2026 Pre-Season Testing

[f1316]

I can only imagine the reaction on this forum if any other team than Ferrari was running this consistently whilst setting the fastest laps and in no danger of having an 'exploit' loopholes closed. AND only running with a spec A car. People would be using words like 'ominous' and going crazy about dominance etc.

I'm not saying Ferrari are going to be dominant or even competitive necessarily - I don't have enough information - but I do know that people judge different teams differently based on limited information (the Aston was clearly some stroke of genius before it even turned a wheel...).

People judge differently based on previous evidence, really.

And while yes, Ferrari actually have done quite well with the last two regulation changes, they failed to capitalize on the opportunities and eventually fell back for one reason or another. And Ferrari just in general seems to have not got that aggressive confidence of a team in true top form.

So I think people not getting overexcited about Ferrari's testing program so far is pretty reasonable. Red Bull, Mercedes and Mclaren all have more recent top form for people to point to and see them more likely to be the top dogs.

And it hurts to say that all cuz I'm a Ferrari fan too, but the team really needs to prove more before people start seeing them in the same conversation as those above.

Maybe but the previous evidence is actually that Ferrari are nearly always competitive - it’s been a while since they had a period of dominance but other teams don’t generally have periods of dominance that regularly either. Which team has had more than one such period in the 21st century? Only Red Bull and arguably the second one was short lived (just two years).

On the other side, which other team has been there or thereabouts more often than Ferrari in the same time period? Arguably no one. So the idea that it’s somehow a ‘joke’ that Ferrari will be fast is ludicrous and detached from reality.

[Badger]

Something to keep in mind too, Bahrain is one of the absolute BEST tracks for recharging and we are still seeing these issues clear as day. When we go to Melbourne and everything is broadcast this charade will be over.

[AR3-GP]

Something to keep in mind too, Bahrain is one of the absolute BEST tracks for recharging and we are still seeing these issues clear as day. When we go to Melbourne and everything is broadcast this charade will be over.

As long as F1 avoids onboard shots, it will be fine. F1TV will be a hard sell though.

[mzso]

Ludicrous idea. They should have gone the other way and completely remove the hybrid system. It's a largely irrelevant tech as most road cars are transitioning to full EV nowadays.

A 1000+ HP V8 or V10 with sustainable fuels would have been wonderful.

The conclusion of the first part is not the second part, but going full electric...

I don't like this regulation set.
The 50/50 split is just plain stupid and I don't personally think it belongs in F1. Every damn lap you have to worry about recharging the battery. You push 2 laps, you suffer for at least 1. I can't imagine how this turns any better on an actual real racing scenario, where you have to think about overtaking and defending on top of that.

Schumacher's opinions about always needing to look after the tires were similar. So lookig after stuff is not a new phenomenon, it just gets broader.

The answer is simple. Find a way to get the cars back to 2022 but shorter and narrower where they could overtake and follow. Get rid of the E crap and drop the weight to 640kg.

"Because I say so" engineering has a far simpler answer than that: Make perfect formula.

[Mezger]

At this rate in this new evolving false world we live in..... why don't they... FIA... whoever just program the ecu with AI and 3D GPS mapping of every circuit to optimize the best delivery of anything. All the driver has to do is brake and turn the wheel if he or she wants.

It's gonna be an interesting year.

[mzso]

Maybe but the previous evidence is actually that Ferrari are nearly always competitive -

More like, usually nearly competitive,

it’s been a while since they had a period of dominance but other teams don’t generally have periods of dominance that regularly either. Which team has had more than one such period in the 21st century? Only Red Bull and arguably the second one was short lived (just two years).

Ferrari had one period of dominance, when they were the least like Ferrari. When they imported all the key staff externally from Benetton. Except Todt who they sourced from Peugeot earlier.

It was a full 20 years before that when Ferrari was even championship capable. Not near dominant.

On the other side, which other team has been there or thereabouts more often than Ferrari in the same time period? Arguably no one. So the idea that it’s somehow a ‘joke’ that Ferrari will be fast is ludicrous and detached from reality.

It's a joke because of the times it's proclaimed, only to never to come true. And Ferrari usually saying they're focusing on next year before the season is halfway through. Only for all of it to repeat.

[ScottB]

One thing I want to say, after following a ridiculous amount of laps via telemetry these last two days.

