A place to discuss the characteristics of the cars in Formula One, both current as well as historical. Laptimes, driver worshipping and team chatter do not belong here.
I did read it, the comment is saying to raise the 9MJ limit to 10MJ, you don't need a 10MJ battery to do that, at worst a 5MJ maintains the same ratio.
Just increase allowed charge to 10 MJ or so. We'd get full out quali runs with 0 recharging.
He is saying to increase the ES to 10 MJ, not the harvest limit. The only way to drive a quali lap "full out" without recharging is to have the energy onboard to begin with. Upping the harvest limit would not help one bit.
Right, I think OP just meant it as "people will not lift on purpose to just recharge if you allow them to regen 10MJ, e.g. from burning fuel, and they can use 10MJ in the lap".
People will not lift for recharging if you allow them more recharging?
If they can't get 8,5 MJ without lifting they sure as heck won't get 10 MJ. You are twisting yourself into a pretzel and I don't know why.
Maybe you should read the comment I was replying to.
I did read it, the comment is saying to raise the 9MJ limit to 10MJ, you don't need a 10MJ battery to do that, at worst a 5MJ maintains the same ratio.
Just increase allowed charge to 10 MJ or so. We'd get full out quali runs with 0 recharging.
He is saying to increase the ES to 10 MJ, not the harvest limit. The only way to drive a quali lap "full out" without recharging is to have the energy onboard to begin with. Upping the harvest limit would not help one bit.
Yes, increase ES to 10MJ. You get faster quali laps with no recharging, pure pace. Batteries are probably already much larger than 4MJ, they are more efficient if you use only the "middle". I bet the change to a bigger battery is feasible. It would also remove a big complaint of lift and coast in qualy.
In race you'd still need to recharge but maybe allow off throttle recharge by running the engine, my understanding is that this is currently not allowed.
Reducing available energy per lap is not a realistic solution as it would reduce laptime.
So we now have two of the most notorious drivers in the sport, Lewis Hamilton and Max Verstappen, openly criticizing the current regulations, in quite strong terms.
From the reports I have been reading, I fully agree with them, it seems you might benefit more from being an accountant of sorts, rather than a talented driver, because of the extreme management that is needed to maximize the energy available on each lap.
So, how could we fix this (especially in the short term)? An easy solution might be to reduce the battery on the overall power of the cars, or even eliminate it altogether, now that we are using sustainable fuels, but I can't see that being done in a short timeframe.
Realistically the goal should be to have slow enough deployment to not get clipping on normal laps, but to become vulnerable if you overuse overtake mode. I think this could be achieved with sharper deployment dropoff at high speed, perhaps beginning even at 150-200 km/h and increased energy flow to compensate. I suggest roughly 3600 MJ/hr (20% more than currently, about 20% less than 2014-2025). The sharper deployment dropoff means you don't clip as heavily on the straights, while the increase in energy flow keeps the top speed up. Overtake mode might need minor tweaks to prevent 1100hp monsters going 400kph with overtake and DRS, but that should be relatively simple.
The result is that the electrical energy is primarily used for acceleration out of corners and overtaking, while the ICE provides the majority of the grunt at high speed. This allows them to keep the nominal electrical output at 350kW, even if it's only at low speed. The FIA could probably still claim 45/55 if they wanted to, despite it being as untrue as 50/50 is today. Overall the cars might end up a little faster over a lap than they are now, but still slower than last year.
This would likely require a quick decision from the FIA and only come into effect for 2027, but it would largely resolve the issues with these engines. If they do this I also hope that they do something to make the cars a bit more interesting mid-corner as well. They look like sports cars in turn 1 and 4.
Another alternative to improve the racing is to simply cap deployment at something like 250kW, while still allowing harvesting at 350kW. Then you once again increase energy flow to compensate, potentially also making small tweaks to make the ICE more thermally efficient. When you can't deploy as much, you can deploy for longer, which will reduce the complexity of deployment and harvesting algorithms, which should reduce clipping.
