2026 McLaren Mastercard F1 Team

[FittingMechanics]

https://x.com/McLarenF1/status/2033151912145498186?s=20

Here and in post race article, they are clearly pointing at Mercedes for the issue. Maybe they are just incompetent.

Mercedes had an issue in qualifying with Russell almost not making a lap in Q3. It doesn't have to be deliberate, it is obvious that reliability and understanding of all these systems is still low.

[Balalu]

I don't think that today was deliberate. It is absurd to even think it. But the fact that Mercedes can learn from it's customers, but it is not reciprocated, is also absurd. Millions are paid by the customers for these engines; it's not charity.

[mwillems]

I could have posted lots of quotes from this one but I thought to go with a positive:

"Every lap is important in 2026. At the same time, I think we are learning quite rapidly. And with what we have learned in Australia, in the China sprint, we think we are actually in a good position now in terms of especially exploiting the power units."

https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433 ... chinese-gp

Exactly.

[mwillems]

I don't think that today was deliberate. It is absurd to even think it. But the fact that Mercedes can learn from it's customers, but it is not recipricated, is also absurd. Millions are paid by the customers for these engines; it's not charity.

There's little that works teams can exploit now, but this is it. It's a one season deal in the main. The advantage will shrink quickly in this season, but personally I'm happy to see us develop. We did it before and to two WCCs, a year off is OK.

[CjC]

Sorry guys, I know this is paywalled but there are plenty of encouraging quotes to be pulled from this article as well.

This one in particular:

"There's good stuff happening in development, so I would expect that the car will be significantly improved in the coming races, especially starting from Miami, but obviously we will have to see what the rate of development is of the other teams, because all cars will be improved."

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/how- ... /10805608/

[mwillems]

And that is exactly right, we don't need to panic. This is multi year regs and is nearing a century old sport. I actually enjoyed watching the battle to struggle to the front, and to then finally take the titles. Now we go again.

[emp]

Mercedes helped define this formula, remember.
Plus, whatever they were doing in the development over the past few years, they 'submitted' things to FIA and 'got approval' (while other PU manufacturers were doing the same, but FIA never thought there was something cheeky being done by Mercedes), only for other teams to question FIA after 'rumours' starting popping out later ; which is when FIA decided to 'play the egalitarian' and came up with a 'new test' but still allowed Mercedes ('our engine is FIA approved') to run the illegal engine all the way until the summer break, 1/2 way into the season. There is absolutely no transparency about whether there is any actual physical testing as part of homologation or just 'CAD drawing approval'.
In times like these, that's when I remember - 'oh wait, this isn't really a 'sport' per se, this is just the annual competition within an engineering club, where they pay a fee to some 'adjudicator' to frame up the rules of competition and check compliance'. There is nothing anywhere that says the FIA are 'free from being influenced' & that the FIA have enough technical wherewithal to 'find/unhide' cheating. FIA discovers cheating or issues TDs only when member(s) of the automotive club rat each other out and put pressure on FIA to do so.

So they followed all the legal proceedings and people are mad because they may have found a loophole which may or may not be legal but people can't prove it's illegal because they got the approval from the FIA and all the people have is rage bait and click bait on the internet?

If anything, people should be mad at the FIA and applaud Mercedes because they did the clever engineering. Like they should applaud (from a technical perspective, as we are on a technical forum and not on social media) the double diffuser or the F duct or the DAS or the fan car or the 2014 Mercedes engine and the examples may go on.

Instead, people applaud clever engineering only when it's their team that does it, which is hypocrisy at it's finest and not something expected on a technical forum.

It's FIA whom I am blaming (didn't you get that?), they are a 'for hire judge' who get paid by FoM/Liberty (or whoever 'runs' the sport). Remember the 'fuel flow trick' by Ferrari ? FIA couldn't find it themselves from the data they have in hand (or maybe turned a blind eye), other teams had to 'convince' them from the same data. I don't expect anything different with the Mercedes engine for these regs. Because there is a much bigger battery and much higher recharge/discharge rate, I reckon it will be 'much harder' than 2019, to expose the compression ratio trick (or any other trick circumventing the rules) in the ICE. And even the 2019 cheat was 'settled' behind closed doors. With the nature of the business being such, stop arguing with the defence 'FIA has approved'. FIA have neither the technical nous nor the intention to 'find tricks' , unless another team presents 'evidence' and forces their hand.

