2026 Pre-Season Testing

[AR3-GP]

It's basically what I was thinking about. You click overtake, you're a sitting duck the next straight (or longer). It's just unusable really. This is going to be like the pre DRS era.

and Piastri said following is just as bad as 2025, even though the 2026 cars having much less downforce. My god this sport is so useless

[organic]

It's basically what I was thinking about. You click overtake, you're a sitting duck the next straight (or longer). It's just unusable really. This is going to be like the pre DRS era.

and Piastri said following is just as bad as 2025, even though the 2026 cars having much less downforce. My god this sport is so useless

Why is this even the case?

[AR3-GP]

It's basically what I was thinking about. You click overtake, you're a sitting duck the next straight (or longer). It's just unusable really. This is going to be like the pre DRS era.

and Piastri said following is just as bad as 2025, even though the 2026 cars having much less downforce. My god this sport is so useless

Why is this even the case?

We have underestimated how much more efficient the venturi floor is. Pound for pound of downforce, the venturi cars were less sensitive and/or had a smaller wake. These flat floor cars either release even more dirty air, or the aero is just far more sensitive to even the smallest amount of turbulence.

The best solution might have been to make smaller venturi cars so we would get the benefit of smaller cars and less downforce, while retaining the better following characteristics. Following in 2025 was bad only because the cars were allowed to generate too much downforce.

I know somewhere team kool greene is having an "I told you so" party

[Emag]

I think the best solution is ironically a manual hybrid system. The DRS + Kers era gave us great racing when Pirellis weren’t blowing up. Have a powerful engine in the back that gives you a good amount of baseline power and give the driver some extra boost they can decide exactly where to use throughout the lap on their own.

[f1isgood]

and Piastri said following is just as bad as 2025, even though the 2026 cars having much less downforce. My god this sport is so useless

Why is this even the case?

We have underestimated how much more efficient the venturi floor is. Pound for pound of downforce, the venturi cars were less sensitive and/or had a smaller wake. These flat floor cars either release even more dirty air, or the aero is just far more sensitive to even the smallest amount of turbulence.

The best solution might have been to make smaller venturi cars so we would get the benefit of smaller cars and less downforce, while retaining the better following characteristics. Following in 2025 was bad only because the cars were allowed to generate too much downforce.

I know somewhere team kool greene is having an "I told you so" party

Following in 2025 was not that bad. It's being overexaggerated. Cars weren't doing what they did pre 2022 being unable to follow after a few laps and going back to cool down and then never attack again. You could attack multiple times.

The issue with 2025 was field convergence. Everyone except McLaren were in a 2 to 3 tenths bubble at the front. You just cannot pass with that delta. Qualify well or go home basically. All again thanks to the FIA being lenient with dirty-air generating components and falling from Toto's plot on safety, resulting in more and more bodywork downforce as the regulations progressed.

The solution is to keep the venturi floors, give teams better suspensions but standardize it, so that the ride can be better and as you say make it small.

[f1isgood]

Oh and by the way, Stella is saying reduce electrical energy during the races so that you can overtake and pass. It's quite hilarious that Toto Wolff dismissed it last year when Horner said that a better split between ICE/ES was needed. Now I don't see Red Bull letting this slide if the Merc powered teams ask for it... They have already made a scene of Red Bull having better deployment. Then have a better ICE. Would be perfect.

[mzso]

and Piastri said following is just as bad as 2025, even though the 2026 cars having much less downforce. My god this sport is so useless

Why is this even the case?

We have underestimated how much more efficient the venturi floor is. Pound for pound of downforce, the venturi cars were less sensitive and/or had a smaller wake. These flat floor cars either release even more dirty air, or the aero is just far more sensitive to even the smallest amount of turbulence.

The best solution might have been to make smaller venturi cars so we would get the benefit of smaller cars and less downforce, while retaining the better following characteristics. Following in 2025 was bad only because the cars were allowed to generate too much downforce.

I know somewhere team kool greene is having an "I told you so" party

I don't think your theory of "ability to follow largely depends on level downforce" holds much water. Not while aerodynamic downforce is a major part of car performance.
I think it's overwhelmingly about "dirty" air and sensitivity. And they dirtied up the air really well, and removed the less sensitive venturi tunnels.

