The only fact is, there is a rumour. It doesn't matter what decision FIA takes or not, fans of other teams would be eternally unhappy if Mercedes or Mercedes powered team dominates the season. For them, rumour is enough to taint Mercedes. But the show will go on.
It is not a rumor. Toto wolff already confessed.
"It's a few horsepower....in England, you would say a couple, which is more like two and three," he said, when asked about the performance benefit he thinks Mercedes gets from the trick.
https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/why- ... tio-trick/"If that governance were to vote for an engine regulation change, you just have to take it on the chin," he admitted.
"It is what it is. And obviously, in that case, it would be detrimental for all of the Mercedes powered teams."
Lol, this is actually hilarious. For "cost" reasons?stewie325 wrote: ↑14 Feb 2026, 17:46Because of costs. They're allowed to use non-compliant fuels during testing because of that.
Therefore, the sport’s governing body, according to Auto Motor und Sport, has taken the decision to allow the usage of non-compliant fuels for the three programmes [Barcelona and two in Bahrain respectively].
https://www.motorsportweek.com/2026/01/ ... ng-report/
Iirc cost had nothing to do with it. A fuel provider thought they just wouldn't have enough fuel ready in time for Barcelona. The associated manufacturer asked for an exemption to allow them to use some sort of non sustainable fuel in the event this was the case. This was granted as a temporary measure. I don't think Shell, BP or Exxon would have any sort of issue with this and Aramco pretty much didn't run in Barcelona so my guess is Petronas didn't have enough fuel for 4 teams ready in time for the shakedown but with Williams skipping the test, they probably didn't need to use the exemption. It would be stupid to not run the fuels the engines were designed for if you could.f1isgood wrote: ↑14 Feb 2026, 19:36Lol, this is actually hilarious. For "cost" reasons?stewie325 wrote: ↑14 Feb 2026, 17:46Because of costs. They're allowed to use non-compliant fuels during testing because of that.
Therefore, the sport’s governing body, according to Auto Motor und Sport, has taken the decision to allow the usage of non-compliant fuels for the three programmes [Barcelona and two in Bahrain respectively].
https://www.motorsportweek.com/2026/01/ ... ng-report/
Makes a lot more sense. Thanksgearboxtrouble wrote: ↑14 Feb 2026, 19:52Iirc cost had nothing to do with it. A fuel provider thought they just wouldn't have enough fuel ready in time for Barcelona. The associated manufacturer asked for an exemption to allow them to use some sort of non sustainable fuel in the event this was the case. This was granted as a temporary measure. I don't think Shell, BP or Exxon would have any sort of issue with this and Aramco pretty much didn't run in Barcelona so my guess is Petronas didn't have enough fuel for 4 teams ready in time for the shakedown but with Williams skipping the test, they probably didn't need to use the exemption. It would be stupid to not run the fuels the engines were designed for if you could.
https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... ologation/
Pretty much. I'd say the encouraging thing is there is no 2014 style dominance here. Mercedes, Ferrari and even RBPT all look to be within the same ballpark. Audi look better than expected while we haven't really seen the Honda's potential because of the gearbox and cooling limitations. Even if Mercedes are slightly ahead on the CR trickery I think the PUs are all close enough that by 2027, all of them (even Audi and Honda) will be equivalent and we'll go back to being an aero formula.
Antonelli looks like he's on lower fuel in his runs today compared to Leclerc. He had a few moments off the track and last week they struggled with setup. Russell said car was not as responsive as Barcelona due to track temp. Its only a snap shot though. Things can change again.
. Albeit we don’t really know fuel loads, engine setting or deployments.