Beta F1-Gears

(https://imgur.com/IDJdtMb.png)


Un año más, y una temporada más de Fórmula Uno, esto es así desde 1950, y ya vamos por la septuagésima sexta (76ª), que estrenaremos este año 2026.

Y por fin llegó, el año de los grandes cambios, el del comienzo con una hoja en blanco para todos, el de los once equipos al fin.

De antemano hay que destacar que básicamente, salvo la reglamentación deportiva y la financiera, en el reglamento técnico, es prácticamente, todo nuevo, y si exáctamente no es así, -las ruedas siguen siendo redondas, y los cilindros siguen siendo cilindros- las prestaciones y recursos si son nuevos.

Dichos cambios si que son "masivos", haciendo prácticamente inviable una recopilación exhaustiva de los cambios en reglamentos técnicos, tal y como hacíamos desde los albores... 

Empecemos por un esquema de una síntesis de un resumen.
(https://imgur.com/9MIMNsH.png)
Resumido a las generalidades, los cambios para este 2026, vienen a ser:

PESO COMPLETO:
    👉 Peso mínimo con piloto: 770 kg (800 kg en 2025). Peso de referencia del piloto: 82 kg.

Respecto a los motores:
    • Básicamente, TODO cambia, pero reducido a un mínimo listado :
        👉 Se elimina el MGU-H.
        👉 Potencia máxima del ICE 2026  350kW (470cv) , 540kW (725cv). en 2025.
        👉 Potencia máxima del MGU-K  350kW (470cv) , 120 kW (160cv). en 2025.
      Resultado buscado : UP bastante más barata (gastos de ID aparte).

    • Fabricantes y clientes de motores:
        👉 Alpine cambia de Renault a Mercedes
        👉 Red Bull & Racing Bulls se asocian con Ford
        👉 Cadillac se une a Ferrari
        👉 Aston Martin se convierte en equipo oficial Honda
        👉 Audi llega a la F1 con motor propio

        ✰ Mercedes suministra a :
            ➭ Mercedes
            ➭ McLaren
            ➭ Alpine
            ➭ Williams
        ✰ Ferrari suministra a :
            ➭ Ferrari
            ➭ Haas
            ➭ Cadillac
        ✰ Red Bull / Ford suministra a :
            ➭ Red Bulls
            ➭ Racing Bulls
        ✰ Honda suministra a :
            ➭ Aston Martin
        ✰ Audi suministra a :
            ➭ Audi


    👉 ADUO (Additional Development Update Opportunity):
Aunque las UP 2026 quedan congeladas a partir del 1 de mayo de 2026, la FIA introduce el sistema ADUO como mecanismo excepcional para corregir déficits significativos de rendimiento o problemas de fiabilidad, pese a dicha congelación del desarrollo.

    A lo largo de la temporada 2026, y agrupando los Grandes Premios en bloques de seis (1º–6º, 7º–12º, 13º–18º), la FIA auditará el rendimiento del motor endotérmico (ICE) únicamente.
    Si se detectan diferencias superiores al 2 % de potencia respecto al motor de referencia, el fabricante afectado podrá recibir autorización para una actualización técnica; dicha autorización podrá ampliarse a dos desarrollos si la brecha supera el 4 %, siempre bajo supervisión directa de la FIA.

(Este mecanismo no garantiza una convergencia total del rendimiento, sino únicamente evitar brechas excesivas bajo el entorno de desarrollo).

Respecto a la aerodinámica:

    🛑 DRS eliminado. Sustituido por aerodinámica activa.
    👉 ✅ Aerodinámica activa:
      Tres modos prefijados. Modo Recta, Modo curva y modo Mixto. Aplicables según los lugares de la pista (rectas/curvas), o de condiciones extras, lluvia, SC, VSC, etc.

    ✅ En modo Recta, tanto el alerón trasero como los dos elementos superiores del alerón delantero "se abren"(bajo ángulo de ataque), reduciendo el drag y tambien la carga vertical (downforce), mayor velocidad punta.
    ✅ En modo Curva, los dos elementos delanteros y el trasero "se cierran"(alto ángulo de ataque), aumentando el drag y la carga vertical, aumentando la velocidad de paso por curva.
    ✅ En modo Mixto, el elemento trasero se cierra, mientras que los delanteros se abren, obteniendo un punto intermedio a los dos anteriores, con prestaciones válidas para ir en mojado con neumáticos intermedios sin enormes estelas de agua, o para ir tras un SC, o en VSC....

Respecto a los neumáticos:
(https://imgur.com/HKEc9JC.png)
    👉 Llantas de 18", pero neumáticos más pequeños.
        • Delanteros :
            Ancho 2025: 345–375mm. Ancho 2026: 320–350mm. (25mm. menos)
            Diámetro 2025: ≤ 725mm. Diámetro 2026: 710mm. (15mm. menos)
        • Traseros :
            Ancho 2025: 440–470mm. Ancho 2026: 410–440mm. (30mm. menos)
            Diámetro 2025: ≤ 725mm. Diámetro 2026: 715mm. (10mm. menos)

    👉 Desaparece el compuesto C6. Quedan del C1 al C5, y los dos de agua. Se pretende ampliar las diferencias entre compuestos.
    👉 Se suponía que iban a desaparecer los calentadores, pero ni Pirelli ni los equipos están por la labor, así que la FIA no puede más que aceptar que no se eliminarán... (aún).
    👉 Pirelli no tendrá la posibilidad de realizar test en medio de la temporada, excepto sus propias pruebas de desarrollo.

Respecto a los eventos:
    👉 Desaparece Imola del calendario.
    👉 El GP de España en Barcelona, pasa a llamarse GP de Barcelona.
    👉 El nuevo circuito de Madrid (Madring, aún en construcción) será el GP de España.
    👉 Las FP1 de los fines de semana Sprint podrán ampliarse por bandera roja.

Respecto a los equipos:


    👉 Por fin el originario Andretti, tras metamorfsoearse (forzado por la FOM) en Cadillac, hará acto de presencia en pista.
        No podemos ser demasiado exigentes con los "novatos", pero tenemos ilusión por ver si hay mimbres para alegrar el campeonato, aunque eso pasaría por una buena UP de Ferrari, que de momento, le suplirá de motores.
    👉 Y también según lo previsto, Sauber pasa a ser "devorado" por Audi, Aunque para ser justos, tampoco les podemos pedir más que a Cadillac, sobretodo, si tenemos en cuenta que se fabricarán sus propias motores. Pero estos si que tienen fama y medios a su disposicón... veremos.

Respecto a los pilotos:
Volvemos a una cierta "normalidad" tras la "anormalidad" del comienzo del año 2025, cuando se cambiaron asientos como caramelos. Este año 2026 solo cambia:
    👉 Red Bull sustituye a Yuki Tsunoda por Isack Hadjar, proveniente de Visa Cash Appp...
    👉 Visa Cash Appp... etc, da entrada a Arvid Lindblad debutante procedente de la F2.
    👉 Cadillac recupera a Sergio Pérez  y  Valtery Bottas , dos "viejos conocidos".
    👉 El pasado año 2025 estuvieron, y no inician el 2026: Jack Doohan, Yuki Tsunoda.

(https://imgur.com/6z1wYq3.png)

Y hasta ahí, eso es el esquema de una síntesis de un resumen. :estudiar:  :mosking:[/color][/size]

Vamos "al turrón" , lo bueno (esta vez es solo un resumen de una síntesis) :mosking: :

Respecto a los coches y mecánica:

PESO COMPLETO:
    👉 Peso mínimo con piloto 770Kg, antes 800Kg. , peso de referencia del piloto 82Kg.
(https://imgur.com/TLpGeQH.png)

MOTOR (UP):
    👉 Se elimina el MGU-H (reaparición del turbo-lag).
    👉 Potencia máxima del ICE 2026  350kW (470cv) , 540kW (725cv). en 2025.
    👉 Limitada compresión máx. a 16.0:1, en 2025 era 18.0:1.
    👉 Potencia máxima del MGU-K  350kW (470cv) , 120 kW (160cv). en 2025.

BATERÍAS (ES):
    👉 Pasan de tener sobre 20–25 kg mínimo regulado en 2025, a los 35 kg mínimo reglamentado para 2026.

REPARTO Y GESTIÓN DE ENERGÍA:
(https://imgur.com/hHyUfxq.png)

FRENOS:
(https://imgur.com/GUjNcIE.png)

CHASIS:
  • Comparativa en planta entre las dimensiones máximas permitidas en 2025 y 2026.

    👉 Anchura máxima: 1,9m , antes 2,0m.
    👉 Anchura alerón delantero: 1,8m, antes 2,0m.
    👉 Anchura del alerón trasero: 1,0m , antes 1,05m.
    👉 Longitud máxima 5,3m, antes 5.5m.
    👉 Longitud de batalla (distancia entre ejes) limitada a 3400mm, antes 3600mm.
    👉 Anchura de batalla (ejes) 1900mm. , antes 2000mm.
    👉 Anchura del suelo del coche recortada en 150mm, aprox. 1850mm, según diseños.

CARENADO , AERODINÁMICA:
    👉 🛑 DRS eliminado. Sustituido por aerodinámica activa.
    👉 ✅ Aerodinámica activa:
          Tres modos prefijados. Modo Recta, Modo curva y modo Mixto. Aplicables según los lugares de la pista (rectas/curvas), o de condiciones extras, lluvia, SC, VSC, etc.

    ✅ En modo Recta, tanto el alerón trasero como los dos elementos superiores del alerón delantero "se abren"(bajo ángulo de ataque), reduciendo el drag y tambien la carga vertical (downforce), mayor velocidad punta.
    ✅ En modo Curva, los dos elementos delanteros y el trasero "se cierran" (alto ángulo de ataque), aumentando el drag y la carga vertical, aumentando la velocidad de paso por curva.
    ✅ En modo Mixto, el elemento trasero se cierra, mientras que los delanteros se abren, obteniendo un punto intermedio a los dos anteriores, con prestaciones válidas para ir en mojado con neumáticos intermedios sin enormes estelas de agua, o para ir tras un SC, o en VSC...

    👉 Resticciones en las rejas (strakes/rastrillos) del fondo:
        ❎ Se limita el número, la superficie total y la localización de estos elementos metálicos.
        ❎ Se exige material y manufactura específicos (titanio, sin tratamientos complejos).

    👉 Difusor :
        ❎ El volumen permitido aguas arriba del eje trasero se reduce.
        ❎ La expansión empieza más tarde y termina antes.
        ❎ El cuello (throat) está más alto, más atrasado, y es más corto.
        🛑 Desaparecen las transiciones tipo "canal Venturi" largos y continuos.
        🛑 Se elimina prácticamente cualquier posibilidad de gestión activa del vórtice del borde del difusor.

    👉 Fondo, Bargeboards:
        ✅ Bargeboards 2026: una única superficie plana, pasiva, sin función aerodinámica activa. Básicamente eliminados:
            🛑 Sistemas multi-plano
            🛑 Cascadas, fences múltiples, "serruchos"
            🛑 Superficies con curvatura aerodinámica libre

    👉 🛑 Desaparece el ala viga (Beam wing)


ELECTRÓNICA :
  👉 Centralita electrónica MES TAG705, solo procesará datos de sensores y motor.
  👉 Centralita BOSCH Powertrain gestionará corrientes de motores e inversores. Nuevo dispositivo.
  👉 Centralita DAR registrará los últimos 30s de actividad en caso de accidente.

GASOLINAS:
    👉 Combustibles con impacto ambiental cero. Hay dos tipos, Biocombustibles y Sintéticos.
    👉 Cada fabricante de UP y suministrador de gasolina deciden cual usar.

NOVEDADES DE PILOTAJE :
La combinación de aerodinámica activa y gestión energética, introduce nuevas formas de utilización del coche en pista.
[/color][/size]

    ✅ Overtake Mode (Modo de adelantamiento): permite a los pilotos que se encuentran a un segundo del coche de delante utilizar potencia extra para intentar adelantar. Sustituye al DRS y es una herramienta estratégica, utilizable en una sola solución o distribuida a lo largo de la vuelta. . Este modo elimina el capado de potencia eléctrica que hay a partir de los 289 kilómetros/hora y ofrece medio megajulio más de regeneración. La diferencia de velocidad que se prevé, debería facilitar los adelantamientos.
    ✅ Boost Mode (Modo Reforzado): sistema de distribución de energía del ERS activado por el piloto. Se puede utilizar en ataque o defensa y proporciona la máxima potencia de motor y batería con solo presionar un botón, independientemente de la posición en la pista. Similar al famoso KERS, libre de aplicar la potencia eléctrica al máximo cuando quieras –mientras puedas–.
    ✅ Recharge (Recarga): permite recargar la batería recuperando energía al frenar, al soltar el acelerador al final de la recta, y también en la curva, cuando no se utiliza toda la potencia disponible. Podrán revisar la recarga de batería colaborando con su ingeniero. Dispondrán de una gama de modos para recargar, desde el frenado hasta la energía del motor.

Asignación de Recursos:
(https://imgur.com/p4rcJuU.png)
 
Reglamentos:

 ✅ Para no defraudar, lo que antes eran tres volúmenes, ahora son seis, y de postre, dos anexos ... para "los muy cafeteros"

Acceso y/o descarga de los reglamentos de F1 2026, publicaciones al 10 de diciembre de 2025:

(https://imgur.com/gVp1kDU.png)  (https://www.fia.com/system/files/documents/fia_2026_f1_regulations_-_section_a_general_regulatory_provisions_-_iss_01_-_2025-12-10_0.pdf)(https://imgur.com/9mn5pwd.png) (https://www.fia.com/system/files/documents/fia_2026_f1_regulations_-_section_b_sporting_-_iss_04_-_2025-12-10_0.pdf)
(https://imgur.com/2zFsXsm.png)  (https://www.fia.com/system/files/documents/fia_2026_f1_regulations_-_section_c_technical_-_iss_15_-_2025-12-10_0.pdf)

(https://imgur.com/Y29QMCH.png)  (https://www.fia.com/system/files/documents/fia_2026_f1_regulations_-_section_d_financial_regulations_-_f1_teams_iss_04_-_2025-12-10_0.pdf)(https://imgur.com/qdh8lo9.png)  (https://www.fia.com/system/files/documents/fia_2026_f1_regulations_-_section_e_financial_regulations_-_power_unit_manufacturers_-_iss_03_-_2025-12-10_0.pdf)(https://imgur.com/HFuWgKe.png)  (https://www.fia.com/system/files/documents/fia_2026_f1_regulations_-_section_f_operational_-_iss_05_-_2025-12-10_1.pdf)

(https://imgur.com/seMn0vB.png)  (https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/f1_driving_standards_guidelines_version_4.1_feb_20_2025.pdf)(https://imgur.com/J0RjbtD.png) (https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/2025_f1_guidelines_penalty_points_overview_-_14_may_clean_0.pdf)

(https://imgur.com/apaWEd7.png)

(https://imgur.com/Qtuhgze.png)

(https://imgur.com/5rfPsq4.png)

(https://imgur.com/Nfgqwy7.png)

(https://imgur.com/dDNqh8s.png)

(https://imgur.com/L5Sglgh.png)

(https://imgur.com/X8ly0rZ.png)

(https://imgur.com/mIQgg4N.png)

:Gracias: Muchísimas gracias por el "resumen de la síntesis" :roto2rie: McH

:alabar: :hoppisar2.

 :gorra:  :gorra:  :gorra:  :gorra:  :Gracias:  :Gracias:  :Gracias:  :Gracias: Trabajo fantástico, McH :drinks:  :drinks:  :drinks:  :drinks:

(https://imgur.com/onq9raF.png)

Artículo sobre la nueva terminología:

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/explained-f1-2026s-new-terminology-and-technology/10787702/

Sumario de los cambios más importantes:

https://f1i.autojournal.fr/magazine/magazine-features/enquete-magazine-features/f1-2026-tout-ce-qui-va-changer/

El Reglamento explicado por la FIA:

https://f1i.autojournal.fr/infos/decryptage/le-reglement-2026-de-formule-1-explique-par-la-fia/

Tratando de descifrar lo que se busca con tanto cambio:

https://f1i.autojournal.fr/magazine/magazine-features/decryptage-magazine-features/la-f1-revient-en-arriere-pour-mieux-avancer-les-vraies-raisons-du-boulversement-technique/

Aclarando conceptos una vez más:

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/boost-overtake-mode-active-aero-recharge-key-2026-terms-explained/

:Gracias:  :bruji1: por las aclaratorias, pero "para no perder las buenas costumbres" de la F1, ahí van unas "confusitorias" :gaydude:  :roto2rie:  :mazo:

https://es.motorsport.com/f1/news/por-que-no-confirmado-algo-importante-reglas-2026/10788776/

Dentro de un mes, el equipo Audi F1, presentará su auto, que se llamará R26. A ver si sale tan bueno como su "tocayo":


https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/the-first-2026-f1-car-is-set-to-hit-the-track-tomorrow/10788770/

Yampezamos... :scare2:

(https://imgur.com/MXWI5M9.png)

No he podido resistirme a puntualizar los grandes avances vistos en tan innovador di seño, con mis disculpas para con el autor y MotorSport :( , pero es que...  :mosking:  :rofl:  :laugh2:

Pensaba que sería dentro de un mes la primera toma de contacto de la R26  :mazo:

Y no te confundes, porque el parecido con la realidad, de todo lo que veamos desde ahora hasta el 18 de febrero, será por pura casualidad. :sherlock: :ouchcomputer:  :mosking: (a excepción de los colores) :mosking:

 :mosking:  Pues mira que tengo espectativas de conocer algo el 20 del presente mes, que será cuando el fabricante japonés Honda, lleve a cabo un "sarao", para presentar la nueva Unidad Motriz.

En f1technical.net, ya se atreven a indicar algunas novedades de la R26:

https://www.f1technical.net/news/28135?sid=771fd5f6f3e8e420e8ee0b5f93a7ec06

Los autos de la Scuderia Ferrari, serán bautizados como SF-26:

https://www.f1technical.net/news/28133

(https://imgur.com/388nUaZ.png)  (https://es.motorsport.com/f1/news/secretos-caudalimetro-2026-complejo-decisivo/10788968/)
(https://imgur.com/i6pKqup.png)

Fuente:https://es.motorsport.com/f1/news/secretos-caudalimetro-2026-complejo-decisivo/10788968/8968/

Cita de: llumia en Ene 11, 2026, 04:50 AM:mosking:  Pues mira que tengo espectativas de conocer algo el 20 del presente mes, que será cuando el fabricante japonés Honda, lleve a cabo un "sarao", para presentar la nueva Unidad Motriz.

Ya, pero es que resulta evidente que nadie va a enseñar absolutamente nada que pueda dar la más mínima pista a los demás, ni de sus posibles fortalezas, y menos aún de sus debilidades. :(

Los vehículos que veamos rodar serán de temporadas previas "adaptados" para probar las cosas sobre las que decidir. Cierto es que habrá cosas como las suspensiones, que se probarán con las que se hayan diseñado (push/pull), pero eso son detalles "menores", como que se espera que vuelvan los cañones de aire en la base de los pontones (para potenciar la carga aero, que se ha reducido), o la presencia de las aletas de tiburón (por lo mismo de antes), pero eso no "da tiempo" :gaydude: (digamos que... "solo lo ahorra")  :mazo: :mosking:

F1's New Era: Everything you need to know about how the FIA is making Formula 1 more competitive, more sustainable and safer in 2026

f Formula 1 has a defining characteristic it is a relentless urge to move forward, to put behind it the successes or failures of the past and to look forward to the next weekend, the next session, the next race. And though the dust has only just settled on one of the most thrilling seasons in recent memory, all eyes are swiftly turning to 2026 and one of the biggest resets the sport has ever seen.

While previous rule shifts have focused on changes to either the engine or the chassis –with one sometimes influencing the other – the FIA's 2026 regulations tackle every aspect of F1 car design in order to create a new era of more competitive, safer and more sustainable racing.

Nimble Car Concept

At the heart of the new regulations is the Nimble Car Concept, a wholly new vision for the design of F1 cars that seeks to reverse the trend of larger, heavier cars by making them significantly smaller, lighter, and more agile.

To do this, the new cars will be 30 kilograms lighter, with a target of 724kg for the car plus the mass of the tyres. The dimensions of the 2026 cars have also been altered, with the wheelbase down by 200mm to 3400mm. The width of the car has been reduced by 100mm and the floor width has been reduced by 150mm.

The surfaces of the car are also changing, with the front wing narrowing by 100mm and featuring a two-element active flap. The rear wing also changes, with a three-element active rear wing. The beam wing – the small horizontal plane underneath the main rear wing so common on 2022-2025 era cars – has also been banished and rear wing end plates have been simplified.

To help cars follow each other, wheel bodywork will be proscribed and in-washing wheel wake control boards will sit at the front of the side pods to assist with the control of the wheel wake. Also removed are the front wheel arches or brows that were a feature of the 2022 cars.

The changes will lead to downforce being reduced by to 30% and drag falling by somewhere in the region of 55%. While that will mean cars are slower through corners, they will be quicker out of those corners and though lap times will initially be slightly slower than currently the expectation is that teams will recover that lost time rapidly as development cycles mature.



Wake Management

Difficulties with cars following one another closely has been a factor in Formula 1 for many years and the 2022 regulations, with raised diffusers designed to channel the disruptive wake up and over the following car, were a bid to counter serious issues with the previous generations of car (2014 and 2017). However, as FIA Single-Seater Director Nikolas Tombazis explains, the 2022 cars eventually began to suffer from the same issues.

"The 2022 cars started off with a significant improvement in their wake characteristics," he says. "I don't remember the exact numbers, but downforce at approximately 20 metres behind went from about 50% on the previous generation of cars to about 80 or 85% to start with on the 2022 cars. And then that gradually decayed during the regulation cycle to what it is now, where we are probably talking about 70%. We believe that the start of the new cycle will be more like 90%, better than it's ever been."

He also points to areas that had been exploited to provoke outwash being tightened in the new regulations.

"The front wing end plates morphed into shapes that permitted quite a lot of outwash, while the inside of the front brake drums also worsened the characteristics, as did the side of the floor," he says. "We learned a lot from that and in developing the regulations for 2026 we hope we will maintain the good characteristics for a longer period or hopefully not have this decay again."



Active Aerodynamics

One of the biggest changes coming in 2026 is active aero. For 15 seasons F1 fans have been used to the sight of the rear wing of F1 cars opening in order to lower drag, providing a speed boost and giving following cars the opportunity to attack rivals ahead. For 2026, that Drag Reduction System (DRS) is no more, replaced by moveable front and rear wings that allow drivers to switch between two distinct modes.

In Straight Mode, the front and rear wing flaps open to reduce overall drag. Unlike DRS, which was only available to drivers running within one second of the car ahead and in specific zones, the new active aero system can be activated by any driver at predetermined points on the circuit (straights of a minimum length) regardless of their position relative to other cars. The second mode, known as Corner Mode, has the front and rear wing flaps in the normal (high downforce) position for better cornering speed.

While DRS was primarily an overtaking aid, the new active aero system is primarily designed to help conserve energy, as reducing drag on straights is essential for efficient energy use with 2026 power units that will rely much more on electrical energy. Overtaking, the primary purpose of DRS, will from 2026 be assisted in a different way.



Overtake Mode

From 2026 onward, the chief overtaking assist will come from an additional electrical energy via the new Overtake Mode. When drivers are within a second of the car in front at activation points, they will be able to deploy additional power energy to try to pass, with an extra +0.5MJ of extra energy available. The chances of an overtake occurring will also be increased by the leading car's energy deployment tapering off after 290km/h, while the car behind can use the override for a full 350kW up to 337km/h. The speed differential should help make passing moves possible.

As Mercedes' Deputy Technical Director, Simone Resta, says, racing in 2026 will be "unpredictable".

"It's going to be quite different, especially in racing rather than in quali," he explains. "We are all used to a certain format with the DRS that helps with overtaking and is used in defined areas and with certain gaps, but next year, every driver will be running moveable front and rear wings together, at many points in the lap, and they will be using the energy to help overtaking. It's going to be different and potentially quite more unpredictable in the way that the drivers will use the energy to overtake."

Andy Stevenson, Sporting Director at Aston Martin concurs, adding: "A lot of work has been done so that we can create these cars that will give us much closer racing. And that's what we're all aiming for. Yes, we have close grids but I think we can improve the racing and make it better. And when you see what technologies that we're bringing to Formula 1 for next year, I'm really excited."



Power Arrangers

It's not just the chassis that is changing for 2026, the cars also get new power units. Still centred around a 1.6-litre hybrid powerplant, the redesigned PU builds on the world's most efficient engines with a remarkable 300% increase in battery power and even split between Internal Combustion and Electric power. While the MGU-H has been removed and the power derived from the ICE element of the PU drops from 550-560kw to 400kw, the battery element increases from 120kw to 350kw.



New rules, new manufacturers and teams

Originally approved by the World Motor Sport Council in August 2022 the new power unit regulations, which accented cost reduction, simplification and financial sustainability in order to make it possible and attractive for newcomers to join the sport at a competitive level, have resulted in a 2026 championship featuring five power unit manufacturers. Alongside regular suppliers Mercedes and Ferrari, Audi enter for the first time, Honda fully return to the sport with Aston Martin after exiting in 2021 and Ford join the grid in support of the new Red Bull Powertrains concern that will build PUs for Red Bull Racing and Racing Bulls.

The regulations have also led to the arrival of a new Constructor in the shape of Cadillac. At the season- opening Melbourne Grand Prix, GM's premium brand will become the sport's first wholly new entrant since Haas in 2016. The arrival marks the culmination of more than two years of intense, but ultimately successful work for the FIA towards expanding the grid.

For its first seasons in F1, Cadillac will use Ferrari power units but in April of 2025 the FIA officially approved GM Performance Power Units LLC., a company formed by TWG Motorsports and General Motors to build powertrains for the Cadillac Formula 1 Team, as a power unit supplier for the FIA Formula One World Championship starting in 2029.



Sustainable Racing

The increase in electrical energy is just one element of a major FIA move towards a more sustainable Formula 1 and from 2026 all F1 cars will use advanced sustainable fuels.

The FIA has mandated the use of sustainable fuel derived from 'Advanced Sustainable Components' (ASCs), ensuring they are sourced from non-food biomass, renewable feedstock of non-biological origin or municipal waste, and meet stringent greenhouse gas emissions thresholds.

To ensure compliance with these stringent standards, the FIA has collaborated with Zemo Partnership, an independent provider of assurance services, to develop the Sustainable Racing Fuel Assurance Scheme (SRFAS). This scheme employs a robust third-party verification process to guarantee that all Formula 1 racing fuel meets the FIA's criteria for blended fuel composition and the sustainability of its advanced sustainable components (ASCs).