Nice suggestions, it would be a step in the right direction, imo.
I did read it, the comment is saying to raise the 9MJ limit to 10MJ, you don't need a 10MJ battery to do that, at worst a 5MJ maintains the same ratio.
Just increase allowed charge to 10 MJ or so. We'd get full out quali runs with 0 recharging.
He is saying to increase the ES to 10 MJ, not the harvest limit. The only way to drive a quali lap "full out" without recharging is to have the energy onboard to begin with. Upping the harvest limit would not help one bit.
Yes, increase ES to 10MJ. You get faster quali laps with no recharging, pure pace. Batteries are probably already much larger than 4MJ, they are more efficient if you use only the "middle". I bet the change to a bigger battery is feasible. It would also remove a big complaint of lift and coast in qualy.
In race you'd still need to recharge but maybe allow off throttle recharge by running the engine, my understanding is that this is currently not allowed.
Reducing available energy per lap is not a realistic solution as it would reduce laptime.
Because you are only solving the quali issue, the race issue is the same and that is the bigger issue in reality. And you are introducing a new issue which is 30-40 kg of extra battery weight which will be present at all times.
You are able to recharge off throttle today. You can do "super clipping" which is essentially running the engine as a generator at 250 kW. You can do partial throttle recharge in corners where appropriate. All this is already being done but it is not enough because the 350 kW MGU-K is way too big for a 400 kW engine to "feed" consistently.
He is saying to increase the ES to 10 MJ, not the harvest limit. The only way to drive a quali lap "full out" without recharging is to have the energy onboard to begin with. Upping the harvest limit would not help one bit.
Yes, increase ES to 10MJ. You get faster quali laps with no recharging, pure pace. Batteries are probably already much larger than 4MJ, they are more efficient if you use only the "middle". I bet the change to a bigger battery is feasible. It would also remove a big complaint of lift and coast in qualy.
In race you'd still need to recharge but maybe allow off throttle recharge by running the engine, my understanding is that this is currently not allowed.
Reducing available energy per lap is not a realistic solution as it would reduce laptime.
Because you are only solving the quali issue, the race issue is the same and that is the bigger issue in reality. And you are introducing a new issue which is 30-40 kg of extra battery weight which will be present at all times.
You are able to recharge off throttle today. You can do "super clipping" which is essentially running the engine as a generator at 250 kW. You can do partial throttle recharge in corners where appropriate. All this is already being done but it is not enough because the 350 kW MGU-K is way too big for a 400 kW engine to "feed" consistently.
Fair point. I do think that a lot of complaints are about recharging on quali laps. This is an obvious "poke in the eye" and a major difference to 2025. In 2025 we still had recharging during the race but not in a quali lap.
Yes, increase ES to 10MJ. You get faster quali laps with no recharging, pure pace. Batteries are probably already much larger than 4MJ, they are more efficient if you use only the "middle". I bet the change to a bigger battery is feasible. It would also remove a big complaint of lift and coast in qualy.
In race you'd still need to recharge but maybe allow off throttle recharge by running the engine, my understanding is that this is currently not allowed.
Reducing available energy per lap is not a realistic solution as it would reduce laptime.
Because you are only solving the quali issue, the race issue is the same and that is the bigger issue in reality. And you are introducing a new issue which is 30-40 kg of extra battery weight which will be present at all times.
You are able to recharge off throttle today. You can do "super clipping" which is essentially running the engine as a generator at 250 kW. You can do partial throttle recharge in corners where appropriate. All this is already being done but it is not enough because the 350 kW MGU-K is way too big for a 400 kW engine to "feed" consistently.
Fair point. I do think that a lot of complaints are about recharging on quali laps. This is an obvious "poke in the eye" and a major difference to 2025. In 2025 we still had recharging during the race but not in a quali lap.
What are your ideas?
The only real solution I can see is to shift the power balance towards the ICE. To go from 55/45 to something like 65/35. This could easily be done by reducing the MGU-K by 100 kW. Alternatively you could increase ICE power, that would be a bigger change but it would make straight line mode redundant, which is good IMO.