I don't like this regulation set.
The 50/50 split is just plain stupid and I don't personally think it belongs in F1. Every damn lap you have to worry about recharging the battery. You push 2 laps, you suffer for at least 1. I can't imagine how this turns any better on an actual real racing scenario, where you have to think about overtaking and defending on top of that.

Ludicrous idea. They should have gone the other way and completely remove the hybrid system. It's a largely irrelevant tech as most road cars are transitioning to full EV nowadays.

A 1000+ HP V8 or V10 with sustainable fuels would have been wonderful.

These things are like you're playing asphalt. Drift through the corners for extra points and double tap on the straights for the boost.

Is the 50/50 split the core issue? Or is it a power requirement and capacity issue? Is there any way they could have made the electrical reserve larger so that everyone isn't recovery limited?

A 430kW ICE simply isn't enough to power a 350 kW MGU-K even with the "super clipping" we have now. Front axle regen and/or an MGU-H would make it a bit more feasible and might make them more raceable, but in the end they would still need more energy flow for it to work flawlessly.

It's beyond me why they didn't decide on a spec MGU-H. In the last engine regulation set it accounted for some 2/3 of the regen, eliminated turbo lag and weighed something like 6kg. The only drawback it had was that it was expensive to develop and had little road relevance. If you turn it into a spec part, none of that is an issue and the cars become quicker out of corners due to no turbo lag as well as less energy starved, which makes energy management much less important.

Now the FIA and FOM have painted themselves into a corner. The only way out of this pickle is increasing energy flow and reducing MGU-K output, which defeats the whole 50/50 marketing thing.

Marketing is an interesting point, mentioned the new rules to some friends recently, and their response was 'oh cool, didn't know F1 was going hybrid' so the sport clearly hasn't done that great a job in the last 12 years on that front!

(Limited sample size I know, but still)

If they quietly shifted to 60/40, while still referencing hybrid / synthetic fuel etc etc I doubt the wider world would notice or care.

The wider world probably will notice if we regularly have cars messing up the starts, pit exit, running out of power etc etc, so I guess it would become a decision on what's going to have the bigger negative impact.

[FittingMechanics]

I really think this is overblown. F1 can also easily reduce energy usage if it looks too bad, it will slow down the cars but if it is bad for the show they will do it.

I bet in 2 months time we will enjoy the tactics and challenges this brings. For example car that is bad at recharging should be relatively better in quali than in race, we might get more scrambled grids and better racing.

[f1isgood]

I think after having seen another day of testing I think this will be the pecking order at Australia

McLaren (Good aero and good engine)
Ferrari (Good aero and okay engine)
Mercedes (Good engine and weak aero)
Red Bull (okay aero and okay engine)

I haven't seen something special from Red Bull so far apart from whatever came out of Wolffs mouth. Some of Landos stint appear like we are in Bahrain 2025 all over again. McLaren have done a very good job.

[f1316]

Ferrari had one period of dominance, when they were the least like Ferrari. When they imported all the key staff externally from Benetton. Except Todt who they sourced from Peugeot earlier.

So wait: they hired people from other teams and that made them “least like Ferrari”? So if McLaren sign Rob Marshall it makes them not McLaren? If Aston sign Newey it makes them not Aston? There’s nothing un-Ferrari about signing external talent- not only does every team do it (and it does nothing to change the DNA) but Ferrari have always done it (they started by borrowing from Alfa, then Lancia, they sign Bernard etc). It’s a ridiculous trope and the subtext is basically that any time the Italian team signs someone from another country, it’s some sort of admission they can’t do it themselves, which is kinda prejudice.

It's a joke because of the times it's proclaimed, only to never to come true. And Ferrari usually saying they're focusing on next year before the season is halfway through. Only for all of it to repeat.

Every team does the same - this year, Aston, Williams, Mercedes and Alpine have all been hyping up their switching off early and focusing on this year. It’s ridiculous to single out Ferrari which, again, hints that there’s some other kind of bias at play.

And re your other about “always nearly competitive” - just look at championship positions during the barren spells. Very often 2nd (which means in those years they’re beating another big team - eg Mercedes, Red Bull etc) and but for a few points there would have been drivers championship in 2008, 2010, 2012 (and a constructors in 2024); 2017 & 18 were good cars and 2022 was nerfed by politics. There’s no shortage of competency.

[CHT]

I really think this is overblown. F1 can also easily reduce energy usage if it looks too bad, it will slow down the cars but if it is bad for the show they will do it.

I bet in 2 months time we will enjoy the tactics and challenges this brings. For example car that is bad at recharging should be relatively better in quali than in race, we might get more scrambled grids and better racing.