I'm sorry, I don't defend the FIA. But their job is to police or make the rules, not to be the moral police for some internet fans. It is not their job to be the smartest out of all the engineers working in the teams. It is their job to make sure that everyone follows the rules.

Are the rules designed with some loopholes in them? Exploit it until it's closed. That's always been the case in every set of rules. Now they seem to be focused on the compression trick, but my speculation is that there isn't any compression trick that will be suddenly stopped when the new test comes in June and Mercedes will still be ahead on the power unit side.

Isn't the base of sporting regulations and every regulation "innocent until proven guilty"? Now we just decide that the fans are judge, jury and executioner just based on vibes and rumours?

C'mon. If they did something and has the seal of approval, it means that at the time of approval it was legal. If the others didn't do it, it's on them to be better.

Like in 2014 with the MGUH and ES flow and MGUH to MGUK flow. No other team thought of that, so it must be banned? That's how most of this sounds to me.

[geogate]

i do agree that the homologation date needs to be changed. I don't believe in the conspiracy stuff, but i do think Mercedes played that to their advantage. But, it is easily fixed. We just need a competent regulator.
Mercedes will have a few months advantage - we knew that beforehand. I expect us to catch them by summer break though. Im like a broken record, but our car is significantly over weight ... that will be fixed regardless of needing better upgrades

[venkyhere]

So they followed all the legal proceedings and people are mad because they may have found a loophole which may or may not be legal but people can't prove it's illegal because they got the approval from the FIA and all the people have is rage bait and click bait on the internet?

If anything, people should be mad at the FIA and applaud Mercedes because they did the clever engineering. Like they should applaud (from a technical perspective, as we are on a technical forum and not on social media) the double diffuser or the F duct or the DAS or the fan car or the 2014 Mercedes engine and the examples may go on.

Instead, people applaud clever engineering only when it's their team that does it, which is hypocrisy at it's finest and not something expected on a technical forum.

It's FIA whom I am blaming (didn't you get that?), they are a 'for hire judge' who get paid by FoM/Liberty (or whoever 'runs' the sport). Remember the 'fuel flow trick' by Ferrari ? FIA couldn't find it themselves from the data they have in hand (or maybe turned a blind eye), other teams had to 'convince' them from the same data. I don't expect anything different with the Mercedes engine for these regs. Because there is a much bigger battery and much higher recharge/discharge rate, I reckon it will be 'much harder' than 2019, to expose the compression ratio trick (or any other trick circumventing the rules) in the ICE. And even the 2019 cheat was 'settled' behind closed doors. With the nature of the business being such, stop arguing with the defence 'FIA has approved'. FIA have neither the technical nous nor the intention to 'find tricks' , unless another team presents 'evidence' and forces their hand.

I'm sorry, I don't defend the FIA. But their job is to police or make the rules, not to be the moral police for some internet fans. It is not their job to be the smartest out of all the engineers working in the teams. It is their job to make sure that everyone follows the rules.

Are the rules designed with some loopholes in them? Exploit it until it's closed. That's always been the case in every set of rules. Now they seem to be focused on the compression trick, but my speculation is that there isn't any compression trick that will be suddenly stopped when the new test comes in June and Mercedes will still be ahead on the power unit side.

Isn't the base of sporting regulations and every regulation "innocent until proven guilty"? Now we just decide that the fans are judge, jury and executioner just based on vibes and rumours?

C'mon. If they did something and has the seal of approval, it means that at the time of approval it was legal. If the others didn't do it, it's on them to be better.

Like in 2014 with the MGUH and ES flow and MGUH to MGUK flow. No other team thought of that, so it must be banned? That's how most of this sounds to me.

