2026 Drama: Alleged engine loophole

[FittingMechanics]

I'm not so convinced. When teams had super flexible wings, others also had flexible wings but to a lesser degree. It didn't stop them in asking for rigidity tests. They understand that if their wing flexes less then they will be less affected by change in the test.

It's possible everyone is above 16.0 at working temperatures but that "fix" for others is much simpler than for Mercedes. Or that the performance penalty of going back to 16.0 for someone at 16.2 vs someone at 17.5 is much smaller.

It's not a front wing. It's an engine. Either way, you can assume that the rival teams are prepared to pass a new test because otherwise they wouldn't be demanding changes to the test ahead of Melbourne.

Remember your original thesis:

I would be surprised if other engines are not exceeding 16.0 when hot so I think Mercedes is in a strong position to demand equal testing and then all engines are illegal.

Do you think the rival manufacturers will show up with illegal engines?

I think they are putting pressure on FIA/FOM to outlaw this and force Mercedes to reduce their CR in the working engine. They would be putting pressure even if they were running at 16.2 at working temperature. It just makes sense for them to push for this because they know Mercedes will need more time to make the changes and any tests if they are approved are easier to pass for them.

This is why I am confident no one will be disqualified over this in Australia.

I'm well aware that the lead times for engines are longer than for front wings, but the nature of complaints is comparable. When wings were flexing, teams will less flexible wings surely didn't have their wings pass new stricter load tests but they still complained, knowing that the performance penalty to their competitor will be bigger and that everyone will have time to adapt.

[CHT]

the loophole here is temperature. If merc can run engine hotter than others they will gain on thermal expansion. So at what operating temperature is FIA going to measure?

[XRayF1]

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).

Toto will sue them for what? If the engine is IN the specs then all this is a nothing burger so no one in MB has anything to afraid off. The rule is clear but the testing procedure seems it will change like many times before in-season and all changed their cars without a word.

The issue to my mind looks like the following.
Toto Wolf said repeatedly that the FIA was involved in how Mercedes intends and has built their ICE.
And that FIA did not complain or advise differently on to how Merc interpreted the rules.

Food for thought - FIS World Council ratified the 2026 engine rules in ~Summer 2022, with FIA providing a specific rule set for the engine manufacturers at the end of 2024.
This says to me that official questions to FIA in how to interpret the rules may have been put forward for the last ~3.5 years. And these FIA answers had to be a big factor for any team on how to actually build their car ... and the engine.
In principle this is what everybody does - in order to avoid a lengthy and costly (re-)development cycle.

IF all this is reasonably true, then, in my opinion, MGP/Toto may have a very good argument - and FIA at the same time is threading on delicate ground. Because any responses given by FIA back then must be consistent with today's interpretation, otherwise the teams would not need FIA at all.
Bottom line - what good would any FIA answer be, if such will swing the other way dependent on who is asking the question and the time of the year?

I believe this being the core element of TW's 'I will sue FIA' statement ...

[basti313]

There are significant issues with doing a hot test.

Yes. I think there is nothing behind this idea of a hot test. Something made up by media. It is simply impossible to test it when running the engine without adding sensors to all engines. Defining such a standard sensor and adding these is crazy for no benefit.

Unless there is a simple thermal valve that opens/closes according to temperature (or pressure) as it is the interaction of the various thermal expansions/contractions at operating speed....

Yep. My bet it they will have to ban exactly any geometric tricks with valves or small orifices that allows any volumes that not take part in the combustion to be counted in compression ratio measurements.
Sounds not too difficult to me.

By the way: A valve is highly likely not needed. A simple orifice with 0.25-0.35mm prevents flame front entry and strong pressure wave coupling. So anything behind a for example 0.3mm orifice is a dead volume but counts in the CR measurements. And this is even temperature independent.

I don’t agree that limiting fuel will solve it or be a way of running in the season. Lower fuel flow will just mean they can run/start with less fuel. Meaning it’s lighter.
The engine could’ve more thermally efficient at higher CRs, meaning they were at an advantage of fuel weight to start with, not taking into account the more power that comes with it.

Absolutely. I posted the equation, the win here is the thermal efficiency. If they use this on the aero side they win. You always win with aero in F1.
I do not see a smart mitigation on this...you simply can not mitigate the benefits on fuel economy and heat generation by adjusting any parameter. Would need some bad BOP with weight...

If something is illegal/outside of regulations, then shouldn’t be allowed to race.
Sure there could be more teams protest against the merc powered teams.
Imagine if 8 teams refused to race against an illegal PU.

Well, this is the issue. Unfortunately Toto is correct: “The power unit is legal. The power unit corresponds to how the regulations are written. The power unit corresponds to how the checks are being done.”
This is the truth that too many here try to somehow not see. The CR is measured at ambient. Period. How much it is when the engine is running does not play any role in the current rules.

The only way to mitigate is running a TD forbidding the trick...which involves a lot of issues like the homologation.

Thinking about this homologation:
- If they disallow the trick, they need to lift homologation either in summer (too early? Engines for summer already in production?) or next year.
- If they lift the homologation everyone needs to keep developing. As they need to lift it for everyone.
- This needs to be somehow integrated in the expenses which are budget capped.

This is really not an easy issue...