The issue with 2025 was field convergence. Everyone except McLaren were in a 2 to 3 tenths bubble at the front. You just cannot pass with that delta. Qualify well or go home basically. All again thanks to the FIA being lenient with dirty-air generating components and falling from Toto's plot on safety, resulting in more and more bodywork downforce as the regulations progressed.

Delta is only needed because of the inability to follow well. Cars being close should be a lot better for racing.
And I don't think the myth of Toto has any merit, it was harmful for drivers' well being the way it was in 2022. There was too much potential to create dirty air and teams developed to create more and more of it. The issue is FIA neglect.

[AR3-GP]

Why is this even the case?

We have underestimated how much more efficient the venturi floor is. Pound for pound of downforce, the venturi cars were less sensitive and/or had a smaller wake. These flat floor cars either release even more dirty air, or the aero is just far more sensitive to even the smallest amount of turbulence.

The best solution might have been to make smaller venturi cars so we would get the benefit of smaller cars and less downforce, while retaining the better following characteristics. Following in 2025 was bad only because the cars were allowed to generate too much downforce.

I know somewhere team kool greene is having an "I told you so" party

I don't think your theory of "ability to follow largely depends on level downforce" holds much water. Not while aerodynamic downforce is a major part of car performance.
I think it's overwhelmingly about "dirty" air and sensitivity. And they dirtied up the air really well, and removed the less sensitive venturi tunnels.

It does in the sense that where we are starting in 2026 will become much worse by 2028 within this rules framework.

[gearboxtrouble]

One interesting thing I noticed is Red Bull ran without one of the bargeboards/front floor devices the last two days of testing. One of the things that's become clear over this test is that teams think you lose less laptime running slower in fast corners than what you gain harvesting through those corners for the straights. This ridiculous engine formula might make have made it less optimal to have more downforce past a certain point. Maybe Red Bull were testing what would happen if they lost one of those devices in an incident but maybe what they're really testing is reducing downforce which you will never need in an asymmetric way to suit the majority of the corners so that the extra harvesting they do at lower cornering speeds makes more of a difference on the straights. Just a theory but I thought it was really weird they ran without one of those "bargeboards" for a long time both of the last two days.

[AR3-GP]

One interesting thing I noticed is Red Bull ran without one of the bargeboards/front floor devices the last two days of testing. One of the things that's become clear over this test is that teams think you lose less laptime running slower in fast corners than what you gain harvesting through those corners for the straights. This ridiculous engine formula might make have made it less optimal to have more downforce past a certain point. Maybe Red Bull were testing what would happen if they lost one of those devices in an incident but maybe what they're really testing is reducing downforce which you will never need in an asymmetric way to suit the majority of the corners so that the extra harvesting they do at lower cornering speeds makes more of a difference on the straights. Just a theory but I thought it was really weird they ran without one of those "bargeboards" for a long time both of the last two days.

I only noticed this in the Thursday evening session. You are saying they did it again on Friday?

[gearboxtrouble]

One interesting thing I noticed is Red Bull ran without one of the bargeboards/front floor devices the last two days of testing. One of the things that's become clear over this test is that teams think you lose less laptime running slower in fast corners than what you gain harvesting through those corners for the straights. This ridiculous engine formula might make have made it less optimal to have more downforce past a certain point. Maybe Red Bull were testing what would happen if they lost one of those devices in an incident but maybe what they're really testing is reducing downforce which you will never need in an asymmetric way to suit the majority of the corners so that the extra harvesting they do at lower cornering speeds makes more of a difference on the straights. Just a theory but I thought it was really weird they ran without one of those "bargeboards" for a long time both of the last two days.

I only noticed this in the Thursday evening session. You are saying they did it again on Friday?

Thats what I read. Afternoon again with Hadjar.

[hollus]

I am not so sure about all this "passing will be impossible". I think it will be wildly different. The old style of passing (I'll call it tactical) might have gotten harder, but there will be a new one, only that the drivers will need to learn it, and they can't do that in testing.
I am sure last year in testing you could just catch a car that was moderately pushing, set up a pass in two corners, and, since the other car was not fighting you, pass. In races of course it was harder, but it was a known amount, a known strategy to make it work (I'll still call it tacticalpassing, it was an isolated even to one segment of one lap).
And yet, in 2025, they pushed for a lap or two for a pass, and if the pass failed, the tires were cooked and "they paid for it for several laps", they could only try again 5-6 laps later.