Because you are only solving the quali issue, the race issue is the same and that is the bigger issue in reality. And you are introducing a new issue which is 30-40 kg of extra battery weight which will be present at all times.
You are able to recharge off throttle today. You can do "super clipping" which is essentially running the engine as a generator at 250 kW. You can do partial throttle recharge in corners where appropriate. All this is already being done but it is not enough because the 350 kW MGU-K is way too big for a 400 kW engine to "feed" consistently.
Fair point. I do think that a lot of complaints are about recharging on quali laps. This is an obvious "poke in the eye" and a major difference to 2025. In 2025 we still had recharging during the race but not in a quali lap.
What are your ideas?
The only real solution I can see is to shift the power balance towards the ICE. To go from 55/45 to something like 65/35. This could easily be done by reducing the MGU-K by 100 kW. Alternatively you could increase ICE power, that would be a bigger change but it would make straight line mode redundant, which is good IMO.
Reducing MGU-K means you are slower. Would be fine by me, I watch IndyCar but many people (drivers included) are blinded by the laptime.
”A lot of fun, I really enjoyed it," Norris reflected to media, including RacingNews365, when asked his opinion on the new rules and Verstappen's stunning broadside against them.
"So yeah, if he wants to retire, he can retire. Formula 1 changes all the time; sometimes it is a bit better to drive, and sometimes it is not as good to drive, but we get paid a stupid amount of money to drive, so you can't really complain.
"I mean, any driver can go and find something else to do; it is not like he or any driver has to be here, but it is a challenge, a good, fun challenge for the engineers and drivers; it is different.
"You have to drive in a different way and understand things differently and manage things differently, but I still get to drive cars and travel the world and have a lot of fun, so there is nothing to complain about.
”I don't expect Max isn't going to go out and not give a ---, like he is still going to try and win, and Max is never going to not try. You're just not going to smile as much.
"It certainly doesn't feel as quick as the last few years, and certainly doesn't handle as perfectly, but I am sure that if he came in and this was the first F1 car he started driving, then he would probably say it is amazing compared to the older cars.
"It doesn't feel as pretty and as beautiful to drive, but it is still pretty good. It is still early days of a regulation [set] which is meant to be a good amount slower.
"But if you fast forward to the end of the year and look at next year, we're going to be a lot quicker by then, so anyone can make their own opinions and have their own opinions and say and decide what they want to do.
"No one should complain about that. Every driver has their own opinions, and he didn't like it, and I like it."
Fair point. I do think that a lot of complaints are about recharging on quali laps. This is an obvious "poke in the eye" and a major difference to 2025. In 2025 we still had recharging during the race but not in a quali lap.
What are your ideas?
The only real solution I can see is to shift the power balance towards the ICE. To go from 55/45 to something like 65/35. This could easily be done by reducing the MGU-K by 100 kW. Alternatively you could increase ICE power, that would be a bigger change but it would make straight line mode redundant, which is good IMO.
Reducing MGU-K means you are slower. Would be fine by me, I watch IndyCar but many people (drivers included) are blinded by the laptime.
It wouldn't make you much slower because a lot of the energy is currently being recovered through "super clipping" and extending braking zones, and these are things that make you slower. You'd have a bit less grunt out of the corners but you'd get most of it back through reduced need for harvesting. Also, you could reduce the size of the K which would shed some kilos.
”A lot of fun, I really enjoyed it," Norris reflected to media, including RacingNews365, when asked his opinion on the new rules and Verstappen's stunning broadside against them.
"So yeah, if he wants to retire, he can retire. Formula 1 changes all the time; sometimes it is a bit better to drive, and sometimes it is not as good to drive, but we get paid a stupid amount of money to drive, so you can't really complain.
"I mean, any driver can go and find something else to do; it is not like he or any driver has to be here, but it is a challenge, a good, fun challenge for the engineers and drivers; it is different.
"You have to drive in a different way and understand things differently and manage things differently, but I still get to drive cars and travel the world and have a lot of fun, so there is nothing to complain about.
