Hybrid overtake boost and variable harvesting limits for 2026 F1 engines

40 comments on “Hybrid overtake boost and variable harvesting limits for 2026 F1 engines”

1. 

   StefMeister (@stefmeister)
   30th March 2024, 0:35

   If they are going to do this On-Demand hybrid boost thing then let’s use it as a P2P so we can finally get rid of DRS.

   Don’t allow them to do it indefinitely and go the P2P route of limited number of uses or set amount of seconds it can be used over a race distance.

   And also don’t make it so powerful that it’s going to just allow drivers to easily cruise past. It needs to be setup so that when used it gives just enough of a boost to allow a driver to have a go at an overtake rather than been the thing that completes the overtake.

   The thing i’ve always liked about P2P & the reason I think it’s a far better system than DRS is because it’s not restricted to 1 second gaps at detection lines & used in a pre-determined zone and it can’t be used every lap. With limited uses it introduces an extra element of strategy as drivers have to think about when to use it and with it not limited to a specific zone it allows drivers to do something unexpected by using it in different places. And it’s also proven to be far easier to fine tune so that it acts only as a bit of an assist rather than been the push of a button easier pass that DRS can often be.
   1. 

      Tristan
      30th March 2024, 0:56

      Yep, the tech could be a better DRS. Not sure what the point of a high-speed boost is if everyone gets the high-speed boost. But at the same time, can’t complain about faster cars I guess.
   2. 

      Jeanrien (@jeanrien)
      30th March 2024, 8:06

      Careful with abbreviations, Liberty might find it a good idea that you’re suggesting pay to pass. Maybe Lawrence has been advocating for this.
   3. 

      notagrumpyfan
      30th March 2024, 8:38

      route of limited number of uses or set amount of seconds it can be used over a race distance.

      They could’ve done that with DRS; that would’ve a lot fairer, and somewhat interesting strategically.
   4. 

      JohnS
      30th March 2024, 11:25

      I don’t like these Mario-cart gimmicks. This is suppose to be the purest form of racing. Let the engineers do their best, then come to the track with the best drivers and see who has done the best. What’s with this showmanship? Is this their form of a participation trophy?
      1. 

         AlanD
         30th March 2024, 13:30

         John, very much agree with that. I dont get why the regulations limit the top speeds or the amount of energy they can harvest etc. I would prefer to see cars start with a fixed amount of fuel, and a fixed amount of electrical energy, and how they use it over the race distnce is entirely up to them. Let the engineering determine who wins rather than tyre degradation and pit strategy.
   5. 

      MichaelN
      30th March 2024, 11:26

      The big issue with time limited P2P is that it often creates what is essentially the same problem as the DRS train.

      The leading cars can pull away on a clean track, while everyone behind them loses time squabbling, and both attacker and defender exhausting their P2P such that it might as well not be there. And should one of them end up near the leaders due to a late race neutralization, the leader will still have close to all of their P2P seconds while those behind won’t have any. This happens in Indycar quite regularly.

      Ultimately, both DRS and P2P are just temporary performance variations. But there are other ways to create these. Tyres are one of them, but much more compelling are the good old human kind: mistakes. And all of motorsport knows how to create this: grass along the track, less downforce, more power, tyres that can (and thus will) be pushed, and… race in wet conditions.

      Professional drivers are all very accomplished, even if some are still a tiny bit better than others. So if you give them fuel saving races, tyres that need to be driven 5 seconds off the pace to last, endless tarmac alongside the track, and no running at the slightest hint of rain… is anyone surprised there are fewer mistakes than before?

      Races like San Marino 2005/2006 were exciting despite there being no pass for the lead because everyone knew that to keep those wins, both Alonso and Schumacher had to be near perfect. That’s super impressive. If you had that race now, add P2P or DRS, and the result is just not as interesting.
2. 

   Tristan
   30th March 2024, 0:53

   Now with all this homologation and development freeze nonsense you can have parts that still meet the regulations but are different to the homologated bits the team started the year with thus making it illegal

   The new part did not meet the regulations. This take is just simply incorrect and they doubled down in a reply comment. Why feature something that is just completely wrong? The car did not meet regulations, not just a part they didn’t start the year with.
   1. 

      pcxmac (@pcxmac)
      30th March 2024, 2:14

      it was the same part, just didnt get QCd. only problem is if the FIA are directing tollerences on the mfg. prints. otherwise there is a chance the part could still be in spec.
   2. 

      Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
      2nd April 2024, 20:18

      I was mostly surprised it happened so fast – it’s been common for the last two decades to have cars disqualified from Le Mans 1-3 months after the chequered flag fell. This is also something done to reduce the risk of turning sportscars into a stealth spend contest, at which point it would be neither a sport nor a show because most of the competitors leave. Sportscars has already proven this on two separate occasions (1992 and 2009), which is why WEC codified strict homologation regulations.
3. 

   pcxmac (@pcxmac)
   30th March 2024, 2:21

   great to see sam get fined 11 billion, cant believe a brand like mercedes would dip its toes in to speculative markets which hinge on drug dealing, human trafficking, garbage value, theft/hacking/other crimes.

   anyone whose traded securities long enough knows its a scam designed to hoover the hopes and energy of hard working peoples. modern servitude, but thats a different discussion. bring back alcohol and cigarette sponsors, more ethical than stake or ftx.
   1. 

      SteveP
      30th March 2024, 8:30

      great to see sam get fined 11 billion, cant believe a brand like mercedes would dip its toes in to speculative markets which hinge on drug dealing, human trafficking, garbage value, theft/hacking/other crimes.

      Red Bull = Bybit.
      Or were you thinking that it’s the right style of money source for RBR ??

      It’s all gambling with other people’s money, but then you can pretty much say that about every bank and them playing the money markets.
      1. 

         pcxmac (@pcxmac)
         1st April 2024, 2:04

         no arguments there, we will see how it turns out in 2030 though.
4. 

   Esploratore (@esploratore1)
   30th March 2024, 3:47

   “It’s no wonder there is less interest in motor sport as a whole as there used to be. They have taken away everything that used to create the interest that drew people in.”

   Absolutely agree with this COTD, for an example that annoys me particularly, full wet races, they were very interesting and now they have to go overboard with safety and are scared of 2 drops of rain, one of the many reasons for dwindling interest, add to that DRS, not letting new teams join, increased periods of dominance.
   1. 

      Dex
      30th March 2024, 5:35

      All the while MotoGP has full wet races, on two freakin’ wheels. But we’ll get (or already have) weird gimmicks in return, like DRS, power-ups and ruined first-person view (why the hell do they need to draw a frame under a car in front, or write a driver’s name above, like in old computer games where most of us turn such graphics off anyway?).
      As for safety, no one wants unnecessary risks. But if you want to be truly safe and can’t accept any risks, just don’t drive an F1 car. Oh, and if you think that the tire manufacturer can’t provide adequate tires for wet races, why, just why have you extended their contract for years to come?
      Again, stay away from MotoGP, Liberty. It’s not ideal, but it’s not F1 at least.
5. 

   Jere (@jerejj)
   30th March 2024, 6:20

   A hybrid overtake boost is an interesting feature & I’m looking forward to seeing how it’ll work in reality.

   I hope Fenestraz’s race engineer didn’t get anything permanent.
   1. 

      Euro Brun (@eurobrun)
      30th March 2024, 10:52

      You don’t remember KERS?
      1. 

         Jere (@jerejj)
         31st March 2024, 18:22

         Yes, but not necessarily quite the same impact-wise.
      2. 

         Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
         2nd April 2024, 20:19

         @eurobrun That was horrible :(
6. 

   Retired (@jeff1s)
   30th March 2024, 6:31

   The four different cars pictured above represent the world we are living in : dull and minimalist. Even doors used to be prettier back in the past.
7. 

   Alan Dove
   30th March 2024, 6:53

   COTD: While I also bemoan the clamping down on these kind of things, I do recommend they check out Superkarts

   ✔️ Open Chassis & Aero Development, no homologation.
   ✔️ Multiple Engine Manufacturers.
   ✔️ Multiple Tyre Manufacturers
   ✔️ Outright Lap Records (Cadwell Park)
   ✔️ Top Drivers
   ✔️ Innovation

   It doesn’t really get any better. Granted, I know it’s hyper niché, but it does tick the boxes for what they desire.
8. 

   MichaelN
   30th March 2024, 8:41

   The FIA also revealed how it intends to avoid drivers being unable to charge their batteries sufficiently at tracks which lack sufficient opportunities for energy harvesting, a problem highlighted by some teams last year.

   The maximum limit of 8.5MJ of energy harvesting per lap “may be reduced to 8MJ at competitions where the FIA determines that the maximum possible energy harvested per lap under braking and in partial load is no more than 8MJ,” states the updates rules.

   Not sure how this is a solution. The teams had complained that they might run out of battery, so reducing the charge seems… a bit pointless? Maybe I’m missing something here.