Now we hear that in 2026 it is that if you use your push to pass, you'll pay for it for 5 laps. Familiar.

So, maybe following closely is harder and the old style will not longer work, if you can't be stable half a second behind, it won't.

Instead we might see a different type of passing:
We assume that most drivers will be energy poor most of the race, not even remotely having 9 MJ to use, ever. That is the scenario where if you try, you'll pay for five laps.
But if the leading driver is energy poor, and the following (but 0.4 sec/lap faster) driver is also energy poor, the follower can simply use less energy (or harvest more) to stay where he is, 1 second behind. After 3 laps saving, he has 6 extra MJ to use. The driver ahead could not save in the same way, at least not so much.
And then the push to pass is not a single straight, burn it all shot. Instead, with 6 extra MJ, it is 10 bursts of extra energy in every small straight, it is no Li-Co at all for 5 consecutive straigths. And the defending driver simply does not have those 6 MJ, so he can only pick one or two fights.
Alternatively, if the defending driver chooses to save energy, then he should be ready to have the attacking driver in his escape tube multiple times, as he can save only intermittently. It becomes a game of bluffs and surprise bursts.

Many will say that is not fun, and I will not challenge that. But I think we'll see lots of passing, just much more estrategic and based on energy management.

And that the pass, when it ultimate comes, will be that 60 km/h delta from the YeListener video, where the defending driver simply ran out of energy, with the attackig driver coming with all guns blazing.
Again, different to what we are used to. And many people won't like "different".

In any case, we'll find out in a month, by the time the second race is over (Australia is just different).

Oh, and no, that type of "strategic" passing, cannot be tested in testing, it requires an equally strategic rival.

[Stu]

Did Russell leak the end date for these PU regs?

For our driving style, it has to be a little different, but we're on the fourth day of this new regulation that's going to run for three years, so I don't think it's worth talking about it so soon, in my view.

3 years of this crap? Kill me now.

You don’t need to watch it…

[Lasssept]

link

[f1isgood]

Why is this even the case?

We have underestimated how much more efficient the venturi floor is. Pound for pound of downforce, the venturi cars were less sensitive and/or had a smaller wake. These flat floor cars either release even more dirty air, or the aero is just far more sensitive to even the smallest amount of turbulence.

The best solution might have been to make smaller venturi cars so we would get the benefit of smaller cars and less downforce, while retaining the better following characteristics. Following in 2025 was bad only because the cars were allowed to generate too much downforce.

I know somewhere team kool greene is having an "I told you so" party

I don't think your theory of "ability to follow largely depends on level downforce" holds much water. Not while aerodynamic downforce is a major part of car performance.
I think it's overwhelmingly about "dirty" air and sensitivity. And they dirtied up the air really well, and removed the less sensitive venturi tunnels.

The issue with 2025 was field convergence. Everyone except McLaren were in a 2 to 3 tenths bubble at the front. You just cannot pass with that delta. Qualify well or go home basically. All again thanks to the FIA being lenient with dirty-air generating components and falling from Toto's plot on safety, resulting in more and more bodywork downforce as the regulations progressed.

Delta is only needed because of the inability to follow well. Cars being close should be a lot better for racing.
And I don't think the myth of Toto has any merit, it was harmful for drivers' well being the way it was in 2022. There was too much potential to create dirty air and teams developed to create more and more of it. The issue is FIA neglect.

Not sure I follow. If cars are close in performance, you simply cannot race wheel-to-wheel consistently. You need either different strengths or performance delta that comes from tires or something else to race. If you look back at early 2022, the racing was good also because Ferrari and Red Bull had very different strengths. As regulations mature the gaps close up much more as all cars converge more or less towards one specific successful formula which makes it a qualifying contest. Cars being close in performance is only good in theory, not in reality. It's nothing new though. The only way racing happens is if the driver in front makes some error from time to time. And nowadays I think drivers have gotten pretty good.


Toto literally chose to run his team's car low enough so that it bounces to make a point. I don't think for once he complains about safety if the W13 was actually fast.