”I don't expect Max isn't going to go out and not give a ---, like he is still going to try and win, and Max is never going to not try. You're just not going to smile as much.
"It certainly doesn't feel as quick as the last few years, and certainly doesn't handle as perfectly, but I am sure that if he came in and this was the first F1 car he started driving, then he would probably say it is amazing compared to the older cars.
"It doesn't feel as pretty and as beautiful to drive, but it is still pretty good. It is still early days of a regulation [set] which is meant to be a good amount slower.
"But if you fast forward to the end of the year and look at next year, we're going to be a lot quicker by then, so anyone can make their own opinions and have their own opinions and say and decide what they want to do.
"No one should complain about that. Every driver has their own opinions, and he didn't like it, and I like it."
Zak's sock puppet Did you read his comments on the pace of the Ferrari?
Drivers should speak out if they feel the sport is going in a bad direction. Just going with the flow because "we make a stupid amount of money" is a terrible mindset from Lando.
So we now have two of the most notorious drivers in the sport, Lewis Hamilton and Max Verstappen, openly criticizing the current regulations, in quite strong terms.
From the reports I have been reading, I fully agree with them, it seems you might benefit more from being an accountant of sorts, rather than a talented driver, because of the extreme management that is needed to maximize the energy available on each lap.
So, how could we fix this (especially in the short term)? An easy solution might be to reduce the battery on the overall power of the cars, or even eliminate it altogether, now that we are using sustainable fuels, but I can't see that being done in a short timeframe.
Bortolleto and Perez criticized the new cars as well.
I want everyone to pay attention to Lando's steering wheel on the bottom left corner. You can see during the lap how much he has to manage the battery by lifting and coasting in some corners and only deploying the battery on some straights which is very similar to the old lmp1 cars: (Here's a comparison with the Porsche 919 Tribute and Leclerc's lap)
But I overall agree with Max's assessment, there is too many things going on. You can literally hear the full deployment of the battery on Charles lap on some of the straights and then it's radically slow on some corners.
Last edited by SB15 on 12 Feb 2026, 23:35, edited 2 times in total.
These rules are written by someone who got exactly the same stuff from my brother yesterday to smoke... In the moment he gave me this, I didn't think that it was gonna be such a heavy hitter, because I don't even have a brother...
Anyway...
No matter what, the current regs are entirely sick. You can put mica, or any pigment with umpteen layers of clearcoat on a piece of horse dung - it will just be a very shiny, shimmering piece of... well, horse dung. These rules are missing something inherently important factor: being thought- and respectful towards the fanbase. The fans are simply not interested in math and physics lessons; they won't know how these PUs work. And they can't care less. They are NOT interested in hybrids, sustainable fuels, CR, any percentualities between ICE vs electric. They can't differentiate a McLaren suspension vs a Haas, a Red Bull brake vs a Ferrari and they are love the safety car because it has better sound than any of the racecars. They want the earth to tremble underfoot, they want stupidly fast accelerating cars with glowing brake discs, close racing without strategy or other artificial cheatery.
Hybrid PUs too expensive? Okay, let's simplify them. Leave out the H and done. They are existing, well built, reliable, powerful, and (somewhat) amortised their initial investments. But nooo, that would have been faaar too simple, so let's throw out the baby with the bathwater, and build an almost-same-yet-even-more-complicated one. But it contains less pieces - we might lie to ourselves - but the way it works is maddeningly complex and unnecessary. Superfluity itself. For another quintillion dollars. Logical, isn't it? Who approved it? And who made the manufacturers to accept it? Can the thunder-juice flow together with the fuel-juice? Oh no, that would be far too simple, so we must manage the below 50, the above 50, the under/above 3xx, the torque, the throttle position, the laughable "active aero" lie which makes a 30+ years old Mitsubishi 3000GT smile, the qlahjvbalvhjbavljhbvliuhpur-factor. Why? Just because it's "sustainable" (no one cares and a lie), sorta contemporary (no one cares), clean (lie and no one cares), just-the-way-it-is (no one cares), the inventing fathers of it reflect light in this specific way (no one cares).