To do this, the SRFAS will employ a rigorous verification process focused on tracing the origin and movement of each ASC throughout the supply chain to ensure compliance with the FIA's stringent criteria, analysis of the blended racing fuel to verify the accurate composition and traceability of ASCs and emissions performance to ensure fuels meet FIA sustainability targets.



Even Safer Racing

The 2026 regulations are not just about improved racing – the FIA's ceaseless mission to continually raise safety levels will also lead to 2026 cars being safer and more secure than ever. Revised front impact structure and increased side intrusion protection will further protect drivers in the event of an impact, while roll hoop loads have been increased from 16G to 20G. Test loads increased from 141kN to 167kN. Rear wing endplate lights will be homologated and lateral safety lights to be introduced to identify ERS status.



Finishing Lines

The 2026 regulations began development with the publication of the PU rules in 2022. Since then, new Technical, Sporting and Financial Regulations have been drafted, reviewed, refined and approved to create a comprehensive new suite of clearer and more consistent rules for F1 to take into the future.

Along with last tweaks to other sections of the regulations, the final element of that suite, the creation of a new Section A, was approved at the December 2025 meeting of the World Motor Sport Council. With the new approved Regulations, the new structure of the 2026 Formula 1 Regulations has finally been completed. The Regulations are now split in six sections: Section A: General

Regulatory Provisions; Section B: Sporting Regulations; Section C: Technical Regulations; Section D: Financial Regulations (for F1 Teams); Section E: Financial Regulations (for PU Manufacturers), and

Section F: Operational Regulations.

Section A constitutes a 'General' section creating consistency between all other sections and to avoid duplications or contradictions. It adopts a more rigorous legal framework, previously introduced with the Financial Regulations.

After three years of intense work in collaboration with Formula 1 and the sport's 11 teams – and with the final rules section now in place – the FIA Formula One World Championship is set for a thrilling future.

https://www.fia.com/news/f1s-new-era-everything-you-need-know-about-how-fia-making-formula-1-more-competitive-more

(https://imgur.com/R75ACNm.png)  (https://es.motorsport.com/f1/news/quimica-formula1-combustibles-agresivos-aditivos/10789572/)
* Supongo que querrá decir ecológicos, a no ser que sean capaces de "cabrear" a los electrones:mosking:


El año 2026 no solo marcará una revolución técnica en lo que respecta a las unidades de potencia, sino que también introducirá un nuevo paradigma en la forma en que la FIA mide, controla e interpreta el combustible que llega al motor a través del un caudalímetro muy cambiado.

Se mantendrá un parámetro de referencia en kg/h, es decir, el caudal en masa del combustible, pero a partir de esta temporada ese valor será convertido directamente por la SECU en caudal de energía, utilizando la densidad energética y el poder calorífico de cada gasolina, certificado todo por un organismo independiente antes de que el coche salga a la pista.

En conjunto, el valor final no podrá superar los 3000 MJ/h, determinados mediante fórmulas que tienen en cuenta el régimen de rotación, la carga y las condiciones de funcionamiento de la unidad de potencia.

En esencia, se trata de un verdadero cambio de paradigma: el enfoque ahora pasa de la cantidad de combustible en términos de masa a su valor energético. Y es también por eso que la investigación tecnológica requiere de unos recursos cada vez más importantes.

Al tratarse de un líquido, como las gasolinas utilizadas hasta el año pasado, los principios de medición siguen siendo los mismos. El sistema se basa en transductores ultrasónicos capaces de determinar la velocidad del fluido que atraviesa el caudalímetro. Conociendo el diámetro del tubo, es posible obtener el caudal volumétrico y, basándose en la densidad de la gasolina, calcular el caudal másico.

Necesario mirar los materiales para ser compatibles con el e-combustible

Sin embargo, hay otro aspecto que requiere especial atención. Las nuevas gasolinas sostenibles tienen una composición química diferente y mucho más compleja de lo que parece. Además, son más agresivas con el hardware, un factor que ha obligado tanto a los fabricantes como a la empresa productora de los caudalímetros a desarrollar soluciones capaces de adaptarse a las distintas características de los nuevos combustibles.

Por ejemplo, Allengra, la empresa que desde este año suministra los caudalímetros, ha dedicado meses a estudiar soluciones que se adapten a los combustibles electrónicos, como cuenta el codirector general Niels Junker en una entrevista exclusiva para Motorsport.com, ya que el sistema está instalado dentro del depósito. Por lo tanto, el reto es doble: resistir la química tanto dentro como fuera del dispositivo.

"Por ejemplo, está la cuestión del conector. El caudalímetro está instalado en el depósito, por lo que la gasolina no solo pasa por el sensor: también hay combustible fuera del sensor. Por eso es necesario trabajar con materiales que sean realmente resistentes a los e-combustibles, esta es una diferencia enorme, porque hoy en día ser compatible con el combustible es relativamente sencillo», explica.

La FIA y los equipos han realizado solicitudes específicas

Precisamente por eso, Allengra también ha recibido solicitudes específicas de la FIA y de los fabricantes de combustibles en relación con los materiales utilizados, especialmente los que están en contacto con la gasolina, ya que podrían suponer una limitación para el desarrollo de los e-combustibles. En consecuencia, se ha fabricado la carcasa exterior del caudalímetro en acero inoxidable.

"Por la misma razón, los transductores del interior del caudalímetro también están 'protegidos' por un refuerzo de acero inoxidable. Pero eso no es todo. Por ejemplo, intentamos reducir al mínimo el número de juntas tóricas o juntas, porque en el automovilismo se considera que ningún cable ni junta es neutro con los e-combustibles: puede que lo sea a corto plazo, pero es inevitable que deje de serlo después de 5 o 10 carreras. Puede variar y eso supone un riesgo".

"Incluso el cableado que va del caudalímetro a la unidad de control no se considera compatible con los combustibles electrónicos, por lo que hay que hacerlo hermético y compatible desde el conector electrónico hasta el mazo de cables".

"Hemos encontrado una solución sellando todo el interior del conector, pero el problema era también encontrar los conectores adecuados, porque los que utilizábamos en el pasado eran herméticos con la gasolina tradicional, pero no eran compatibles con los e-fuel".

"Por lo tanto, tuvimos que buscar nuevos proveedores. Es un trabajo que lleva meses. No se trata solo de la compatibilidad de los materiales, sino también de motivos de seguridad y plazos de entrega. Debemos garantizar la igualdad para todos, por lo que no podemos suministrar algo que corra el riesgo de romperse o de no llegar a tiempo".

"Al final, encontramos una solución para que el cableado fuera resistente al combustible, pero al mismo tiempo los equipos también deben poner de su parte para evitar cualquier fuga, y de hecho han introducido controles de calidad específicos".

"Cada equipo gestiona este aspecto de forma diferente. Con los e-combustibles, los equipos nos envían el combustible y nosotros tenemos que calibrar el sensor y hacer las pruebas con cada combustible".

Aditivos del e-combustible: una nueva y costosa línea de investigación

El desarrollo de los e-combustibles ha abierto una frontera que va mucho más allá de la simple sustitución de la gasolina tradicional. Ya no se trata de optimizar un producto existente, sino de construir un combustible completamente nuevo, molécula a molécula, dentro de estrictas restricciones químicas y normativas. En este escenario, la investigación sobre aditivos se está convirtiendo en uno de los principales campos de debate e innovación.

Y es precisamente aquí donde el reglamento de la FIA introduce una distinción crucial. Se permiten los aditivos procedentes de fuentes no sostenibles, pero dentro de límites extremadamente estrictos y solo si entran en categorías que no alteran la combustión de forma indebida, evitando así ventajas de rendimiento encubiertas. Se trata de una cuestión importante, ya que los aditivos con las mejores propiedades son, por lo general, precisamente los no sostenibles.

El caso de los aditivos sostenibles es diferente. Si están certificados y se trazan a lo largo de toda la cadena de suministro, no están sujetos a las mismas restricciones que los aditivos no sostenibles. Es en este aspecto donde se centra la investigación de los proveedores, comprometidos con el desarrollo de moléculas avanzadas y sostenibles, capaces de mejorar la estabilidad, la resistencia a la detonación y la calidad de la combustión sin sobrepasar las restricciones del reglamento.

Se trata de un trabajo complejo, ya que cada componente debe cumplir criterios de sostenibilidad, una disponibilidad mínima anual, la compatibilidad con los materiales y la coherencia con el desarrollo de los futuros combustibles comerciales. Al mismo tiempo, sin embargo, es un área con un gran potencial. Y es también por eso que los costes han superado ya los 250 euros por litro.

No es el líquido en sí mismo el que tiene ese valor: es la investigación que lo respalda, así como la cadena de suministro, que debe ser completamente "verde", certificada en cada paso, desde el abastecimiento hasta las emisiones de todo el ciclo de vida. Mejorar la calidad del combustible significa, por ejemplo, poder obtener la misma energía con una masa inferior, reduciendo la cantidad de gasolina a bordo.


Fuente : https://es.motorsport.com/f1/news/quimica-formula1-combustibles-agresivos-aditivos/10789572/

El equipo Cadillac F1, ha puesto en pista por primera vez, el auto de es5ta campaña, en el circuito de Silverstone:

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/cadillacs-2026-f1-car-makes-track-debut/

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/01/1000052191.jpg)

https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/01/1000052191.jpg

(https://i.imgur.com/tfpcweU.png)

https://i.imgur.com/tfpcweU.png

(https://i.imgur.com/EMH2kJy.png)

https://i.imgur.com/EMH2kJy.png


(https://i.imgur.com/CUSs34q.png)

https://i.imgur.com/CUSs34q.png

(https://i.imgur.com/VMWaHrU.png)

https://i.imgur.com/VMWaHrU.png


(https://images.motorsport-magazin.com/images/960/540/q_80/1115738.webp)

https://images.motorsport-magazin.com/images/960/540/q_80/1115738.webp

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYo9uTLnvGg[/video]

Otra imagen del auto del equipo Cadillac F1:

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/01/image1--18--1.jpeg)

https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/01/image1--18--1.jpeg

GA sobre el auto del equipo Cadillac F1:

Emerging on a murky January day at Silverstone, we have Formula 1's long-awaited 11th team - Cadillac, completing its very first F1 2026 shakedown. With its major backer's background as a car manufacturer, this has to be classed as a works team even though for the next few seasons it will be using a Ferrari power unit while the operation builds up. But everyone has to start somewhere.

Cadillac has been building for this moment for a long time, but the day it actually runs in earnest is a big one. The late nights, the head scratching, the working through short-term and long-term solutions to problems and the knowledge that you will very soon know exactly where you stand in the pecking order will mean it's now feeling very real for all of those involved.

To the team's credit, for the new regulations, it is actually a step ahead of most of its rivals, who have yet to turn a wheel in anger.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/image0--26-.jpeg)

https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/image0--26-.jpeg

As we can see in the picture above, it has opted for a pullrod front suspension (red highlight). Were I making those decisions, I would have gone in the same direction. The simple fact is that the centre of gravity of all the inboard components is lower and the pullrod can also have a smaller cross section so less aerodynamic blockage.

It also has a reasonable amount of anti-dive on the top front wishbone (dark blue highlight is the forward leg, light blue highlight is the rearward leg). However, some of that anti-dive will be reduced with the fact it has some pro-dive on the lower wishbone (dark green highlight is the forward leg, light green highlight is the rearward leg).

With ground effect cars, even ones with less powerful ground effect than last year's cars, you still need to control that underfloor area platform as best as possible.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/image2--19-.jpeg)

https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/image2--19-.jpeg

It has a horizontal wing element on the outer upper edge of front wing endplates (orange highlight). This is a new area of development for this year so I'm sure we will see a few interesting interpretations of how best to separate the airflow around the inside and outside of the front tyre before we hone in on the best practice.

Also, the radiator inlet is high and more of a horizontal letterbox with vertical opening (magenta highlight) than we were seeing from the front running cars last year which had an overhung upper surface. This gives it what looks like a huge sidepod undercut. It also has a very steeply falling away upper sidepod surface, again with the reduction in the need to seal the edges of the underfloor to optimise the ground effect, as was common practice last year. This area is also up for initial interpretation. However, sealing the sides of the floor, even when we had the complete flat bottom cars and a very simple diffuser, was never a bad thing.

As for the rear suspension, it has opted for a pushrod-operated inboard mechanism (orange highlight) and has some degree of anti-lift on the rear to wishbone (forward leg dark blue highlight rearward leg light blue highlight). Cadillac uses Ferrari gearbox internals, but manufactures its own casing so it doesn't have to have the same rear suspension geometry as its supplier.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/image4--6-.jpeg)

https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/image4--6-.jpeg

With cooling, what comes in cool must go out hot and is useless at creating downforce. One of its hot air exits is on the upper corner of the chassis shoulders (highlighted with a yellow ellipse).

When looking for these areas, you try to find the position on the body surface that gives the best cooling for the least loss of downforce. Some areas are regulated to stop some of the inherently richer teams plunking a big hole right where a lesser funded team would need to fix a sponsors logo, so that's why we don't see so many random hot air out positions.

The all-in-black Cadillac having its first test reminds me of a day that feels like yesterday when we ran the first Jordan at Silverstone in late November 1990. The Jordan 911, as it was originally called, hitting the track with fellow Irishman John Watson behind the wheel, was a big day for Eddie Jordan and myself, not to mention the 25-odd people that made up the team at the time. Actually, a few of them are now among the hundreds of people who now work for Cadillac - so extra good luck to them.

I'm really pleased to see this new team up and running. However, if you thought it was difficult up until now, then you ain't seen nothing yet! The hard work starts now.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/what-cadillacs-2026-f1-car-has-revealed-gary-anderson/

Enlace para ver el "sarao" de Honda y el equipo Aston Martin. Comienza en una hora a las 05:00:

https://www.youtube.com/live/sWdkJCo5dME

RA626H:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_E_OzvW4AANUK4?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_E_Oz0WkAAptaW?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_E_Oz2WYAEiczT?format=jpg&name=small)

Fuente: https://x.com/HondaRacingF1

(https://cdn-8.motorsport.com/images/mgl/2jEDmPz0/s1200/honda-2026-power-unit.webp)

https://cdn-8.motorsport.com/images/mgl/2jEDmPz0/s1200/honda-2026-power-unit.webp

Primeras imágenes de la VCARB-03:

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/01/Racing-Bulls-10.png)

https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/01/Racing-Bulls-10.png

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/01/Racing-Bulls-7.png)

https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/01/Racing-Bulls-7.png

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_G4oH0W0AAQXZ4?format=jpg&name=large)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_G4oH0W0AAQXZ4?format=jpg&name=large

(https://cdn-4.motorsport.com/images/mgl/YK13p3z0/s1100/liam-lawson-racing-bulls.webp)

https://cdn-4.motorsport.com/images/mgl/YK13p3z0/s1100/liam-lawson-racing-bulls.webp


(https://cdn-6.motorsport.com/images/mgl/Y9lLXNL2/s1100/arvid-lindblad-racing-bulls.webp)

https://cdn-6.motorsport.com/images/mgl/Y9lLXNL2/s1100/arvid-lindblad-racing-bulls.webp

(https://cdn-9.motorsport.com/images/mgl/0R7wJBB2/s1100/arvid-lindblad-racing-bulls.webp)

https://cdn-9.motorsport.com/images/mgl/0R7wJBB2/s1100/arvid-lindblad-racing-bulls.webp

Gary Anderson's verdict on the real 2026 Racing Bulls

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/01/Racing-Bulls-17.png)

-It's great that we are getting to see real 2026 Formula 1 cars running on track, with Racing Bulls the latest to appear. It was only a shakedown, but less is now hidden and we can start to get into more definitive technical analysis. (Shakedown images courtesy of Federico Basile)

Racing Bulls has taken a step back this year towards being a Red Bull junior driver stepping-stone again. It was where Sebastian Vettel and Max Verstappen cut their teeth and Isack Hadjar is the latest to graduate from it, so it's a team that can be used to progress drivers along their learning curve.

Verstappen has been regularly linked to a move away, so Red Bull needs to be prepared and Liam Lawson and Arvid Lindblad need the VCARB 03 to be a car good enough to make their case for a promotion. That also makes this car important for Red Bull as a whole.race.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/RB-5.jpeg)

Tuesday's running at Imola is the first time the DM01 power unit, designed and built in-house by Red Bull Powertrains, has run on track. We can see a very small Ford logo (red ellipse) on the nose and the sidepod just above the body stay. I'm pretty sure that is, in reality, about the size of Ford's technical involvement in this project!

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/RB-4.jpeg)

Starting with a look at the front suspension, it's pushrod operated (red highlight above). The top wishbone (forward leg dark blue, rearward leg light blue) has a lot less anti-dive than used last year.

The reasoning for this is likely that it is in line with the increased ride height, and more importantly rake. For these reduced ground effect cars with their reduced underfloor tunnels and smaller diffusers, it looks like we are stepping back in time to the car concepts from pre-2022. More rake basically means the whole car attitude works to accelerate the airflow underneath the underfloor from the front to the rear.

If rake generates increased underfloor downforce, then increased rake under braking will again increase the downforce. That might be a bit simplistic, but it's an early overview.

There is also a suspension link (highlighted in white above) that I'm not sure of. A multi-link suspension system as opposed to simple A-frame wishbones can generate massive differences in kingpin and camber angles with varying steering lock, so I wouldn't be surprised to see this being exploited to optimise the tyre contact patch.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/RB-8--1-.jpeg)

A quick comparison of the 2025 and 2026 Racing Bulls cars' front suspensions shows what I mean about the reduction in anti-dive and the change from pullrod to pushrod. The front wing endplates (highlighted with a yellow ellipse above) show how the vertical part has moved inboard.

However, the lower tray section looks vulnerable. We also saw a wide upper horizontal blade on the Haas and Cadillac. I'm pretty sure we will see a few of those flying through the air this year after collisions.

It also shows a reasonable comparison of the now-three-element front wing assembly. The mainplane is basically very similar with a flap height reduction. I'm unsure what mode this wing set-up is in, but with fewer slot gaps (i.e. two, instead of three) it will force the teams to run a reduced flap angle.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/RB-3.jpeg)

The rear suspension is also pushrod-operated (red highlight) inboard suspension. The rear top wishbone (front leg highlighted in dark blue, rearward leg in light blue) and lower wishbone (rear leg highlighted in dark green, rearward leg highlighted in light green) have retained a reasonable if not increased amount of rear anti-lift.

This would also match the high-rake philosophy. If you are running increased rake and the aerodynamic sealing system for the sides of the floor is working, the last thing you need is for the rake to increase further under braking and that sealing system to fail as a result. Then you would lose a load of rear downforce just when you need it.

You still need to seal the underfloor sides as well as possible, but instead of running the car low, you need to do it aerodynamically using the forward bargeboard assembly and whatever you can come up with that is legal on the floor edge surface.

Around the middle of the car, we can see a fair amount of change with a body stay (highlighted in red below) supporting that large flat area of underfloor. I expect this flat floor area will be one of the first areas where we will see developments flooding in.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/RB-2.jpeg)

The splitters under the leading edge of the floor (yellow ellipse above) are in line with the height reduction on the leading edge of the floor itself. When we had the last 'flat bottom' era pre-2022, this area was defined as a simple radius. With these splitters there is more scope in the new regulations to get adventurous in this area.

The cooling inlets (plural) (green highlights above) in the sidepod are fairly similar to last year's concepts. There's no overhang, but it's early days. It is in line size-wise with what we saw on the Cadillac and much smaller than what we saw on the Haas renders. However, that inlet will be supplemented by the airflow above the driver's headrest. Gone are the days of this area being a simple engine intake, it now feeds the turbo but will also feed airflow for some of the other cooling requirements.

This shows how much more important it is to optimise the airflow around the sidepod area, as it is the main potential downforce-producing area on the car.

If the intersection between the top surface of the headrest and the undersurface of the intake generates decent flow conditions coming off the driver's helmet, then the area above that is not so critical.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/sidepod-and-floor-racing-bulls-shakedown.jpg)

Now we come to the bargeboard area. We are seeing a return to the multi-element bargeboards pre-2022 - for comparison see the image below of a 2021 bargeboard. They are not quite as complicated yet, but give it time and I'm sure we will see some impressive vortex generating devices in that area to help seal the floor sides.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/RB6.png)

As for the rear wing assembly, this shows the twin-element rear flap. By way of  comparison, I would love to see it switch between corner and straightline mode.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/RB-7.jpeg)

Gone is the integrated intersection between the outer end of the wing and the mainplane and flaps. I've highlighted that with the orange ellipse above, and taken the close-up crop of the 2025 and 2026 Racing Bulls comparison image below with orange ellipses on that element of the cars.

(http://[https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/RB-8--1--1.jpeg/img%5DYou%20could%20say%20that%20yesterday's%20eureka%20moment%20is%20destined%20for%20today's%20dustbin!%20I%20say%20this%20was%20a%20eureka%20moment%20because%20the%20objective%20with%20the%202022%20rules%20was%20to%20reduce%20the%20vortices%20we%20often%20saw%20in%20wet%20or%20damp%20conditions.%20This%20vortex%20was%20towed%20along%20behind%20the%20offending%20car%20and,%20depending%20how%20far%20behind%20they%20were,%20anyone%20following%20had%20to%20suffer%20the%20consequences%20of%20that%20turbulent%20flow.%20I%20don't%20think%20the%20laws%20of%20physics%20have%20changed%20over%20the%20last%20four%20years,%20so%20what's%20going%20to%20be%20different%20now?PatreonMembers'%20ClubGary%20Anderson's%20verdict%20on%20the%20real%202026%20Racing%20BullsFormula%201Gary%20Anderson's%20verdict%20on%20the%20real%202026%20Racing%20BullsJan%2020,%202026by%20Gary%20Anderson6%20min%20read%202%20commentsIt's%20great%20that%20we%20are%20getting%20to%20see%20real%202026%20Formula%201%20cars%20running%20on%20track,%20with%20Racing%20Bulls%20the%20latest%20to%20appear.%20It%20was%20only%20a%20shakedown,%20but%20less%20is%20now%20hidden%20and%20we%20can%20start%20to%20get%20into%20more%20definitive%20technical%20analysis.%20(Shakedown%20images%20courtesy%20of%20Federico%20Basile)Racing%20Bulls%20has%20taken%20a%20step%20back%20this%20year%20towards%20being%20a%20Red%20Bull%20junior%20driver%20stepping-stone%20again.%20It%20was%20where%20Sebastian%20Vettel%20and%20Max%20Verstappen%20cut%20their%20teeth%20and%20Isack%20Hadjar%20is%20the%20latest%20to%20graduate%20from%20it,%20so%20it's%20a%20team%20that%20can%20be%20used%20to%20progress%20drivers%20along%20their%20learning%20curve.Verstappen%20has%20been%20regularly%20linked%20to%20a%20move%20away,%20so%20Red%20Bull%20needs%20to%20be%20prepared%20and%20Liam%20Lawson%20and%20Arvid%20Lindblad%20need%20the%20VCARB%2003%20to%20be%20a%20car%20good%20enough%20to%20make%20their%20case%20for%20a%20promotion.%20That%20also%20makes%20this%20car%20important%20for%20Red%20Bull%20as%20a%20whole.Tuesday's%20running%20at%20Imola%20is%20the%20first%20time%20the%20DM01%20power%20unit,%20designed%20and%20built%20in-house%20by%20Red%20Bull%20Powertrains,%20has%20run%20on%20track.%20We%20can%20see%20a%20very%20small%20Ford%20logo%20(red%20ellipse)%20on%20the%20nose%20and%20the%20sidepod%20just%20above%20the%20body%20stay.%20I'm%20pretty%20sure%20that%20is,%20in%20reality,%20about%20the%20size%20of%20Ford's%20technical%20involvement%20in%20this%20project!Starting%20with%20a%20look%20at%20the%20front%20suspension,%20it's%20pushrod%20operated%20(red%20highlight%20above).%20The%20top%20wishbone%20(forward%20leg%20dark%20blue,%20rearward%20leg%20light%20blue)%20has%20a%20lot%20less%20anti-dive%20than%20used%20last%20year.The%20reasoning%20for%20this%20is%20likely%20that%20it%20is%20in%20line%20with%20the%20increased%20ride%20height,%20and%20more%20importantly%20rake.%20For%20these%20reduced%20ground%20effect%20cars%20with%20their%20reduced%20underfloor%20tunnels%20and%20smaller%20diffusers,%20it%20looks%20like%20we%20are%20stepping%20back%20in%20time%20to%20the%20car%20concepts%20from%20pre-2022.%20More%20rake%20basically%20means%20the%20whole%20car%20attitude%20works%20to%20accelerate%20the%20airflow%20underneath%20the%20underfloor%20from%20the%20front%20to%20the%20rear.If%20rake%20generates%20increased%20underfloor%20downforce,%20then%20increased%20rake%20under%20braking%20will%20again%20increase%20the%20downforce.%20That%20might%20be%20a%20bit%20simplistic,%20but%20it's%20an%20early%20overview.There%20is%20also%20a%20suspension%20link%20(highlighted%20in%20white%20above)%20that%20I'm%20not%20sure%20of.%20A%20multi-link%20suspension%20system%20as%20opposed%20to%20simple%20A-frame%20wishbones%20can%20generate%20massive%20differences%20in%20kingpin%20and%20camber%20angles%20with%20varying%20steering%20lock,%20so%20I%20wouldn't%20be%20surprised%20to%20see%20this%20being%20exploited%20to%20optimise%20the%20tyre%20contact%20patch.A%20quick%20comparison%20of%20the%202025%20and%202026%20Racing%20Bulls%20cars'%20front%20suspensions%20shows%20what%20I%20mean%20about%20the%20reduction%20in%20anti-dive%20and%20the%20change%20from%20pullrod%20to%20pushrod.%20The%20front%20wing%20endplates%20(highlighted%20with%20a%20yellow%20ellipse%20above)%20show%20how%20the%20vertical%20part%20has%20moved%20inboard.However,%20the%20lower%20tray%20section%20looks%20vulnerable.%20We%20also%20saw%20a%20wide%20upper%20horizontal%20blade%20on%20the%20Haas%20and%20Cadillac.%20I'm%20pretty%20sure%20we%20will%20see%20a%20few%20of%20those%20flying%20through%20the%20air%20this%20year%20after%20collisions.It%20also%20shows%20a%20reasonable%20comparison%20of%20the%20now-three-element%20front%20wing%20assembly.%20The%20mainplane%20is%20basically%20very%20similar%20with%20a%20flap%20height%20reduction.%20I'm%20unsure%20what%20mode%20this%20wing%20set-up%20is%20in,%20but%20with%20fewer%20slot%20gaps%20(i.e.%20two,%20instead%20of%20three)%20it%20will%20force%20the%20teams%20to%20run%20a%20reduced%20flap%20angle.The%20rear%20suspension%20is%20also%20pushrod-operated%20(red%20highlight)%20inboard%20suspension.%20The%20rear%20top%20wishbone%20(front%20leg%20highlighted%20in%20dark%20blue,%20rearward%20leg%20in%20light%20blue)%20and%20lower%20wishbone%20(rear%20leg%20highlighted%20in%20dark%20green,%20rearward%20leg%20highlighted%20in%20light%20green)%20have%20retained%20a%20reasonable%20if%20not%20increased%20amount%20of%20rear%20anti-lift.This%20would%20also%20match%20the%20high-rake%20philosophy.%20If%20you%20are%20running%20increased%20rake%20and%20the%20aerodynamic%20sealing%20system%20for%20the%20sides%20of%20the%20floor%20is%20working,%20the%20last%20thing%20you%20need%20is%20for%20the%20rake%20to%20increase%20further%20under%20braking%20and%20that%20sealing%20system%20to%20fail%20as%20a%20result.%20Then%20you%20would%20lose%20a%20load%20of%20rear%20downforce%20just%20when%20you%20need%20it.You%20still%20need%20to%20seal%20the%20underfloor%20sides%20as%20well%20as%20possible,%20but%20instead%20of%20running%20the%20car%20low,%20you%20need%20to%20do%20it%20aerodynamically%20using%20the%20forward%20bargeboard%20assembly%20and%20whatever%20you%20can%20come%20up%20with%20that%20is%20legal%20on%20the%20floor%20edge%20surface.Around%20the%20middle%20of%20the%20car,%20we%20can%20see%20a%20fair%20amount%20of%20change%20with%20a%20body%20stay%20(highlighted%20in%20red%20below)%20supporting%20that%20large%20flat%20area%20of%20underfloor.%20I%20expect%20this%20flat%20floor%20area%20will%20be%20one%20of%20the%20first%20areas%20where%20we%20will%20see%20developments%20flooding%20in.The%20splitters%20under%20the%20leading%20edge%20of%20the%20floor%20(yellow%20ellipse%20above)%20are%20in%20line%20with%20the%20height%20reduction%20on%20the%20leading%20edge%20of%20the%20floor%20itself.%20When%20we%20had%20the%20last%20'flat%20bottom'%20era%20pre-2022,%20this%20area%20was%20defined%20as%20a%20simple%20radius.%20With%20these%20splitters%20there%20is%20more%20scope%20in%20the%20new%20regulations%20to%20get%20adventurous%20in%20this%20area.The%20cooling%20inlets%20(plural)%20(green%20highlights%20above)%20in%20the%20sidepod%20are%20fairly%20similar%20to%20last%20year's%20concepts.%20There's%20no%20overhang,%20but%20it's%20early%20days.%20It%20is%20in%20line%20size-wise%20with%20what%20we%20saw%20on%20the%20Cadillac%20and%20much%20smaller%20than%20what%20we%20saw%20on%20the%20Haas%20renders.%20However,%20that%20inlet%20will%20be%20supplemented%20by%20the%20airflow%20above%20the%20driver's%20headrest.%20Gone%20are%20the%20days%20of%20this%20area%20being%20a%20simple%20engine%20intake,%20it%20now%20feeds%20the%20turbo%20but%20will%20also%20feed%20airflow%20for%20some%20of%20the%20other%20cooling%20requirements.This%20shows%20how%20much%20more%20important%20it%20is%20to%20optimise%20the%20airflow%20around%20the%20sidepod%20area,%20as%20it%20is%20the%20main%20potential%20downforce-producing%20area%20on%20the%20car.If%20the%20intersection%20between%20the%20top%20surface%20of%20the%20headrest%20and%20the%20undersurface%20of%20the%20intake%20generates%20decent%20flow%20conditions%20coming%20off%20the%20driver's%20helmet,%20then%20the%20area%20above%20that%20is%20not%20so%20critical.Now%20we%20come%20to%20the%20bargeboard%20area.%20We%20are%20seeing%20a%20return%20to%20the%20multi-element%20bargeboards%20pre-2022%20-%20for%20comparison%20see%20the%20image%20below%20of%20a%202021%20bargeboard.%20They%20are%20not%20quite%20as%20complicated%20yet,%20but%20give%20it%20time%20and%20I'm%20sure%20we%20will%20see%20some%20impressive%20vortex%20generating%20devices%20in%20that%20area%20to%20help%20seal%20the%20floor%20sides.As%20for%20the%20rear%20wing%20assembly,%20this%20shows%20the%20twin-element%20rear%20flap.%20By%20way%20of %20comparison,%20I%20would%20love%20to%20see%20it%20switch%20between%20corner%20and%20straightline%20mode.Gone%20is%20the%20integrated%20intersection%20between%20the%20outer%20end%20of%20the%20wing%20and%20the%20mainplane%20and%20flaps.%20I've%20highlighted%20that%20with%20the%20orange%20ellipse%20above,%20and%20taken%20the%20close-up%20crop%20of%20the%202025%20and%202026%20Racing%20Bulls%20comparison%20image%20below%20with%20orange%20ellipses%20on%20that%20element%20of%20the%20cars.You%20could%20say%20that%20yesterday's%20eureka%20moment%20is%20destined%20for%20today's%20dustbin!%20I%20say%20this%20was%20a%20eureka%20moment%20because%20the%20objective%20with%20the%202022%20rules%20was%20to%20reduce%20the%20vortices%20we%20often%20saw%20in%20wet%20or%20damp%20conditions.%20This%20vortex%20was%20towed%20along%20behind%20the%20offending%20car%20and,%20depending%20how%20far%20behind%20they%20were,%20anyone%20following%20had%20to%20suffer%20the%20consequences%20of%20that%20turbulent%20flow.%20I%20don't%20think%20the%20laws%20of%20physics%20have%20changed%20over%20the%20last%20four%20years,%20so%20what's%20going%20to%20be%20different%20now?The%20shakedown%20also%20gave%20us%20a%20good%20look%20at%20the%20rear%20wheels.%20The%20standard%20hub%20caps%20were%20removed%20as%20part%20of%20the%20push%20to%20reduce%20weight,%20but%20now%20the%20teams%20can%20replace%20them%20with%20whatever%20they%20want%20to%20aid%20airflow%20through%20the%20wheel%20-%20adding%20that%20weight%20back%20on%20again.%5Bimg%5Dhttps://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/2R197229.jpg)

