2026 McLaren Mastercard F1 Team

[De Wet]

I am not because he is respectful unlike the one who posted. And I prefer to see it as half full instead as half empty. And I dont see why decision making has been taken away when it requires you to strategize for maximum efficiency. And its not a problem it cant be fixed.

You seriously think these idiots who allowed these stupid engine rules will fix it properly ?

I can't tell you if they can or not but I would like to give them a chance to do it. It's not really hard to fix it. Just bring a battery that can last twice or thrice as much and the problem is solved. You need battery power duration.

The whole point is to move away from this heavy battery nonsense. Give them a 10/20kg battery and let's see what they can do with it. Let them use it which ever way they want. Might produce some clever engineering. Allow the ICE to produce 800/900hp.

[venkyhere]

Do you know when was the last time F1 was genuine? 1950 to 2008. Half of those that are criticising the rules havent seen those eras. Are you telling me that people discovered the problem now and were content with the crappy rules of 2009-2025 with one DRS zones and cars that were unable to make a single or unable to follow the lead car? Or were they content that we have one tyre manufacturer, so few engine manufacturers, budget cap, no unlimited testing that brought us spec b, spec c and spec d, pit stop fueling and V10-V12 engines. Its hypocritical (not you, Im talking generally) to act like the problem is these rules specifically when the problem was chronial.

But regarding these rules the only problem is the battery. All you need to do is open the rules and go for a redesign even in the middle of the championship. A battery that can hold double or triple the amount of power and can be charged just as fast and the problem is solved. Lets give it some time to see what solution can they find. Ranting about it every single race certainly wont solve it faster.

It doesn't seem that you understand the actual formula/rules accurately, to appreciate the criticism of it.
Can you elaborate what you meant by :
"go for a redesign" and "battery that can hold double or triple the amount of POWER" ?

The problem, in detail :
1. The current batteries have poor charge/weight ratio, and are not state of the art battery tech, it's the same battery tech that's been there since 2014
2. The battery still has the same 'charge holding capacity' (not power) as the ones from 2014-2025, 4MJ capacity. This can't be increased because of 1 above, it will go against the need to reduce car weight.
3. Inorder to please pseudo environmentalists (who haven't yet understood/are-ignoring , life-time carbon footprint or full energy cycle from concept to decay) and some hybrid engine manufacturing giants, they decided to limit fuel flow and increase 'electrical flow' (without increasing electrical storage).
4. So now, we have slightly less heavier and slightly smaller cars, but with 2/3rd energy available to use over the entire race, whilst limiting the 'nett peak' energy rate usable to 2/3rd as well, even though the instantaneous peak energy rate can blow up to the same 1000+ hp.
5. When they realized that going '2/3rd' energy capacity and energy rate is going to ruin racing, they tried to compensate by introducing active aero, where the car can shred a huge amount of drag in certain portions of the track
6. All of the above 'cooked' together into such an energy deprived pudding, that Ai algorithms decided to make "efficient" use of electrical energy only when the steering of the car is pointing straight (corner exits and track straights), and removed 'fast cornering' from the equation, and decided to make use of corners into energy harvesting zones. These algorithms restricted the freedom the driver has with his pedals and steering, to such an extent that if a driver decides to 'go to the limit of grip' in a corner he feels confident about, the algorithm immediately flags a mistake and goes 'out of sync' and thinks that the extra duration of pedal press belongs to the next 'zone' fruther downstream on the track and does it's 'thing' here, whatever it's supposed to do later. The driver cannot decide for himself, where he wants the car to be faster or slower than typical case, depending on the situation he finds himself in. There is the 'boost' button which will give him an extra 0.5MJ energy, but the last three races suggest it's more of a bane than a boon, and drivers are not very keen/happy using this.

Now tell me, what did you mean by "go for a redesign" and "battery that can hold double or triple the amount of POWER" ?

[BMMR61]

Perfectly put. This obsession with net zero and the limitations of, among other things, battery technology, is ruinous to racing - racing defined by driving flat out while not destroying the tyres.

In a funny way, the current racing (and qualifying) is emblematic of planning a long trip in an electric vehicle. Working out when to recharge!

[Darth-Piekus]

I mean the ability for the battery to be charged faster and able to use that power for a longer time. That is what I mean by redesign.

[Magistos]

In a funny way, the current racing (and qualifying) is emblematic of planning a long trip in an electric vehicle. Working out when to recharge!

Add to that, if this is supposed to push consumer tech forward on some level - when would "daily drivers" ever use push to pass, for example? That just seems like asking for trouble. My vehicle with adaptive cruise already knows to kick into a more responsive gear and accellerate gently when I click the turn signal to the left.