   The fact that the power of the electric motor is capped relative to speed should prevent this from being an issue anyway. Coupled with the new aero rules, the idea was that the cars would reach high speeds faster than today. That in turn would mean the power was capped more often than today, and it wouldn’t be possible to run out of a full 4MJ store even at the long Baku straight.
   1. 

      AlanD
      30th March 2024, 13:42

      Michael, that part of the regs really bugs me too I was reading it as meaning that on longer tracks, everyone will be able to fully recharge to the limit, no problem, but on shorter twistier tracks, some cars might not be as good at harvesting than others, putting them at a disadvantage. Whilst i think that is the essence of an engineering driven motorsport, others would say “oh no, that’s not fair on the drivers, he only wins because he’s got the fastest car”. So then I was wondering why some cars might not be able to get a full recharge. Would it be because their recharge system has less copper wiring in it, less weight to carry, which equates to an advantage on longer tracks, or different driver styles? Whatever it is, it just seems wrong to me to limit the amount of energy recovery at all. Let the engineers design systems which wring out every last drop of avaialble energy.
      1. 

         MichaelN
         30th March 2024, 14:12

         I think the reasoning is like this, but I’d like to see more on this because it might be different.

         The current and 2026 rules both have a 4MJ battery. Currently, the battery can be charged from the MGU-K (capped at 2MJ per lap) and the MGU-H (uncapped). In 2026, the MGU-H will no longer be on the cars and the MGU-K will be capped at 9MJ per lap. (Or maybe it’s now 8.5MJ? I missed that change…) However, in 2026 the power will be increased from 120 kW to 350 kW. To compensate, the output is capped linearly relative to speed, such that above 300 km/h the output will decrease to current levels around 340 km/h. In addition, the moveable aero should bring the cars up to speed more quickly, resulting in the cap coming into play earlier on the straights, such that the full 350 kW will not be used that long.

         The way I understand the complaints is that at a track like Monza, it would be impossible to charge the maximum 9 MJ each lap because of, as the FIA words it, small amount of time spent ‘braking and in partial load’. The scenario painted by Red Bull (so take that with a grain of salt) was that drivers would need to back off towards the end of straights, essentially having a huge lift & coast, to charge the battery in order to create their own ‘partial load’ scenario, to prevent a vicious cycle where not enough charging would mean less deployment, which meant lower speeds, even less charging, etc.

         It might be that the idea behind the proposed reduced charging cap is to prevent that behaviour. Essentially to say: ‘just keep going, there’s no point in trying to charge the battery more anyway’.

         If this is the case, that seems disappointing. Capping the maximum charge at easily attainable values will just make everything the same, reducing the need to innovate, experiment, or strategize. The FIA was probably convinced by appealing to its favorite issue: safety. But F1 drivers are now very used to how ‘charging laps’ influence corner approaches; and there are even lights on the cars to alert competitors! As so often in F1, if someone is saying there’s a ‘problem’ it usually means they’re unable to hit their performance targets…
         1. 

            AlanD
            30th March 2024, 18:32

            Thanks for a very clear explanation of the issues
9. 

   ludewig
   30th March 2024, 11:23

   This won’t make the roundup since I’m sure that it clashes with the politics of the writers here, but there is a video out there showing that Lewis has been training to shoot guns at Taran tactical, the same place where Keanu Reeves got his training for John Wick.

   Apparently Lewis was one of their best students, getting to a really high level in just one day of training.
   1. 

      AlanD
      30th March 2024, 13:51

      Ludewig, I remember David Coulthard in comentary once saying that he’d had a load of tests done for some reason, and the researchers told him he had the visual acuity and reactions that they typically find in fighter pilots, but his hearing was more typical of someone twice his age, presumably a result of years of sitting a few inches in front of incredibly noisy engines.

      I suspect that Lewis, and pretty well all F1 drivers, has great visual acuity, great depth perception, and is very good at controlling the adrenaline which lets him hold a steady aim under pressure. I think the other thing top sportsmen and top drivers have is the ability to move on, to not dwell on the previous mistake, or to seek to justify it to themselves and others, and instead just to say to themselves that what’s happened has happened, no-one cares.
      1. 

         ludewig
         31st March 2024, 2:07

         @AlanD

         Yes, and they also have to be able to quickly learn a sequence of actions and improve the accuracy.
   2. 

      grat
      30th March 2024, 15:24

      So?
      1. 

         ludewig
         30th March 2024, 15:55

         So what?
10. 