Having now seen what we can call a first iteration of the 2026 regulations, the area I would question would be the front wing endplates. These regulations don't need that silly horizontal tray, or at least not one the size that it currently is. The bargeboard area and the likely development that will go on around that area, or the rear wing endplate intersection to the mainplane and flaps. Why does anyone want to create more vortices and turbulence coming off that area?

The final question is whether, as Racing Bulls is the junior team, this car we've now seen for real is close to what Red Bull Racing will actually hit the track with?

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/gary-andersons-verdict-on-the-real-2026-racing-bulls/

El equipo Audi F1, preocupado por la ventaja de ´"trucar" la relación de compresión:

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/audi-fears-significant-deficit-if-2026-engine-tricks-allowed/

Los autos de los equipos Cadillac F1 y Haas F1 (VF26) bajo la lupa de N. Capentiers:

La Haas et la Cadillac à la loupe : deux visions opposées


(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-haas-cadillac-0-copy.jpg)

À quelques jours des premiers essais, Haas et Cadillac dévoilent déjà deux interprétations radicalement différentes du règlement 2026. Voici notre analyse exclusive en images.

En cette période de l'année, la prudence reste de mise lorsqu'il s'agit d'analyser les images disponibles.

Cadillac a bien diffusé quelques illustrations de son déverminage à Silverstone, mais elle n'a pas encore réellement dévoilé sa monoplace 2026. Haas, de son côté, assure que les rendus numériques publiés lundi ne représentent pas seulement la décoration de sa nouvelle voiture, mais bien son design (une affirmation à relativiser, ces images présentant une F1 avec des roues arrière à l'avant de la monoplace...)

Quoi qu'il en soit, ces versions de la Haas VF-26 et la Cadillac 2026 (dont on avait déjà aperçu quelques secrets) diffèrent sensiblement des monoplaces qui prendront la piste lors du premier test de présaison à Barcelone la semaine prochaine.

"La voiture que tout le monde verra à Barcelone ne sera pas celle qui courra en Australie, précise le team principal Ayao Komatsu, et je pense que ce sera le cas pour tout le monde, tout simplement parce qu'il est trop tôt."

La situation est différente des années précédentes, lorsqu'il y avait seulement un test deux semaines avant la première course. Cette année, on a un roulage privé qui se déroule plus d'un mois avant le début de la saison : les équipes ne vont pas arrêter le développement en soufflerie. Par conséquent, les voitures qui rouleront à Barcelone, et même lors de la première semaine d'essais à Bahreïn, seront moins abouties que celles construites pour la première course en Australie."

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-haas-vf-26_1-copy.jpg)

Un aileron avant... d'avant 2009
Pour autant, les images publiées par les deux écuries américaines permettent déjà de dégager quelques premiers enseignements.

Le premier concerne l'aileron avant, qui obéit à la philosophie dite d'"inwash" imposée par le nouveau règlement technique. La volonté de la FIA de réduire, voire d'éliminer, l'outwash oblige les écuries à orienter les flux vers l'intérieur de la monoplace (un peu comme sur les F1 d'avant 2009).

Cela dit, l'objectif fondamental des aérodynamiciens reste inchangé : éviter que des turbulences ne longent la carrosserie, qu'elles proviennent des pneus avant ou de l'aileron lui-même. Or, l'aileron avant à inwash est associé à des éléments de carrosserie spécifiquement conçus pour canaliser vers l'intérieur les turbulences générées par les roues avant. Les aérodynamiciens vont donc devoir trouver d'autres moyens pour produire malgré tout un peu d'outwash (sans doute par les écopes de frein).

Un autre point notable concerne la présence d'une ailette horizontale fixée perpendiculairement à la dérive latérale sur la Haas et la Cadillac. Ce choix tranche avec celui de Red Bull, qui a présenté une ailette bien plus réduite, ou encore avec Racing Bulls, qui n'en disposait pas du tout. Fait intéressant, la caméra infrarouge qui mesure la température des pneus avant a été positionnée sur cette ailette sur la VF-26.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-haas-cadillac-suspension-copy.jpg)

Haas et Cadillac : deux choix très différents pour la suspension
Du côté de la suspension, les deux bolides US sont assez différents.

La Haas présente une architecture à poussoirs à l'avant comme à l'arrière (les différences entre une suspension à poussoirs et une suspension à tirants sont expliquées ici). Ce choix constitue un indice fort quant aux orientations techniques retenues par Ferrari, fournisseur du groupe propulseur, de la boîte de vitesses et de la suspension arrière de Haas. Il suggère en effet que la SF-26 adoptera elle aussi une suspension à poussoirs aux deux extrémités, comme nous l'annoncions en décembre.

Pourquoi un tel choix, qui rompt avec la tradition de la suspension avant à tirants ? L'an passé, cette architecture était privilégiée pour plusieurs raisons : elle offrait une meilleure répartition des masses (les composants internes étant positionnés plus bas dans la voiture) et permettait un contrôle plus précis de l'assiette, un paramètre crucial avec les monoplaces à effet de sol de l'ancienne génération.

Mais au regard du règlement 2026, une suspension avant à poussoirs semble constituer la voie la plus pertinente. Cette architecture pourrait mieux s'accorder avec le nouveau régime d'écoulement de l'air issu de l'aileron avant, ainsi qu'avec la manière dont ce flux interagit ensuite avec les flancs et le fond plat. Par ailleurs, les systèmes à pushrod peuvent se révéler plus légers et plus simples à intégrer, alors que la chasse au poids constitue l'un des axes de travail majeurs pour les équipes en vue de la saison 2026.

Audi ainsi que Red Bull et Racing Bulls (pour autant que leur images soient fiables) ont opté pour cette configuration. Ce qui n'est pas le cas de Cadillac, qui a de façon assez originale choisi une suspension avant à tirant. Celle-ci offre un centre de gravité plus bas et moins de blocage d'un point de vue aérodynamique.

Sur la Haas, la suspension avant semble par ailleurs proche de la configuration à éléments séparés utilisée par McLaren en 2025. Il n'y a pas de triangle inférieur classique, mais deux bras distinctes reliant le porte-moyeu en des points différents, créant ainsi un axe de direction virtuel. Cette géométrie modifie le carrossage, le pincement et la hauteur de caisse en fonction de l'angle de braquage et du débattement de la suspension. Elle favorise la gestion des pneumatiques et permet aussi de positionner la biellette de direction dans une zone aérodynamiquement intéressante.


(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-haas-vf-26_3-copy.jpg)

Cadillac sur une pente plus abrupte que Haas
Les déflecteurs latéraux diffèrent fortement entre les deux monoplaces. Celui de la Cadillac apparaît sommaire, vraisemblablement pour masquer le véritable dessin. Le déflecteur de la Haas, lui, utilise un élément avant en L et deux ailettes horizontales au-dessus, constituant ainsi les trois sections autorisées par le règlement. Ces éléments visent à diriger vers le haut les flux perturbés générés par l'ensemble des roues avant, ce qui génère de la charge sur cet élément et un effet de succion sous le fond plat.

Les pontons des deux voitures diffèrent également. Sur la Cadillac, les flancs descendent de manière abrupte, tandis que sur la Haas, la pente est plus douce, même si la partie finale chute nettement avant l'extrémité du fond plat. Ces différences témoignent de choix aérodynamiques distincts, liés à l'intégration de la carrosserie avec le flux d'air et le refroidissement des organes internes.

En ce qui concerne la suspension arrière, les deux voitures partagent la même configuration générale. Haas et Cadillac ont opté pour un mécanisme interne commandé par poussoirs, avec un certain degré d'anti-lift appliqué sur les triangles arrière. Cela pourrait laisser penser que ce choix découle de l'utilisation du moteur Ferrari et de ses pièces environnantes.

En réalité, ce n'est pas le cas : Cadillac utilise les composants internes de la boîte de vitesses Ferrari, mais conçoit et fabrique son propre caisson en carbone, ce qui lui permet de ne pas dépendre de la géométrie de suspension arrière du moteur. Haas, en revanche, achète le moteur, la transmission (caisson et composants internes) ainsi que les éléments internes de la suspension directement auprès de Ferrari.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-haas-vf-26_4-copy.jpg)

La F1 2026, un nouveau continent
Les deux monoplaces présentent une configuration identique au niveau de l'aileron arrière, avec des supports doubles désormais obligatoires dans le cadre du règlement 2026. Ce dernier impose en effet un montage à deux piliers, reliés à la face inférieure du plan principal, excluant toute solution à pilier unique. Attention : les carénages n'abritent pas de DRS mais le mécanisme permettant d'ouvrir les deux volets de l'aileron arrière en ligne droite.

Les versions visibles sur la Haas comme sur la Cadillac apparaissent encore très simples d'un point de vue aérodynamique, ce qui n'a rien de surprenant à ce stade du développement. À Barcelone, l'essentiel de l'attention sera porté sur l'optimisation de l'utilisation de l'énergie, un domaine qui devra progresser très rapidement pour l'ensemble des équipes. La priorité est clairement identifiée : maîtriser la gestion du groupe propulseur avant d'accélérer le développement aérodynamique.

"Avant même de penser à courir, et même à tester, nous devons d'abord maîtriser la gestion de l'énergie, c'est le point clé, explique Ayao Komatsu. Je ne suis pas sûr que nous mesurions encore pleinement l'ampleur du défi, parce que nous ne savons pas encore ce que nous ne savons pas. Du côté de l'aérodynamique, nous sommes plutôt satisfaits de ce que nous avons fait jusqu'à présent, mais comme avec toute nouvelle réglementation, la question sera de savoir si les objectifs que nous nous sommes fixés sont suffisants."

"Dès que nous entrerons en essais, je suis certain que nous verrons des concepts différents, et si nous sommes passés à côté de quelque chose, il faudra s'y attaquer très vite. Lors des premières courses, plus qu'un objectif sportif, ce sera avant tout un objectif interne : d'abord la gestion du groupe propulseur, ensuite le développement aérodynamique"

Ce constat est partagé par Esteban Ocon, qui souligne que le pilotage des monoplaces 2026 sera profondément différent. "C'est une manière très particulière de piloter la voiture. Il va y avoir beaucoup plus de gestion, à la fois du côté moteur et du côté hybride, explique le Français. La voiture en elle-même m'a semblé plutôt saine. L'équilibre était correct, même s'il ne s'agissait évidemment que d'un premier ressenti en simulateur. Il faudra voir ce que cela donne en conditions réelles, mais le niveau d'adhérence était bon."

Notons aussi sur la Haas, le triangle de suspension inférieur. La précédente transmission Ferrari, avait inversé la position du triangle et de la biellette de direction afin d'améliorer l'aérodynamique. Cette configuration est désormais revenue à une architecture plus conventionnelle, de sorte que la biellette de direction travaille de concert avec la sortie du diffuseur.

Même moteur, même transmission, mais pas la même histoire : là où Haas navigue sur des routes déjà cartographiées, Cadillac entame la découverte de son Amérique en Formule 1.

https://f1i.autojournal.fr/magazine/magazine-technique/la-haas-vf-26-a-la-loupe/

Lo importante de "saraos" como el celebrado esta mañana en Japón son las respuestas, y parece que se gana fuerza la idea que al fabricante japonés le ja vuelto a pillar el toro:

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/where-honda-stands-tough-f1-2026-targets-compression-ratio-trick/

@ScarbsTech

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_F3MseWIAEFOA1?format=jpg&name=large)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_F3MseWIAEFOA1?format=jpg&name=large

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_GZRlDW4AAAGHH?format=jpg&name=large)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_GZRlDW4AAAGHH?format=jpg&name=large

RC LPL Tetsushi Kakuda Discusses Key Points of the New Power Unit Regulations and the Development Focus of Honda's PU

From the perspective of a development engineer, what do you see as the main challenges and key points of the power units from 2026 onward?

"In terms of difficulty—honestly, everything. Other than the basic architecture of a V6 turbo internal combustion engine (ICE), everything is new, so it was essentially a complete reset. The basic structure, such as engine mounting distances and positions, does change, but overall it's not dramatically different from before. However, the internals are completely different: the combustion system and the fuel have changed, so the requirements are entirely new. In that sense, it really is a new engine.

"With the elimination of the MGU-H, we have to rethink how we use the turbocharger. The compression ratio is more restricted, variable intake systems are no longer allowed, and deciding what kind of engine to build has become a completely new challenge.

"On the electrical side, output increases significantly, and the amount of energy flowing in and out of the battery and the control electronics (CE) becomes enormous to match the motor. That means we have to develop an optimal battery and CE capable of controlling it optimally. In short, this is a power unit that requires entirely new development across the board."

It's often said that removing the MGU-H simplifies the structure. What is your view on that?

"In terms of mechanical complexity, having an MGU-H does make the PU more complex. However, under the new rules the amount of electrical energy is much larger, so even small differences can translate into clear performance gaps. That's what is different from before. So even if the system is simpler in structure, the level of difficulty remains very high.

"Energy management will also be a differentiating factor, particularly in deciding where to use the limited amount of energy.

 In principle, it's best to use as much as possible on the straights, but depending on the car's characteristics, you might choose to use it between short corners. That would then reduce the energy available on the straight, for example.

"There are also cases where electrical energy is used to shape torque characteristics or achieve peak power, depending on how the turbo and engine are designed. With the MGU-H gone, turbo lag becomes a major issue, and using electrical energy to compensate for that is certainly an option. However, electrical energy is limited—you can't use it anytime, anywhere—so how you use it becomes extremely important."

Is it fair to say that electrical energy is always in short supply? If so, doesn't that makes both generation and usage extremely challenging?

"Exactly. The key point is how efficiently you generate the limited electrical energy and how you use it. It's not just about power assist—this will vary depending on ICE characteristics, the circuit, race conditions, and even the driver's style. That requires extremely fine control, which makes it a very challenging area."

How about durability and reliability? Under the previous regulations, there were many issues early on, especially with the MGU-H.

"With reliability, we certainly experienced firsthand how difficult the MGU-H was. This time, we don't have those unknown rotational speeds or extremely complex mechanisms, so I don't expect failures on the same scale. That said, there are still definite challenges.

"For example, with the increase in electric output, the effects of high torque on the MGU drivetrain become a difficult area. Thermal management and temperature control of the battery and motor are also areas where each PU manufacturer may take a different approach, and that will inevitably affect reliability."

Does the use of sustainable fuels also have a major impact?

"It does. The regulations themselves, including fuel composition, have changed completely. While we do have some knowledge, we need to start fresh in terms of how to match the fuel with new hardware and understand what effects are produced by different components. That's why we really feel the difficulty of this as completely new development.

"With the strict constraints on producing and using fuel sustainably, fuel development becomes a battle of ideas and speed."

Will batteries also become an area where performance differences emerge under the new regulations?

"The total capacity doesn't change, but the amount of energy flowing in and out increases, so differences will appear in terms of energy loss and deployment duration. Performance degradation due to aging will also become a factor affecting overall performance."

Specific details of development of Honda's PU are undoubtedly confidential, so what is your perspective and thinking? What has been the focus in Honda's PU development?

"There are many new elements, all of them important, so there's nothing we can afford to neglect. That said, I believe the ICE is where differences are most likely to emerge. How much output you can extract from the ICE, and how you achieve high performance together with the new fuel, is extremely important.

"From our perspective, the high-speed combustion approach that delivered results with the previous PU is now largely unusable due to compression ratio limits and changes in fuel flow. That means we have to find new ideas to improve performance. Other manufacturers are in the same situation, so it really becomes a competition of ideas."

When it comes to the battery, is it fair to think that the performance advantage from the previous PU can be carried over?

"That's what we believe—and what we hope. Even after the decision to end our activities, battery development continued, not limited to F1 alone. Because of that, it has evolved further, and it's an area we're confident in."

Regarding energy management, Honda has continued racing through its technical partnership with Red Bull Powertrains. Would you say you have ample experience and data in this area?

"Yes, in that sense we do want to compete by making full use of battery performance and energy management. However, the situation for energy management is completely different from before.

"Until last year, roughly half the energy was generated by the MGU-H and half by the MGU-K, so the proportion of how the MGU-K was used wasn't overwhelmingly large."

"In particular, energy could be transferred directly from the MGU-H to the MGU-K, so how well the MGU-H performed made a big difference.

 The MGU-K harvested energy under braking, but because it was relatively small, differences were limited. Now, everything relies on the MGU-K, so our entire approach to energy management has been reset.

"Having experience and data is certainly better than not, and I believe it will be useful to some extent. But in reality, there are still many things we won't know until we actually try."

With winter testing and the season opener approaching, what is the current situation?

"The specifications for the 2026 season are essentially fixed, and our current focus is on improving reliability ahead of homologation.

 However, there are many things you can only learn by installing the PU in a car and actually running it. That's why winter testing—mounting it in a real car or one that's very close to race conditions and confirming that everything operates properly, is an extremely important task, and that's the stage we're at now."

https://global.honda/en/F1/features/2026_Commentary/kakuda/

A Message fro HRC President Koji Watanabe

Formula 1 reborn under the 2026 regulations

The 2026 season will mark a major turning point for Formula 1 as a whole. For Honda, it will also be the start of a new challenge. Honda brought its Formula 1 activities to a close at the end of the 2021 season, and now, at a moment when F1 is being fundamentally reshaped by new regulations, returns to the sport to begin supplying power units to the Aston Martin Aramco Formula One Team (AMAF1).

The new-generation power unit introduced under these regulations is technically extremely demanding—and precisely for that reason, it represents a challenge well worth taking on. With a significantly higher proportion of electrification and the adoption of sustainable fuels, the new power unit aligns closely with the direction required by the times. Honda sees this as an ideal arena in which to further refine and strengthen its advanced technologies. At HRC, despite strict budget caps and numerous technical challenges, steady progress has been made toward winter testing and the opening round.

 Developing an all-new power unit with a new team, under new regulations, using new fuels, and within tight limits on testing and prototype numbers imposed by the cost cap, is an exceptionally difficult path. Every member of staff involved is fully committed, pooling their knowledge and efforts to take on this demanding challenge.


A new partnership envisioned by AMAF1 and Honda

In this first season of the challenge, the most important priority is to build a true one-team structure between AMAF1 and HRC, and to continue evolving it throughout the season. Rather than a simple supplier–constructor relationship, the aim is to share challenges, development philosophies, and long-term direction at a fundamental level, growing together as a unified team pursuing the same goals.
 This is the central theme for 2026 and a major objective that has been fully aligned through discussions between team owner Lawrence Stroll and myself.

Development has progressed steadily over time, and a strong relationship with AMAF1 has been built. Even so, as the opening race draws near, it is only natural to feel that more time is needed.

 That said, through the collective efforts of everyone involved, a solid foundation has been established—both for the new power unit and for the partnership with AMAF1—to enable further growth going forward. In the coming season, closer communication throughout the development process, coupled with the building of deep mutual trust, will allow steady step-by-step progress, which is firmly believed to be the path to major success.

The new power unit was fired up late last year, and with on-track running now imminent, AMAF1 team members are working alongside HRC at Sakura, combining the power unit with a dummy chassis to conduct a wide range of durability tests and validation work. Beyond PU development, HRC has strengthened its communications structure and is preparing a variety of initiatives to energize Honda's Formula 1 activities throughout the season. These efforts are being advanced in close coordination with HRC UK, creating a unified support structure across the organization. We expect favorable results from this collective approach.


Expectations, challenges, and confidence ahead of on-track running

The determination to fight for victories remains unchanged. However, the true level of competitiveness—and the relative strength compared with rivals—cannot be fully understood until the cars are actually running and racing. At this stage, the focus is on confirming whether the targeted performance levels can be consistently delivered, and there is a reasonable degree of confidence in that regard.

At the same time, this is a completely brand-new power unit, and potential issues cannot be fully identified until it is installed in the car and run on track. Extensive bench testing is currently being conducted to identify weaknesses and potential problems, but real-world running introduces different conditions, and new issues may emerge. These must be addressed one by one to improve reliability, complete the homologation process, and deliver a higher-level power unit by the opening race.

The same applies to the chassis, where on-track running is required to validate aerodynamics, suspension, and overall vehicle behavior, and to complete the package as a whole. With the new generation of F1 cars, it is more important than ever that the chassis and power unit function seamlessly as an integrated system. As such, pre-season testing will play a critical role—not just in evaluating individual components, but in confirming the overall performance of the car as a complete package.

With the first on-track running just ahead, there is a mixture of anticipation and uncertainty, but we have full resolve to work with the team to break through any challenges that arise.

The 2026 season represents the first step in Honda's new chapter in Formula 1. Together with AMAF1, HRC is committed to facing this new challenge with sincerity and unwavering dedication. Fans are warmly invited to watch over this new journey and to support the team as it gives its all on track. We sincerely appreciate the continued encouragement and support.

https://global.honda/en/F1/features/2026_Commentary/watanabe/

Gracias por toda la información  :Gracias:.