[venkyhere]

Let's say this too goes the typical 'rules farce' route, where FIA will bend backwards in the face of 'money pressure' from Liberty and Toto Wolff stamps his 'political clout' seal. Even then something interesting can happen :
If the "illegal" (namesake placeholder) engine was used only by his team, they could possibly 'sandbag' and win by small margins ; however, there are three other teams on it, so the game will quickly change into one-upmanship over each other, which in turn, will lead to an arms-race where they can't let go of performance, where the merc engined teams are the "lead-pack" in every race. This will lead to a PR perception of 'establishment of clear PU advantage via cheating' ,irrespective of any technical understanding, no matter how much the 'typical F1 media' (Sky/F1/Espn/Race and other websites who will be given strict instructions to not portray Mercedes in bad light) tries. General public consumes news via social media (from unknown sources) more than mainstream.

2026 is going to be interesting not just engineering wise, but politics wise as well.

[Sergej]

Let's say this too goes the typical 'rules farce' route, where FIA will bend backwards in the face of 'money pressure' from Liberty and Toto Wolff stamps his 'political clout' seal. Even then something interesting can happen :
If the "illegal" (namesake placeholder) engine was used only by his team, they could possibly 'sandbag' and win by small margins ; however, there are three other teams on it, so the game will quickly change into one-upmanship over each other, which in turn, will lead to an arms-race where they can't let go of performance, where the merc engined teams are the "lead-pack" in every race. This will lead to a PR perception of 'establishment of clear PU advantage via cheating' ,irrespective of any technical understanding, no matter how much the 'typical F1 media' (Sky/F1/Espn/Race and other websites who will be given strict instructions to not portray Mercedes in bad light) tries. General public consumes news via social media (from unknown sources) more than mainstream.

2026 is going to be interesting not just engineering wise, but politics wise as well.

that depends on how worth is this trick, maybe Williams and Alpine have a dogsh*t and they will fall behind no matter of the trick.

[FW17]

Let's say this too goes the typical 'rules farce' route, where FIA will bend backwards in the face of 'money pressure' from Liberty and Toto Wolff stamps his 'political clout' seal. Even then something interesting can happen :
If the "illegal" (namesake placeholder) engine was used only by his team, they could possibly 'sandbag' and win by small margins ; however, there are three other teams on it, so the game will quickly change into one-upmanship over each other, which in turn, will lead to an arms-race where they can't let go of performance, where the merc engined teams are the "lead-pack" in every race. This will lead to a PR perception of 'establishment of clear PU advantage via cheating' ,irrespective of any technical understanding, no matter how much the 'typical F1 media' (Sky/F1/Espn/Race and other websites who will be given strict instructions to not portray Mercedes in bad light) tries. General public consumes news via social media (from unknown sources) more than mainstream.

2026 is going to be interesting not just engineering wise, but politics wise as well.

You make it sound as if all the 4 Mercedes powered teams are going to get the engines with the loophole. No one knows what the loop hole is and where it is, so why would all 4 teams get the same engine?

This loophole advantage is partly for the works to not be embarrassed by its customers again.

[FittingMechanics]

Engines have to be identical.

[FW17]

Engines have to be identical.

How is it ensured?

Are metallurgical tests are being carried on to ensure all have the same alloy composition?
On whose request are these tests going to be done? FIA or teams?
Small differences in internal structures of block and head, Who comes to know about it?

Engines are wholly assembled and sealed by the engine manufacturer so v1 and v10 look the same but completely different, there is no way of policing it.

[Badger]

Engines have to be identical.

How is it ensured?

Are metallurgical tests are being carried on to ensure all have the same alloy composition?
On whose request are these tests going to be done? FIA or teams?
Small differences in internal structures of block and head, Who comes to know about it?

Engines are wholly assembled and sealed by the engine manufacturer so v1 and v10 look the same but completely different, there is no way of policing it.

Yet one look at a piece of telemetry would reveal this power advantage. Think a bit before vomiting out this conspiratorial nonsense.

[FW17]

Engines have to be identical.

How is it ensured?

Are metallurgical tests are being carried on to ensure all have the same alloy composition?
On whose request are these tests going to be done? FIA or teams?
Small differences in internal structures of block and head, Who comes to know about it?

Engines are wholly assembled and sealed by the engine manufacturer so v1 and v10 look the same but completely different, there is no way of policing it.

Yet one look at a piece of telemetry would reveal this power advantage. Think a bit before vomiting out this conspiratorial nonsense.

Different fuels

[basti313]

....
If the "illegal" (namesake placeholder) engine was used only by his team,...

....
This loophole advantage is partly for the works to not be embarrassed by its customers again.

You guys should have a faint look at the rules...

[Badger]

How is it ensured?

Are metallurgical tests are being carried on to ensure all have the same alloy composition?
On whose request are these tests going to be done? FIA or teams?
Small differences in internal structures of block and head, Who comes to know about it?

Engines are wholly assembled and sealed by the engine manufacturer so v1 and v10 look the same but completely different, there is no way of policing it.

Yet one look at a piece of telemetry would reveal this power advantage. Think a bit before vomiting out this conspiratorial nonsense.

Different fuels

They all use Petronas fuel.

[Nickel]

How is it ensured?

Are metallurgical tests are being carried on to ensure all have the same alloy composition?
On whose request are these tests going to be done? FIA or teams?
Small differences in internal structures of block and head, Who comes to know about it?

Engines are wholly assembled and sealed by the engine manufacturer so v1 and v10 look the same but completely different, there is no way of policing it.

Yet one look at a piece of telemetry would reveal this power advantage. Think a bit before vomiting out this conspiratorial nonsense.

Different fuels

I was under the impression that the fuels were specific to the engine manufacturer? So for example mclaren would also be using Petronas fuel?

[FNTC]

https://www.gpblog.com/en/news/the-bran ... s-for-2026
Mercedes, McLaren, Williams, Alpine all use Petronas. So will be 8 identical engines with same fuel.