So Lance Armstrong was innocent, and would have stayed innocent had there been no whistleblower(s). He/his team cleverly exploited a loophole in the doping test, for many years. So he should be rather congratulated instead of being called a cheat, right ?
I have no personal connections to the sport, am only a fan of great engg and great driving, irrespective of which team/driver. The last formula had 'marginal' cases of 'rule loophole exploitation' mainly because it was an engine-freeze formula, and there is only so much that teams can 'hide' with aero, because it's 'visible'. That's not the case with an engine formula.
My questions/comments are only aimed at the way the sport has 'not exactly been fair' and continues to do so today. So bet it. The intention of my post was only to point out that the 'FIA approved' argument is flawed. Not just vide their competence, but given the history of corruption and favouritism over many decades. I am not asking for a 'revolutionary change' to how the sport is governed, I am just saying please stop with the 'chickenfeed excuse' of FIA approved = everything fine.

[Dimond]

Sorry guys, I know this is paywalled but there are plenty of encouraging quotes to be pulled from this article as well.

This one in particular:

"There's good stuff happening in development, so I would expect that the car will be significantly improved in the coming races, especially starting from Miami, but obviously we will have to see what the rate of development is of the other teams, because all cars will be improved."

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/how- ... /10805608/

An unpaywalled version (might ask you to select fire hydrants before reading)

https://archive.is/XUjpZ

[emp]

It's FIA whom I am blaming (didn't you get that?), they are a 'for hire judge' who get paid by FoM/Liberty (or whoever 'runs' the sport). Remember the 'fuel flow trick' by Ferrari ? FIA couldn't find it themselves from the data they have in hand (or maybe turned a blind eye), other teams had to 'convince' them from the same data. I don't expect anything different with the Mercedes engine for these regs. Because there is a much bigger battery and much higher recharge/discharge rate, I reckon it will be 'much harder' than 2019, to expose the compression ratio trick (or any other trick circumventing the rules) in the ICE. And even the 2019 cheat was 'settled' behind closed doors. With the nature of the business being such, stop arguing with the defence 'FIA has approved'. FIA have neither the technical nous nor the intention to 'find tricks' , unless another team presents 'evidence' and forces their hand.

I'm sorry, I don't defend the FIA. But their job is to police or make the rules, not to be the moral police for some internet fans. It is not their job to be the smartest out of all the engineers working in the teams. It is their job to make sure that everyone follows the rules.

Are the rules designed with some loopholes in them? Exploit it until it's closed. That's always been the case in every set of rules. Now they seem to be focused on the compression trick, but my speculation is that there isn't any compression trick that will be suddenly stopped when the new test comes in June and Mercedes will still be ahead on the power unit side.

Isn't the base of sporting regulations and every regulation "innocent until proven guilty"? Now we just decide that the fans are judge, jury and executioner just based on vibes and rumours?

C'mon. If they did something and has the seal of approval, it means that at the time of approval it was legal. If the others didn't do it, it's on them to be better.

Like in 2014 with the MGUH and ES flow and MGUH to MGUK flow. No other team thought of that, so it must be banned? That's how most of this sounds to me.

So Lance Armstrong was innocent, and would have stayed innocent had there been no whistleblower(s). He/his team cleverly exploited a loophole in the doping test, for many years. So he should be rather congratulated instead of being called a cheat, right ?
I have no personal connections to the sport, am only a fan of great engg and great driving, irrespective of which team/driver. The last formula had 'marginal' cases of 'rule loophole exploitation' mainly because it was an engine-freeze formula, and there is only so much that teams can 'hide' with aero, because it's 'visible'. That's not the case with an engine formula.
My questions/comments are only aimed at the way the sport has 'not exactly been fair' and continues to do so today. So bet it. The intention of my post was only to point out that the 'FIA approved' argument is flawed. Not just vide their competence, but given the history of corruption and favouritism over many decades. I am not asking for a 'revolutionary change' to how the sport is governed, I am just saying please stop with the 'chickenfeed excuse' of FIA approved = everything fine.

