Petition to FIA - 2026 rules canceled, V10s in 2028

[DChemTech]

Got fed up with these vaccum cleaners and I can't imagine 2026 engines that would most likely sound like Formula e. When there is already a Formula e, I don't understand why F1 has to go that way. Formula 1 is racing first and foremost and then comes the technology part. Dumbing it down was a bad idea. V10s with fully sustainable fuels should keep F1 as an attractive racing series, while the other series' can be labs for road car tech.

If that is the way you want it to be, make it a spec series. Like pretty much every other class. In fact, F1 is pretty much the only 'lab for road car tech' whilst all others are purely 'racing series'.

[basti313]

... it should be about maximizing efficiency, and getting insane performance out of modest equipment .....

Spot on.

spot on what exactly ?
for 100 years the rulemakers wanted maximisation of so-called 'volumetric efficiency'
but now that's bad

there's nothing modest about the current equipment
2026 rules are more modest - but the prime mover (ICE) is less efficient

Why? They are still fuel limited, why do you think therer is less efficiency? I would say especially in this rule with less power, set the ICE efficiency is king and things like drivability play less a role.

[basti313]

spot on what exactly ?

Spot on that dumbing it down is the lowest common denominator for technical interest.

Unless the dumbed down V10's had a tech revolution while nobody was looking?

Yes. It would go down even worse. Building a V10 on the currently used materials in the 2026 ruleset would be awfully heavy.
My bet is if anything changes, we stay (again) at the V6, have the now lowered compression...and on this limited basis they will slightly increase flow and boost.

[Hoffman900]

Got fed up with these vaccum cleaners and I can't imagine 2026 engines that would most likely sound like Formula e. When there is already a Formula e, I don't understand why F1 has to go that way. Formula 1 is racing first and foremost and then comes the technology part. Dumbing it down was a bad idea. V10s with fully sustainable fuels should keep F1 as an attractive racing series, while the other series' can be labs for road car tech.

If that is the way you want it to be, make it a spec series. Like pretty much every other class. In fact, F1 is pretty much the only 'lab for road car tech' whilst all others are purely 'racing series'.

Meh, F1 is highly prescriptive for rules. Have you looked at the PU rules? The lean burn rule set would never pass NOx emissions anywhere anyway, so not sure why they need to invest effort in making that work.

The BoP endurancs classes have way more relevant tech as a lot of them are using (modified) production platforms.

[Tommy Cookers]

there's nothing modest about the current equipment
2026 rules are more modest - but the prime mover (ICE) is less efficient

Why? They are still fuel limited, why do you think therer is less efficiency? .....

less efficient because there is no MGU-H ....
recovering exhaust energy without mean exhaust 'backpressure' and according to Mercedes the biggest single efficiency improver

[boiler]

Got fed up with these vaccum cleaners and I can't imagine 2026 engines that would most likely sound like Formula e. When there is already a Formula e, I don't understand why F1 has to go that way. Formula 1 is racing first and foremost and then comes the technology part. Dumbing it down was a bad idea. V10s with fully sustainable fuels should keep F1 as an attractive racing series, while the other series' can be labs for road car tech.

If that is the way you want it to be, make it a spec series. Like pretty much every other class. In fact, F1 is pretty much the only 'lab for road car tech' whilst all others are purely 'racing series'.

Meh, F1 is highly prescriptive for rules. Have you looked at the PU rules? The lean burn rule set would never pass NOx emissions anywhere anyway, so not sure why they need to invest effort in making that work.

The BoP endurancs classes have way more relevant tech as a lot of them are using (modified) production platforms.

And if IMSA and WEC could gain a foothold in the mass market, F1 would likely experience a serious drop in viewers. I find it funny how everyone says F1 shouldn't go backwards when the Hypercar class hsa nearly every type of piston-driven engine on the grid, with racing that is head and shoulders above what we see in F1 week in and week out.

The fact that IMSA and WEC have such low numbers compared to F1 and NASCAR tells me that the majority of fans couldn't care less about the quality of racing and are more interested in wrecks and, in F1's case, the "image." F1 may very well head down the same road NASCAR ventured down 25 years ago, where it became less about the racing and more about the narrative and all the other distractions they produce now.

[Vinlarr89]

Honestly cannot see why any serious race going or even armchair motorsport fan would not want to see a return of the V10s!

If they run on sustainable fuel, it ensures the footprint of the sport remains sustainable, whilst vastly reducing the complexity of the power units and failure modes. Is the end to end life of these hybrids even that sustainable?

As for the technology race being reduced, or the risk of loosing an engine manufacturer, then so be it! Is this a technology precession or motorsport? For me nothing beats the pure adrenaline that the sound of those V10s create, and have been sorely missing for 20 years.

If you want tech go and watch formula e.

[DChemTech]

Honestly cannot see why any serious race going or even armchair motorsport fan would not want to see a return of the V10s!

If they run on sustainable fuel, it ensures the footprint of the sport remains sustainable, whilst vastly reducing the complexity of the power units and failure modes. Is the end to end life of these hybrids even that sustainable?

As for the technology race being reduced, or the risk of loosing an engine manufacturer, then so be it! Is this a technology precession or motorsport? For me nothing beats the pure adrenaline that the sound of those V10s create, and have been sorely missing for 20 years.

If you want tech go and watch formula e.

I honestly don't see why anyone would want that and gets 'pure adrenalin' from something that sounds like a mosquito with a megaphone.

