2025/2026 Hybrid Powerunit speculation

[Hoffman900]

If they kept the current rules but got rid of 2 way comms and all the feedback on the wheel, it could potentially be interesting, but that’s about it.

[vorticism]

Superclipping is the most noticeable thing for the casual viewer. Conceptual revision to the generation rules: if revs flatline for more than x s, or if revs reduce, then generating cuts out and doesn’t return for x s or until passing transponders indicating track location i.e. generating curve doesn’t reset until the next straight. This would force longer durations in-gear and slower acceleration but would punish the flatlining and bogging-down associated with superclipping i.e. the casual viewer wouldn’t be able to notice generating occuring. Each braking zone would have to be raced toward (as usual, as they viewer is used to seeing), and not coasted toward, or else no generating.

f.e. “generating which occurs outside of braking events may only occur during an RPM increase of minimum rate x...”

[vorticism]

Some fundamental questions would be:
-should this sort of parallel-hybrid or parasitic-hybrid be in motorsport
-does axle regen belong in motorsport

(these two are not one in the same but the way they've combined them in F1 is actually clever and efficient)

If so, how should it be implemented. If so, should it be found at this level of motorsport.

You can make an argument from physics that regenerative braking systems can reduce vehicle mass--you could also make arguments that regen systems increase vehicle mass. There are so many variables in a chosen domain that the answer is not one-size-fits-all. Similarly you could argue one way or the other that hybrid drive systems can reduce or increase vehicle mass, depending on the domain.

Personally, I’d ditch axle regen entirely and get back to 100% friction braking because it offers the best braking feel at best cost & efficiency (within a familiar domain). Feel is the (?) most important dynamic for an athelete. No sprinters wears loafers. Tackle fuel efficiency by other methods. Deciding that method is easier said than done when dozens of interest groups are involved, each prefering different types of fuel, thermodynamics, engines, manufacturing methods, etc.

[wuzak]

If we were to ban super clipping and LiCo, the cars would be horrifically slow, since they would be turbo lagging out of slow corners with almost no electrical power at all available to compensate for it.

The interesting thing about slow corners, where turbo lag may be noticeable, is that they are usually proceeded by a braking zone.

If we combine energy recovery under braking at 350kW with maximum deployment of 200kW, there should be enough to get the cars past the turbo lag and accelerate them down the straight.

That is not a good option compared to slowing the cars down slightly with decreased deployment rates, which would make the tradeoffs that encourage excessive LiCo and super clipping disappear.

Reducing the deployment rate will increase the time deployment is available, but doubtful that it would reduce LiCo or super-clipping.

LiCo and super clipping are driven by the amount of recharging possible under braking and part-throttle and the amount that is allowed per lap.

There are only one or two tracks on the calendar that have enough braking to come close to the energy limit.

Realistically super clipping is a good thing for the viewer, but only in certain cases. The ideal use cases for super clipping are places like Monza turns 1-2, the Monaco hairpin, turns 1-2 in Shanghai, the Suzuka hairpin, the pitlane etc. In other words super clipping is good when it is being used in places where you would otherwise be off-throttle or at a low but relatively constant speed, or where you would be gradually slowing down regardless.

Those examples, I would argue, would be part-throttle recharging, not super clipping.

[JordanMugen]

Cars racing each other is the majority of spectacle.

Not for qualifying it isn't! Are Liberty Media happy for viewership of qualifying day to collapse?

If they kept the current rules but got rid of 2 way comms and all the feedback on the wheel, it could potentially be interesting, but that’s about it.

Wouldn't that be really dangerous with unpredictable cars where drivers had no idea how much power or harvesting they will have at any point?

f.e. “generating which occurs outside of braking events may only occur during an RPM increase of minimum rate x...”

That would work! Excellent idea.

Doesn't it contradict the nature of even pure ICE cars to plateau and stop accelerating at the end of long straights though, which is when you would want to harvest with a hybrid car?

Personally, I’d ditch axle regen entirely and get back to 100% friction braking because it offers the best braking feel at best cost & efficiency (within a familiar domain). Feel is the (?) most important dynamic for an athelete.