Ya falta menos  :gorra:

El equipo Alpine F1, ha rodado la A526 en Silverstone hoy. El próximo Viernes, presentación oficial:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_MDlZ-WgAA9npo?format=jpg&name=medium)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_MDlZ-WgAA9npo?format=jpg&name=medium

(https://i.ibb.co/VW0bCb7r/Alpine-a526.jpg)

https://i.ibb.co/VW0bCb7r/Alpine-a526.jpg

(https://i.postimg.cc/FsbNVYmh/a526.png)

https://i.postimg.cc/FsbNVYmh/a526.png

(https://i.postimg.cc/RZqpVYgT/a5262.png)

https://i.postimg.cc/RZqpVYgT/a5262.png

(https://i.ibb.co/4nnPMs90/Alpine-a526-1.jpg)

https://i.ibb.co/4nnPMs90/Alpine-a526-1.jpg

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_NUM4BXQAAT9g5?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_NUM4BXQAAT9g5?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

N. Carpentiers, pone la lupa en la VSCARB-03:

La Racing Bulls VCARB 03 à la loupe

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-racing-bulls-vcarb03_0-copy.jpg)

La VCARB 03 de Racing Bulls a effectué ses premiers tours à Imola, offrant un premier aperçu concret d'une monoplace de Formule 1 à la mode 2026. Analyse en images.

La Racing Bulls VCARB 03 (quel joli nom...) a pris la piste à Imola avec Liam Lawson au volant, effectuant ses premiers kilomètres dans des conditions froides et humides. Ce roulage a également marqué le premier essai du moteur Red Bull Powertrains en tant que motoriste complet pour cette saison.

L'équipe a utilisé son quota de démonstration de 15 km et prévoit de prolonger les essais mercredi lors d'une journée de tournage plus longue, désormais autorisée jusqu'à 200 km grâce à une récente modification réglementaire. Les essais ont été réalisés sur des gommes spécifiques Pirelli destinées aux démonstrations.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-racing-bulls-vcarb03_1.jpg)

Des F1 à nouveau penchées

Alan Permane revient sur la stratégie de développement de la monoplace : "Toutes les écuries sont confrontées exactement au même problème. Plus vous développez tard votre voiture, plus elle sera rapide. Vous voulez donc la garder le plus longtemps possible dans la soufflerie. Vous voulez finaliser les conceptions mécaniques le plus tard possible. L'installation du moteur, avec l'installation des radiateurs, tout cela a un effet sur les volumes des pontons, ce qui a un effet sur le fond plat, ce qui a un effet sur la création d'appui."

À l'avant, l'aileron intègre plusieurs surfaces générant des vortex, conséquence inévitable de l'introduction des volets avant mobiles sous la réglementation 2026. La section mobile est clairement délimitée, avec des actionneurs intégrés visibles, tandis que la section fixe extérieure adopte un angle d'incidence réduit, pour optimiser le flux local et limiter les pertes autour du pneu avant. Il n'y a pas d'ailette supérieure sur les dérives latérales, contrairement à la Haas et la Cadillac.

Le système de suspension est à poussoirs, comme sur toutes les monoplaces à l'exception de la Cadillac. On a expliqué ici les avantages de cette configuration de suspension dans la F1 2026. Ce qu'il faut également remarquer, c'est que le positionnement des bras de suspension produit beaucoup moins d'effet anti-plongée que sur les F1 de la période 2022-2025.

Pourquoi ce changement ? Comme le règlement impose un fond plat littéralement plus plat (et non plus en forme de tunnel Venturi), il est à nouveau intéressant de faire pencher la monoplace vers l'avant (une attitude que l'on appelle le "rake" dans le jargon). Avec une voiture penchée vers l'avant, le fond plat agit comme une sorte de grand diffuseur. C'est d'ailleurs pour cela qu'à l'arrière la suspension conserve une géométrie anticabrage semblable à celle de la précédente génération de F1.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-racing-bulls-vcarb03_2-copy.jpg)

Sur la Racing Bulls, une suspension avant inspirée de McLaren
Autre détail très important : la présence probable d'une suspension à plusieurs éléments ("multilink"). Comme on l'a expliqué ici en images, il s'agit d'une suspension avec deux bras séparés, qui créent un axe de braquage virtuel.

Cette architecture permet à l'angle de pincement de changer selon les conditions dynamiques (freinage, virage, ligne droite), sans intervention active. Cela permet d'optimiser la réactivité, la traînée et la gestion thermique des pneus avant. McLaren l'a introduit l'année passée pour bien gérer ses gommes, avec succès.

On trouve ce système sur la Haas VF-26 et donc, très vraisemblablement sur la future Ferrari SF-26.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-racing-bulls-vcarb03_3.jpg)

L'architecture de refroidissement est l'un des éléments les plus remarquables de la Racing Bulls. L'entrée d'air principale a été fortement élargie par rapport à 2025, à cause des besoins thermiques de la nouvelle architecture moteur. Sa taille est assez énorme alors que les ouvertures des pontons restent, dans leurs dimensions, ressemblent à celle de l'an passé. Cela montre à quel point il est crucial d'optimiser l'écoulement de l'air autour de la zone des pontons, puisqu'il s'agit de la principale région de la voiture présentant un potentiel de génération d'appui.

La géométrie des pontons combine un undercut frontal de style 2025 avec une philosophie arrière de type inwash d'avant 2022. À l'arrière, la taille est très étroite, ce qui est imposé en grande partie par la réglementation.

Après ce déverminage à Imola, la Racing Bulls VCARB 03 entamera son programme officiel avec un test de cinq jours à Barcelone, du 26 au 30 janvier. Permane a indiqué que le rythme de développement sera rapide, avec des évolutions attendues dès la première course à Melbourne.

https://f1i.autojournal.fr/magazine/magazine-technique/la-racing-bulls-vcarb-03-a-la-loupe/

Scarbs, nos recuerda las novedades "aero" para esta temporada:

F1 2026 aero regulations in focus part 1 – 'Back to the Future'
 
In terms of aero in F1, everything is changing. A lot of the solutions, however, are reinterpretations of old ideas, so it's really a case of 'back to the future'.

The FIA are trying to reduce the wake the car creates, to allow cars to race close enough together to encourage an overtake.

Secondly, the 2026 aero rules have been worked out in coordination with PU rules in order to get a more efficient race car.

Finally, seeking to redress the one big problem associated with 2022's 'ground effect' was 'Porpoising' and the stiff suspension it required to cure it.

These three requirements have brought a new package which includes: inwash aerodynamics, adaptive aero and flat floor/diffuser.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000103118-740x507@2x.jpg)

2026 INWASH

The result of the continued move towards ridding the cars of outwash, is the enforcement of an inwash philosophy.

Some F1 fans will remember the narrower front wings from pre-2009 were of an inwash design. These rules bring those back and even go a step further.

An F1 aerodynamicist's real aim is to remove any wake from running along the car's bodywork, be that wake coming from the front tyres or front wing.

These new rules will really challenge the aero departments within each team, as not only is there an inwash front wing, but there is new bodywork, specifically aimed at bringing the front wheel wake inboard.


2026 ADAPTIVE AERO

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000102401-740x740.png)

The power unit regulations were released before the rest of the 2026 rule book, as the PU's have a far longer development lead time.

It's often misunderstood that the aero rules were developed later to solve unexpected problems in the delivery of power throughout the lap.

In actual fact the two were always developed in tandem, the moveable aero solutions an obvious route to making the car perform more efficiently.

Initially both sidepod cooling and brake cooling were considered to improve efficiency. Instead, just the wings were written into the rules.

The 2026 solution is to open up both the front and rear wings on each lap. This acts as a means to reduce drag and stop wasting fuel, allowing for full downforce in the corners.

The switch between the high downforce and low drag conditions are now to be known as Z-mode and X-mode respectively.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000103117-740x463.jpg)

2026 FLAT FLOOR & DIFFUSER

The rules have chosen to return to the more benign 'flat' floor and diffuser, albeit upsized from the 2021 dimensions.

This is a better understood aero set up, that should prevent teams needing to the run the cars so low and stiff. The diffuser is now longer and taller, to create more expansion, for more downforce.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000102394-scaled-e1768055355794-740x464.jpg)


2026 FROM NOSE TO TAIL

FRONT WING

Starting with the front wing, the wing must now adopt a curved spoon profile, and its narrower span must fit between the front wheels, with the wing losing one element to use a maximum of three.

Even with this reduction the wing will be more than powerful enough to balance the car, so the aerodynamicists will want to shape the wing to make the aero around other areas of the car work better.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000103123-740x416.jpg)

Creating more downforce with a longer and steeper section will rob airflow downstream for other devices, so the distribution of load across the wing will need to be sympathetic to the whole car.

With the inwash philosophy enforced upon the design, development will likely extend to how the front wing endplate and inner brake ducts work.

One line of thinking is to keep the wing flatter nearer the tips and allow the endplate and brake duct help push the front tyre wake away from the car.

Although it's possible that bold philosophy could be to run a higher wing profile near the tip, that could help drive airflow in the right place across the inner face of the wheel.

How teams choose to load the wing towards the centre of the span to balance the car will be complicated by the active aero element.

Looking to the past, the lower central section was heavily loaded, as it works more efficiently being close to the track in ground effect.

However, the middle section is unlikely to open with active aero in X-mode (low drag), so its expected teams will only open the mid spans. Therefore, focussing the downforce on the centre will create less of a drag reduction effect.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000119265-740x563.jpg)

Aclaración: :umnik:

@ScarbsTech

More pictures from @Cadillac_F1
 
I've been able to add and correct some details from my first analysis. Clearly the car is in an incomplete state, but does feature some nice details.
#F1 #F1tech

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_NzzZ2X0AE9uGu?format=jpg&name=medium)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_NzzepXwAI0c6F?format=jpg&name=small)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_NzzdIW8AAwFgC?format=jpg&name=small)

-------

While there will be variations between teams, a mid-span loading would be the conventional compromise to get a good airflow to the centre of the car and inside the front wheels.

From having the wing connected to the nose since 2022, we now see the return of a pylon mounted wing hanging below the nose. This lower nose will end the strange optical effect of the 2022 cars where the underside of the car could be seen from under the nose/wing.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/RP-FW44-35-740x493.jpg)

The design of the pylons themselves is heavily restructured and not like a key area for repeated development.

Another reintroduction to the front wing is the allowance for underwing fences. These again help the control the tyre wake and tightly worded regulations limit their design.

On the outer face of the wing the endplate shape is quite constricted by the regulations, unless some seriously differently interpretations of the rules are found.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000103133-740x416.jpg)

The strake and footplate do, however, allow some areas to manage airflow passing around the front tyre – no doubt aided by the new freedom to shape the wheel covers.

These wheel covers were a spec design since 2022 and help to reduce the dirty wake created by the spinning front tyre, so we can expect some variation between the teams here.

There should not be any scope to blow air out through the wheel cover, but there is a performance gain in creating outwash in this way, so we can expect some controversy around this.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000118617-e1768304670146-740x579.jpg)

Inside the wheel the inner brake duct design will remain key, not just brake cooling, but also tyre temperature through ducting air past or insulating the disc from the wheel.

Rumours of the power of this practice and the materials involved were overstated in 2025, but there remains some performance to be gained from the careful design in this area.

The wakeboards are close to what I expect most teams will have. Made of 4 elements, but still meeting the 3 cross section rule. Plus they form an extra slot below, to help load the floor edge.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_LeAPOWoAAVsDe?format=jpg&name=small)

The wheels are enclosed as per the regulations, with both an outer open disc and an inner disc fairing.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_LeBA9XsAAkmHa?format=jpg&name=small)

FRONT SUSPENSION

The first question and easiest area to spot is whether there is a pushrod or pullrod. This will be a much talked about area and a lot of myths will be circulated about either design and the relative importance.

In reality the choice between one design and another is not a first order performance factor.  Aerodynamics, serviceability and geometry are all factors, but the differences are minimal.

That said, the shift towards pushrod on the rear was driven recently the larger underfloor tunnel and by better accessibility to the spring/damper hardware.

Some interesting trends 'appear' to be on the new Haas VF26 (caveats apply)

The front suspension looks like Mcl's 2025 lower multilink set up.
There's no lower wishbone, but 2 seperate links joining the upright in different places, creating a virtual steering axis.
#F1 #F1tech

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_DIYivWEAIobAS?format=jpg&name=small)

This alters camber, toe and ride height with steering and travel. This can aid tyre management, one of Mcl's strengths in 2025.
It also places the trackrod in a useful aero location for downwash towards the floors lower leading edge.
See @EngDesignIng posts about it...

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_DIZDFWcAAUkLP?format=jpg&name=small)

Pushrod is likely to remain popular at the front, the choice is likely to be down the attachment point on the inside of the wheel and how much downwash is needed from the rod sitting in the airstream, without any major gains from either set up.

Another area ripe for fan discussion has been the 'Anti dive' angle of the front suspension members, where in side view the wishbones tilt down towards the rear.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000119264-e1768761952511-740x556.jpg)

It's still arguable whether or not the anti-dive dive geometry gives any major effect. It's more likely that the extremely inclined wishbone geometries are an aero consideration, creating downwash to direct the front wing wake downwards towards the floor.

While the floor inlet is much lower for 2026, this will still be a useful set up and has already been noted on some teams monocoques during seat fits.

Less noted throughout 2025, was the front lower suspension set up on the McLaren. This wasn't a conventional wishbone, but two single arms joining the upright in two separate positions, giving a multilink set up.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/1000115356-740x494.jpg)

This gives both an aero downwash advantage, by having two separate arms in the airflow. More importantly it provides a completely different geometry to the wheel through steering and travel, changing camber, toe and ride height.

It's likely this was a greater part of McLaren's tyre management gains than anti-dive or brake ducts. As it was hard to replicate during a season without huge cost, teams will have had the year to add it to the development list and incorporate it into their 2026 car, so watch out for this area.

Allied to this the position of the steering remains an early consideration for the cars area concept.

Again, purely as an aerodynamic gain, placing the exposed track rod to help create downwash is a reasonable aero gain. Conventionally the steering rack/track rod sits in front of the front suspension, aligned with either the upper or lower wishbone.

McLaren resurrected an old layout where the rack sits low in the cockpit behind the suspension, allowing the track rod to have a greater effect on the airflow at the floors leading edge. They went a stage further in 2025 with the multilink set up, while Mercedes copied their 2024 layout.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/20251123_084642-740x494.jpg)

https://motorsport.tech/formula-1/f1-2026-aero-regulations-in-focus-part-1-back-to-the-future

F1 2026 aero regulations in focus part.2 – Sidepods, diffuser and rear wing

In the second of our two-part F1 2026 season preview, we delve into more detail surrounding the vitally important areas of the sidepods, diffuser and adaptive aero rear wing.

SIDEPOD FRONT

This is where the real gains are to be made in 2026, getting the new underfloor to work.

Although the floor will be less powerful in 2026, creating only about 50% of the car's downforce, given the active aero, the floor will still need to keep the car balanced when X-mode (low drag) is engaged and the wings aren't working.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000103110.png)

To do this the aero needs not only to get the diffuser to work well, but also front of the floor, as that allows a better front to rear balance in both X-mode and Z-mode (high downforce).

The FIA have created two areas to create load at the front of the floor, on the floorboard under the wake board and the floor section directly behind it.

As the air diverts either side of the car ahead of the sidepods, it will reach the wakeboard and its footplate.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000102374-scaled-e1768756218238-740x395.jpg)

Much like the venetian blind sets up of pre-2022, this can be used in creating some useful downforce at the front of the floor. The floor's leading edge is allowed up to 5 aero devices across its width.

These are likely to formed as the vortex generating teeth seen before 2022, speeding up the airflow under the front of the floor and out of the floor edge, again creating downforce.

WAKEBOARD

One area that teams might exploit is the lateral support for the wakeboard. As the board is poorly supported and sitting in a highly unsteady airflow, the FIA have allowed a lateral beam to support it.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000103131-740x740.jpg)

While the support's shape is small and heavily regulated, it's allowed to sit at any height ahead of the sidepod/floor.

This opens up interpretations where a low mounted support could influence the airflow ahead of the floors leading ledge. Some teams might find interpretation controversial, but as of now the loophole appears to remain in the regulations.

Thus, the design of the wakeboard and its three allowed sections will be a key battleground. Its introduction is to pick up the turbulent front tyre wake and direct it in inboard, reducing the car's wake ahead of another car.

It means, however, that the car sits in its own dirty air, obviously not something the teams want to happen. So the work here will be to prevent the tyre wake hitting the car's bodywork.

The rules were written to encourage the triple vane set up to favour an inwash design. It is possible to create a vertical outwash vane shape, but the compromises in the shape here would likely negate any advantage.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000118617-e1768304670146-740x579.jpg)

Given the wakeboards have to be there, nearly full size and without transparent openings, the teams may well create horizontal openings to create upwash, aiding the floor and creating some outwash to push at least the front tyre wake away from the car.

Combining the floor and the wakeboard into an effective set up will rely upon the influence of the sidepod front. Using the undercut to either divert or direct airflow to the wakeboard and floor edge, every team is likely to have a very different philosophy as the cars reach the first race.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000118618-e1768304550830-740x583.jpg)

Along with the wakeboard design, this is going to be an aero of change every few races as teams develop their own ideas or adopt other team's designs.

SIDEPODS

It's down to the sidepods bulk shape to do a lot of the airflow management between the front and the rear of the car.

We saw in the last ruleset, that super slim or even size-zero sidepods aren't obviously the solution to the aerodynamicists needs.

Instead, they are oversized, creating high and flat flanks which are used to create high pressure to push the tyre wake awake from the car.

Then, the airflow over the top of the sidepod is used to increase pressure over the diffuser for more downforce. A lot of these tricks will still work in 2026, although we can't discount some extreme interpretations of smaller (or even bigger) sidepods as a solution.

Given a large undercut might still be desirable for floor edge management, the positioning of the cooling inlet will continue to be design factor that teams play with.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000103132-740x740.png)

After some super slim "r" shaped inlets, McLaren led a move towards a squarer inlet, which was followed by several other teams. We can expect to see variations of all of these.

The reduced cooling requirement of the new Combustion engine (ICE), but upscaled heat rejection from the Hybrid system, means the balance of cooling will change.

Typically, the sidepods house the ICE cooling and the centreline cooling fed from the roll hoop that sits above the engine/gearbox cool the lower temperature hybrid/auxiliary systems.

Teams might shift more Low Temperature Radiators (LTRs) into the sidepods or increase the air ducts along the centreline.

There might be a useful way to do the latter solution, that the new rules cater for. It's a solution already exploited by Red Bull in 2025, which was an additional inlet on top of the sidepod. This makes use of the high-pressure area over the sidepod created the cockpit's obstruction.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/SI202511090871-740x493.jpg)

There's now a specifical regulatory volume in which a duct can sit and feed coolers or even the turbo's airbox inside the engine cover, looking somewhat like the late-1980s Benetton's.

DIFFUSER

As the airflow passes over and under the car, it will eventually reach the all-important diffuser. Every aspect of upstream design will work to ensure the diffuser is fed with the ideal airflow.

Airflow over the diffuser is affected by the sidepod, as detailed above, but also the rear suspension. Although the profile of the wishbones, track rods and push/pull rods are tightly constrained, teams do use their shape and layout to help the local airflow here.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000103111-1-740x365.jpg)

Likewise, the pushrod/pullrod question persists at the rear of the car for the same reason as at the front. Pushrod has gained more favour recently, as the pushrod clears the tunnels better and allows for easy access to the springs/dampers, as the gearbox doesn't need to be removed to access them as with Pullrod.

One area ripe for development is the bib and splitter area at the front of the floor, which sets up an inner vortex that runs along the stepped underfloor. There, some of the floor's inner leading-edge teeth will be assigned to creating a similar flow that joins with the diffuser's outer wall.

Helping the outer most of these airflows will be the floor corner, which is just ahead of the rear tyre.

By the time the outer vortex reaches the diffuser wall its nearly out of energy and needs help – especially, as the wake from the front inner tyre face wants to encroach into this area.

So, airflow is allowed to spill under the rear floor edge and the FIA now allow slots in the floor corner to further drive airflow to meet this outer vortex.

It's a detail seen with the 2022 cars was a hole in the diffuser wall, often called a mouse hole, which can be recreated in these rules to further inject some energy into the airflow.

Lastly, the teams have a regulatory volume to add fences under the diffuser. These not only manage pressure distribution inside the diffuser, but the vortices also shed from the lower edges further reduce pressure inside the diffuser.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000103118-740x507.jpg)

A key factor in the floor's performance is Ride Height. As explained above, the 2022-era cars favoured super low ride heights, but looking at the cars before them ran a lot of 'rake', Mercedes being the notable exception.

This effectively turns the whole floor into an expanding diffuser, creating more downforce.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/1000116119-e1765536369821-740x544.jpg)

But, teams had bargeboards and complex floor edges to manage this airflow up to 2021. For 2026 hardly any of these tricks will be possible. It will be interesting to see how far teams can recover airflow management to allow the benefits of rake going forwards.

REAR WING

Lastly, we reach the very end of the car and the rear wing. This now returns to a more conventionally shaped wing and endplate set up mounted on two pylons.

It can run up to three elements, while the two-element beam wing below is gone, with just a neutral 'stay' to steady the rear wing assembly on its pylons.

At the rear the lower wishbone is again interesting, in that the previous Ferrari gearbox reversed the wishbone/trackrod position for better aero.

This has now swapped back to a conventional layout, so that the trackrod works with the diffuser exit.

(https://x.com/ScarbsTech/status/2013329381741953237/photo/1)

(https://x.com/ScarbsTech/status/2013329381741953237/photo/1)

It may be said that DRS has gone, but it hasn't, its just employed in a different way with Active Aero and X-mode. This will be achieved exactly as it was with DRS, a hydraulic actuator inside a pod above the rear wing.

This can be activated by the driver, from the steering wheel, in activation zones designated by the FIA at each track.

These zones will be longer and widespread than DRS zones, so why not always run the rear wing in maximum downforce in Z-Mode? Teams will have completed thousands of simulations to assess just how to run the rear wing.

https://motorsport.tech/formula-1/f1-2026-aero-regulations-in-focus-part-2-sidepods-diffuser-and-rear-wing

Comparativa: VSCARB-03 vs. VSCARB-02:

(https://i.postimg.cc/nhbm5nVH/G-Lc-Hc-PXMAAz-KQh.jpg)

https://i.postimg.cc/nhbm5nVH/G-Lc-Hc-PXMAAz-KQh.jpg

VSCARB-03:

Manejo del "pitch":

Suspensión delantera: Geometría "anti-hundimiento"/'anti-dive': Si nos fijamos en los tirantes no observamos un efecto tan acusado como la temporada pasada:

(https://cdn-6.motorsport.com/images/mgl/Y9lLXNL2/s1100/arvid-lindblad-racing-bulls.webp)

https://cdn-6.motorsport.com/images/mgl/Y9lLXNL2/s1100/arvid-lindblad-racing-bulls.webp

(https://cdn-6.motorsport.com/images/mgl/YXypvKR6/s1100/arvid-lindblad-racing-bulls.webp)

https://cdn-6.motorsport.com/images/mgl/YXypvKR6/s1100/arvid-lindblad-racing-bulls.webp

Suspensión trasera: Geometría "anti-levantamiento"/'anti-lift': Aquí sí se observa un efecto acusado:

(https://cdn-4.motorsport.com/images/mgl/YK13p3z0/s1100/liam-lawson-racing-bulls.webp)

https://cdn-4.motorsport.com/images/mgl/YK13p3z0/s1100/liam-lawson-racing-bulls.webp

Quizás, como el Reglamento obliga a levantar el ala delantera del suelo, puede que  interese con la ayuda del 'rake' (mayor altura respecto al suelo, de la parte trasera del fondo plano, que de la delantera) a la hora de la frenada, se hunda ligeramente la parte delantera y aproximar más al suelo el ala delantera, pero evitar al mismo tiempo que se levante la parte trasera y entre en pérdida el difusor ('stalling').

El equipo Mclaren F1, se va a saltar, por lo menos, el primer día de pruebas en el Circuit y quizás el segundo. Recordemos que las pruebas duran 5 días, pero cada equipo, sólo puede utilizar 3 de los mismos.

Actualmente, el auto se encuentra en Austria, probándose en las instalaciones de AVL:

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/mclaren-2026-f1-test-plan-barcelona/

Algunas imágenes de estudio de la W17:




(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_QZqzRXsAATbhJ?format=jpg&name=large)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_QZqzRXsAATbhJ?format=jpg&name=large

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_QZqzRXsAATbhJ?format=jpg&name=large)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_QZqzRXsAATbhJ?format=jpg&name=large

(https://images.ctfassets.net/1fvlg6xqnm65/Pttgj5Urv154QiBvzkc71/c24c3bd4b890a52ef730b142784f7d07/W17-Homepage-Hero.jpg?w=1920&q=75&fm=webp)

https://images.ctfassets.net/1fvlg6xqnm65/Pttgj5Urv154QiBvzkc71/c24c3bd4b890a52ef730b142784f7d07/W17-Homepage-Hero.jpg?w=1920&q=75&fm=webp

(https://i.postimg.cc/FRFN6DHL/G-QTHISXMAAd9NY.jpg)

https://i.postimg.cc/FRFN6DHL/G-QTHISXMAAd9NY.jpg

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iShLnYIWTJI[/video]

(https://i.postimg.cc/VLc1rH4H/Screenshot-4866.png)

(https://i.postimg.cc/qq7kqtp6/Screenshot-4867.png)

https://i.postimg.cc/qq7kqtp6/Screenshot-4867.png

(https://i.postimg.cc/7hQq2xLR/Screenshot-4871.png)

https://i.postimg.cc/7hQq2xLR/Screenshot-4871.png

(https://i.ibb.co/k6PRNmF7/image.png)

https://i.ibb.co/k6PRNmF7/image.png

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_R9VPxXIAApY_l?format=jpg&name=medium)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_R9VPxXIAApY_l?format=jpg&name=medium

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_SMP1lX0AA4EbO?format=jpg&name=large)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_SMP1lX0AA4EbO?format=jpg&name=large

(https://i.postimg.cc/QtfhwvPH/20260122-193257.jpg)

https://i.postimg.cc/QtfhwvPH/20260122-193257.jpg

W17: Da la impresión que el fondo plano incorpora una rendija (slot) en la zona con el recuadro amarillo  :sherlock:

(https://i.postimg.cc/85xMnxBt/w17-slotg.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)

La R26 [la versión de estudio y la real] (Audi F1) bajo la lupa de N. Carpentiers:

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-audi-r26_0.jpg)

Audi a dévoilé sa livrée 2026 à Berlin, mais les images projetées en coulisses ont révélé une version sensiblement différente de celle exposée sur scène.

