansion. So technically, they still can run the same engine, just not as hot as they intended.

These engines and the fuels are incredibly complex and are optimized to hit a very narrow set of operating parameters to make the combustion as efficient as possible. Changing even one of those parameters like temperature will probably lead to a cascading effect that makes the entire power unit uncompetitive. I'd say best case they can have a new power unit that is legal ready for the 2nd half of the season along with a new fuel optimized for it. If Mercedes are indeed running an illegal engine then they need to be given an exemption from homologation to ensure they're able to change the ICE to meet the regs. In the interim they would need to be allowed to race with the illegal engine thats equalized in some way either through a lower fuel flow or an electrical deployment handicap.

Hotter engine lead to increase thermal expansion and increase compression ratio, while reducing radiator cooling requirement. The effect on engine will be felt in many areas of the car including aero package as well.
https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/merc ... -for-2020/#

[gearboxtrouble]

I rewatched the FIA video. I don't think the FIA is just going to sit on this. Tombazi spent a lot of time justifying the reduction to 16:1. He said it was to simplify the engines and to help newcomers be closer, who would otherwise never catch up if the compression ratio was not reduced. There is nothing in that video which suggest that the FIA would allow someone to exceed 16:1 through a loophole. This was never on.

Mercedes might have asked questions, but it's clear that they haven't done it in a direct way. The answer would have been no. You cannot exceed 16:1 when hot. So it looks like Mercedes have only sought to clarify the testing process and have fooled themselves into believing they have found a loophole. Merc might actually have to bite a bullet here.

I agree with this take. Imho there's little to no chance that the FIA allows a CR of >16 in any phase long term. The nuance is timing. There's no practical way anyone can change the entire combustion and fuel concept before the 2027 season. There needs to be a way to let the teams running non compliant engines in 26 to avoid a farce. The bigger electrical contribution allows them the tools to negate any advantage a CR of 18 would give teams by adjusting the peak MGU-K power and storage allowance. The least bad solution would be to measure the CR hot asap and use that to adjust the electrical parameters lower to simulate the impact of a hard 16 CR cap.

[johnnycesup]

I rewatched the FIA video. I don't think the FIA is just going to sit on this. Tombazi spent a lot of time justifying the reduction to 16:1. He said it was to simplify the engines and to help newcomers be closer, who would otherwise never catch up if the compression ratio was not reduced. There is nothing in that video which suggest that the FIA would allow someone to exceed 16:1 through a loophole. This was never on.

Mercedes might have asked questions, but it's clear that they haven't done it in a direct way. The answer would have been no. You cannot exceed 16:1 when hot. So it looks like Mercedes have only sought to clarify the testing process and have fooled themselves into believing they have found a loophole. Merc might actually have to bite a bullet here.

I agree with this take. Imho there's little to no chance that the FIA allows a CR of >16 in any phase long term. The nuance is timing. There's no practical way anyone can change the entire combustion and fuel concept before the 2027 season. There needs to be a way to let the teams running non compliant engines in 26 to avoid a farce. The bigger electrical contribution allows them the tools to negate any advantage a CR of 18 would give teams by adjusting the peak MGU-K power and storage allowance. The least bad solution would be to measure the CR hot asap and use that to adjust the electrical parameters lower to simulate the impact of a hard 16 CR cap.

It would probably be a lot simpler to adjust the fuel flow to reduce the ICE power for the Merc Engine, that way you're not compensating one advantage by giving another. It shouldn't be that big of a change, maybe 2/3%

[gearboxtrouble]

I rewatched the FIA video. I don't think the FIA is just going to sit on this. Tombazi spent a lot of time justifying the reduction to 16:1. He said it was to simplify the engines and to help newcomers be closer, who would otherwise never catch up if the compression ratio was not reduced. There is nothing in that video which suggest that the FIA would allow someone to exceed 16:1 through a loophole. This was never on.

Mercedes might have asked questions, but it's clear that they haven't done it in a direct way. The answer would have been no. You cannot exceed 16:1 when hot. So it looks like Mercedes have only sought to clarify the testing process and have fooled themselves into believing they have found a loophole. Merc might actually have to bite a bullet here.

I agree with this take. Imho there's little to no chance that the FIA allows a CR of >16 in any phase long term. The nuance is timing. There's no practical way anyone can change the entire combustion and fuel concept before the 2027 season. There needs to be a way to let the teams running non compliant engines in 26 to avoid a farce. The bigger electrical contribution allows them the tools to negate any advantage a CR of 18 would give teams by adjusting the peak MGU-K power and storage allowance. The least bad solution would be to measure the CR hot asap and use that to adjust the electrical parameters lower to simulate the impact of a hard 16 CR cap.

It would probably be a lot simpler to adjust the fuel flow to reduce the ICE power for the Merc Engine, that way you're not compensating one advantage by giving another. It shouldn't be that big of a change, maybe 2/3%

Maybe but that might be more complicated than it sounds. If you lower the fuel flow cap to 97% then you offset that somewhat by having to carry less fuel in the race. It might also have a greater impact than 3% because the engine probably has an efficiency curve to maximize its efficiency at peak load which is no longer reachable. Maybe they could offer them a choice of how they equalize their engine - electrical cap or fuel flow.

