2026 pecking order speculation

[Badger]

If the other manufacturers fail at ambient temperature that would actually be the dumbest thing I've ever heard of and they should just give Mercedes the win. Until recently there was never even a consideration of measuring geometric compression ratio at anything other than ambient. If your engine can't even pass the test at ambient you should just stop being a PU manufacturer.

I'm sorry, but Toto has to be playing mind games, or that article from The Race must have fundamentally misunderstood something from their source or are just wholesale making things up for clicks.

Mark Hughes whilst being connected and a good F1 historian is not a particularly technical mind. His race pace analysis that he used to post after every Friday was like a work of fiction. That article screamed "contrarian for clicks" to me, because it made absolutely no sense why they would vote down their own proposal given the things his sources were saying in the article.

[zibby43]

Well one thing is for sure, my predictions about Aston and Honda from this thread are ahead of schedule. I always found it ridiculous to vote them that high.

That’s one thing that took me off-guard in my guesses for this year. I had assumed there would be power unit parity across all manufacturers, because the power units became simpler. The only exception I expected was a potential for Merc to have the best one, not for anyone to be behind. If testing is anything to go by: how has this happened? I placed AMR high on the condition that Newey and team-restructuring took place quickly, not upon the outcome of what Honda delivered--because I thought Honda, like all the engine suppliers, would have no problem delivering these now-simpler engines.

Unless the higher duty cycle ES and lowered fuel-flow quantity made the simpler (by part count) power units just as difficult to optimize as before.

All we know is Mercedes asked the FIA for clarification on the compression ratio rule, and how it would be checked.

This has lead the other teams to assume they must have found a way to run at higher ratios, and they want the FIA to change their verification procedure to find out.

That's all.

If the answer is that simple, it makes me think that what Toto said could be true. That the regulations change was about some or all of the other manufacturers engines failing at ambient temperature, not running temperature (coolant temps).

If the other manufacturers fail at ambient temperature that would actually be the dumbest thing I've ever heard of and they should just give Mercedes the win. Until recently there was never even a consideration of measuring geometric compression ratio at anything other than ambient. If your engine can't even pass the test at ambient you should just stop being a PU manufacturer.

I'm sorry, but Toto has to be playing mind games, or that article from The Race must have fundamentally misunderstood something from their source or are just wholesale making things up for clicks.

I think there is kind of a misunderstanding here. The argument, as I understood it, was that if the test was going to shift to purely a hot test in the future, other teams would attempt to exploit the fact that the test would no longer be run at ambient temps.

And so the Merc teams seemed to be insisting on testing at both ambient and operating temps. And the reception seemed to be poor - which suggests gaming the ambient test in the future was exactly what the other teams were driving at.

Feel free to correct me if my understanding is off.

[f1isgood]

That’s one thing that took me off-guard in my guesses for this year. I had assumed there would be power unit parity across all manufacturers, because the power units became simpler. The only exception I expected was a potential for Merc to have the best one, not for anyone to be behind. If testing is anything to go by: how has this happened? I placed AMR high on the condition that Newey and team-restructuring took place quickly, not upon the outcome of what Honda delivered--because I thought Honda, like all the engine suppliers, would have no problem delivering these now-simpler engines.

Unless the higher duty cycle ES and lowered fuel-flow quantity made the simpler (by part count) power units just as difficult to optimize as before.



If the answer is that simple, it makes me think that what Toto said could be true. That the regulations change was about some or all of the other manufacturers engines failing at ambient temperature, not running temperature (coolant temps).

If the other manufacturers fail at ambient temperature that would actually be the dumbest thing I've ever heard of and they should just give Mercedes the win. Until recently there was never even a consideration of measuring geometric compression ratio at anything other than ambient. If your engine can't even pass the test at ambient you should just stop being a PU manufacturer.

I'm sorry, but Toto has to be playing mind games, or that article from The Race must have fundamentally misunderstood something from their source or are just wholesale making things up for clicks.