Lors du lancement de sa livrée 2026 à Berlin, Audi F1 a présenté sur scène une monoplace de démonstration standard, construite par Memento Exclusives. Cette showcar, identifiable par son numéro générique R26, correspond au modèle F1 2026 utilisé habituellement pour les présentations officielles.

Mais des observateurs attentifs ont remarqué qu'une autre version de la voiture est brièvement apparue à l'écran derrière la scène, avant la révélation officielle, comme on peut le voir sur la comparaison ci-dessous.

Cette monoplace se distinguait notamment par l'utilisation des véritables numéros de course, ainsi que par plusieurs différences visibles par rapport à la maquette.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-audi-r26_00-copy.jpg)

Des éléments déjà vus à Barcelone
Contrairement à la voiture de présentation, équipée d'une suspension avant à tirants (pullrod), la version projetée à l'écran utilisait une suspension à poussoirs (pushrod), déjà observée sur la R26 lors de son roulage à Barcelone (flèches jaunes).

Les pontons diffèrent également, avec un dessin plus élaboré intégrant une sorte de visière, comme sur la configuration vue en piste (flèches vertes). Le nez présente lui aussi une géométrie distincte : plus plat que celui du show car, il comporte des ouvertures de refroidissement typiques d'une monoplace réellement exploitée (flèches cyan).

Sur ces images, l'Audi F1 ressemble à la voiture qui a roulé à Barcelone, et qui devrait logiquement être reprise lors du première séance d'essais hivernaux, qui se tiendra la semaine prochaine à huis-clos.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-audi-r26_1-copy.jpg)

Audi F1 suit la tendance en matière de suspensions
La R26 présente une architecture à poussoirs à l'avant (les différences entre une suspension à poussoirs et une suspension à tirants sont expliquées ici), une configuration qui est plus appropriée dans le cadre du règlement 2026.

Cette architecture pourrait s'accorder plus efficacement avec le nouveau régime d'écoulement généré par l'aileron avant, ainsi qu'avec la façon dont ce flux interagit ensuite avec les flancs et le fond plat. En parallèle, les systèmes à pushrod peuvent s'avérer plus légers et plus simples à intégrer, alors que la réduction de masse figure parmi les axes de travail majeurs des équipes en vue de la saison 2026.

Comme on le voit sur la comparaison ci-dessus, la Haas VF-26 et la Racing Bulls VCARB03 ont opté pour cette solution, à la différence de Cadillac, la seule équipe à ce jour à avoir préféré une suspension avant à tirants.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-audi-r26_2-copy.jpg)

Une carrosserie très prudente...
Dans cette version initiale qui roulera à Barcelone, l'Audi F1 affiche des flancs plutôt dodus. La découpe sous les entrées d'air (resserrement que l'on appelle l'undercut dans le paddock) est beaucoup moins marquée que sur la Racing Bulls et la Cadillac. On aperçoit même une sorte de protubérance dans cette zone, qui évoque la Ferrari F1-75 de 2022 (flèches vertes).

Quant à la pente des pontons, elle est très peu marquée, alors que la Racing Bulls et la Cadillac présentent des pontons plongeant vers les roues arrière (comparez les lignes vertes).

Ces amples volumes s'expliquent par la volonté de laisser s'écouler beaucoup d'air à l'intérieur de la voiture, afin de ne prendre aucun risque en matière de refroidissement lors des premiers roulages à Barcelone, qui serviront essentiellement à faire tourner les nouveaux groupes propulseurs. Un capot moteur et des flancs resserrés devraient apparaître lors des tests de Bahreïn, qui seront davantage consacrés aux châssis.

Ces volumes généreux s'expliquent par la volonté de laisser circuler une grande quantité d'air à l'intérieur de la voiture, afin de ne prendre aucun risque en matière de refroidissement lors des premiers roulages à Barcelone, principalement destinés à faire fonctionner les nouveaux groupes propulseurs. Un capot moteur et des flancs plus resserrés devraient en revanche faire leur apparition lors des essais de Bahreïn, davantage axés sur le travail châssis.

"Vous imaginez bien que, pour être les premiers en piste, nous avons pris très tôt des décisions sur le niveau aérodynamique et la configuration de la voiture, explique Jonathan Weathley, le team principal de l'équipe. C'est cette version qui sera utilisée pour ces tests de fiabilité et de systèmes. Puis, au moment opportun, nous introduirons notre évolution destinée à la course avant Melbourne, lors de l'une des journées d'essais à Bahreïn."

Audi F1 en quête de fiabilité
La fiabilité constitue un enjeu central pour Audi, comme l'a souligné Mattia Binotto. Le dirigeant a précisé qu'Audi sera prête à rouler dès lundi matin en Catalogne, dans le cadre d'un programme de cinq jours durant lequel chaque équipe peut effectuer trois journées de piste, à répartir librement.

"L'objectif est d'abord de franchir l'arrivée, car la fiabilité, à ce stade du développement, est primordiale. Boucler la distance de course, terminer un week-end de Grand Prix sans problème majeur en piste."

"Pour développer la voiture et le moteur, il faut du temps de roulage. Nous voulons être fiable et, dans une certaine mesure, compétitifs, en nous battant pour quelques positions, quelle que soit la place finale en Australie. L'essentiel ne sera pas notre point de départ, mais plutôt la manière dont l'équipe progressera."

En termes aérodynamiques, il semble que la souffleri de Hinwill soit enfin bien corrélée à la réalité, comme l'explqiue James Key, en poste depuis septembre 2023 :

"Au fond, c'était une question de physique des écoulements, et de ce qui fonctionne ou ne fonctionne pas. À mon arrivée, l'un de nos points faibles était ce que j'appelle la 'robustesse aéro' : la capacité à livrer quelque chose qui marche réellement. Nous n'avions pas suffisamment de critères pour produire une aéro qui fonctionne."

Par son statut de débutant, Audi ne sera pas immédiatement le seigneur des anneaux, mais le porteur des anneaux. Tel Frodo, il devra apprendre et surmonter les obstacles.

https://f1i.autojournal.fr/magazine/magazine-technique/laudi-r26-a-la-loupe/

Hoy se produjo un encuentro entre personal de la FIA y técnicos expertos, donde acordaron ingeniar un procedimiento para medir la relación de compresión "en caliente", pero a la hora de poner una fecha para implementar esa medida,.... si eso ya tal.....

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/what-has-been-agreed-f1-2026-engine-meeting-compression-ratio/

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/01/2026-Shakedown---3-1.JPG)

https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/01/2026-Shakedown---3-1.JPG

El equipo Mercedes F1, ha realizado una sesión de grabación promocional ('filming day') donde la W17 ha rodado en Silverstone 200 km, el máximo permitido.

GA desmenuza la W17 (la mostrada en las fotos de estudio y la real):

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/01/2026-Shakedown---6-1.jpg)

The 2026 Formula 1 season represents a big opportunity for Mercedes to recover from its relatively disastrous ground effect era, one in which it never really got on top of the situation and where inconsistency was its dominant trait. Being untouchable at one event then fighting to get into Q3 at the next one is not a good place to be; it just ebbs away your confidence.

When you have that problem it's not necessarily down to poor car design, but more about the tools you have available for design concept and development direction. Whatever tools you have are there to help make these big decisions and if they don't give the correct answers then it is very easy to head off in the wrong direction. It takes big balls for someone to use gut feel to overrule any data-driven decisions.

So, will the problem continue in 2026? If Mercedes hasn't recognised where it was coming from - which is either the windtunnel and/or the simulation tools, or the way the team combines the data from those two - and rectified it, then yes it will.

However, as this set of regulations is less critically dependent on what is happening between the ground and the undersurface of the car, the problem shouldn't be quite as bad.

Turning to the new car for 2026, again I'll say at the beginning we can only comment on what we are given. The initial renders released in the morning did look fairly detailed to me but then a few real pictures from the shakedown run showed how renders can differ from the real car. Not necessarily intentionally, but the renders aren't released the instant they're created, and development goes on endlessly until the actual car hits the track.

As an overall package it looks good; nothing startling anywhere but good, clean lines with everything looking like it is working as one.

As I have said before, sometimes it is better to optimise what you have experience of and Mercedes has stuck with the pushrod operated front suspension. That's no bad thing as I don't believe there is much to choose between a pullrod or pushrod, so packaging is the prime consideration in that area.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/data-src-image-dee3f469-0851-4248-a91e-65e36bda8ff3-1.jpeg)

n the renders you couldn't see much of the suspension wishbone geometry. But from this on-track shot we can see Mercedes has retained the anti-dive on the top wishbone (forward leg dark blue highlight, rearward leg light blue highlights) the pushrod (red highlight) and what I think is the front track rod (green highlight).

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/01/Mercedes-AMG-F1-W17-E-PERFORMANCE---GR-4-1.jpg)

Aerodynamically, the Mercedes begins with a three-element front wing, which is now detached from the nose structure. Over the last few years this was an area which teams including Mercedes played around with. I have always liked it being detached as it allows some airflow through that gap to help keep the airflow attached to the underside of the nose.

The shakedown pictures reveal a little more of the aero here. We can see the high radiator inlet (yellow highlight below) making way for the sidepod undercut, giving the airflow wake coming off the front wing and front suspension somewhere to go. Even though it's a long way away, this undercut improves the performance of the front wing.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/data-src-image-018a9c62-97ab-418b-a733-a1da86c1969b.jpeg)

The underfloor leading edge splitters (red ellipse above) are much smaller than last year. That is because of the reduced underfloor ground effect, meaning that the leading edge of the floor is lower. They will still be more or less working in the same way by turning some of that airflow outwards, but just less effective.

And now I wonder what Mercedes would say that little vertical fin (blue ellipse above) on the outer foot of the front wing endplates is there for? The major objective of these new regulations was to reduce outwash, which plays havoc with a following or potentially overtaking car. I would hate to think this component was there to generate outwash and, more importantly, that at this early stage of running the FIA doesn't have the courage to outlaw this style of airflow management devices.

The front wing endplates are fairly brutal. This is a regulation requirement and that is questionable to me: why do they need such a dramatic footplate and why so wide?

Simply chop them at the inside of the outer tunnel and they will cause a lot less potential yellow flags from car damage.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/Mercedes-AMG-F1-W17-E-PERFORMANCE---GR-10-1.jpg)

The radiator intakes are in line with the current trends, being high and allowing a decent sidepod leading edge undercut, and again we have the now reduced-in-size splitters on the leading edge of the underfloor.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/Mercedes-AMG-F1-W17-E-PERFORMANCE---GR-8-1.jpg)

We are now seeing the return of the bargeboards of the pre-ground-effect era. Hopefully they will never get to the multi-element components we saw in 2021, but it all starts here.

his area is all about picking up the disturbed airflow coming off the back of the front tyre and also using that redirected airflow to help seal the sides of the underfloor. They even require their own support stay.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/01/Mercedes-AMG-F1-W17-E-PERFORMANCE---GR-10-2.jpg)

Going further rearward it's all quite compact - by no means the 'size zero' sidepods we saw at the beginning of 2022, but all nicely packaged without the need for lumps and bumps all over the place.

The headrest area and the undercut to the lower surface of the airbox intake is the important part of this section of the car. If you can get consistent airflow through this area it reduces driver buffeting and improves the performance of the rear wing.

Mercedes also has the 'sponsorship fin' (which I'm not a fan of) on the trailing edge of the engine cover. It has the car number on it, which is great, and it would be good to see this as a regulation requirement.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/data-src-image-d1b790c8-a3d8-416e-9d96-44be0bc1d5ce.jpeg)

In the renders, the sidepod upper surface appeared to sweep downwards and then back up again. The track shot comparison above shows that doesn't really happen.

I have added some flow lines to this sidepod detail below to show what Mercedes is trying to achieve.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/data-src-image-558bebce-027f-40ce-8c19-40d2eba11ada.jpeg)

All that flow will meet up in what is called the coke bottle area - basically the gap between the inner body surface and the inside of the rear tyre.

The outer flow (red highlight) will be pulled through these louvres by what is called the inner tyre squirt. This is the airflow that is displaced when the tyre rotates onto the track surface; it either goes inwards or outwards. Pulling it inwards can then fill up the void where the tyre rotates away from the the track surface, so effectively managing the tyre airflow displacement as efficiently as possible.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/01/Mercedes-AMG-F1-W17-E-PERFORMANCE---GR-12.jpg)

This plan view shows a neat and tidy coke bottle concept exposing the upper surface of the underfloor and creating space for the airflow displaced by the rear tyres that I'd demonstrated above. That airflow then helps improve the performance of the rear wing and diffuser but also improves the efficiency of the overall car by in effect reducing the car's width. If the airflow had to go around the outside it would increase drag.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/Mercedes-AMG-F1-W17-E-PERFORMANCE---GR-12-1-1.jpg)

The area in front of the rear tyre has again gone back to the thinking of pre-ground-effect days. It's important to manage the airflow that is being displaced by the rear tyre rotating onto the track surface and where that displacement goes. If it's inboard it will affect the performance of the diffuser, so the intention is to feed what is called the outer tyre squirt with the airflow coming over the top of the floor through these small louvres.

There's lots more developments to come in that area I'm pretty sure.

I'm a little surprised by the rear suspension. Last year, Mercedes increased the anti-lift on the rear suspension for Imola in May but it caused some problems with driver feedback. Basically, it made the car feel numb.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/data-src-image-889efd99-7bca-4724-8bce-b6f332a4a91c.jpeg)

If what I am seeing is correct, Mercedes seems to have retained it and/or even increased it. The top wishbone (forward leg dark blue, rearward leg light blue highlights) shows a fairly dramatic difference in height where it mounts to the inner structure. The lower wishbone (forward leg dark green, rearward leg light green highlights) shows again a marked difference in the height of the inboard mountings.

Both of these add together to give the anti-lift characteristics to the rear suspension. If what I am seeing is correct, the pushrod (red highlight), the driveshaft shroud (magenta highlight), and probably the trackrod (yellow highlight) make up the rest of the suspension system.

Having said all that, the characteristics from braking on the rear suspension for this season will be quite different to last year. As we now have more electrical energy recovery to achieve solely through the rear axle, under deceleration and especially braking there will be more horizontal load going through the axle into the wishbone system and less torsional load transmitted through the wishbones.

That difference will have quite an effect on how the rear ride height changes under deceleration and braking.

The rear suspension is also (as last year) pushrod operated. With the reduced maximum wheelbase from 3600mm to 3400mm, the area that you can use for the inboard mechanism of a pullrod suspension has been reduced so packaging would be very difficult - not impossible, but at the rear there is a reasonable amount of space on top of the gearbox and it's instantly accessible for set-up changes.

If this is the car we see in testing and Mercedes has recognised and rectified what held it back in the ground effect era then I'm pretty sure we will see Mercedes taking a step forward this year.

Will it be back to the domination seen before 2022? Rumour has it that the new Mercedes power unit is a rocketship and with McLaren, Williams and Alpine using it too, that's eight drivers who are all very competent that could take big points.

The Mercedes works drivers, George Russell and Kimi Antonelli, will certainly hope that the chassis is the step they need to be ahead of the rest of that bunch. As for the rest, that's really out of their control.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/mercedes-f1-2026-car-w17-gary-anderson-verdict/

En la siguiente foto, subida por ScarbsTech, se observa la ranura/slot presente en el fondo plano de la ´W17. Estas dos corrientes de flujo de aire, energetizan los laterales del difusor evitando la separación de flujo de la capa límite, pudiendo aumentar el AoA y aumentar el "poderío" del mismo o para un mismo AoA reducir el "arrasre"/'drag':

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_SeMGCXMAAmK08?format=jpg&name=medium)

https://x.com/ScarbsTech/status/2014408865614303653/photo/1

Comparativa VCARB-03 vs. W17:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_TJzVlWMAA6Hy-?format=jpg&name=small)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_TJzVlWMAA6Hy-?format=jpg&name=small

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_SP_JNWcAAr0hC?format=jpg&name=large)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_SP_JNWcAAr0hC?format=jpg&name=large

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_SP_JVWMAA_JDV?format=jpg&name=large)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_SP_JVWMAA_JDV?format=jpg&name=medium

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_SP_JOX0AAIlY3?format=jpg&name=large)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_SP_JOX0AAIlY3?format=jpg&name=large

(https://i.postimg.cc/G2TXVYVR/2.jpg)

https://i.postimg.cc/G2TXVYVR/2.jpg

(https://i.postimg.cc/6q3pBWVG/15.jpg)

https://i.postimg.cc/6q3pBWVG/15.jpg

(https://i.postimg.cc/T3rfM587/7.jpg)

https://i.postimg.cc/T3rfM587/7.jpg

El equipo Williams F1, se perderá esta primera tanda de entrenamientos de pretemporada:

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/williams-f1-2026-barcelona-test-fw48/

C. Horner, interesado en la compra del equipo Alpine F1:

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/horner-in-talks-over-alpine-buy-in-briatore/

Especulando sobre las causas de la ausencia del equipo Williams F1 en estos primeros tests:

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/williams-missing-first-f1-2026-test-setback-what-we-know/

GA, sobre la SF-26:

Gary Anderson's take on Ferrari's basic 2026 F1 launch car

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/01/XPB_1393497_HiRes.jpg)

And then there was Ferrari! We have heard so much through the Italian tifosi during the winter that it sort of feels like we have seen the team's 2026 Formula 1 design already, but here is the real thing. It's a mixture of renders and the actual car that did Ferrari's first few shakedown laps at Fiarano.

The team has already stated this first version of the 2026 car - which Ferrari calls its 'spec A' - is to allow it to build up data and reliability mileage, giving it time for more research and development, so this is not the final Australian Grand Prix race version of the car.

But anyway let's see if Lewis Hamilton's memos to Ferrari about what it needed to do to improve have been taken on board.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/data-src-image-1275d38e-f044-484a-855d-1d1533824c54.jpeg)

Compared to the Red Bull renders and referencing it to the front face of the headrest and the central section of the halo (red arrows) the wheelbase and its positioning doesn't look much different.

This is all down to the scaling, but again as the rear wing overhang is the same and front wing overhang very similar, I don't think we are seeing a significant difference.

Below is a comparison of the Ferrari and the Mercedes during their respective shakedowns, so both actual cars. Ferrari has stuck with a simple rollover bar inlet (green ellipse) whereas Mercedes has gone for the multipurpose inlet (engine air intake and cooling) that I think all others team bar Ferrari will also adopt. Doing this allows Mercedes to reduce the radiator sidepod inlets.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/data-src-image-4664b547-b920-4820-84f0-697ca344e27d.jpeg)

Also the underside of the nose detail is quite different. The main underside height (yellow highlight above) is very similar on both cars but the side undercut detail (magenta highlight) looks much more extreme on the Mercedes.

In reality this will increase the airflow to the underfloor and if that's what you desire to generate more downforce then Ferrari will need to think again.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/data-src-image-182211f2-fc25-453f-afd7-66482dcd2457.jpeg)

As was widely predicted, Ferrari has gone to a pushrod front suspension (red highlight above), which seems to be de rigueur for 2026.

To be honest, the difference between the two options is very small so I'm pretty sure it's down to what you feel most comfortable with as a design package.

As for the geometry, Ferrari has retained the anti-dive seen in 2025 on the top wishbone (forward leg dark blue, rearward leg light blue) and perhaps even increased it.

The lower wishbone forward leg (green highlight) runs more or less parallel with what I believe is the track rod (yellow highlight).

The radiator inlet (yellow highlight) is very similar to the Mercedes version, but again we need to remember that Ferrari will have less cooling flow through the airbox intake (green ellipse).

 Time will tell who has enough cooling for those hot, 35C ambient temperature races.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/data-src-image-7f8ac3d0-8d9a-427e-b138-4a74234f02ec.jpeg)

Turning to this picture from the shakedown (as opposed to the realised renders) it shows what I believe to be an increase in anti-dive on the top wishbone, (highlighted with dark blue forward leg, light blue rear leg). In my book this is a lot. The rear leg of the lower wishbone (light green highlight) shows it again runs fairly parallel to the track rod (yellow highlight) so there is not much influence on the dive characteristics under braking from that suspension member.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/data-src-image-ae4bbd2c-05f4-474e-970c-dd6873936a7a.jpeg)

As for the rear suspension, again Ferrari has retained the pushrod (red highlight) operated system as last year. The anti-lift characteristics also look very similar to last season, if not (as with the front) slightly increased, see the top wishbone (forward leg dark blue, rearward leg light blue). As for the lower wishbone (forward leg dark green, rearward leg light green) it will also contribute to the overall anti-lift characteristics.

As I said in the Mercedes analysis, the braking loads on the rear suspension are very different this year - more electrical recharge is required, which generates a rearward horizontal load at axle height and coupled to that is the actual hydraulic braking load which produces a torque in the wishbone system.

It is to the combination of this horizontal load and this torque that these suspension pickup point positions have to react, so I'm pretty sure every team will have simulated the rear suspension characteristics many times before making rash decisions.




(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/data-src-image-f3ea239e-9fce-4029-a343-252177c49d1b.jpeg)

Now onto the bargeboard area. Again, with each car we are seeing reasonably different solutions to more or less the same problem - that problem is generated from the turbulence (red arrows) created as the void behind the front tyre tries to get back to some sort of normal pressure.

If this is allowed to go into the underfloor then you lose a bunch of downforce from the underfloor. These bargeboards, which I have added some highlight lines to, tidy up that flow and then allow it to be pulled around the car by the low pressure in the coke bottle area.

This flow all starts at that sidepod leading edge undercut.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/data-src-image-d876cb8a-4740-4816-a68a-0a41cadfcdf7.jpeg)

As that flow goes rearward some of it tries to go under the outer edge of the floor. Again, if that happens you will lose underfloor downforce so these small louvers try to connect what is called the tyre squirt - the airflow that is displaced when the tyre rotates onto the track surface - which is fairly high energy so pulls some of that flow into it.

Some teams seem to try to connect the flow on the top of the floor to the tyre squirt going inside the tyre. In Ferrari's case it looks like it is trying to connect it to the tyre squirt going around the outside of the tyre.

I'm sure we will see many developments in this area so time will tell who is correct.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/data-src-image-253edcc9-1ad3-44f9-a0c3-22b5a8541aba.jpeg)

Overall I'm glad Ferrari itself said this was simply a test and reliability version of the car that was being released first. I'm not seeing that much that makes me wide eyed. That said, it's neat and tidy so perhaps a decent base to start from - but developments will count and Ferrari will ultimately be judged on the success (or not) of those.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/gary-andersons-take-on-ferraris-basic-2026-f1-launch-car/

La Mercedes W17, bajo la lupa de N. Carpentiers:

La Mercedes W17 à la loupe : l'astuce qui surprend

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-mercedes-w17_0.jpg)

Lors de son premier galop d'essais à Silverstone jeudi, Mercedes a créé la surprise avec un diffuseur présentant deux fentes à gauche et à droite.

La trouvaille aérodynamique introduite par Mercedes au niveau du diffuseur repose sur une large ouverture latérale, visible de part et d'autre de la voiture. Loin de correspondre à un double diffuseur au sens strict, cette architecture vise à contrôler la zone d'expansion.

La position de cette ouverture suggère en effet la volonté de générer un écoulement descendant localisé, capable de guider et de canaliser l'air le long des parois externes du diffuseur, dont le focntionnement est expliqué ici. Ce flux d'air énergisé protégerait l'écoulement interne face aux turbulences générées par la rotation des roues arrière (communément désignées sous le terme de "rear wheel squirt").

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-mercedes-w17_1-copy.jpg)

Protéger l'expansion interne du diffuseur

Dans la phase finale du diffuseur, l'écoulement est particulièrement vulnérable. L'air en expansion, déjà ralenti et soumis à de forts gradients de pression, peut facilement être perturbé par les turbulences issues des roues arrière. Cette interaction tend à dégrader l'efficacité de l'expansion et à réduire l'appui généré.

L'ouverture latérale imaginée par Mercedes permettrait de créer une zone de pression et de direction du flux plus favorable, une sorte de barrière aérodynamique, symbolisée en bleu ci-dessous, protégeant le diffuseur de l'intrusion des turbulences des pneus. Il s'agit de créer une sorte de paroi destinée à limiter l'intrusion des turbulences dans le cœur du diffuseur.

Le flux ainsi généré contribuerait à maintenir l'intégrité de l'écoulement interne, condition essentielle pour exploiter pleinement le potentiel d'expansion sous la voiture.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-mercedes-w17_2-copy.jpg)

Une astuce réglementaire encore sous surveillance
Cette hypothèse est renforcée par le dessin très marqué des pontons Mercedes. Le fort undercut semble précisément conçu pour canaliser un volume important d'air vers cette ouverture latérale. Le flux ainsi guidé alimente la fente du diffuseur, énergisant l'écoulement le long des parois externes et au sommet du tunnel.

Très bien, mais est-ce légal ? À première vue, cette ouverture latérale semble aller bien au-delà de ce que la réglementation autorise habituellement dans cette zone, où seules de très petites ouvertures étaient tolérées par le passé. L'hypothèse la plus crédible ne se situerait toutefois pas dans les articles encadrant directement le diffuseur ou les parois du fond plat, mais dans la manière dont ces éléments s'articulent avec les règles régissant les écopes et déflecteurs de frein arrière.

En tout cas, la solution apparaît également sur la Ferrari SF-26 présentée vendredi, comme on peut le constater sur la comparaison ci-dessous.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-mercedes-w17_4-copy.jpg)

Un moteur déjà au centre de toutes les attentions
Dès sa sortie  en piste, la voiture a parcouru près de 200 kilomètres, soit le maximum autorisé lors d'un filming day, avec George Russell et Kimi Antonelli se relayant au volant.

Cette entrée en matière impressionnante renforce le statut de favori précoce attribué à Mercedes avant même le début des essais hivernaux. Depuis plusieurs mois, le paddock bruisse de rumeurs positives autour du développement du moteur Mercedes pour la réglementation 2026. Ces échos se sont intensifiés en fin de saison dernière, lorsque certains constructeurs rivaux ont exprimé leur agacement face à l'interprétation retenue par Mercedes du nouveau taux de compression, plus restrictif sur le papier.

Selon ces mêmes bruits de paddock, cette lecture du règlement pourrait offrir un gain de performance de plusieurs dixièmes de seconde à elle seule sur le plan moteur. Le premier roulage de la W17, sans incident et avec un kilométrage maximal immédiatement atteint, ne fait qu'alimenter cette perception d'un constructeur particulièrement bien préparé à l'entrée en vigueur du nouveau cycle technique.

