2026 Drama: Alleged engine loophole

[ScottB]

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/merc ... -proposal/

So in the end it's all going to fall apart because some / all of the rest want to break the compression limit when cold?

Not sure how they didn't see this coming, if you make having a max compression ratio at any temperature, not just at ambient, the basis of your argument, why would you think the FIA's answer would be to just test at a hot temperature!

[dialtone]

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/merc ... -proposal/

So in the end it's all going to fall apart because some / all of the rest want to break the compression limit when cold?

Not sure how they didn't see this coming, if you make having a max compression ratio at any temperature, not just at ambient, the basis of your argument, why would you think the FIA's answer would be to just test at a hot temperature!

As I wrote, now that everyone knows that tricks are allowed, tricks will be incoming since they can change that area of the engine for next year.

FIA are clowns.

[WardenOfTheNorth]

Was ferrari ever forced to install sensors that no one else had to install? That does seem out of line. Seems like they would have at least checked some other teams. If one is doing it others might also. Whatever it was they thought ferrari was doing. Obviously at first they were doing something if they lost power after a clarification was issued.

No. Everyone had the sensors installed.

So actually, the new test at a higher temperature is a good analogy in that everyone has to pass it.

Nope, Ferrari was the only car with a split battery and they installed on it a special sensor for that. All because Horner thought that something he didn't know was going on. of course nothing was going on.

Apologies, I thought you meant the fuel flow sensors.

[AR3-GP]

There is something that doesn't make sense to me. Why is the FIA letting the inmates run the asylum? If the FIA believes that going above 16:1 is not okay, then they should revise the regulations on their own. Why does this need approval from the manufacturers?

[Badger]

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/merc ... -proposal/

So in the end it's all going to fall apart because some / all of the rest want to break the compression limit when cold?

Not sure how they didn't see this coming, if you make having a max compression ratio at any temperature, not just at ambient, the basis of your argument, why would you think the FIA's answer would be to just test at a hot temperature!

This is exactly what I said yesterday. We have been operating under the assumption that engines just increase their CR when running hot, that may not be the case. I think the rumour that Merc is running close to 18:1 is completely unrealistic if that is the case. They may be able to run slightly higher when hot whereas some of the others actually decrease a little bit, and that is where the rumoured advantage stems from.

Still, it does not make sense why the others would vote down this proposal if their CR decreases or remains the same. Everyone was already complying with the ambient test, so a hot test for someone with a decreasing/constant CR is not going to be a problem. It would only be a problem for a car with an increasing CR at temperature.

[ScottB]

There is something that doesn't make sense to me. Why is the FIA letting the inmates run the asylum? If the FIA believes that going above 16:1 is not okay, then they should revise the regulations on their own. Why does this need approval from the manufacturers?

The sooner you want the change to happen, the more people need to vote for it, essentially. Changing something in season requires a super majority.

The FIA seems content that the Mercedes engine was legal, it was the other manufacturers that objected, and now don't like the answer they've been offered.

[AR3-GP]

=-==

[ScottB]

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/merc ... -proposal/

So in the end it's all going to fall apart because some / all of the rest want to break the compression limit when cold?

Not sure how they didn't see this coming, if you make having a max compression ratio at any temperature, not just at ambient, the basis of your argument, why would you think the FIA's answer would be to just test at a hot temperature!

This is exactly what I said yesterday. We have been operating under the assumption that engines just increase their CR when running hot, that may not be the case. I think the rumour that Merc is running close to 18:1 is completely unrealistic if that is the case. They may be able to run slightly higher when hot whereas some of the others actually decrease a little bit, and that is where the rumoured advantage stems from.

Still, it does not make sense why the others would vote down this proposal if their CR decreases or remains the same. Everyone was already complying with the ambient test, so a hot test for someone with a decreasing/constant CR is not going to be a problem. It would only be a problem for a car with an increasing CR at temperature.

Presumably they've now got their own versions in the works and have decided the benefits are worth it and this now goes away?

[AR3-GP]

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/merc ... -proposal/

So in the end it's all going to fall apart because some / all of the rest want to break the compression limit when cold?

Not sure how they didn't see this coming, if you make having a max compression ratio at any temperature, not just at ambient, the basis of your argument, why would you think the FIA's answer would be to just test at a hot temperature!