(Contributed by a newer-ish (2013) fan who has gone back and watched many old seasons now, etc., and hangs out here not as an engineer, but as someone who LOVES the science and technical aspect of it all. I only joined in 2024 because I wanted to start commenting. I was a lurker for YEARS before that.)

[Darth-Piekus]

I cant wait to see the real MP4-40 at Miami. One month cant pass fast enough.

[Gillian]

In a funny way, the current racing (and qualifying) is emblematic of planning a long trip in an electric vehicle. Working out when to recharge!

Add to that, if this is supposed to push consumer tech forward on some level - when would "daily drivers" ever use push to pass, for example? That just seems like asking for trouble. My vehicle with adaptive cruise already knows to kick into a more responsive gear and accellerate gently when I click the turn signal to the left.

(Contributed by a newer-ish (2013) fan who has gone back and watched many old seasons now, etc., and hangs out here not as an engineer, but as someone who LOVES the science and technical aspect of it all. I only joined in 2024 because I wanted to start commenting. I was a lurker for YEARS before that.)

It does not and has not for decades.

[venkyhere]

I mean the ability for the battery to be charged faster and able to use that power for a longer time. That is what I mean by redesign.

How ? Energy cannot be pulled out of thin air. If you want to discharge for longer, you need bigger battery, which is a weight penalty. If you want to charge faster, you need to have more fuel flow. And the "small" (relative to the need for half the peak power to be electrical) size of the battery makes even qualifying a joke where it needs to be recharged multiple times over the single lap. Considering that the packaging is super tight with fuel tank size and the battery pack size, in situ with the car becoming shorter and narrower, without reduction in engine dimensions, what "redesign" are you talking of,and which has to happen 'within the year' ?

Your reply is just corporate speak,, without an iota of specificity or discussion of the engg tradeoffs. Henceforth, please do your hpmework, put in the effort to learn the subject matter, before dismissing comments/opinions which "look distasteful to me" as RABID FANS.

I haven't seen you argue on merit, even one subject, in this thread. All responses are based on emotion/vibes. Doesn't make for a technical discussion.

[Darth-Piekus]

I cant tell you how as Im no technician. Thats up to the engineers to find out. Obviously it cant happen within a year.

And regarding the rabid fans comment. It goes to those who are yelling about how bad the rules are constantly every single race with the corporate speak you said and no homework. They said it once, twice, three, four times. At a point its annoying. Obviously that doesnt go to you unless though you feel you are one of them. Are you?

The last sentence wasnt needed. Its a personal opinion and keep it to yourself. Everyone pretty much has emotional responses.

[Jaymz]

I mean the ability for the battery to be charged faster and able to use that power for a longer time. That is what I mean by redesign.

How ? Energy cannot be pulled out of thin air. If you want to discharge for longer, you need bigger battery, which is a weight penalty. If you want to charge faster, you need to have more fuel flow. And the "small" (relative to the need for half the peak power to be electrical) size of the battery makes even qualifying a joke where it needs to be recharged multiple times over the single lap. Considering that the packaging is super tight with fuel tank size and the battery pack size, in situ with the car becoming shorter and narrower, without reduction in engine dimensions, what "redesign" are you talking of,and which has to happen 'within the year' ?

Your reply is just corporate speak,, without an iota of specificity or discussion of the engg tradeoffs. Henceforth, please do your hpmework, put in the effort to learn the subject matter, before dismissing comments/opinions which "look distasteful to me" as RABID FANS.

I haven't seen you argue on merit, even one subject, in this thread. All responses are based on emotion/vibes. Doesn't make for a technical discussion.

Calm down. Not like you know any better about redesigning a battery for an F1 PU.

[Emag]

I mean the ability for the battery to be charged faster and able to use that power for a longer time. That is what I mean by redesign.

How ? Energy cannot be pulled out of thin air. If you want to discharge for longer, you need bigger battery, which is a weight penalty. If you want to charge faster, you need to have more fuel flow. And the "small" (relative to the need for half the peak power to be electrical) size of the battery makes even qualifying a joke where it needs to be recharged multiple times over the single lap. Considering that the packaging is super tight with fuel tank size and the battery pack size, in situ with the car becoming shorter and narrower, without reduction in engine dimensions, what "redesign" are you talking of,and which has to happen 'within the year' ?

Your reply is just corporate speak,, without an iota of specificity or discussion of the engg tradeoffs. Henceforth, please do your hpmework, put in the effort to learn the subject matter, before dismissing comments/opinions which "look distasteful to me" as RABID FANS.

I haven't seen you argue on merit, even one subject, in this thread. All responses are based on emotion/vibes. Doesn't make for a technical discussion.