Also, sorry to say, but sustainable fuel doesn't exist, not for road cars. And this is coming from someone working in the field. There is a vast, vast shortage of energy required to make 'sustainable fuel', and if we want to produce it from biomass, there's just enough biomass to supply the aviation industry - which is also hardest to electrify. For maximum impact, every drop of sustainable fuel should go to aviation first and long haul shipping second. For regular cars and short distance shipping, electrification is by far the most sensible. Pushing 'sustainable fuels' for regular cars is not just greenwashing, it's actively hampering progress in sustainable transportation. If you want to do something road-relevant still, aim for engine technology with maximum efficiency. Any innovation coming from that may still have relevance for specific hard-to-electrify applications, and improving efficiency (hence using less fuel) is always a good thing.

But that's a very different route than using midlife crisis engines with greenwashing fuel just for show.
If that's the way you want to go - just for the show and to satisfy outdated primal urges - then stop pretending to do something road-relevant or sustainable. Just make it a full spec series already, and just use whatever fuel. Better racing, more drama - great episodes of drive to survive I'm sure. But it will have very, very little to do with what F1 used to be... and of course, enjoy it while it lasts, as time will catch up with anything that is at a standstill.

[Tommy Cookers]

ammonia is a sustainable carbon-free fuel (coming to a town near me)

nitromethane is an example of an existing lower-carbon fuel
carbon can be removed eg if ICE combustion uses eg 20% oxygen/80% exhaust not air
pitstops would be necessary for replenishment of oxygen


my complaint is the bias of hybrid F1 rules .....
energy 'storage' is denied to fuel/mechanical energy flow but given lavishly to mechanical/electrical energy flow
ok the batteries now seem to be better than I expected

[piast9]

(...)
That said, I’d rather see the current PU’s without fuel flow restrictions. Same rule set, no fuel flow restrictions, same rpm cap, and allow more than one injector / cylinder.
(...)

Nope, no RPM cap. It makes racing impossible. You drag race on the straight and hit hard RPM limit and you can't pass. In my opinion fuel flow cap is better for racing.

[Hoffman900]

(...)
That said, I’d rather see the current PU’s without fuel flow restrictions. Same rule set, no fuel flow restrictions, same rpm cap, and allow more than one injector / cylinder.
(...)

Nope, no RPM cap. It makes racing impossible. You drag race on the straight and hit hard RPM limit and you can't pass. In my opinion fuel flow cap is better for racing.

Every race series on the planet has a rpm limit

Your gearing isn’t fixed.

[Seanspeed]

As for the technology race being reduced, or the risk of loosing an engine manufacturer, then so be it! Is this a technology precession or motorsport?

It's been both for a very long time now. It's silly to reduce this down to a binary choice of just one or the other.

No matter if I'd like to see gas-guzzling V10's back, I just think realistically, there's little chance of it happening. We could lose more than just one engine manufacturer, and quite likely whole teams. There would be fury at the huge expenses of R+D that some of them have been making towards these new 2026 powertrains being literally thrown down the drain, only for them to be asked to create an entirely new, from-scratch powertrain instead in just a couple years.

And the perception of F1 going back to gas-guzzling engines would also be considered as a huge negative. Even if we speak reasonably that the F1 cars themselves are not even a drop in the ocean, it's still just a bad look for all these companies actually participating to not care about road relevance or at least the appearance of caring about emissions/climate change. The optics of it aren't good and they will care about that. And frankly, I dont blame them. They are the sort of companies at the forefront of being able to do something about the issues, and you're very naive if you think all of them compete in F1 simply because they're just so passionate about racing and nothing else.

[Vinlarr89]

Well if it’s all about optics and perception. Best get ready for hydrogen fuel cells and full electric propulsion.
Best also ban all crypto and gambling sponsorships while they’re at it because that might offend someone
Max Verstappen will emit more co2 on the way to one race in his private jet than the equivalent of an entire season of running v10s for the grid.
Where is the real problem here?

[Seanspeed]

Well if it’s all about optics and perception. Best get ready for hydrogen fuel cells and full electric propulsion.
Best also ban all crypto and gambling sponsorships while they’re at it because that might offend someone
Max Verstappen will emit more co2 on the way to one race in his private jet than the equivalent of an entire season of running v10s for the grid.
Where is the real problem here?

Hydrogen is largely not an accepted general solution to anything at this point. At least beyond like fusion-based energy.

Anyways, you're confusing the problem of optics of the sport and the manufacturers. Two different things. I'm talking about the manufacturers, who hold significant influence in terms of what happens to the technical regulations.

And again, the actual emissions of the F1 circus itself are not really any consideration. I feel like I basically explained all this in my post already. :/

[DChemTech]

Well if it’s all about optics and perception. Best get ready for hydrogen fuel cells and full electric propulsion.

Electric is the way to go for consumer cars for sure. Hydrogen is not a realistic option, really.
As Tommy indicated, there are alternative liquid fuels that may be of interest for long haul freight and other hard-to-electrify sectors. If F1 can have a technology contribution there that makes engine development interesting for suppliers, that would be great. The alternative is to stick with a fixed engine formula for shows, as mentioned. But be prepared to lose suppliers then.

Best also ban all crypto and gambling sponsorships while they’re at it because that might offend someone

That would be great, indeed. Not because they are 'offensive', but because they stimulate rather harmful, exploitative business.

Max Verstappen will emit more co2 on the way to one race in his private jet than the equivalent of an entire season of running v10s for the grid.
Where is the real problem here?

True, and I think we acknowledged that, no? And if F1 wants to brand itself as sustainable, certainly something that should stop (and in any case there should be a levy on emissions for all sectors, including air traffic. If you want to pollute, carry the financial responsibility of the consequence). But in terms of perception what happens on track is much more consequential than what happens off-track, even if in numbers it's inconsequential.