[CHT]

I agree with this take. Imho there's little to no chance that the FIA allows a CR of >16 in any phase long term. The nuance is timing. There's no practical way anyone can change the entire combustion and fuel concept before the 2027 season. There needs to be a way to let the teams running non compliant engines in 26 to avoid a farce. The bigger electrical contribution allows them the tools to negate any advantage a CR of 18 would give teams by adjusting the peak MGU-K power and storage allowance. The least bad solution would be to measure the CR hot asap and use that to adjust the electrical parameters lower to simulate the impact of a hard 16 CR cap.

It would probably be a lot simpler to adjust the fuel flow to reduce the ICE power for the Merc Engine, that way you're not compensating one advantage by giving another. It shouldn't be that big of a change, maybe 2/3%

Maybe but that might be more complicated than it sounds. If you lower the fuel flow cap to 97% then you offset that somewhat by having to carry less fuel in the race. It might also have a greater impact than 3% because the engine probably has an efficiency curve to maximize its efficiency at peak load which is no longer reachable. Maybe they could offer them a choice of how they equalize their engine - electrical cap or fuel flow.

May not need to play with fuel, just need a bigger radiator to cool down the engine to reduce thermal expansion.

[johnnycesup]

Maybe but that might be more complicated than it sounds. If you lower the fuel flow cap to 97% then you offset that somewhat by having to carry less fuel in the race. It might also have a greater impact than 3% because the engine probably has an efficiency curve to maximize its efficiency at peak load which is no longer reachable. Maybe they could offer them a choice of how they equalize their engine - electrical cap or fuel flow.

If the "breakeven point" for efficiency is 3%, which would probably amount to a 2kg change in total fuel mass (which decreases during the race), you might just adjust it to 3.1% or 3.2% and boom, solved.

[Sergej]

Question from a non expert: is there a way to measure CR at hot temps (or maybe at operation conditions ?) in a reliable and robust way ? surely Mercedes won't accept any kind of penalization without extensive proof of wrongdoing; also, it will be important to find by how much they exceed 16:1 in order to elaborate a proportionate handicap.

[dialtone]

Question from a non expert: is there a way to measure CR at hot temps (or maybe at operation conditions ?) in a reliable and robust way ? surely Mercedes won't accept any kind of penalization without extensive proof of wrongdoing; also, it will be important to find by how much they exceed 16:1 in order to elaborate a proportionate handicap.

Ferrari took it without proof, so Mercedes can take it and then some.

[Sergej]

Question from a non expert: is there a way to measure CR at hot temps (or maybe at operation conditions ?) in a reliable and robust way ? surely Mercedes won't accept any kind of penalization without extensive proof of wrongdoing; also, it will be important to find by how much they exceed 16:1 in order to elaborate a proportionate handicap.

Ferrari took it without proof, so Mercedes can take it and then some.

That's a valid point, but: 1 Ferrari had zero political power at the time and swallowed a pill that maybe they could have challenged (also, it was like "take your 38% slice and shut up"), surely Toto will be more fighting; 2 at the time there was GPS data showing that Ferrari did something fishy with the engine, in this case do they have some real data (other then rumors and whistles) to indicate what Mercedes are doing and by what extent ?

[dialtone]

Question from a non expert: is there a way to measure CR at hot temps (or maybe at operation conditions ?) in a reliable and robust way ? surely Mercedes won't accept any kind of penalization without extensive proof of wrongdoing; also, it will be important to find by how much they exceed 16:1 in order to elaborate a proportionate handicap.

Ferrari took it without proof, so Mercedes can take it and then some.

That's a valid point, but: 1 Ferrari had zero political power at the time and swallowed a pill that maybe they could have challenged (also, it was like "take your 38% slice and shut up"), surely Toto will be more fighting; 2 at the time there was GPS data showing that Ferrari did something fishy with the engine, in this case do they have some real data (other then rumors and whistles) to indicate what Mercedes are doing and by what extent ?

Not exactly my point. FIA explicitly said they didn’t want a lawsuit with Ferrari because it wasn’t in the interest of the sport.

FIA is saying the exact same things now.

Do with it what you will, they gave an interview about how this isn’t a rule interpretation championship. Adrian Newey has just given an interview where he says all engines but one understood the rule to be one specific way. RedBull presumably switched sides because they’re not dumb and probably saw more likelihood of success on the new side.

They’re going to compromise and it won’t be a “run it like this for the year”.

[Sergej]

What Newey and other teams say on the basis of nothing is pretty irrelevant, it's the parts' game.

I agree that FIA doesn't seem to want to let this thing go and that interview is pretty clear in my opinion, I'm just wondering how they will handle it to avoid a lawsuit war with Toto or a complete farce (Mercedes PU teams not allowed to race).