The Hughes article doesn't make any sense whatsoever. If they vote down the test, then it will just remain a cold test at 16:1 and they won't be able to run above 16:1 at ambient so that it comes down to 16:1 hot. So what is the benefit of voting it down?

If test is done ALSO when hot, then there's potential to actually hinder Mercedes which is what the manufacturers want. It makes zero sense to go back to square one which is JUST a cold test which apparently ONLY hinders everyone but Mercedes.

[ScottB]

The Hughes article doesn't make any sense. He's a Merc fan. If they vote down the test, then it will just remain a cold test at 16:1 and they won't be able to run above 16:1 at ambient so that it comes down to 16:1 hot. So what is the benefit of voting it down?

If test becomes cold and hot, then there's potential to actually hinder Mercedes.

I guess either;

They want to push for a purely hot test, to the advantage of that faction.

They don't think their own engine would pass the proposed 130C oven test.

[Badger]

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/merc ... -proposal/

So in the end it's all going to fall apart because some / all of the rest want to break the compression limit when cold?

Not sure how they didn't see this coming, if you make having a max compression ratio at any temperature, not just at ambient, the basis of your argument, why would you think the FIA's answer would be to just test at a hot temperature!

This is exactly what I said yesterday. We have been operating under the assumption that engines just increase their CR when running hot, that may not be the case. I think the rumour that Merc is running close to 18:1 is completely unrealistic if that is the case. They may be able to run slightly higher when hot whereas some of the others actually decrease a little bit, and that is where the rumoured advantage stems from.

Still, it does not make sense why the others would vote down this proposal if their CR decreases or remains the same. Everyone was already complying with the ambient test, so a hot test for someone with a decreasing/constant CR is not going to be a problem. It would only be a problem for a car with an increasing CR at temperature.

Presumably they've now got their own versions in the works and have decided the benefits are worth it and this now goes away?

They've done this precisely because they don't want the hassle of having to develop their own expanding CR engine, so that makes no sense at all. Also bringing in this test mid season has the chance of nerfing Merc, whereas developing their own version of Merc's exploit would likely have to wait until 2027. Mark Hughes doesn't actually explain why they would vote it down, it seems like a bait headline to me.

[WardenOfTheNorth]

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/merc ... -proposal/

So in the end it's all going to fall apart because some / all of the rest want to break the compression limit when cold?

Not sure how they didn't see this coming, if you make having a max compression ratio at any temperature, not just at ambient, the basis of your argument, why would you think the FIA's answer would be to just test at a hot temperature!

This is exactly what I said yesterday. We have been operating under the assumption that engines just increase their CR when running hot, that may not be the case. I think the rumour that Merc is running close to 18:1 is completely unrealistic if that is the case. They may be able to run slightly higher when hot whereas some of the others actually decrease a little bit, and that is where the rumoured advantage stems from.

Still, it does not make sense why the others would vote down this proposal if their CR decreases or remains the same. Everyone was already complying with the ambient test, so a hot test for someone with a decreasing/constant CR is not going to be a problem. It would only be a problem for a car with an increasing CR at temperature.

Presumably they've now got their own versions in the works and have decided the benefits are worth it and this now goes away?

Didn't Ferrari say they're not going to protest, they just want to know what is and isn't allowed?

Sounds to me like someone planning to bring their own in.

What changes are allowed under the new development allowance rules?

[PlatinumZealot]

If anybody's engine can play compression ratio tricks it's the Ferrari one, if the steel cylinder head rumours are true.

Btw.. Another place to put a sealable chamber is under the piston crown but when cold the air enters from a hole in the side near the rings. Under load and with oil the rings block this holes. This way is easier to copy though.

[richardn]

So, if Mercedes clever trick doesn't actually exceed 16:1 even when hot, but stops the ratio from dropping to 15.x:1 when at running temp then they probably aren't cheating at all?

Taking the article at face value, maybe the other PU manufacturers wanted to use inevitable PUAC tokens to get to parity when running on the cheap, by being above 16:1 at ambient.

[fourmula1]

but what about the 60 pages of claims of certainty! Guess we still have no idea whats going on. Probably nothing. Teams just want rules clarified and fixe so they can get on with it.