This year is somehow the representative model of the whole society. The rulers write countless regs in legalese language (in questionable quality), build serious limitations into them - so the drivers (aka the people) can't be joyful, they can't concentrate fully on close racing and the on-the-limit art of driving and be happy when they execute a perfect overtaking or a hairy, but still respectful outbraking because they HAVE TO USE the exact distractions the rulers have built in their even more limiting imaginations. Have you ever thought about how many legendary races would become NOTHING when today's regs/stewards would rule over them? The Villeneuve/Arnoux battle? The Zanardi pass in Laguna Seca? The Senna/Prost crashes? Oh, he crossed that line! OMG! He touched the grass which would have slowed him down anyway, but no, punish him! The team fükked up the release? Who's getting the penalty? Of course, the driver! So my little meaningless driver, don't complain, just drive, but in a decent, energy conserving way - aaaand we exactly know how many extremities you have and calculate the appropriate task for your ears, nose, your flapping manhood in your overalls in the name of efficiency AND besides, you can NOT accelerate as hard as you want as the systems allow in your car because we limit them as soon as you reach a certain velocity, so you will have to focus to yet another different task... Yes, for example braking - which doesn't work the same as in the past either, as you have to L&C, brake early, etc. They have to play the piano with their hands AND feet AND lift AND close its lid with their lips and noses AND propel themselves with their feet a la Flintstones sitting on their chairs TOGETHER WITH the piano without touching, AND maneuvering stricly between lines and other invisible madness existing in the rulebook. Now the pilots have to listen to hours of theory about the exact methodology of pushing/lifting/setting/switching/turning/braking/half-braking/waving to the crowds while waiting for the straight to end... Oh, what a glorifying way of RACING isn't it? They rather look like a musician clowns who blow the trumpet WHILE play a small drum with their other hand and their feet play the bigger drum and the cymbal at the same time. Yes, clowns precisely, because such a frumpy way of multitasking is somehow laughable (if artful too).
Any rules which require a pro-tech forum to discuss them through hundreds of pages are just egoistic and they are existing only for the sole purpose of ego-hurrah & we-should-show-that-we-can - without any kind of TRULY positive purpose. Hold on... Just try to zoom out a bit to see the entire picture. Building something as advanced as the current PUs are... entirely meaningless, as these machines are totally irrelevant. They have no road relevance, they basically as archaic as steam engines - I'm sure we could build fantastic steam engines now which could operate at a far better efficiency than ancient ones. But these factors are just micro-focal. These PUs are not space age propulsion, no electrogravitics, no TT Brown effect, heck, not even a 100 years old Pierce Arrow propelled by zero point energy in real time, built by Nikola Tesla himself (Formula E, anyone?). So why should we lie about them, painting them as Christ's eleventh coming? These are just banging metal blocks; which - in their honest simplicity - can be fascinating machines, when they are powerful, loud, and provide good racing. They are just tools which should be cheap enough to produce, they must provide superstimuli to remain in the souls of the fans, because these superstimuli mean ALL the wonders, the experience, the can't-forget-factor which make our hearts pound faster and ourselves feel alive, imagining that we are driving these machines just NOW, just to make our inner child as playful and as happily ageless as ever possible...
My recipe would be simple: 1986 power to weight ratio, a V10 with mechanical throttle linkage and no rev limit, foot-clutch for the start, standard brakes with steel discs, standard tub and suspensions, no diffuser and proper racing tires. The teams can draw their respective simple wings and airboxes. Sequential shifter on the side, max 3 dials on the steering wheel. Refueling allowed but only in 50l or 100l increments. Only exceptional drivers could ride these cannonballs well enough. That's it.
Last edited by Bence on 13 Feb 2026, 02:42, edited 4 times in total.
but many people (drivers included) are blinded by the laptime.
Did you read his comments on the pace of the Ferrari?