There will be new sets of tactics and challenges such as giving up position in corner to recharge and to retake position on the straights..

[dialtone]

Maybe but the previous evidence is actually that Ferrari are nearly always competitive -

More like, usually nearly competitive,

it’s been a while since they had a period of dominance but other teams don’t generally have periods of dominance that regularly either. Which team has had more than one such period in the 21st century? Only Red Bull and arguably the second one was short lived (just two years).

Ferrari had one period of dominance, when they were the least like Ferrari. When they imported all the key staff externally from Benetton. Except Todt who they sourced from Peugeot earlier.

It was a full 20 years before that when Ferrari was even championship capable. Not near dominant.

Wild ass take. Ferrari damn nearly won a title in 1990, (thanks to Senna who should have been DSQed from the championship but we do that only when a driver is in Ferrari like in 1997) which is barely 10 years earlier, Schumacher picked up the car in 1996 and almost won a year later in 1997, and when he joined Ferrari in 1996 Michael mentioned that he would have won the chip in 1995 with it.

20 years before championship capable LMAO, reality is that Ferrari put together good cars in the past 30 years and in many cases was let down by its drivers ('17-'18) or politics ('22), and certainly bad strategy too ('12).

[mzso]

and 2022 was nerfed by politics

or politics ('22),

Could you guys quit it with the 2022 delusion? They were not on par with Red Bull.

So wait: they hired people from other teams and that made them “least like Ferrari”?

None of the key people was their own talent. And the team in that era was different (better) then before or after.

Every team does the same - this year, Aston, Williams, Mercedes and Alpine have all been hyping up their switching off early and focusing on this year. It’s ridiculous to single out Ferrari which, again, hints that there’s some other kind of bias at play.

Nope. Not at all. But it's more often the fans who proclaim victory in the beginning of the year. Ferrari just keeps promising next year.

Wild ass take. Ferrari damn nearly won a title in 1990, (thanks to Senna who should have been DSQed from the championship but we do that only when a driver is in Ferrari like in 1997) which is barely 10 years earlier,

Almost near having a lucky break that year. And in the next year they had a tractor.
That DSQ only happened once, and it was meaningless, which is precisely the reason it happened. If Schumacher won, there would have been no punishment like in 94.

Schumacher picked up the car in 1996 and almost won a year later in 1997, and when he joined Ferrari in 1996 Michael mentioned that he would have won the chip in 1995 with it.

Let's not get started with Schumacher and all the self-serving utter bullshit he said over the years.
In 96 he did have to turn his head though because the car was faster that way.

let down by its drivers ('17-'18)

Mutual effort actually.

and certainly bad strategy too ('12).

Much the same as the Prost year. A superb driver almost dragging their car to a championship.

[nitrotech]

Guys, take a room. This is 2026 testing thread. I came here looking for latest of testing and here we are.

[f1316]

and 2022 was nerfed by politics

or politics ('22),

Could you guys quit it with the 2022 delusion? They were not on par with Red Bull.

So wait: they hired people from other teams and that made them “least like Ferrari”?

None of the key people was their own talent. And the team in that era was different (better) then before or after.

Every team does the same - this year, Aston, Williams, Mercedes and Alpine have all been hyping up their switching off early and focusing on this year. It’s ridiculous to single out Ferrari which, again, hints that there’s some other kind of bias at play.

Nope. Not at all. But it's more often the fans who proclaim victory in the beginning of the year. Ferrari just keeps promising next year.

Wild ass take. Ferrari damn nearly won a title in 1990, (thanks to Senna who should have been DSQed from the championship but we do that only when a driver is in Ferrari like in 1997) which is barely 10 years earlier,

Almost near having a lucky break that year. And in the next year they had a tractor.
That DSQ only happened once, and it was meaningless, which is precisely the reason it happened. If Schumacher won, there would have been no punishment like in 94.

Schumacher picked up the car in 1996 and almost won a year later in 1997, and when he joined Ferrari in 1996 Michael mentioned that he would have won the chip in 1995 with it.

Let's not get started with Schumacher and all the self-serving utter bullshit he said over the years.
In 96 he did have to turn his head though because the car was faster that way.

let down by its drivers ('17-'18)

Mutual effort actually.

and certainly bad strategy too ('12).

Much the same as the Prost year. A superb driver almost dragging their car to a championship.

Ok not worth the effort - none of what you said holds water tbh so no point continuing