    JJ (@jjfrazz)
    30th March 2024, 16:04

    Today the Long Beach IndyCar circuit is the definition of a “Micky Mouse” race track! It was half-decent in the 70s and early 80s, but then it started getting shortened. By the 90s, it no longer felt or looked like a Grand Prix track! Today, the Los Angeles area doesn’t even know there is an IndyCar race in Long Beach!
11. 

    cdfemke (@cdfemke)
    30th March 2024, 23:00

    So “New 2026 F1 power unit rules confirmed”, how many cylinders and what fuel, how many liters ? There are questions
    1. 

       SteveP
       31st March 2024, 8:53

       how many liters ? There are questions

       I’m unsure what a “liter” is, the SI unit is “litre”

       Of course, as long as it avoids sounding like the electric milk floats in FE most people will be happy.
    2. 

       pcxmac (@pcxmac)
       1st April 2024, 2:11

       current regs are at about 4600 MJ/hr, w/ ethanol having a lower stoichiometric rate around 9 vs 14.2 for gasoline.
       ethanol has a much higher RON, so you can make almost twice as much power with out the negative effects, BUT, you have to flow about 1.6x more to get the same ‘energy levels’ so with the Power Units dropping to 500 hp, instead of say 800, I believe the flow rate will be just over 100kg/hr, and that is why they moved the target to 3000 MJ/hr to disguise the fact that they are actually pushing more fuel through the engines. I believe its probably closer to 110 kg/hr. These cars will be so slow without any boost though. Sad times. But mediocrity is the product of micromanagers.

       But because they are using ethanol, the engines should at least last a long time. That said, growing corn for fuel is disgusting for the environment, especially when its GMO, and fed to other living animals and messes up the food chain.
    3. 

       pcxmac (@pcxmac)
       1st April 2024, 2:37

       That said, the ability to roll in ‘VCR-Turbo’ as nissan puts it, seems pretty interesting. With the advent of highly compressible fuels like Ethanol, it only makes sense. Hopefully Ferrari have some good signals and mech. techs to integrate an interesting modulating technology to help with traction and optimize power delivery, through a Variable Compression Ratio.

       Boggles the mind to wonder if its possible to have each piston modulated/balanced independently, if thats possible.
    4. 

       Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
       2nd April 2024, 20:23

       V6, 10% bio-ethanol with the other 90% from synthetic sources and 100% complaint with certain sustainability rules (so no fuelling the car with the edible part of the plant), 2.4 litres. Those parts haven’t moved for a while and it doesn’t look like anyone in power is interested in moving them at this time.
12. 

    pcxmac (@pcxmac)
    30th March 2024, 23:30

    just remember the batteries in F1 are still about 1/40th the energy density of gasoline. ~ 200+wh/kg vs 9700wh/kg

    if a passenger car has 76kg (even with 25% efficiency) [18 kg effective] you still have to carry at least 720 kg of battery for an EV.

    10x weight differential. With Merc’s almost 50% turbo’d engine that would drive the effective weight ratio closer to 20x and 1440kg battery vs. 20 gallons of petrol. Which is about as much as an early 90’s 300zx, far more than an RX7, and way more than a mx5.

    Get rid of the batteries, and bring back refueling, and drop the power unit prices to 1 million, which is far more than they are probably worth anyways. Bring back the lighter cars, and give the smaller teams a chance. The heavier format will only create more disparity between the manufacturers power units. And only Mercedes will win, or only Red Bull will win. At least before the power unit crud, multiple teams had a legit chance at the championship.
    1. 

       Johns
       31st March 2024, 3:31

       Absolutely agree. True race cars went away with the V10’s. Now we just have. Glorifies Prius’s dressed up as race cars. And fancy rules to keep the electronics and batteries in check and fair. And I once thought grooved tires were too much showmanship
       1. 

          Johns
          31st March 2024, 3:36

          Question: would a F1 car of the vintage just before the hybrid era, given modern aerodynamics, be just as “fast” as a 2024 spec F1 car?

          If not, maybe the way to slow the cars down for a better “show” would be to dump the batteries?

          Maybe we will all stop believing we are saving the planet by using batteries?
13. 

    Mayrton
    31st March 2024, 7:40

    Ah great, more artificial trickery to bring down the sport’s integrity but boost its entertainment value. The thing is they know they are running F1 into the ground. But they don’t mind. Short term it will attract higher volume of day tourists that makes their franchise more valuable on paper. There really isn’t any sport related KPI in their targets when they discuss franchise nr x labeled ‘F1’ during their meetings. Anything for shareholder value which represents them having a super well paid job. The long term has nobodies interest, since they will have enriched themselves way before it.

Comments are closed.