I see!

The interesting thing about slow corners, where turbo lag may be noticeable, is that they are usually proceeded by a braking zone.

Exactly why was anti-lag banned in these rules? Just because of the gunfire sounds being undesirable, or because it would waste fuel?

[Farnborough]

Teams will be beefing up the clutch system to do the start on full throttle and boost.

The teams that have specified a lowered 1st ratio do look to be "on point" with what we've seen so far.

We've obviously yet to see a live and fully competitive launch with 22 cars yet though.

Getting the clutch fully closed with that lower ratio will prompt earlier build of boost too, with Ferrari apparently favouring a smaller turbo, then it does look to be stacked in their favour through erudite planning.

Well that's funny

One team appears to, so far, got this more optimal than the others.

[Tommy Cookers]

Maybe stupid questions for the experts, how feasable would it be to add a front axle a smaller mguk/electric generator for next year?

apparently the experts have all left the building

additionally to the mechanical complexities there is a difficulty that has been ignored ....

the MG is slaved to the ICE so benefits by working through the 8 speed gearbox with a 3.15 spread between 1st and 8th
so eg at all speeds from 100 kph to 315 kph the MG and CE work most efficiently (at high voltage/'low' current)

but with a front axle MG or G-only the electrics must work at high current/low voltages (and high voltage/'low' current)
this is less efficient ie it wastes energy and demands far more cooling

perhaps this is the time for the rhombic wheel arrangement that was advocated decades ago ?
2 wheels at mid-wheelbase, 1 front wheel, and 1 rear wheel ....
ie adding a more rearward weight distribution facilitating aero .....
and 3 wheel drive/regen for PU & gearbox (behind driver)

[jacme22]

Maybe stupid questions for the experts, how feasable would it be to add a front axle a smaller mguk/electric generator for next year?

apparently the experts have all left the building

additionally to the mechanical complexities there is a difficulty that has been ignored ....

the MG is slaved to the ICE so benefits by working through the 8 speed gearbox with a 3.15 spread between 1st and 8th
so eg at all speeds from 100 kph to 315 kph the MG and CE work most efficiently (at high voltage/'low' current)

but with a front axle MG or G-only the electrics must work at high current/low voltages (and high voltage/'low' current)
this is less efficient ie it wastes energy and demands far more cooling

perhaps this is the time for the rhombic wheel arrangement that was advocated decades ago ?
2 wheels at mid-wheelbase, 1 front wheel, and 1 rear wheel ....
ie adding a more rearward weight distribution facilitating aero .....
and 3 wheel drive/regen for PU & gearbox (behind driver)

So not feasible . Yeah I was underestimating the additional complexities of adding regen braking to the front axle.

Considering F1 is boasting already about the number of overtakes in Australia I wouldn't be suprised, if the ratings are good, that they don't change the regs a bit. Maybe they push Mercedes to share more information with the customer teams to make a race or two exciting.

[mzso]

Not for qualifying it isn't! Are Liberty Media happy for viewership of qualifying day to collapse?

Why would it? That's about watching a timer and drivers crossing a finish line.

Superclipping is the most noticeable thing for the casual viewer.

On on-boards, if pointed out. Even then they'll forget about it in 5 minutes. You think too much of casual viewers.

Barring rear-end collisions, or other safety issues nothing is likely to change. We did almost have one at the start. It wasn't broadcast (unless I missed it, but even the commentators reacted to it as if it was new footage). It was only shown in the driver's cool-down room.

[mzso]

Any reason why would cars would only have "20" or "0" percent charge at the start as Leclerc and Russel claimed?

It doesn't make sense. There's plenty opportunity to recharge on the warm-up lap, even if they started from zero for some reason.

[JordanMugen]

Not for qualifying it isn't! Are Liberty Media happy for viewership of qualifying day to collapse?

Why would it? That's about watching a timer and drivers crossing a finish line.

Or it's about watching cars pushed flat out...

You reckon the cars are still spectacular in qualifying even with the superclipping and sacrificing corners?

Superclipping is the most noticeable thing for the casual viewer.

On on-boards, if pointed out. Even then they'll forget about it in 5 minutes.