Jeudi, les constructeurs de Formule 1 ont trouvé un accord avec la FIA sur une méthode permettant de mesurer le taux de compression des moteurs lorsqu'ils sont à pleine température, mais il est peu probable que cette procédure soit appliquée à court terme.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-mercedes-w17_3.jpg)

Un contraste marqué avec la concurrence
La comparaison des kilométrages avec les autres équipes rend ce début encore plus impressionnant. Avec sa R26 (analysée ici), Audi, pour sa première sortie en tant qu'écurie d'usine, n'a parcouru qu'environ un quart du kilométrage autorisé, privilégiant une configuration très conservatrice afin de sécuriser la fiabilité. Racing Bulls, de son côté, a d'abord opté pour un simple événement de démonstration limité à 15 kilomètres à Imola avec sa VCAR03 décortiquée ici en images, avant de programmer un filming day complet le lendemain.

La Cadillac 2026 n'a pas non plus exploité l'intégralité de son allocation lors de son roulage à Silverstone. Dans ce contexte, la capacité de Mercedes à maximiser immédiatement son temps de piste apparaît comme un premier avertissement adressé au reste de la grille.

Cette dynamique positive ne s'est pas limitée à l'équipe officielle. Alpine a elle aussi connu un premier roulage encourageant pour sa toute première sortie avec un moteur Mercedes. Malgré des conditions météo difficiles, marquées par une piste humide et une luminosité déclinante, l'écurie française est parvenue à couvrir environ 140 kilomètres avant d'interrompre sa séance.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-mercedes-w17_5.jpg)

Mercedes a-t-elle tiré les leçons de ses échecs ?
Mercedes conserve une suspension avant à tirants (pushrod), un système qu'elle utilisait déjà en 2025 alors que peu d'écuries y avaient recours, et qui semble devenir un choix majoritaire pour 2026.

Plus léger pour une même rigidité, ce système aide à respecter le poids minimum abaissé à 770 kg et illustre la volonté de l'équipe de capitaliser sur chaque gramme.

Le nez de la W17 se fixe au troisième élément de l'aileron avant via des piliers, laissant un large passage destiné à canaliser l'air vers le fond plat., comme sur la plupart des autres F1 2026.

Du côté des bargeboards, l'équipe a conçu un assemblage conforme au règlement mais favorisant un upwash plutôt qu'un inwash, une approche destinée à mieux gérer le sillage des pneus arrière et à optimiser le flux vers le diffuseur.

La capacité de la Mercedes W17 à ramener l'équipe vers ses anciennes heures de gloire dépendra surtout de la manière dont elle parviendra à négocier le nouveau règlement 2026, après n'avoir jamais pleinement su exploiter le potentiel maximal des monoplaces à effet de sol.

Les échecs passés ne sont jamais une garantie de réussite future. Mais si Mercedes a réellement su tirer les enseignements de ses difficultés et les intégrer de manière cohérente dans la conception de la W17, l'équipe pourrait disposer d'une base technique solide pour le nouveau cycle réglementaire. Associée à un groupe propulseur annoncé comme très compétitif, cette base pourrait transformer Mercedes en un concurrent particulièrement dangereux dès l'entrée en vigueur du règlement 2026.

https://f1i.autojournal.fr/magazine/magazine-technique/la-mercedes-w13-a-la-loupe/

ScarsTech, sobre ranuras/slots, presentes en fondos planos para potenciar el "poderío" del difusor. De momento, vistos en la W17 y en la SF16:


Mercedes W17 Tech Insight – Gambling on the slots

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/IMG-20260123-WA0000-1500x500.jpg)

Following the launch of its 2026 challenger, the W17, Mercedes started the day with a simple render.

But they then surprised us all during shakedown with an aero detail that will have their rivals checking their rules books.

A large slot has been made into the diffuser wall, that could have several benefits. Put simply, it creates more downforce.

Yet have Mercedes pushed the envelope by gambling on slots for this season?

An interpretation of 2026 regulations

Part of the new 2026 F1 regulations is a step away from the fully shaped 'ground effect' underfloor and a return to an upscaled version of the old flat floor and diffuser, as set out in my tech season preview on Motorsport.Tech.

Getting the floor to create downforce is one of the key aims for any aero department.

But the FIA and F1 have gotten a lot better at wording the bodywork rules to control exactly where bodywork can go and preclude any unexpected loopholes.

Already, however, it seems the rules around the diffuser are open to interpretation.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/IMG-20260123-WA0001-740x740@2x.jpg)

Slotted Diffuser

Looking at the real W17 circulating the Silverstone track on its shakedown run, at nearly every angle light is seen passing through the diffuser area.

This isn't white paint or a missing part, but an intentional opening creating a 'slotted diffuser'.  Air goes into the slot from above the floor and then passes inside along the diffuser wall.

The cars unusual sidepod design, undercut all along its length, would appear to serve to direct plenty of flow towards the slot in the diffuser.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/IMG-20260123-WA0004-e1769159066714-1536x1433.jpg)

How it works

At first, you might think a diffuser needs to be sealed to create the low pressure to create downforce, surely opening a hole in it would ruin that effect.  But the aerodynamics of diffusers is far more complex than that.

Keeping the airflow moving and attached to the diffuser is critical, just as it is with a steep wing.  If the airflow detaches, then the aero can stall, losing downforce.

In race car wings we see elements all separated by a slot gap. The air passing through the slot helps the flow stay attached to the wing's under surface, keeping the wing working to make downforce.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/IMG-20260123-WA0003-e1769159109616.jpg)

Just as it is with the diffuser, air passing up into it from the flat floor ahead, struggles to stay attached to the diffusers inner surface.

Various tricks are employed to help here. Vortices shed from upstream help drive airflow into the diffuser. But, with such long floors, it's hard to keep the vortices powerful enough to help in a very steep diffuser.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/IMG-20260123-WA0002.jpg)

This slot will help drive those vortices keeping the flow attached and aid the air's expansion inside the diffuser, which is the means to create downforce.

It's a chicken and egg thing. You want a steep kick-line into the diffuser, but you need to keep the airflow attached. Finding a better way to keep the flow working means you can have a steeper diffuser and the downforce that it helps create.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000103118-scaled.jpg)

Not just this, but with the more powerful flow up the diffuser's inner wall, there's less likelihood for the flow to separate when the car is moving about, such as changes in ride height and yaw. It makes for more predictable handling for the driver.

Equally, the wet weather at the shakedown visibly shows the spray patterns around the rear tyre.  Air will want to spill off the tyre and push sideways towards the diffuser when this happens and the diffuser effectiveness is reduced.  This is known as tyre squirt.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/IMG-20260122-WA0005.jpg)

Having a more powerful airflow along the side of the diffuser wall means that tyre squirt should have less effect, again improving the performance of the diffuser.

Its win-win all the way, with this slotted diffuser wall. So it appears Mercedes have found a trump loophole if it is legal.

Previous diffuser tricks have existed, notably the double diffuser of 2009, but this works in a aerodynamic way and with different rules to the slotted diffuser.

Therefore, this can't really be considered double diffuser.  Other diffuser tricks were to blow exhausts gasses into the same area, creating a blown diffuser.

As the air flow into the slot isn't powered by the engine, this can neither be called a blown diffuser.  We're not sure what Mercedes are calling this, but the term 'slotted diffuser' currently suits the aerodynamics at play.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/IMG-20260122-WA0006-740x366@2x.jpg)

How's it possible? Is it legal?

It wasn't initially envisioned within the rules that slots could be incorporated into the diffuser. Rules stated how the diffuser wall had to be solid and fitted into a tight regulatory volume.

A small opportunity for a gap was left in the rules, but for a much smaller opening, similar to the previous generation of ground effect cars.

It was often called a 'mouse hole', which served a similar, but more limited function as the Mercedes Slotted diffuser.

I suspect that the loophole comes from the floor's proximity to the lower rear brake deflector.

This is a FIA regulated surface that helps control the airflow between tyre and floor, but with a fixed spec prevents teams going overboard with their own design.

(https://motorsport.tech/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/1000103111-1-740x365@2x.jpg)

Rules add that other bodywork cannot be close to the deflector.  Thus, Mercedes may have the diffuser purposely too close to the deflector, there by allowing the remove the offending bodywork from the diffuser wall.

As yet, we haven't had an explanation from Mercedes, nor a complaint from a rival or the FIA. And a formal protest cannot be lodged until the first race weekend.

And it may not just be Mercedes that have found this loophole. Although other teams may well have this trick in mind themselves.

It's a fascinating early development and we will have to see how much performance it brings the team and how others react to it!

Stay tuned to Motorsport Technology during the build-up to the F1 2026 Season as we continue to bring the latest tech developments, race reaction and video tech insight.

https://motorsport.tech/formula-1/mercedes-w17-tech-insight-gambling-on-the-slots

La Ferrari SF-26, bajo la lupa de N. Carpentiers:


La Ferrari SF-26 à la loupe : les secrets de la suspension et du diffuseur dévoilés

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-ferrari-sf-26_0-copy.jpg)

La SF-26 inaugure une ère technique inédite pour Ferrari, entre innovations aérodynamiques et enjeux de fiabilité pour la saison 2026.

Première Ferrari de l'ère Vasseur, la SF-26 est le premier projet mené sous la direction de Loïc Serra, arrivé au poste de directeur technique en octobre 2024.

La SF-26 est "une refonte complète de l'architecture de la monoplace", selon Ferrari, afin de répondre aux exigences des nouvelles réglementations sur le châssis et le moteur en vigueur cette année.

"L'aérodynamique active constitue effectivement un des nouveaux degrés de liberté, confirme le directeur technique de la Scuderia. Je parle plus de degré de liberté que de complexité, car conceptuellement ce n'est ni plus ni moins complexe qu'avant, mais en termes de liberté de conception, c'est très différent."

"Contrairement au DRS, par exemple, qui n'était disponible que pour les dépassements, l'aérodynamique active pourra être utilisée à chaque tour, au moins sur certaines zones. C'est donc un degré de liberté qu'il faut prendre en compte dans le développement, et qui fait partie des contraintes changeantes qui modifient la recette de performance."

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-ferrari-sf-26_1-copy.jpg)

Une suspension à la mode McLaren...
La SF-26 présente une architecture à poussoirs à l'avant comme à l'arrière (les différences entre une suspension à poussoirs et une suspension à tirants sont expliquées ici), comme nous l'annoncions dès le mois de décembre. La suspension à poussoirs aux deux extrémités de la monoplace constitue une première pour Ferrari depuis 2011 en ce qui concerne la configuration de suspension arrière à poussoirs.

Par ailleurs, la suspension avant reprend la configuration à éléments séparés utilisée par McLaren en 2025.

Dans le triangle inférieur, les deux bras ne se fixent pas à la roue en un seul point, mais en deux points différents. Comme on le voit sur l'image ci-dessous, deux bras distincts relient le porte-moyeu en des points différents, créant ainsi un axe de direction virtuel.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-ferrari-sf-26_0-copy.jpg)

Cette géométrie modifie le carrossage, le pincement et la hauteur de caisse en fonction de l'angle de braquage et du débattement de la suspension.

Elle aide à la gestion des pneumatiques et permet aussi de positionner la biellette de direction dans une zone aérodynamiquement intéressante.

Et, tout comme Mercedes, Ferrari place les prises d'air des freins avant derrière le déflecteur. Cela permet de maintenir un flux d'air propre à la sortie de l'aileron et derrière le pneu. Les autres équipes utilisent des prises d'air pleines.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-ferrari-sf-26_3-copy.jpg)

... et un diffuseur ouvert à la sauce Mercedes
Alors que l'on pensait que les ingénieurs de Mercedes avaient mis le doigt sur une astuce originale sur leur W17, on se rend compte qu'elle se retrouve sur la Ferrari. Les flancs du diffuseur de la SF-26 comportent deux ouvertures. En permettant le passage d'un flux d'air énergisé, ces ouvertures vont produire une sorte de paroi destinée à limiter l'intrusion des turbulences dans le cœur du diffuseur.

En observant la monoplace de Charles Leclerc et Lewis Hamilton lors de son roulage de mise en route à Fiorano, un détail frappe immédiatement : sous presque tous les angles, la lumière semble traverser la zone du diffuseur.

Il ne s'agit ni de peinture blanche ni d'un élément manquant, mais bien d'une ouverture volontaire formant ce que l'on pourrait appeler un "diffuseur à fente". L'air pénètre dans cette ouverture depuis le dessus du fond plat, puis circule à l'intérieur le long de la paroi du diffuseur.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-ferrari-sf-26_2-copy.jpg)

Intuitivement, on pourrait penser qu'un diffuseur doit être parfaitement étanche pour générer la basse pression nécessaire à la production d'appui, et que l'introduction d'une ouverture viendrait forcément perturber ce mécanisme. En réalité, l'aérodynamique d'un diffuseur est plus complexe.

L'élément fondamental reste la capacité à maintenir l'écoulement de l'air attaché à la surface du diffuseur, exactement comme sur une aileron très incliné. Si le flux se décroche, l'aérodynamique entre en décrochage et l'appui chute brutalement.

C'est ce qui explique que sur les ailerons des F1, chaque élément est séparé par un interstice. L'air qui s'y engouffre permet précisément au flux de rester attaché à l'intrados, garantissant le fonctionnement de l'aile en production d'appui.

Le problème est similaire au niveau du diffuseur. L'air qui remonte depuis le fond plat situé en amont peine naturellement à rester attaché à la surface interne du diffuseur.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-ferrari-sf-26_5-copy.jpg)

Différentes solutions sont utilisées pour y parvenir. Des vortex générés en amont contribuent à entraîner le flux vers l'intérieur du diffuseur. Mais avec des fonds plats aussi longs, il devient difficile de maintenir des vortex suffisamment énergisés pour alimenter efficacement un diffuseur très pentu.

La présence de cette fente permet justement d'alimenter ces vortex, de maintenir l'écoulement attaché et de favoriser l'expansion de l'air à l'intérieur du diffuseur, mécanisme central dans la génération d'appui.

Par ailleurs, ces vortex forment une sorte de barrière empêchant les turbulences causées par les roues d'entrer dans le diffuseur et de dégrader son efficacité (ce que l'on appelle le "tyre squirt"). Un écoulement plus puissant le long des flancs du diffuseur permet de limiter cet effet parasite, améliorant une nouvelle fois la performance globale du diffuseur.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-ferrari-sf-26_4-copynew.jpg)

Des doutes sur le moteur
Ferrari, avec Audi et Honda, suspecte que Mercedes et Red Bull ont trouvé un moyen de faire tourner leurs moteurs avec un rapport de compression supérieur à ce que le règlement autorise théoriquement.

En effet, la limite de 16:1, entrée en vigueur pour 2026, n'est mesurée qu'à température ambiante. Selon certaines sources, Mercedes, et dans une moindre mesure Red Bull, utiliseraient des solutions ingénieuses permettant d'augmenter le rapport de compression lorsque le moteur est chaud, offrant ainsi un gain de performance.

Ferrari, Audi et Honda ont écrit à la FIA pour obtenir des éclaircissements. L'instance dirigeante a organisé une réunion jeudi avec des experts techniques afin de définir une feuille de route.
Les sources indiquent que la réunion a été productive et qu'un consensus commence à émerger sur la manière de mesurer le rapport de compression à température de fonctionnement. Cependant, un accord méthodologique ne signifie pas que le nouveau système sera appliqué immédiatement.

Sur le capot moteur, Ferrari a installé un aileron dorsal relativement long, dont le format est imposé par le règlement 2026. Cet aileron, ou shark fin, génère un vortex puissant lorsque la monoplace est en lacet, ce qui peut perturber l'aileron arrière. Le bord cranté de la Ferrari permet de fragmenter ce vortex et d'améliorer le fonctionnement de l'aileron arrière.

Une "spec A"
Ferrari précise que cette première version de la monoplace 2026 — la « spec A » — sert principalement à collecter des données et accumuler du kilométrage pour la fiabilité, laissant le temps au développement. Il ne s'agit donc pas de la version définitive pour le Grand Prix d'Australie.

"Dans cette situation, le plus important est de parcourir des kilomètres, a déclaré Frédéric Vasseur. Ce n'est pas de courir après la performance, mais de valider les choix techniques de la voiture en termes de fiabilité. Ensuite seulement, il s'agira de chercher la performance.
Je pense que tout le monde arrivera à Barcelone avec non pas une voiture mulet, mais disons une spec A."

Un plan de développement confirmé par Loïc Serra : "Un point important à garder en tête est que nous devons laisser suffisamment de marge dans notre concept pour permettre le développement de la voiture durant la saison. La voiture qui débutera la saison sera très différente de celle qui la terminera, et le rythme de développement sera assez élevé. Si la voiture de base, le "squelette", n'offre pas la flexibilité nécessaire, cela compliquera énormément notre travail. La voiture doit donc être capable de cette flexibilité."

Après l'échec de la SF-25, les mauvaises performances de Hamilton et les critiques du président de Ferrari, Frédéric Vasseur doit sauver sa tête avec la SF-26, sur laquelle pèse donc une énorme pression.

https://f1i.autojournal.fr/magazine/magazine-technique/la-ferrari-sf-26-f1-a-la-loupe/

La VF-26 recorriendo los primeros kms. ayer Sábado en Fiorano:

(https://i.postimg.cc/jdpRMrWf/G-b-Sgv-IW0AAzb-ZK.jpg)

https://i.postimg.cc/jdpRMrWf/G-b-Sgv-IW0AAzb-ZK.jpg

(https://i.postimg.cc/Lsn7wxJr/G-b-Vu-UWk-AAHQo-I.jpg)

https://i.postimg.cc/Lsn7wxJr/G-b-Vu-UWk-AAHQo-I.jpg

SF-26: Detalle suspensión delantera:

(https://i.postimg.cc/RhKpjdwN/SF16-front-susp.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/YL2xF1nH)

Chuletario de la mano de Honda Racing F1:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_Xgz6WWQAAMHMI?format=jpg&name=small)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_Xgz6TXUAA9R9-?format=jpg&name=small)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_Xgz6VW8AENH-x?format=jpg&name=small)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_Xgz6TXIAAHB1o?format=jpg&name=small)

Madre mía, la de deberes que tengo pendiente de leer para ponerme al día  :pelosdepunta: .

Muchísimas gracias por tenerlo todo tan actualizado. Es la única manera de que me pueda enterar de algo... aunque sea con retraso  :gaydude: .

Sois los «másmejores».

 :drinks:  :gracias2: :alabar:   :akelarre:  :gracias2:

Cita de: llumia en Ene 24, 2026, 04:22 AMEl equipo Williams F1, se perderá esta primera tanda de entrenamientos de pretemporada:

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/williams-f1-2026-barcelona-test-fw48/

El comunicado del equipo:


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_WYPh6WoAEI4kT?format=jpg&name=large)

No tengo del todo claro cómo funcionan las pruebas que comienzan mañana en Montmeló y que durarán cinco días. Si no he entendido mal, los equipos participarán tres de los cinco días. :dntknw:

Al parecer, estos son los neumáticos que han elegido. Aparece Williams pero ya comunicaron que no estarán.

Y me da que los «Redbullitos» tienen preferencia por los neumáticos más blandos  :sherlock: .


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_ib2TIWkAAFfXt?format=jpg&name=large)

Cita de: GoVal en Ene 25, 2026, 11:03 PMNo tengo del todo claro cómo funcionan las pruebas que comienzan mañana en Montmeló y que durarán cinco días. Si no he entendido mal, los equipos participarán tres de los cinco días. :dntknw:

Al parecer, estos son los neumáticos que han elegido. Aparece Williams pero ya comunicaron que no estarán.

Y me da que los «Redbullitos» tienen preferencia por los neumáticos más blandos  :sherlock: .


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_ib2TIWkAAFfXt?format=jpg&name=large)

Efectivamente, son unas pruebas privadas (la prensa no está invitada), que tienen una duración de 5 jornadas y cada equipo sólo puede rodar en 3 de las mismas como máximo.

La Alpine A526, bajo la lupa de N. Crpentiers:

L'Alpine A526 à la loupe

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-alpine-a526_0.jpg)

Alpine a présenté sa nouvelle A526, déjà testée à Silverstone, avec des ambitions claires pour 2026 grâce à son moteur Mercedes

Le constructeur français a levé le voile sur sa monoplace 2026, l'A526, via un show car. Cependant, la voiture a déjà parcouru les premiers kilomètres de test à Silverstone mercredi dernier.

David Sanchez, directeur technique exécutif d'Alpine, souligne l'ampleur de la transition : "L'année dernière a été véritablement extraordinaire en termes de Formule 1, avec la gestion de notre passage aux moteurs Mercedes et la conception de notre première voiture pour les nouvelles règles techniques."

"Avec de tels changements réglementaires, ce projet a représenté un défi très intéressant et nous avons vraiment donné le meilleur de nous-mêmes. La voiture est plus courte et plus étroite que ces dernières années, avec une certaine liberté aérodynamique à explorer. L'aéro active permet d'avoir des ailerons avant et arrière mobiles, quelque chose que la grande majorité des pilotes sur la grille n'aura pas expérimenté auparavant. La réduction de l'appui et de la traînée devrait favoriser des courses plus disputées, ce que tous les fans auront hâte de voir."

Une intégration moteur réussie et prometteuse
Arrivé à Enstone en 2024 après un long passage chez Ferrari, l'ingénieur français, dont l'A526 est la première Alpine conçue sous sa direction, se montre confiant sur la collaboration avec Mercedes :

"Nous avons évidemment plus de puissance électrique dans les moteurs, puisque nous avons signé avec Mercedes-AMG pour 2026. Travailler en étroite collaboration avec nos nouveaux collègues de Brixworth ces derniers mois a été fantastique, afin de maximiser l'efficacité globale de notre package."

"Nous travaillons de la manière la plus ouverte possible. Nous avons d'excellentes interactions. L'intégration du moteur s'est très bien passée, et maintenant nous allons nous concentrer sur la résolution de tous les petits problèmes et sur la fiabilité et l'intégration."


(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-alpine-a526_2-copy_new.jpg)

Une Alpine d'emblée fiable
Le premier roulage de l'A526, dotée d'une suspension avant à tirants, comme la Cadillac et contrairement à la plupart des F1 2026 (dont la Mercedes W17 et l'Audi R26), a été productif : Alpine a parcouru environ 140 km sur les 200 km autorisés, avec Pierre Gasly au volant, malgré une météo pluvieuse et un éclairage déclinant.

"Dès le départ, pouvoir effectuer des tours sans interruption est un vrai boost de confiance, car cela montre qu'on peut se rendre à Barcelone et commencer à travailler immédiatement," a expliqué Sanchez.

"Nous voulions atteindre les 200 km. Nous avons commencé la journée avec un run de cinq ou six tours, et la voiture a bien fonctionné. Ensuite, nous avons attendu que la météo s'améliore, mais elle ne s'est jamais vraiment arrangée. Vers le milieu de l'après-midi, nous avons décidé de ressortir Pierre sur la piste pour continuer les tours. Nous nous sommes arrêtés uniquement parce qu'il nous a dit 'il fait trop sombre maintenant'. Atteindre les 200 km aurait été assez facile. Cela donne confiance pour commencer le programme à Barcelone."

Les images étant rares, il est difficile de savoir si la monoplace de Pierre Gasly et Franco Colapinto est équipée d'une suspension avant multilink et d'un diffuseur ouvert, comme la Ferrari SF-26.

Plus d'excuses pour Alpine en 2026
Alors que Mercedes devrait disposer du moteur de référence en 2026, le changement pourrait permettre à Alpine de progresser après sa dernière place au championnat constructeurs 2025.

Flavio Briatore a insisté sur l'absence d'excuses cette saison : "Je m'attends au meilleur, cette année il n'y a plus d'excuses. Nous avons une voiture entièrement nouvelle et les mêmes pilotes. Franco a passé un très bon hiver et est prêt à rivaliser avec Pierre. Nous avons besoin de deux pilotes qui se challengent au sein de l'équipe."

"Si la voiture est mauvaise, ce sera de notre faute, car nous n'avons rencontré aucun problème pour la construire. Nous avons le budget et les sponsors pour la développer pleinement. Si nous voulons aller plus loin, je ne pense pas que ce soit possible – nous avons fait tout ce qui était possible."

Les premières images de l'A526, dotée des mêmes ailettes que la Haas et la Cadillac, révèlent une différence notable dans l'architecture autour du moteur et des pontons par rapport à l'équipe usine Mercedes, Alpine ayant perdu son statut de constructeur pour devenir client à partir de 2026. Il ne s'agit pas d'une première collaboration avec Mercedes pour l'écurie d'Enstone, qui utilisait déjà ses moteurs lorsqu'elle était Lotus en 2015, au début de l'ère V6 turbo-hybride.

Alpine, dernière équipe sur dix au classement constructeurs 2025, avec 22 points avait interrompu le développement de sa monoplace de l'an passé dès janvier pour concentrer ses ressources sur le respect des nouvelles règles 2026, impliquant à la fois des changements moteurs et châssis.

"Notre stratégie était d'investir autant que possible, le plus tôt possible, sur la voiture 2026, car pour tenter de corriger de nombreuses limitations fondamentales, qui prennent du temps à être développées, nous devions commencer dès le départ," a précisé David Sanchez.

https://f1i.autojournal.fr/magazine/lalpine-a526-a-la-loupe-la-f1-qui-doit-relancer-gasly/

Si estos están en lo cierto en Aston tienen un problemón, más el "F2 engine" :miedito:

https://autoracer.it/f1-2026-williams-aston-martin-ferrari-crash-test-barcellona-problemi/

Cita de: llumia en Ene 26, 2026, 05:13 AMEfectivamente, son unas pruebas privadas (la prensa no está invitada), que tienen una duración de 5 jornadas y cada equipo sólo puede rodar en 3 de las mismas como máximo.

Muchas gracias por la aclaración, llumia  :drinks: .

No entiendo muy bien este secretismo. Hemos pasado de tener tiempos e imágenes en directo de los test a no estar invitada ni la prensa  :dntknw: .

Y para rematar, se espera lluvia intensa para los próximos días.

Estos son los mejores tiempos de hoy y las vueltas dadas. Ocon se ha paseado un ratejo largo.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_my9BEW4AAfMfv?format=png&name=large)



El motor que más ha rodado, el Mercedes. ¿Volverán a ser invencibles?

Mercedes: 209
Ferrari: 198
RBPT - Ford: 195
Audi: 27
Honda: 0

Muy contento Antonelli tras el día de hoy.


Kimi Antonelli: "The car is nice. It's very nice to drive"

"I have to say the team did, on the PU side, a really good job. Drivability which was a big question mark seems to be good so far. Obviously it's early days, that's why with the running we will discover a lot more about the car and PU and we'll be able to see where it's lacking or where it's good. But so far, the package is feeling good."

Cita de: GoVal en Ene 26, 2026, 09:36 PM

Cita de: llumia en Ene 26, 2026, 05:13 AMEfectivamente, son unas pruebas privadas (la prensa no está invitada), que tienen una duración de 5 jornadas y cada equipo sólo puede rodar en 3 de las mismas como máximo.

Muchas gracias por la aclaración, llumia  :drinks: .

