2026 F1 Cars - General Thread

[FNTC]

I am unable to picturize how downshifting is going to increase tyre wear. Someone please help me understand.

I would think that aggressive downshifting to provoke regen on the rear wheels will cause added friction to the rear tires.

[Owen.C93]

In braking the rears are fully loaded anyway, be it by the brakes or the regen, you’re trying to maximise before locking.

If you have less regen then maybe you add more brake heating into the tyre which is going to have a big effect on wear though.

Also I’m not really convinced about aggressive downshifting doing much for regen. It’s not like engine braking where higher RPMs meant more mechanical drag. If anything the increase in engine braking from high RPM will actually lose regen power since it’s a friction loss.


You have the same amount of regen input power regardless of whatever gear/rpm you’re in. It’s just a case of using the RPM/torque ratio that best matches the efficiency curve of your MGU-K.

[venkyhere]

I am unable to picturize how downshifting is going to increase tyre wear. Someone please help me understand.

I would think that aggressive downshifting to provoke regen on the rear wheels will cause added friction to the rear tires.

That's exactly what I am unable to 'see'. The MGU-K sits in between the ICE and the gearbox, so there is the clutch, then the gearbox and then the diff and then the wheels/tyres. If at all there are jerks/torque-spikes caused on the PU side, by downshifting or via MGU-K suddenly engaging, there is still the clutch present, that is supposed to 'smooth out' the spike. If anything, the presence of the MGU is going to help 'smooth out' such jerks even more than a typical 'ICE only' F1 car and help the tyres 'more', because the ECU can use the MGU cleverly to 'absorb' such spikes - in fact there is a hint of TC and ABS in what such usage of the MGU as a 'damper' by the ECU entails. Hence I want to understand whether that article mentioning tyre wear as a penalty for extra downshifts, is just a fluke or has a technical reasoning (which I want to decipher).

[Brahmal]

Having regen on the front wheels as well would definitely help with these problems!

I read an article about this a few months ago, don't remember where. Front regen was discussed during the formulation process, which all teams participated in. It was voted down because, allegedly, the other teams thought Audi would have an advantage from doing this for years in other series. If true, pretty short-sighted!

[AR3-GP]

Just stick a chicane in the middle of every straight.

[Owen.C93]

Watching the live timing it looks like before a quali lap they don’t leave the final corner flat out but just at half throttle, then go flat about 100m before the start/finish line. That means Ham and Rus both passed pit entry at 210kph as they start their lap, but passed the same spot at 270kph at the end of their lap or when on race sim.


Makes sense since they need as much battery as they can for the lap, but it’s going to be odd to see them going so slowly as they start their lap.

Also we’re used to traffic jams into the final corner, but we now might have them queueing up on the main straight which is going to be chaotic.

[Seanspeed]

Also we’re used to traffic jams into the final corner, but we now might have them queueing up on the main straight which is going to be chaotic.

Getting the right preparation and spacing for qualifying laps will probably be a VERY annoying aspect for the drivers this era.

[BorisTheBlade]

Also I’m not really convinced about aggressive downshifting doing much for regen. It’s not like engine braking where higher RPMs meant more mechanical drag. If anything the increase in engine braking from high RPM will actually lose regen power since it’s a friction loss.


You have the same amount of regen input power regardless of whatever gear/rpm you’re in. It’s just a case of using the RPM/torque ratio that best matches the efficiency curve of your MGU-K.

IMHO that a is something the Press got wrong - I am generally surprised that not many press people seem to read and comprehend the regulations.
IMHO the downshifting is not for recovery under braking but for part-throttle recovery during the following corner. You want to be in the lowest gear possible as the energy flow limit is directly connected to RPM - see C5.2.4.
This in turn decides, how much ICE power above the driver power demand can be used for recovery.

OFC there could be some loopholes in these regulations that I would never dream of. But until someone comes up with a better theory, this is what I suspect.

[Tommy Cookers]

Also I’m not really convinced about aggressive downshifting doing much for regen. It’s not like engine braking where higher RPMs meant more mechanical drag. If anything the increase in engine braking from high RPM will actually lose regen power since it’s a friction loss.
.... You have the same amount of regen input power regardless of whatever gear/rpm you’re in. It’s just a case of using the RPM/torque ratio that best matches the efficiency curve of your MGU-K.

IMHO that a is something the Press got wrong - I am generally surprised that not many press people seem to read and comprehend the regulations.
IMHO the downshifting is not for recovery under braking but for part-throttle recovery during the following corner. You want to be in the lowest gear possible as the energy flow limit is directly connected to RPM - see C5.2.4.
This in turn decides, how much ICE power above the driver power demand can be used for recovery.

there's overwhelming reasons for keeping high rpm for generation ....

the MGU-K/CE is designed for high voltage (rpm)/'moderate' current (torque) not high current/'moderate' voltage
that's why the torque is capped (to 500 Nm) below c.6200 rpm, so that eg 350 kW is not possible below that rpm
ok down-shifting keeps the MGU-K/CE in its happy zone ....

but (for a given MGU-K power) the lower road-speeds demand more axle torque ie consume more tyre grip ....
and things get worse when eg down to 1st gear as any further slowing then consumes tyre grip even faster

[Owen.C93]

George just said in an interview that they’re having to use low gears to keep the turbo spinning. Going to 1st instead of 3rd in turn 1.

I think that’s a more logical explanation.

[FNTC]

De la Rosa from aston on the F1 youtube live show now also said they were having to do aggressive harvesting causing risks for rear lock ups.
"The more aggressive harvesting you get, the more energy you recover, but there is a point when the rears start locking"

[Owen.C93]

Well yeah that’s just related to the 350kw of regen power. You want to keep hold of that for as long as possible into the apex.

[Stu]

George just said in an interview that they’re having to use low gears to keep the turbo spinning. Going to 1st instead of 3rd in turn 1.

I think that’s a more logical explanation.

Running a turbo that can generate 4.8bar of boost is very engine speed reliant, that it creates comment just proves how much they were using the MGU-H previously to eliminate lag.

[misteralex844]

That’s a fair instinct, in an energy-limited formula, teams will likely push right up to the maximum allowed usage because performance gains usually outweigh the small weight savings from carrying less fuel. But as you said, it comes down to detailed strategy modeling, and the teams will already have run the numbers. It’ll be interesting to see who optimizes it best.

[mzso]

Is there any reason that on some cars, particularly the Ferrari, the rear crash structure sticks out so much?
Did something change in the regulations that allows this now?