You seem to underestimate the intelligence of racing fans.

It is normal that in a racing car with a combustion engine that the driver is hard on the throttle then jumps on the brake at the last moment, at least in qualifying. Fans expect this.

The old clipping was sufficiently hidden to not be a problem, where the superclipping is predominant even in the pole position lap.

[gearboxtrouble]

After watching the race my conclusion is the new rules are a farce. Laptime and position changes come from automated energy management decisions, not driver judgement and skill. F1 needs to fix this fast and the primary goal should be to remove superclipping entirely - the cars should not decide to take fast corners 40-50 kph lower than they can just because its optimal for laptime. Li co is more acceptable as the drivers control that. My suggestions to do this-

• 2026 - Dynamically set the MGUK power cap per race weekend based on the amount of energy available to achieve full power (however low that is) all the time the cars are at 100% throttle. Make overtake a +50KW power boost that the drivers control.

• 2027 to 2029 - Increase the energy flow by 20% and the max fuel energy density by 20% and cap the MGUK power at 200KW (+50KW for overtake). This should bring us back to on demand 1000+ hp cars.

• 2030+ - F1 is fully 1000 hp ICE only with sustainable fuels and a small +50KW electric push to pass. FE is electric, WEC is hybrid and F1 is sustainable ICE. This should be the future of motorsports

[Cold Fussion]

After watching the race my conclusion is the new rules are a farce. Laptime and position changes come from automated energy management decisions, not driver judgement and skill. F1 needs to fix this fast and the primary goal should be to remove superclipping entirely - the cars should not decide to take fast corners 40-50 kph lower than they can just because its optimal for laptime. Li co is more acceptable as the drivers control that. My suggestions to do this-

• 2026 - Dynamically set the MGUK power cap per race weekend based on the amount of energy available to achieve full power (however low that is) all the time the cars are at 100% throttle. Make overtake a +50KW power boost that the drivers control.

• 2027 to 2029 - Increase the energy flow by 20% and the max fuel energy density by 20% and cap the MGUK power at 200KW (+50KW for overtake). This should bring us back to on demand 1000+ hp cars.

• 2030+ - F1 is fully 1000 hp ICE only with sustainable fuels and a small +50KW electric push to pass. FE is electric, WEC is hybrid and F1 is sustainable ICE. This should be the future of motorsports

How do you propose to increase the fuel LHV to 49.2 MJ/Kg? That's almost pure methane's LHV.

[gearboxtrouble]

After watching the race my conclusion is the new rules are a farce. Laptime and position changes come from automated energy management decisions, not driver judgement and skill. F1 needs to fix this fast and the primary goal should be to remove superclipping entirely - the cars should not decide to take fast corners 40-50 kph lower than they can just because its optimal for laptime. Li co is more acceptable as the drivers control that. My suggestions to do this-

• 2026 - Dynamically set the MGUK power cap per race weekend based on the amount of energy available to achieve full power (however low that is) all the time the cars are at 100% throttle. Make overtake a +50KW power boost that the drivers control.

• 2027 to 2029 - Increase the energy flow by 20% and the max fuel energy density by 20% and cap the MGUK power at 200KW (+50KW for overtake). This should bring us back to on demand 1000+ hp cars.

• 2030+ - F1 is fully 1000 hp ICE only with sustainable fuels and a small +50KW electric push to pass. FE is electric, WEC is hybrid and F1 is sustainable ICE. This should be the future of motorsports

How do you propose to increase the fuel LHV to 49.2 MJ/Kg? That's almost pure methane's LHV.

Fair enough - the goal was to get to ~700 hp without increasing the fuel weight dramatically. 20% on the lower bound of the current range is somewhere around high end conventional race fuels. Maybe a 10% increase from the middle of the range combined with a compression ratio increase could do the job.

[Winterapfel]

There were some comments made by the Mercedes customer teams about needing to understand the power unit and software better.

How does this work? Mercedes has to provide equal engines and software to the customer teams? but doesn't have to tell them what software settings to best use or perhaps doesn't even have to give any explanation on the software, the way to use the software and how to deal with all settings and variables?