I've said it before, but I think they should just bite the bullet and make the cars slower and limit both deployment rate and capacity. Instead of having these burst accelerations that dump the battery in 3 seconds, they have to allow for softer mappings and enforce them so that it empties only up to a specified percentage of the total capacity on a given straight.

It would remove super clipping (on some tracks they might still clip on the top end), make recharging easier and overall bring back the driver factor in most corners. The downside is that the cars will probably be 2-3 seconds slower (or more depending on track). I personally don't care that much about laptimes if it improves the bullsh*t they created with this ruleset.

[Jaymz]

I mean the ability for the battery to be charged faster and able to use that power for a longer time. That is what I mean by redesign.

How ? Energy cannot be pulled out of thin air. If you want to discharge for longer, you need bigger battery, which is a weight penalty. If you want to charge faster, you need to have more fuel flow. And the "small" (relative to the need for half the peak power to be electrical) size of the battery makes even qualifying a joke where it needs to be recharged multiple times over the single lap. Considering that the packaging is super tight with fuel tank size and the battery pack size, in situ with the car becoming shorter and narrower, without reduction in engine dimensions, what "redesign" are you talking of,and which has to happen 'within the year' ?

Your reply is just corporate speak,, without an iota of specificity or discussion of the engg tradeoffs. Henceforth, please do your hpmework, put in the effort to learn the subject matter, before dismissing comments/opinions which "look distasteful to me" as RABID FANS.

I haven't seen you argue on merit, even one subject, in this thread. All responses are based on emotion/vibes. Doesn't make for a technical discussion.

I've said it before, but I think they should just bite the bullet and make the cars slower and limit both deployment rate and capacity. Instead of having these burst accelerations that dump the battery in 3 seconds, they have to allow for softer mappings and enforce them so that it empties only up to a specified percentage of the total capacity on a given straight.

It would remove super clipping (on some tracks they might still clip on the top end), make recharging easier and overall bring back the driver factor in most corners. The downside is that the cars will probably be 2-3 seconds slower (or more depending on track). I personally don't care that much about laptimes if it improves the bullsh*t they created with this ruleset.

I'm guessing hubris will be the defining factor and nothing significant will change. They will maybe create a rule where the clipping car isn't allowed to move line like Colapinto did. I get the feeling this is a rule set made by the corrupt for the show.

[Seerix]

I mean the ability for the battery to be charged faster and able to use that power for a longer time. That is what I mean by redesign.

How ? Energy cannot be pulled out of thin air. If you want to discharge for longer, you need bigger battery, which is a weight penalty. If you want to charge faster, you need to have more fuel flow. And the "small" (relative to the need for half the peak power to be electrical) size of the battery makes even qualifying a joke where it needs to be recharged multiple times over the single lap. Considering that the packaging is super tight with fuel tank size and the battery pack size, in situ with the car becoming shorter and narrower, without reduction in engine dimensions, what "redesign" are you talking of,and which has to happen 'within the year' ?

Your reply is just corporate speak,, without an iota of specificity or discussion of the engg tradeoffs. Henceforth, please do your hpmework, put in the effort to learn the subject matter, before dismissing comments/opinions which "look distasteful to me" as RABID FANS.

I haven't seen you argue on merit, even one subject, in this thread. All responses are based on emotion/vibes. Doesn't make for a technical discussion.

Calm down. Not like you know any better about redesigning a battery for an F1 PU.

I'm pretty sure most of people here know better than shouting "bigger battery and more fuel flow" without taking into consideration obvious issues with such statements like weight and size constraints.

[Darth-Piekus]

Would you prefer they remove the battery completely or go into the previous rules?

[Jaymz]

How ? Energy cannot be pulled out of thin air. If you want to discharge for longer, you need bigger battery, which is a weight penalty. If you want to charge faster, you need to have more fuel flow. And the "small" (relative to the need for half the peak power to be electrical) size of the battery makes even qualifying a joke where it needs to be recharged multiple times over the single lap. Considering that the packaging is super tight with fuel tank size and the battery pack size, in situ with the car becoming shorter and narrower, without reduction in engine dimensions, what "redesign" are you talking of,and which has to happen 'within the year' ?

Your reply is just corporate speak,, without an iota of specificity or discussion of the engg tradeoffs. Henceforth, please do your hpmework, put in the effort to learn the subject matter, before dismissing comments/opinions which "look distasteful to me" as RABID FANS.

I haven't seen you argue on merit, even one subject, in this thread. All responses are based on emotion/vibes. Doesn't make for a technical discussion.

Calm down. Not like you know any better about redesigning a battery for an F1 PU.

I'm pretty sure most of people here know better than shouting "bigger battery and more fuel flow" without taking into consideration obvious issues with such statements like weight and size constraints.

Doubt it.