No entiendo muy bien este secretismo. Hemos pasado de tener tiempos e imágenes en directo de los test a no estar invitada ni la prensa  :dntknw: .

Y para rematar, se espera lluvia intensa para los próximos días.

Estos son los mejores tiempos de hoy y las vueltas dadas. Ocon se ha paseado un ratejo largo.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_my9BEW4AAfMfv?format=png&name=large)



El motor que más ha rodado, el Mercedes. ¿Volverán a ser invencibles?

Mercedes: 209
Ferrari: 198
RBPT - Ford: 195
Audi: 27
Honda: 0

El motor RBPT-Ford, ha rodado bastantes kms., me esperaba menos.

What happened on day one of F1's private 2026 test

New Red Bull Formula 1 driver Isack Hadjar was fastest on the opening day of Formula 1's private, five-day test at Barcelona.

Seven teams took to the track - some fielding the same driver throughout, some swapping at midday - as F1 sought to limit the amount of information coming out from the track, with security patrolling its surroundings and a publicly available live timing feed cut off a few hours into the running.

All throughout, the Red Bull and the Mercedes were the two standout cars in the classification, taking turns in first place.

Ultimately, Hadjar - whose Red Bull team was revealed by tyre supplier Pirelli to have overwhelmingly favoured the C3 soft tyre in its selection for the test - ended the day quickest with a 1m18.159s.

This was enough for the RB22 (powered by Red Bull's new bespoke engine developed with assistance from Ford) to end up over half a second clear, though this was also over four seconds off the opening practice time from the Spanish Grand Prix weekend at Barcelona last year.

For Mercedes, Kimi Antonelli ran in the morning (when he was Hadjar's closest rival on the timing screens) and George Russell took over the W17 in the afternoon, ending up second.

Alpine had caused the day's first red flag but Franco Colapinto, in the Mercedes-powered car all day, ended up third.

Esteban Ocon had a very busy day in the Haas, clocking in 154 laps, by far the most of any driver (though Mercedes was not far off through the combined efforts of Antonelli and Russell).

For comparison, Haas was also the most prolific team on the opening day of last year's test in Bahrain, with 160 laps. The teams then managed an average of 130 - though the Bahrain layout is notably longer than that of Barcelona.

Going by the mileage numbers, it was a bit of a baptism of fire for newcomers Audi and Cadillac.

An Audi stoppage with Gabriel Bortoleto behind the wheel caused an early red flag, and the car - equipped with the new Audi power unit - seemingly never returned from there on.

"We had a technical issue with the car," explained Audi team principal Jonathan Wheatley.

"We spotted it, decided to switch the car off on track. We've got plenty of testing this year and we wanted to really understand the problem, so we've been carefully analysing that."

Meanwhile, Cadillac logged mileage with both Valtteri Bottas and Sergio Perez but that mileage was limited overall, with issues reported and Perez in particular barely getting into a double-digit lapcount.

Ferrari is due to join the test on Tuesday, with McLaren set to begin its programme either Tuesday or Wednesday.

Aston Martin isn't expected before Thursday (so isn't going to get the three allowed days in), while Williams is missing the test.

Day one times
1 Isack Hadjar (Red Bull) 1m18.159s, 107 laps
2 George Russell (Mercedes) +0.537s, 95 laps
3 Franco Colapinto (Alpine) +2.030s, 60 laps
4 Kimi Antonelli (Mercedes) +2.541s, 56 laps
5 Esteban Ocon (Haas) +3.142s, 154 laps
6 Liam Lawson (Racing Bulls) +3.354s, 88 laps
7 Valtteri Bottas (Cadillac) +6.492s, 33 laps
8 Gabriel Bortoleto (Audi) +7.137s, 27 laps
9 Sergio Perez (Cadillac) +7.815s, 11 laps

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/f1-2026-private-test-barcelona-everything-that-happened/

Nine things we learned from the first day of F1 2026 testing

The start of Formula 1's behind-closed-doors test at Barcelona made for one of the most unusual days of testing in recent memory.

A grand commitment to secrecy, unintentionally available live timing being discovered (and then closed off), and most importantly actual running from several cars made for a weird but fascinating first proper day of 2026.

Here is what we learned as a glorified 'shakedown week' began.

Early laptime hints

Not to be guilty of reading into laptimes from testing, but Isack Hadjar and Red Bull's new in-house engine are off to great starts.

OK, that is said tongue-in-cheek. But as we understand it, the time Hadjar set in a flurry of improvements just after midday still stood as the first 2026 benchmark by the end of Monday.

These laptimes mean very, very little. Next to nothing unless you know that a team drained the tank, rinsed the battery, and still ended up five seconds off the pace!

2026 day one times
1 Isack Hadjar (Red Bull) 1m18.159s
2 George Russell (Mercedes) +0.537s
3 Franco Colapinto (Alpine) +2.030s
4 Kimi Antonelli (Mercedes) +2.541s
5 Esteban Ocon (Haas) +3.142s
6 Liam Lawson (Racing Bulls) +3.354s
7 Valtteri Bottas (Cadillac) +6.492s
8 Gabriel Bortoleto (Audi) +7.137s
9 Sergio Perez (Cadillac) +7.815s

However, they don't mean nothing at all. It's a very useful reference for the rest of the week: for which teams clearly did no performance running at all, and for who seemed comfortable at least starting to lean on the car a little.

For example, Red Bull and Mercedes have been able to start on the front foot, whereas newcomer Cadillac (and to a degree Audi) is unsurprisingly a long way adrift as it is prioritising mileage above all else and has the most to learn.

Then the other teams are dotted across the six-second spectrum between.

And when Hadjar appeared before F1's in-house cameras at the end of the day, he sounded genuinely upbeat - and perhaps even pleasantly surprised.

"It was pretty productive. Surprisingly we managed to do a lot more laps than we expected," he said. "Everything went pretty smoothly. We had only minor issues.

"So it's quite impressive considering it's our first day with our own engine. It was definitely smooth."

Who did the most running


Seven teams - Mercedes, Audi, Alpine, Cadillac, Racing Bulls, Haas and Red Bull - leapt into action immediately on the opening day.

errari and McLaren are set to join on Tuesday although McLaren could delay until Wednesday.

But Aston Martin will join late and not maximise the permitted three days of running with its 2026 car as its "intention is to run Thursday and Friday", while Williams is the only team known to be missing the test as it has had delays in the build of its new FW48.

The first day of official testing for these new engines went significantly better than the last one.

Back in 2014 at Jerez, when the 1.6-litre V6 turbo power units were introduced, a grand total of 93 laps was all that was logged. For the latest engine, the first day of running has produced significantly more running, with several teams ready to start racking up the miles as soon as the pitlane opened.

There were stoppages. On the first morning alone there were three red flags in three hours across Alpine, Audi and Racing Bulls. Audi did not seem to get back on track after its early setback, leaving the team completing just 27 laps all day.

2026 day one lap totals
Haas: 154
Mercedes: 151
Red Bull: 107
Racing Bulls: 88
Alpine: 60
Cadillac: 44
Audi: 27

But the overall strength of the running - including Haas racking up a mammoth 154 laps - is a testament to the level of preparation that the teams today are capable of with all manner of dyno and virtual facilities that were either non-existent or less advanced 12 years ago.

George Russell, while acknowledging Mercedes' own 151-lap total, said he was "pretty impressed with a number of other teams" too.

"You see the Red Bull-powered teams, [with] a brand-new power unit, and they're like a brand-new team from a power unit side and they had a really smooth day with two cars," he said. "Audi had some good laps in there as well, and I think Haas did the most laps of everyone with a Ferrari engine.

"So it's not quite 2014 vibes of half the grid is breaking down and having loads of issues. I think Formula 1 has evolved so much since then and the level is just so high, from every single aspect. It was pretty impressive to see all the teams on the whole having a lot of laps under their belts on day one."

And that bodes well for the season that is to come, at least for the teams if not fans of increased unreliability.

Security games

A closed test means no media access but there was an importance in trying to at least get a sense of these new cars. The uncertainty was how much we would actually be able to see.

Because the Barcelona circuit is in quite a hilly region, there are some places on the outside where you can see the track.

'The Hill', which is a hiking route just up above the outside of the final sector, is the obvious place to go and The Race was joined there by several Spanish journalists and photographers who often go there for tests.

But 20 minutes in, security turned up and told us to move on, claiming that even though this is public land, because it offered an eyesight of the track, we weren't allowed to stand there.

This triggered some cat-and-mouse games between one or two security cars and then various groups of people in various spots all around the track.

Read more: What it was like being locked out of F1's first 2026 test

There were people in some trees that overlooked the final sector, some watching from a raised gravel car park that overlooks the penultimate corner, a photographer stood on top of a bank in the far distance to get a look at Turn 10 - and people just going back to 'The Hill' while security chased other people!

The police got involved as well, and Spanish media even said local 'secret police' were warning people to move away too: first they had to be 200 metres away, then 400m, then moved out beyond car parks, and even threatened with fines.

It was quite heavy-handed, especially as F1 put out footage of the cars, and it added up to quite a weird test day - perhaps the weirdest we've known.

Something we could actually see

While finding a good vantage point to watch the cars up close was not easy, there was still plenty to learn from places we eventually got to see and hear them in action.

One of the more interesting visual aspects that was very noticeable - even from a distance - was how much the rear derating warning lights flash with the new generation of cars.

The light comes on when cars are either harvesting energy or not running on full power, and acts as a warning to those behind about potential big closing speeds.

While in the past the lights would only be noticeable in certain sections of tracks, or even isolated phases of a race, watching cars around a lap at Barcelona showed the lights were on pretty much all the time. It was quite rare for cars not to have to have them flashing.

Through the high-speed Turn 3 they were on, they remained on down the run from Turn 5 to Turn 7, and you could spot the cars still flashing up the hill into the Turn 9 right-hander. The outcome is no real surprise considering how energy-starved the 2026 cars are expected to be.

Such frequency of the lights being on was akin to what we see in wet races when the lights act as visibility aids.

What we could hear

One other notable aspect from early running too was how the sound of the cars is not as alien as some had perhaps feared.

Stories about the need for cars to be revved excessively in corners, to keep the turbo spinning up so the battery does not need to be used to fill in for lag under acceleration, prompted the idea of high-revving, low-gear weirdness in turns.

But early impressions suggest things are not that extreme, and, from what we could hear in early running, they do not sound dissimilar at all to the 2025 power units.

It's admittedly not easy to get a handle on what these new engines sound like on track from outside the circuit, with less immediacy than you would be used to.

However, the first impression is that they don't sound vastly different from the previous generation, which in the grand scheme of things means they sound like F1 engines - even if not the screamers of the past.

There are hints of what Audi team principal Jonathan Wheatley described as "more aggressive" sounds when cars are on fast laps, and there's plenty of depth to the sound.

But it's not a night-and-day difference compared to the old engines.

Unnecessarily controversial

The first test is the biggest moment of interest for fans, so there was always going to be huge attention on the test.

There was a huge opportunity here to educate people about F1, to tell everyone how good these 2026 cars are, to talk about all the different elements and bring people on a journey from now until the season opener - but instead it begins under a cloud of negativity and avoidable controversy.

There were already questions about why the test was behind closed doors so having media, content creators and fans chased away from a test, from public areas, isn't the ideal look for F1 - and fans seemed to only realise on the day what it being a closed test would actually mean in terms of timing and firm information.

It turned a day that should have been a huge success for brand new cars and engines - which have done so many laps and already look reasonably brisk - into stories about security chasing people away and live timing appearing and then being taken down.

And the initial sentiment on Monday suggested that, as feared, fans would be left feeling short-changed and that the secrecy was unnecessary. Especially as things got clamped down on further.

It came across as teams and stakeholders going out of their way to shut people out even if that wasn't the intention and - admittedly with the benefit of hindsight - it was all unnecessary given how well most of the cars ran.

How much slower these cars are

One of the talking points around the 2026 cars last year was a debate over whether they would be quick enough.

Day one of testing is far too early to make a firm judgement but the initial showing has to be considered encouraging.

Hadjar's best time was a second quicker than the fastest lap on day one of the very first test with new cars at Barcelona in 2022 but that was on the layout with the slower final sector including a chicane.

For a comparison to the current layout, and last year's cars, Oscar Piastri's 2025 pole position time was a 1m11.546s - so, there was a seven-second difference.

But if you look at the last few big rule changes, you can get a clue for how much progression is possible. Based on 2014, 2019 and 2022, it would be no surprise if these cars were two or three seconds faster by the end of the week.

Then there is usually a second - at least - from cold, winter conditions to the early summer race weekend itself. And whatever is realistic to expect from car development, too.

So the 2026 cars only being a couple of seconds slower than their predecessors looks quite achievable.

New team is up against it

The scale of the challenge of building up a modern F1 team from scratch is monumental. That Cadillac was 6.5s off the pace on Monday and had a stuttering afternoon of running once Sergio Perez took over from Valtteri Bottas is proof of that.

However, not only are the timesheets of very limited relevance right now, but also it's essential to have realistic expectations.

For Cadillac, the fact that it had already run at Silverstone before today and still managed 44 laps in total at Barcelona on day one is a big positive.

Long-term, the ambitions are grand but for this year, it's all about having a car that can run reliably, qualify consistently and act as a focal point around which to build up a new team.

Perez admitted that the day had featured "a lot of issues" but also tried to suggest that was a positive thing because "you want all the problems to come now and hopefully the next couple of days can be a lot smoother for us".

Some gaps will be filled in

One of the big debates within the F1 community around this test was who was really responsible for it being private and who was being difficult about how much could be shared from it.

But the F1 argument has consistently been that as the teams wanted this to be held behind closed doors, the championship wanted to find a compromise to bring some imagery and information to media and fans.

How that would really manifest was obviously unknown until day one. It's not been a goldmine - some teams are clearly hesitant to share any of their allowance of six on-track images a day, and the short interviews recorded on-site are surface-level and could do with prodding for a bit more specific information.

As a whole, though, it's been a reasonably useful middle ground. F1's making images available to the media and what appears online is fair game to pick up, and quotes do help to fill in some gaps. Alpine, Haas, and Mercedes all shared end-of-day releases with basic information. Plus, we were still able to verify accurate timing information, even though access got cut off because we were never meant to have it.

And the highlights package F1's putting together isn't just brushing aside any negatives. Monday's, for example, has footage of a broken down Audi and an Alpine being recovered to the pits.

So by the end of the week we will hopefully get as clear a picture as possible from a test that's started out as a hardcore version of what non-televised tests used to be like a decade ago.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/f1-2026-barcelona-test-day-one-what-we-learned/

Oracle Red Bull Racing @redbullracing · 5h (https://x.com/redbullracing/status/2016158478256029758?s=20)

PICTURES OF MAX ON TRACK (in the rain too 😌)


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_rU953WwAAI3GS?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_rU_XlXUAAnicZ?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_rU_ZfWMAAU4Ta?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)

Ayer Hadjar marcó el mejor tiempo y hoy ha tenido un accidente que puede le impida a Red Bull seguir participando en el test.


Big Hadjar shunt ends Red Bull's second F1 test day

Jan 27, 2026 by Jon Noble

Isack Hadjar brought Red Bull's second day of running at Formula 1's Barcelona test to an early end with a crash into the barriers at the final corner late on Tuesday.

On a day blighted by rain that hit the Circuit de Catalunya-Barcelona from the morning, Hadjar had taken over from Max Verstappen in the afternoon to gain some wet-weather experience.

But with around 30 minutes of the day's session left, Hadjar lost control of his RB22 at the final corner – although it is not known if this was because of driver error or caused by a car problem.

However, the end result was he skipped across the gravel trap and ended up against the tyre barriers on the outside.

According to eyewitnesses, Hadjar's car sustained some damage in the incident – which will likely make it difficult for him to resume running before the 6pm (local) chequered flag.

It is reported to have ended up backwards and lost the rear wing in the shunt.

It is not clear how many spare parts Red Bull has available in terms of replacements for anything broken, and whether or not it will be able to resume on Wednesday.

However, being the only team to have tested over the first two days, Red Bull now has a choice of when it wants to complete the final day of running that it is allowed before Friday. Each team can run a maximum of three of the five days of testing.

That could give it some breathing space to get any spares flown over from the UK to get back in action.

Hadjar had topped the opening day of testing on Monday as Red Bull had a strong start with the first car that it has designed with its own engine, alongside Ford.

However, Hadjar only got to run in the wet on Tuesday with team-mate Max Verstappen getting dry laps done early on.

Verstappen himself had triggered the first red flag of the day when he briefly went off into the gravel at Turn 5 on his out lap.

The only other team running on Tuesday was Ferrari, with Charles Leclerc out in the morning before handing the car over to Lewis Hamilton in the afternoon.

Day 2 laptime latest

1 Max Verstappen 1m19.578s (27 laps)
2 Charles Leclerc 1m20.844s (66 laps)
3 Isack Hadjar 1m31.891s (51 laps)
4 Lewis Hamilton 1m32.872s (57 laps)

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/hadjar-crashes-red-bull-on-second-day-of-f1-test/

Red Bull unsure when it can run again after Hadjar crash

Jan 27, 2026 by Scott Mitchell-Malm

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_ruRCeXYAA-Kus?format=jpg&name=large)

Lead image courtesy of @ekaitzgilf1 (https://x.com/ekaitzgilf1/status/2016185775218373128?s=20)


Red Bull is not sure when it will be able to repair its new Formula 1 car after Isack Hadjar's Tuesday crash and team principal Laurent Mekies said "we will try our best" to fix it this week.

Hadjar ended up backwards in the wall at the final corner of the Barcelona circuit after what seems to have been driver error in wet conditions on Tuesday afternoon.

It brought Red Bull's second day of testing to an early end and damaged the rear of the car although the extent is unknown.

Red Bull only has one day of testing left this week as has used two of its three permitted days already. The teams have booked Barcelona for five days with some - like McLaren and Aston Martin - yet to run at all.

Although the flexibility Red Bull has to run on Wednesday, Thursday or Friday means that Hadjar's crash should give it time to repair the car and run again, Mekies said the team could only "try our best to repair the car and see what's coming next".

It is possible that with the cars being so new, Red Bull is short on spares. Mekies said Red Bull "can't wait to have the next possibility to run but it's something we are trying to analyse now and hopefully we get some answers a bit later on".

"The priority right now, as we speak tonight, is to assess the damage on the car, is to see what does it give to us in terms of opportunities to run in the next days," he said.

"We only have one day left, so we have to make sure we play that card carefully and it's an analysis that will take still a few hours."

That at least suggests Red Bull only needs Tuesday evening at the track to assess the damage, what its options are, and which day of running could be feasible if it has what is needed to make repairs.

Hadjar's crash was an unfortunate setback after a very encouraging first day as a Red Bull Racing driver.

He was quickest on Monday and completed more than 100 laps, then took over the RB22 again from Max Verstappen on Tuesday afternoon which gave him some useful wet running.

"It was very tricky conditions this afternoon, so very unfortunate that it finished that way, but it's part of the game," said Mekies.

"These difficulties came after a very, very positive day yesterday in terms of the number of laps Isack could complete in the car, and in terms of his learning and development and feedback to the engineers."

If there is any knock-on effect for Red Bull's programme it will presumably be at the expense of a full Verstappen day in the car given he had only participated in the first few hours of Tuesday.

It is important for the four-time world champion to get on track properly as his first runs in the RB22 were already compromised by the weather – although it will not be a defining part of his pre-season with two tests in Bahrain still to come.

"We only got one run worth of dry running before the rain came," said Mekies.

"We felt, anyway, that it was interesting to run in the rain, also with these regulations, and obviously everything is new."

He added: "The checklist is too long to be completed in just a few days in Barcelona.

"So it's always going to be a matter of priority, and trying to be flexible and adapt your programme as difficulties come out or in terms of when you find an interesting direction that you should pursue."

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/red-bull-unsure-when-it-can-run-again-after-hadjar-crash/

MCL40: Vista frontal

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/01/G_vyPx0WcAA-_dS--2-.jpeg)

Craig Scarborough @ScarbsTech (https://x.com/ScarbsTech) · 19min (https://x.com/ScarbsTech/status/2016602990828732731?s=20)

No front wing adjusters on the McLaren ???
But, a hole in a removable panel, just above the active aero actuators. I guess a tool could adjust both sides of the wing though the hole?
#MCL40 #F1 #F1tech


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_xpu7oWMAAZN9K?format=jpg&name=large)


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_xpu1mWwAAv5wr?format=jpg&name=large)


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_xpu9iXYAAJ8x2?format=jpg&name=large)

Craig Scarborough @ScarbsTech (https://x.com/ScarbsTech) · 30min (https://x.com/ScarbsTech/status/2016600940514513129?s=20)

Mercedes have followed Red Bull and Ferrari with a new Pitot array. Measuring air speed and direction. The three legged structure is probably 3D printed from metal in 1 piece.
#F1 #F1tech


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_xn3jcXAAAjmmc?format=jpg&name=large)


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_xn3gNWIAAAObP?format=jpg&name=large)


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_xn3guWcAEZYkc?format=jpg&name=large)


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_xn3k9WEAA_pIU?format=jpg&name=large)

Mercedes stays on top of Barcelona test as Antonelli goes fastest

Andrea Kimi Antonelli replaced Mercedes Formula 1 team-mate George Russell at the top of the timesheets as F1 concluded the third day of five at the Barcelona private test.

After Russell set the fastest time of the test so far on Wednesday morning, Antonelli was almost exactly two tenths quicker after taking over the W17 in the afternoon.

Russell, who Mercedes said conducted the majority of his morning running on the hard C1 tyre, said of his experience: "The track temperature was in the low single-digits this morning, one of the coldest circuits I've ever driven on, so there's little-to-nothing you can read into the times."

Mercedes will still be able to run another day - either Thursday or Friday - but has already ticked well over the 300-lap mark in the shakedown, as both Antonelli and Russell logged over 90 laps on the day.

Its customer, reigning champion team McLaren, had a credible first outing with the new, test-liveried MCL40, to the tune of over 70 laps and the third-fastest time of the day.


Drivers' champion Lando Norris had the car at his disposal and lapped within a second of Antonelli, while team-mates Franco Colapinto and Pierre Gasly completed an all-Mercedes-powered top five on a reasonably productive day for Alpine, as the pair combined for 100-plus laps in total.

Of the cars with non-Mercedes power units in them, the Ferrari-powered Haas was the fastest through Ollie Bearman, but after its early stoppage its day amounted to just over 40 laps - less than a third of what it'd managed on Monday - before another, more "serious" issue parked the VF-26 for good.

Red flags were also caused by Audi - very early in the day, due to a "real basic" hydraulic leak - and Racing Bulls.

The latter team comfortably cleared 100 laps in the end with Arvid Lindblad, while Audi finally got some respectable mileage on the board with around 70 for Nico Hulkenberg - after its running had been cut short on Monday.

Ferrari and Red Bull did not run after taking to the track on Tuesday (with Red Bull's Tuesday having ended in a crash for Isack Hadjar).

Aston Martin had earmarked Thursday for its first appearance, while Williams is missing the test.

Day three times
1 Kimi Antonelli (Mercedes) 1m17.362s, 91 laps
2 George Russell (Mercedes) +0.218s, 92 laps
3 Lando Norris (McLaren) +0.945s, 76 laps
4 Franco Colapinto (Alpine) +1.788s, 58 laps
5 Pierre Gasly (Alpine) +1.935s, 67 laps
6 Ollie Bearman (Haas) +1.952s, 42 laps
7 Arvid Lindblad (Racing Bulls) +2.058s, 120 laps
8 Nico Hulkenberg (Audi) +3.648s, 68 laps

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/f1-2026-barcelona-test-mercedes-fastest-antonelli-russell/

Desde el equipo Williams F1, responden que el chasis de la FW48 ha pasado todas las pruebas pertinentes y ya ha sido homologado, respecto al "sobrepeso", indican que a día de hoy es posible saberlo, ya se verá en Bahrein y que si fuera así se llevaría a cabo un intenso programa para reducirlo. También notifican que antes de la próxima tanda de ensayos, harán una jornada promocional /'filming day', donde el auto rodará por primera vez: :

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/williams-f1-team-responds-claims-failed-tests-overweight-car/

Sobre los problemas de fiabilidad en la VF26, ya solucionaron la mayoría de los encontrados el Lunes, y el avance en prestaciones fue significativo. En la jornada de hoy, se encontraron con 2 fallos importantes. El encontrado por la tarde es el que más les preocupa. No especifican de qué se trata, pero se piensa que no están relacionados con el con la unidad motriz.

PD: Me encanta la librea de este auto :sherlock:  :good2:

What we know about Haas reliability woes on third day of F1 test

Haas made a "huge step forward" in its Barcelona Formula 1 test programme on Wednesday despite suffering two reliability issues – the second of which was "a bit more serious".

Ollie Bearman stopped on track in the morning with a minor problem that was easily rectified - but Haas's day ended early with a second, unrelated issue late in the afternoon.

It meant after completing more laps than any other team on Monday, the Ferrari customer team managed just 42 on its second day of running.

Despite that, team principal Ayao Komatsu suggested the quality of the work it completed was much improved as it worked through its test items in the laps it did run.

"We'd sorted out so many issues from Monday, so when we were running on track today, I could see a huge step forward compared to day one," he said.

"That's a big positive for us. Unfortunately, in both the morning and afternoon sessions, we had two reliability issues.

"I'm not worried about the one we had this morning, the one in the afternoon was a bit more serious and it's obviously something we're looking into and analysing exactly what happened – and of course, how to solve it."

Neither issue is understood to be engine-related.

The silver lining is this happened relatively early in the team's pre-season programme and now Haas needs to decide whether it conducts its third and final permitted day of running on Thursday or Friday.

As well as Komatsu praising the team's improved operational performance, Bearman said Wednesday was the first time he could "push it on its limits, at least for what they were for the set-up being run today" and is "excited to see the car go through its paces more".

"We had a bit of an interrupted day but we still got through some important items and learned some big things about this car," said Bearman.

"It's a shame on one hand, it's the nature of these tests, but it's good to get these things out of the way now as opposed to later."

