2026 car comparisons

[amr]

They really studied the rule book this year. I love it.
The actuator/s seem to be in the endplate.
https://cdn-8.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... ari-s.webp

https://cdn-4.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... rrari.webp

Missed marketing opportunity. They should have placed the HP and IBM logos upside down. Everyone will take pictures of their wing these days.

On a technical note, I wonder if there are benefits of integrating the actuator in the endplate and not having the bulkier one on the main plane. It probably takes away some wing cord, but due to the spoon-like profile, maybe keeping the middle of the wing clean and free has benefits outside the DRS usage.

[Martin Keene]

They really studied the rule book this year. I love it.
The actuator/s seem to be in the endplate.
https://cdn-8.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... ari-s.webp

https://cdn-4.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... rrari.webp

I wonder if it acts like an airbrake momentarily when driver hits the brakes...Could give gains in the brake zone too.

Surely that is the last thing you’d want to do with this rule set? Anything slowing the car down other than the brakes at the front & MGU-K at the rear is wasted energy.

[FittingMechanics]

They really studied the rule book this year. I love it.
The actuator/s seem to be in the endplate.
https://cdn-8.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... ari-s.webp

https://cdn-4.motorsport.com/images/mgl ... rrari.webp

I wonder if it acts like an airbrake momentarily when driver hits the brakes...Could give gains in the brake zone too.

Surely that is the last thing you’d want to do with this rule set? Anything slowing the car down other than the brakes at the front & MGU-K at the rear is wasted energy.

Yeah plus the same motion happens when you activate SM, so if it acts as an aerobrake it acts both at the start and the end.

Likely that aero brake effect is minimal.

[willga]

Everyone's popping their minds over the inverted element creating lift, but it's going through the air trailing-edge first.

In isolation, at best it'd be aerodynamically neutral, but maybe it's acting as a sort of flow-conditioner in conjunction with the lower element? - rotating it may bring it further forward relative to the fixed lower aerofoil

[amr]

You can actually see the rear wing lift a bit and then squat down again in the full video of the actuation, showing the lift and return to downforce.

It's also going to raise the car slightly at the rear (with the Ferrari sitting low, that'll have a proportionally larger impact), affecting the underfloor aero. Probably a tiny effect but non-zero.

The squat effect could be from loading off and adding the downforce back. Not necessarily from the wing, creating lift.
It's just too complex to say with the naked eye if it generates lift or not.
If you look at the position when open, the angle of attack is still negative, at least for the initial trailing element, which now becomes the leading element. The second element might have a positive angle of attack, which, on its own, could generate lift, but again, things must be considered as a package.

[Badger]

Not sure what the benefit is exactly. Lift generates drag same as downforce and would also make the rear unstable. Maybe it's just about redirecting the airflow down behind the car and reducing drag that way.

[euv2]

[SuperCNJ]

Does anyone know if the rotating rear wing actually provides an advantage? I get that it generates uplift but if they delay its deployment until most of the initial hard acceleration is done, I'm guessing the reduction in downforce is probably ok? But does having an inverted rear wing actually reduce drag, more so that it would with a conventional system?

[PlatinumZealot]

Everyone's popping their minds over the inverted element creating lift, but it's going through the air trailing-edge first.

In isolation, at best it'd be aerodynamically neutral, but maybe it's acting as a sort of flow-conditioner in conjunction with the lower element? - rotating it may bring it further forward relative to the fixed lower aerofoil

Probably also stalls the lower plane... And perhaps even spoils the air for following cars..

[michl420]

Not sure what the benefit is exactly. Lift generates drag same as downforce and would also make the rear unstable. Maybe it's just about redirecting the airflow down behind the car and reducing drag that way.

I think he only reason they do this is to reduce drag. It needs bigger actuators and a more robust flap construction, so it has his downsides. But big respect for the engineers to think about something.

[motobaleno]

Not sure what the benefit is exactly. Lift generates drag same as downforce and would also make the rear unstable. Maybe it's just about redirecting the airflow down behind the car and reducing drag that way.

mechanical friction reduction tyres-tarmac should not be ignored. there is not only aero. rear unstable in straight not necessarily a problem

[Gridlock]

I'd love to see exactly how this was lawyered into existence vs the wording of the regs around SLM.

3.11.6 Rear Wing Rotation System
Except for the forwardmost volume, the Rear Wing Profiles, including any fitted gurney and
portions of Rear Wing Auxiliary Components that are attached to these volumes, may be
2026 Formula 1 Technical Regulations 31 24 June 2024
© 2024 Fédération Internationale de l’Automobile Issue 8
rotated about a fixed axis whilst the car is in motion. Bodywork that can rotate in such a way
is defined as RW Flap.
a. No part of RW−Flap may lie outboard of Y = 535.
b. The axis of rotation of RW Flap must:
i. be aligned with a Y−Axis.
ii. lie between XR = 450 and XR = 525.
iii. lie within 10mm of a Rear Wing Profile volume at Y = 530.
c. Any rotation must maintain:
i. the geometric relationship between the rearmost two volumes as defined in
Article 3.11.1.
ii. compliance with all bodywork regulations except for Article 3.11.1 (a), (d), (e) and
(f).
d. The design is such that failure of the system will result in RW Flap returning to its design
position.
e. Any rotation may only be commanded by direct driver input and controlled using the
control electronics specified in Article 8.3.
f. The adjustment permitted under this Article is only allowed when the car is stationary
or when specifically permitted by Article x.x of the Sporting Regulations.
g. At any Y−Plane, the distance between adjacent volumes at their closest position must
lie between 10 mm and 65 mm.

I'd imagine (c) ii is where the magic is

[matt_s]

d. The design is such that failure of the system will result in RW Flap returning to its design
position.

I wonder how they are achieving this. Spring loaded?

It doesn't state that it has to return immediately under all conditions. I wonder if (under failure conditions) the return mechanism would be strong enough to deactivate at the end of SML zones if the following corners were flat out? Copse-Maggots-Becketts?

[johnnycesup]

Even if that extreme rotation is not useful in the end of the day, they can probably keep the actuator on the endplates, right? Seems like there is some tangible gains there, both in corner mode and in straightline mode.

It's pretty interesting how Ferrari still has front wing adjustment pods outside the nose unlike the other frontrunners, but could be the only one without the SM pods on the middle of the rear wing.

[ryaan2904]

Is it possible to program the rw rotation mechanism through the ERS? I mean the ERS is already predicting power curves during partial throttle/traction limited conditions. And superclipping/Lico is most useful during end of straights. Also the teams already have custom presets for power mapping and ers deployment for each track. So they could program it to work in a way that the flap will rotate a set amount of time (0.5 sec ?) after superclipping kicks in. Unless the movement of the rear wing is only allowed when the driver touches the brakes. But then we have already seen front and rear wing closing offset with Ferrari