I think there is kind of a misunderstanding here. The argument, as I understood it, was that if the test was going to shift to purely a hot test in the future, other teams would attempt to exploit the fact that the test would no longer be run at ambient temps.

And so the Merc teams seemed to be insisting on testing at both ambient and operating temps. And the reception seemed to be poor - which suggests gaming the ambient test in the future was exactly what the other teams were driving at.

Feel free to correct me if my understanding is off.

We are in a cost capped engine era. The other teams simply dont want to invest in development just because Mercedes are doing something potentially illegal. As it stands, the hot tests alone or hot tests with the cool test should be enough to test Mercedes' legality.

That article doesnt make too much sense.

[dialtone]

If the other manufacturers fail at ambient temperature that would actually be the dumbest thing I've ever heard of and they should just give Mercedes the win. Until recently there was never even a consideration of measuring geometric compression ratio at anything other than ambient. If your engine can't even pass the test at ambient you should just stop being a PU manufacturer.

I'm sorry, but Toto has to be playing mind games, or that article from The Race must have fundamentally misunderstood something from their source or are just wholesale making things up for clicks.

I think there is kind of a misunderstanding here. The argument, as I understood it, was that if the test was going to shift to purely a hot test in the future, other teams would attempt to exploit the fact that the test would no longer be run at ambient temps.

And so the Merc teams seemed to be insisting on testing at both ambient and operating temps. And the reception seemed to be poor - which suggests gaming the ambient test in the future was exactly what the other teams were driving at.

Feel free to correct me if my understanding is off.

We are in a cost capped engine era. The other teams simply dont want to invest in development just because Mercedes are doing something potentially illegal. As it stands, the hot tests alone or hot tests with the cool test should be enough to test Mercedes' legality.

That article doesnt make too much sense.

That ship has sailed when the FIA allowed it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[venkyhere]

illegal PU team1
illegal PU team2
Ferrari
Redbull
illegal PU team3
illegal PU team4
Haas
RacingBulls
Audi
Cadillac
AstonMartin

[Frank73]

illegal PU team1
illegal PU team2
Ferrari
Redbull
illegal PU team3
illegal PU team4
Haas
RacingBulls
Audi
Cadillac
AstonMartin

Illegal PU and FIA start-assisted.

[Matt2725]

illegal PU team1
illegal PU team2
Ferrari
Redbull
illegal PU team3
illegal PU team4
Haas
RacingBulls
Audi
Cadillac
AstonMartin

How can it be illegal when the FIA says it's legal?
Or is this the cope for this year for when Ferrari fumble the ball again?

[Frank73]

illegal PU team1
illegal PU team2
Ferrari
Redbull
illegal PU team3
illegal PU team4
Haas
RacingBulls
Audi
Cadillac
AstonMartin

How can it be illegal when the FIA says it's legal?
Or is this the cope for this year for when Ferrari fumble the ball again?

Well in the last four years of the venturi tubes cars, Mercedes has fumbled more often than Ferrari. Despite tailor made TDs by maFIA. I still laugh when I see the horrific zero-pod crap.

[K1Plus]

1)Ferrari
2)Mercedes
3)McLaren
4)Red Bull
5)Alpine
6)Haas
7)Audi
8)VCARB
9)Williams
10)Cadillac
11)GP2Engine

[Andi76]

illegal PU team1
illegal PU team2
Ferrari
Redbull
illegal PU team3
illegal PU team4
Haas
RacingBulls
Audi
Cadillac
AstonMartin

How can it be illegal when the FIA says it's legal?
Or is this the cope for this year for when Ferrari fumble the ball again?

In fact, the FIA does not really say that it is legal. Toto Wolff claims that the FIA said it is.... Same as Ferrari in 2019... Binotto also said that the FIA said what they were doing is legal.

Ultimately, the FIA said change that and yes, by the way, you will be penalized, and we will improve how it is measured. Now we have 1-1 the same thing. Once again, something is legal when it is measured and illegal when it is not measured. And the FIA is about to say, "Maybe are changing the tests..." So it's not that black and white...