Please stop with the whataboutism and thinking that personal doping in a sport where no motorized vehicle is involved equals following the rules and even getting an approval from the regulator that what they do is ok from a legal, engineering and rules perspective.

Biology is not maths or physics and shouldn't be used as comparison.

As I said, if the rules are flawed and someone gets an advantage it will be exactly what happened in every regulatory cycle. They will issue a technical directive or something and the loophole will be closed, but not without evidence and certainly not because someone on the internet is thinking that.

As I've said, the FIA is not there to do things without reasonable evidence and certainly and they have without doubt a lot of flaws.

I don't know what they could do here or what they could've done better considering that they have no evidence at the moment.

[Emag]

Sorry guys, I know this is paywalled but there are plenty of encouraging quotes to be pulled from this article as well.

This one in particular:

"There's good stuff happening in development, so I would expect that the car will be significantly improved in the coming races, especially starting from Miami, but obviously we will have to see what the rate of development is of the other teams, because all cars will be improved."

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/how- ... /10805608/

An unpaywalled version (might ask you to select fire hydrants before reading)

https://archive.is/XUjpZ

"This car that we have at the moment is a solid platform. If anything, it's slightly underdeveloped, let me say. There's nothing in the car that is not sound conceptually, it just needs to be developed further."

Ah but when I called this car a little basic compared to its rivals I was flogged for my opinion

[venkyhere]

As I said, if the rules are flawed and someone gets an advantage it will be exactly what happened in every regulatory cycle. They will issue a technical directive or something and the loophole will be closed, but not without evidence and certainly not because someone on the internet is thinking that.

As I've said, the FIA is not there to do things without reasonable evidence and certainly and they have without doubt a lot of flaws.

I don't know what they could do here or what they could've done better considering that they have no evidence at the moment.

"Define a 'geometric compression ratio test' by themselves, using a fluid/gas as the displacement object, instead of asking teams how they want the CR to be measured"
- for starters.
an actual test defined by the governing body, instead of gymnastics with words about re-definition, temperature etc. Every PU manufacturer has to submit their engines and FIA will decide whether it passes the test or not. It's only geometric CR, all they need is an engine on a bench (no sensor info, no dyno, no temperature checking, nothing) and a fluid/gas pumping mechanism of their own. The engine need not run at all. How hard can it be ?

[McFAN]

Sorry guys, I know this is paywalled but there are plenty of encouraging quotes to be pulled from this article as well.

This one in particular:

"There's good stuff happening in development, so I would expect that the car will be significantly improved in the coming races, especially starting from Miami, but obviously we will have to see what the rate of development is of the other teams, because all cars will be improved."

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/how- ... /10805608/

An unpaywalled version (might ask you to select fire hydrants before reading)

https://archive.is/XUjpZ

"This car that we have at the moment is a solid platform. If anything, it's slightly underdeveloped, let me say. There's nothing in the car that is not sound conceptually, it just needs to be developed further."

Ah but when I called this car a little basic compared to its rivals I was flogged for my opinion

Tbf the contention was was whether one could tell the level of complexity just by "eyeballing" the car, we all acknowledge that there's more development to come.

PS: I personally also thought that the downwashing sidepod geometry does "look" kinda basic
but who knows

[Waz]

Sorry guys, I know this is paywalled but there are plenty of encouraging quotes to be pulled from this article as well.

This one in particular:

"There's good stuff happening in development, so I would expect that the car will be significantly improved in the coming races, especially starting from Miami, but obviously we will have to see what the rate of development is of the other teams, because all cars will be improved."

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/how- ... /10805608/

An unpaywalled version (might ask you to select fire hydrants before reading)

https://archive.is/XUjpZ

"This car that we have at the moment is a solid platform. If anything, it's slightly underdeveloped, let me say. There's nothing in the car that is not sound conceptually, it just needs to be developed further."

Ah but when I called this car a little basic compared to its rivals I was flogged for my opinion

Really? McLaren have said all along that the car is basic, because of the wind tunnel restrictions etc. And they said it would be for the first few races. This was from preseason testing already.