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/haas-reliability-woes-barcelona-f1-test-wednesday/

@FormulaDirecta

🚨 Acumulado de vueltas por equipos y motores en los test de pretemporada de Barcelona (día 3)

Por equipos:
🥇 Mercedes - 332 vueltas
🥈 Racing Bulls - 207 vueltas
🥉 Haas - 196 vueltas

Por motoristas:
🥇 Mercedes - 589 vueltas
🥈 Red Bull Ford - 392 vueltas
🥉 Ferrari - 360

 :Gracias: :bruji1: Llumia :Gracias:
Por la puesta al día en los diseños vistos, pero ya sabéis que soy cabezota :mosking: , cuánto se parecerán a los que veamos en Marzo? :sherlock:  :scratch_one-s_head:

Lo veo (mal, porque la foto es una  :mierda: ), pero no lo entiendo...  :sherlock:  :umnik:

AM26 , esta tarde en Montmeló:
(https://imgur.com/q1vX0ej.png)

Esa "barriga" en el morro??... :sherlock:
Esas tomas de aire con la cuchara abierta por arriba??... :sherlock:
Tiene las aletas famosas de los McLaren de los 2000 en los laterales del "intake" ?? :sherlock:
Eso de los pontones :sherlock:  , son aperturas de salida de flujos clientes?? :sherlock:
Esa suspensión trasera...  :scare: ... no lo entiendo (alomojó es que no se ve) :sherlock:

si que parece "No ve d'oso" :mazo:  :roto2rie: 

:scare:
(https://imgur.com/ofIcCXc.png)

Dónde han metido toda la parte trasera??? :sherlock:  :scare:  :umnik2:
Y los pontones??? :sherlock:  :scare:  :umnik2:

Esperemos que no sea una "tostadora" de aquellas que también hicieron famoso a Newey :gaydude:  :miedito:  :mosking:

https://x.com/formuladirecta/status/2016929228734800363?s=48&t=1sVRGm3iU53gwBxoqnW_ag

(https://imgur.com/b2sdbK1.png) :sherlock:

(https://imgur.com/zq7l80b.png) :sherlock:

(https://imgur.com/lL4jPy4.png) :sherlock:

 :estudiar:

Cita de: McHouserphy en Ene 29, 2026, 08:03 PMLo veo (mal, porque la foto es una  :mierda: ), pero no lo entiendo...  :sherlock:  :umnik:

AM26 , esta tarde en Montmeló:
(https://imgur.com/q1vX0ej.png)

Esa "barriga" en el morro??... :sherlock:
Esas tomas de aire con la cuchara abierta por arriba??... :sherlock:
Tiene las aletas famosas de los McLaren de los 2000 en los laterales del "intake" ?? :sherlock:
Eso de los pontones :sherlock:  , son aperturas de salida de flujos clientes?? :sherlock:
Esa suspensión trasera...  :scare: ... no lo entiendo (alomojó es que no se ve) :sherlock:

si que parece "No ve d'oso" :mazo:  :roto2rie: 

1. Sobre la "barriga en el "morrro": Hay que recordar aquellas comparativas de morro pelícano vs. no pelícano, donde con CFD (2D) validamos las hipótesis de partida, que una disminución de la sección libre al flujo, por la ecuación de continuidad,para conservar el flujo volumétrico (caudal), la velocidad debe aumentar y si la velocidad aumenta, un balance de energía mecánica, nos va a indicar que se va a producir una caída de la presión. En su día lo validamos empleando CFD :risitas:

2. Aletines en la zona de la toma de aire: Efectivamente, aquellos McLaren los incorporaban, aunque no sé si los que los introdujeron fueron los del equipo BMW F1, son acondicionadores de flujo, para mejorar la "calidad" del aire que llega al alerón trasero.

3. Suspensión trasera: Efectivamente se observa con dificultad, pero da la impresión, que los tirantes superiores de la misma, en lugar de estar anclados al chasis, los están al pilar que soporta el ala trasera.

New Aston Martin red flags fourth day of F1 testing

Aston Martin brought the penultimate day of Formula 1 testing at Barcelona to an early end on Thursday as a problem for Lance Stroll after just four laps left his new AMR26 stranded on track.

The team had worked all day to get its 2026 car out for the first time, with Stroll completing a first installation lap with an hour of running left.

But after later managing just four laps at slow pace, his car came to a halt in the final sector on his fifth tour and he stopped in the run-off area near the pitlane entry.

There was no immediate explanation for what caused the stoppage, but Aston Martin will be hoping it is a minor issue that can be resolved so it can get a full day's running done on Friday.

While Stroll's stoppage brought out the only red flag of the day, Aston Martin was not the first squad to hit trouble.

McLaren's Oscar Piastri found himself stranded in the garage for the afternoon session as his squad worked on finding a fix to a problem with its MCL40.

"Unfortunately a few issues today," said Piastri afterwards.

"We had a fuel system issue which cut our day a bit short but I know the team is working really hard to get that fixed to get us back out for as many laps as we can tomorrow."

The troubles for Aston Martin and McLaren were in contrast to the valuable mileage that both Mercedes and Ferrari managed over the course of the day.

Mercedes continued its impressive form, as George Russell set a new benchmark time for the week with a lap of 1m16.445s in the afternoon as his squad began to ramp up the pace of the W17.

That effort meant he edged out team-mate Kimi Antonelli at the top of the timesheets at the end of the day by 0.636 seconds.

With Piastri unable to improve from his morning effort and ending the day fourth in the standings, it was Ferrari's Charles Leclerc who ended up the closest challenger to Mercedes.

Leclerc set a best lap of 1m18.223s as he completed 85 laps in total – adding to the 89 laps that team-mate Lewis Hamilton had managed in the morning on his way to sixth in the standings.

Arvid Lindblad was fifth fastest for Racing Bulls, with team-mate Liam Lawson ending up seventh.

The other car running was Sergio Perez in the Cadillac, who completed 66 laps with a best lap of 1m21.024s.

Mercedes has now completed the three days it is allowed to run, while a host of teams are planning to get their final day of running done on Friday.

This includes Red Bull, which has not been able to return to the track since Isack Hadjar crashed heavily at the final corner late on Tuesday.

Thursday times
1. George Russell (Mercedes) 1m16.445 (78 laps)
2. Kimi Antonelli (Mercedes) 1m17.081s (90 laps)
3. Charles Leclerc (Ferrari) 1m18.223s (89 laps)
4. Oscar Piastri (McLaren) 1m18.419s (48 laps)
5. Arvid Lindblad (Racing Bulls) 1m18.451 (47 laps)
6. Lewis Hamilton (Ferrari) 1m18.654s (83 laps)
7. Liam Lawson (Racing Bulls) 1m18.840 (64 laps)
8. Sergio Perez (Cadillac): 1m21.024 (66 laps)
9. Lance Stroll (Aston Martin) 1m46.404 (4 laps)

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/new-aston-martin-red-flags-fourth-day-of-f1-testing/

Best times and total mileage for every F1 team and driver at Barcelona

Mercedes' prolific running means it has concluded its Formula 1 testing at Barcelona already having completed considerably more mileage than any other team.

An incredibly productive three days at Barcelona for both George Russell and Kimi Antonelli ended Mercedes' week at 500 laps exactly – more than 2300 kilometres of the Spanish Grand Prix venue.

Teams can run on three of five days from Monday to Friday and Mercedes wrapped up its allocation on Thursday having also run Monday and Wednesday.

The next-busiest team, Racing Bulls, ran the same schedule and has also ended its test with 319 laps completed.

But Ferrari is likely to have the second most productive test after Mercedes as its two days of testing, having only started on Tuesday, have already yielded 297 laps.

At the other end, Aston Martin's arrival late in the day on Thursday meant it managed just four laps before stopping on-track.

Other teams lacking mileage going into the final day are new works team Audi, new entrant Cadillac, and reigning world champion McLaren after a fuel system problem on Thursday.

Laps completed by team
Team           Laps        Km
Mercedes      500    2,328.50
Racing Bulls  319    1,485.58
Ferrari           297    1,383.13
Haas             196     912.77
Red Bull        185     861.55
Alpine           185     861.55
McLaren        121    563.50
Cadillac         110    512.27
Audi               95     442.42
Aston Martin   4       18.63

This is obviously reflected in what each engine manufacturer has achieved this week.

Mercedes is well clear of Ferrari while new manufacturer Red Bull Powertrains has had an impressive first showing with the two Red Bull teams.

But Audi's having an underwhelming first F1 test despite prioritising reliability and mileage with the form of its initial package – and Honda's engine has had the most minor of shakedowns in the Aston Martin.

Laps completed by engine manufacturer

Engine         Laps     Kilometres
Mercedes     806      3,753.54
Ferrari          603      2,808.17
RBPT            504      2,347.13
Audi              95         442.42
Honda             4           18.63

Mercedes is not only the busiest team at Barcelona this week. It has also been comfortably quick, as much value as that holds at this stage of testing.

George Russell and Kimi Antonelli have traded fastest times this week, with both the only drivers to go below 1m18s - and Russell even setting a 1m16.445s.

Monday pacesetter Isack Hadjar is still third quickest so far, but is 1.7s slower than Russell.

As this is still such an early stage of testing, and some drivers have not had much mileage, the field spread is abnormally large.

Even discounting Lance Stroll's installation lap 1m46.404s there is a nine-second gap from Russell to Gabriel Bortoleto, who only managed a limited amount of running on Monday before a technical problem ended Audi's day.

Newcomer Cadillac is currently 4.6s off the pace, level with Audi and 1.6s off the next team – but it is no surprise to see such a strong correlation between the number of laps a driver has completed and where they are on the unofficial testing leaderboard.

Fastest times
George Russell       1m16.445s
Kimi Antonelli        1m17.081s
Isack Hadjar           1m18.159s
Charles Leclerc       1m18.223s
Lando Norris          1m18.307s
Oscar Piastri           1m18.419s
Lewis Hamilton       1m18.654s
Liam Lawson           1m18.840s
Franco Colapinto    1m19.150s
Pierre Gasly             1m19.297s
Ollie Bearman         1m19.314s
Arvid Lindblad        1m19.420s
Max Verstappen     1m19.578s
Nico Hulkenberg    1m21.010s
Sergio Perez           1m21.024s
Esteban Ocon         1m22.456s
Valtteri Bottas         1m25.789s
Gabriel Bortoleto    1m25.434s
Lance Stroll             1m46.404s
Fernando Alonso     No time

Laps completed by driver
George Russell     265
Kimi Antonelli      237
Arvid Lindblad     167
Isack Hadjar         158
Charles Leclerc     155
Esteban Ocon      154
Liam Lawson        152
Lewis Hamilton    142
Franco Colapinto 118
Sergio Perez          77
Lando Norris         76
Nico Hulkenberg   68
Pierre Gasly           67
Oscar Piastri          48
Ollie Bearman       42
Valtteri Bottas       33
Max Verstappen    27
Gabriel Bortoleto  27
Lance Stroll            4
Fernando Alonso   0

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/best-times-and-total-mileage-for-every-f1-team-and-driver-at-barcelona/

Gary Anderson's verdict on the real 2026 McLaren F1 car

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/01/download--1-.jpeg)

McLaren's 2026 Formula 1 car has finally hit the track at Barcelona. As expected from a pre-season test behind closed doors test, pictures of the real car are limited.

However, we are still able to pick out a few pointers from what we've seen so far.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/image1--20-.jpeg)

The front wingspan profile of the mainplane leading edge and the flap trailing edge, highlighted with the light blue lines above, are fairly benign. It doesn't change shape quickly across its span. I'm a fan of this as it reduces the potential of crossflow when the pressures on the under surface and top surface change quickly. This type of concept will produce a more consistent flow structure to the rest of the car coming along behind.

Also, although fairly difficult to see, the profile under the nose looks like it is fairly V-shaped - the thinner red highlight line being the breakpoint on the side of the nose, and the thicker red highlight being what looks like the lower floor section of the nose.

This opens up the area under the nose, giving the central section of the front wing more clearance to the nose, allowing better quality and more consistent airflow to the central part of the underfloor through this section.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/image0--28--1.jpeg)

However, it's under the nose in this area where it all gets a bit more exciting and different. McLaren has these vanes coming down from that surface. I will christen them 'snowplough' vanes. I have put the edge detail in different colours: yellow, green, blue and red going rearwards. All of them look like they have a slightly different profile.

If they're V-shaped where they attach to the nose surface, they could be spilling airflow outwards prior to it getting turned outwards by the V-shape connection between the floor and the underneath of the chassis further rearward. The lower outer corner could also be to generate vortices, which could reenergise the airflow that actually goes underneath the leading edge of the underfloor.

Whatever they do, I'm pretty sure that a few other teams will be looking closely at it very soon in CFD.

By having three slot-gap separators per side between the front wing's second and third elements (light blue highlight), and two between the first and second elements (white highlight), I would assume McLaren will back off two elements for its low-drag mode (dubbed straight mode this year).

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/image5--5-.jpeg)

he front wing endplates are nicely sculpted, very three-dimensional and McLaren has this fairly serious horizontal fin mounted on the outer surface, which I have highlighted with a yellow ellipse.

This fin will help direct the airflow down into what is called the tyre squirt area, the area where the rotating tyre forces the airflow around its contact patch on the track surface. If allowed to go around the inside, it disrupts the airflow to the rest of the car.

The objective is to force as much of it as possible around the outside; these red arrows below show what I mean. That flow will then join up with the airflow coming through the tunnel in the lower footplate of the endplate, helping seal the underside of the wing, which will improve its performance. That airflow will then be pulled around into the void behind the front tyre.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/image3--11-.jpeg)

We can also see that the bargeboards are now more elaborate than on the render version shown on Monday. These horizontal vanes will help extract airflow from the bargeboard footplate.

The original style of bargeboard that the FIA believed it was proposing was to instigate inwash. However, from what I have seen so far, most teams have found a way past that and are now creating outwash.

Quite a few of the teams have a similar appendage on the endplates and similar treatment to the bargeboard area. So I'm keen to see where the FIA stands as far as these concepts are concerned. They clearly have an influence on outwash.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/image6--1-.jpeg)

The inlet of the front brake duct (red ellipse) shows a lot more detail; it's divided up into areas to vary the cooling across the internal parts that need different levels of cooling. Last season, McLaren was initially the leader in this style of cooling detail and it helped it keep control of the tyre temperatures front and rear. When the penny dropped, some of the other teams caught up fairly quickly.

The inner surface of the brake duct, highlighted above in yellow, creates a wall to contain the airflow spilling off the front tyre, which is highlighted with the purple arrows. Managing this flow reduces the negative effect it would have on the downforce-producing devices coming along behind.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/image7.jpeg)

As for the front suspension, the forward pickup is highlighted in dark blue, and the rear leg is highlighted in light blue. The inboard height difference is what gives you the degree of anti-dive and with this height difference, it's a lot of anti-dive - probably even more than last year.

What I believe is the front trackrod is highlighted in yellow and on the other side, highlighted with the green arrow, is what I think is the forward leg of the lower wishbone. I can't really see the rear leg of the lower wishbone to comment on its influence on the overall dive characteristics of the front suspension, but it can have a significant influence.

Anti-dive is great to support the car when you have braking torque going through the suspension system, but as you come off the brakes and that torque reduces the car's ride height will get back to where it should be for the speed and downforce level you are carrying. That means that the front of the car could be moving more just at corner entry and the difference between turning in on the brakes and not being on the brakes could be significant.

We know that last year, around mid-season, McLaren modified its outboard front suspension pickups to give Lando Norris more braking and steering turn-in feeling. It seemed to work, but as it wasn't considered to be a performance advantage, just a driver-feel improvement, team-mate Oscar Piastri didn't use it.

As you never unlearn anything, I'm sure McLaren will have optimised that package to work with this level of anti-dive and both drivers will start the season with the package.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/image8.jpeg)

As for the rear end, the overall suspension layout is not dissimilar to last year, with a top wishbone forward leg (dark blue line), rearward leg (light blue line), lower wishbone front leg (green line), pushrod (red line) and driveshaft (shroud, pink highlight).

The brake duct inner surface, with the yellow highlight, is there to contain the airflow spillage highlighted with the purple arrows coming off the rear tyre.

McLaren does have some small louvres on the floor just in front of the rear tyre; they are highlighted with the orange ellipse. Again, these feed into the rear tyre outward tyre squirt to manage the airflow around the tyre contact patch.

This is a new season with very different regulations for both the chassis and power unit compared to last season, so all of the top teams and probably a few others will think right now that this is their big opportunity to claim top spot and knock McLaren off its perch.

From what I have seen of the top four, yes, they all have come up with something slightly different. The interesting thing is, who has got it right? It's going to be in Melbourne before we see any indication of that and, even then, it will still be early days - with plenty of time to see who can develop at a faster rate and who can take the right direction.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/real-2026-mclaren-f1-car-gary-anderson-verdict/

Newey's 'extreme' Aston Martin - Gary Anderson's first reaction

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/01/476db392-031b-39bd-49bc-d1ed6c4e0e18.jpeg)

Having just seen the first images of the 2026 Aston Martin, there's no question it's an Adrian Newey Formula 1 car! Even without seeing the detail, you can tell it's extreme, aggressive and all of those other words you can use for a car that pushes to extremes.

Concept-wise, it looks like it's on the limit. The front and rear suspension appears to be pushrod, and the front top wishbone is very high and has a very wide base for its inboard pick-up points.

The rear upper wishbone also looks like its inboard pick-up points are very high and the lower rear wishbone looks very low. However, I'd need to see more shots from different angles before I can go into too much detail.

You could also say it has a 'zero' sidepod concept, and then some. That's not so much in terms of width, but in terms of depth, it's so slim I'm even surprised there is room for a radiator in there. The intake is high and letterbox shaped and the exit is fairly well forward in the engine cover sides and I would say 'brutal'. However, some of that is because the engine cover behind that opening is undercut to the extreme.

As for the sidepod itself, it's effectively an extreme double floor. This means the cross-sectional area between the wheels going from front to back will be smaller than the others that I have seen. That will mean a lot less airflow displacement as the car passes through it  - which in turn should reduce the drag level. This could be very beneficial under these regulations.

Adrian is always very good at working out the right compromises when it comes to creating the most performance from a rules package. So with the energy demands of these cars and the value of low-drag in making best use of that, perhaps he's decided to go all-in on that?

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/01/f4d13890-bb85-143f-c841-9f4416b5e5de.jpeg)

There also appears to be the return of the 'horns' on the side of the airbox. It's difficult to see in detail, but they could be rollover bar supports allowing the airbox intake to be more open. Also, beside the driver's head there are some vertical turning vanes to help control the airflow direction in that area.

There is also a larger-than-most undercut between the bottom of that intake and the top of the driver's headrest. I suppose that could be the reason for the 'horns', but it's difficult to see how big those horns and fins are.

It does look like it might be 'different', to say the least, and that's from front to rear.

But then again what else would you expect from the 'pencil' of Adrian Newey?

The first sight of the car has whetted everyone's appetite and I'm looking forward to going over the detail when we see it.


https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/gary-anderson-on-neweys-extreme-first-aston-martin/

Adam Cooper @adamcooperF1 (https://x.com/adamcooperF1) · 1min (https://x.com/adamcooperF1/status/2017308945510248806?s=20)

'@alo_oficial (https://x.com/alo_oficial) on his first day in the @AstonMartinF1 (https://x.com/AstonMartinF1) AMR26: "It was good. Definitely excited to be back in the car after the winter. For us, it's the first day. I know some of the teams did filming days or shakedowns at the beginning of January, and then the whole week here in Barcelona, but for us, it was really the very first day. So I think we had a positive one, 60-plus laps, and the car is responding well. So first day, and more to come. Especially the last I think two weeks has been very, very intense, the factory trying to have the car ready, and we just made it to Barcelona in the last two days. So a tremendous effort from from everyone. I think it was phenomenal, the last 48 hours."


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_7rT1KW8AI_hvZ?format=jpg&name=large)

Algunos análisis del AMR26.


Virutas de Goma™ @VirutasF1 (https://x.com/VirutasF1) · 21h (https://x.com/VirutasF1/status/2017007734256808351)

Los ingenieros de varios equipos han estado analizando las fotos del Aston Martin AMR26, y han llegado a varias conclusiones interesantes. La mayoría son teóricas, o preguntas que dejan en el aire, pero son análisis llamativos

Ahí vamos (+)

Si empezamos de delante y hacia atrás, lo primero que reseñan es que no se aprecian los actuadores del flap delantero. En el resto de coches como el Audi o el McLaren, hay una pequeña barra brillante, metálica, que se encarga de subir y bajar "el DRS delantero". En el AM no se ve

En el AMR26 debe estar en alguna parte, pero... ¿donde?

Lo 2º que se aprecia es que los dos tornillos que en las paradas unos mecánicos ajustan las alas a toda velocidad, puede que sea solo uno. En lugar de uno a cada lado, será uno en el morro, arriba, a un palmo del extremo

Lo tercero que les llama la atención es la enorme tobera de escape de gases que hay tras la posición del piloto en el cockpit. Todos los consultados coinciden en lo mismo: no parece que sea de refrigeración, es demasiado grande. O es un experimento o algo tipo F-duct

Subimos de nivel: el AMR26 tiene demasiadas conexiones del cuerpo principal con el suelo. No es normal. El resto de coches tiene una o ninguna y este tiene al menos 4. O el suelo es de papel de fumar, o es muy flexible... no queda claro. Queda claro que normal no es,ahí hay algo

Y la rareza última es esa especie de boquete en el lateral delantero del morro. Todos dicen lo mismo:

No sabemos que puñetas es eso

Ahora mismo hay un centenar de ingenieros escudriñando fotos de las que no hemos visto... pero ellos si

Sobre lo del "virutas de goma"... :scratch_one-s_head: ...

Se nota que esos srs. no manejan técnicas de combate :scare:  :roto2rie:

Cómo puedes hacer perder recursos a los rivales sin ni siquiera interactuar con ellos?? :umnik:  :scratch_one-s_head:

Pues poniendo mil detalles inútiles, falsos, o inventados, en una maqueta base, ya que lo que va a probar es motor y sistema eléctrico, esos detalles aero son intrascendentes para los test reales a ejecutar.

Y mientras tanto, en el resto de equipos ponen a algunas personas a buscar lo que no hay, a ver si encuentran algo... :roto2rie: , no vaya a ser que les pongan a pensar de verdad, y de verdad encuentren algo. :ouchcomputer:  :roto2rie:  :mosking:

Guerra psicoilógica :roto2rie:  :rofl:

Hamilton ends F1's Barcelona test on top

Lewis Hamilton finished Formula 1's first pre-season test at Barcelona with the quickest time of the week for Ferrari on Friday, as he put together a strong lap late on.

At the end of a five-day session where all the indications had previously pointed to Mercedes being well ahead, Hamilton produced a 1m16.348 seconds lap as track conditions ramped up on the final evening to end the week on top.

That lap put him just less than one tenth of a second ahead of Mercedes driver George Russell, who had been quickest on Thursday but was absent for the final day because his team had used up its allocated three days.

While testing times can be deceptive because fuel loads vary, that Ferrari was able to show some promise and prove reliable will be a boost to the squad and its drivers.

Earlier this week, Hamilton suggested that Ferrari was in a much better position than it had been 12 months ago, as it built up then to what proved to be a troubled campaign.

"Last year, we had a worse start to testing," he said. "So this is actually, considering this a completely new band of rules, it's better than we've experienced in the past. So I'm really hopeful that continues."

Hamilton's closest challenger was McLaren's Lando Norris, who rounded off a much better day for the world champion squad that had missed a lot of running on Thursday because of a fuel system problem.

Norris's best lap of 1m16.594s just edged out Charles Leclerc's fastest time from the morning of 1m16.653s, with Oscar Piastri ending up fourth quickest from his Friday morning effort.

Max Verstappen drove all day for Red Bull, as the team got back into action for the first time since Isack Hadjar's crash on Tuesday.

The Dutchman completed 118 laps over the course of the day with a best lap of 1m17.586s that put him fifth overall.

The busiest man of the day though was Alpine's Pierre Gasly, who completed a total of 164 laps in his new Mercedes-powered car. The Frenchman concluded a fairly positive week for the Enstone-based outfit, even if it remains unsure about its overall competitiveness just now.

The main local interest surrounded Fernando Alonso, who got through a full day's programme in the new Aston Martin AMR26.

The Spaniard's best time of the day had been produced in the morning, but his team will be pleased to have got 61 laps under its belt without major drama after the early problem that blighted Lance Stroll's debut outing on Thursday.

Unofficial day five times
1 Lewis Hamilton (Ferrari) 1m16.348s (67 laps)
2 Lando Norris (McLaren) 1m16.594s (86 laps)
3 Charles Leclerc (Ferrari) 1m16.653s (78 laps)
4 Oscar Piastri (McLaren) 1m17.446 (80 laps)
5 Max Verstappen (Red Bull) 1m17.586s (118 laps)
6 Pierre Gasly (Alpine) 1m17.707s (164 laps)
7 Esteban Ocon (Haas) 1m18.393s (85 laps)
8 Ollie Bearman (Haas) 1m18.423s (105 laps)
9 Nico Hulkenberg (Audi) 1m19.870s (78 laps)
10 Gabriel Bortoleto (Audi) 1m20.179s (67 laps)
11 Fernando Alonso (Aston Martin) 1m20.795s (61 laps)
12 Valtteri Bottas (Cadillac) 1m20.920s (54 laps)

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/lewis-hamilton-ends-f1-barcelona-test-on-top/

El "minuto a minuto" de esta 5ª jornada de ensayos:

https://www.marca.com/motor/formula1/2026/01/30/697c55e745521b0b0797fe8f-directo.html#narration

https://as.com/motor/f1-test-pretemporada-en-barcelona-en-directo-resultados-y-clasificacion-de-alonso-hoy-en-vivo-f202601-d-2/

Gary Anderson's in-depth analysis of 2026 Aston Martin F1 car

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/01/image--15-.png)

Aston Martin finally hit the track at Barcelona late on Thursday afternoon. It was an inauspicious start, as Lance Stroll only managed four-and-a-bit slow laps before grinding to a halt. We don't know what the problem is, but that's what pre-season testing is all about: finding and fixing your problems so you're ready to go to Melbourne and get a result.

But when the Aston Martin AMR26 rolled out of the garage, it caught the eye more than any other car.

This is Adrian Newey's first Aston Martin F1 car after two decades at Red Bull, and this new adventure seems to have inspired him as, from what I've seen, it looks like a good interpretation of the new regulations. And to think the majority of it comes from just a man with a pencil and a drawing board...

On Thursday, I gave you my initial thoughts from what we first saw on the car but, with a few more fairly grainy images that we've enhanced as best we can, there's now enough detail to get into. And just as the airflow across the whole car is set up by the front wing and nose, I'm going to start at the front.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/image0--29-.jpeg)

The nose-to-front-wing hangers highlighted in red attach to the second element of the front wing. This is the most efficient way of doing it, as it means the structural part of the nose can be shorter. If you consider the front wing's vertical load, its centre point would be in this area. If you mount it by the front element, which most teams have, then the peak load will be behind the mountings; this puts a torque into the mounting system.

However, it does mean that with these new active aerodynamic rules that you will probably only be able to back off the third element when you activate straight line mode. The forward element is mounted to the second element with the hangers highlighted with the green ellipses, so they would be rigid. The third element is mounted to the second element with the hangers highlighted with the yellow ellipses, so they will have a pivot allowing the third element to back off when requested. The jury is still out on which solution is the best.

The front wing endplates are fairly simple and don't have any upper vanes as some other cars have, for now. However, the outer tunnel, highlighted in light yellow, is as big as any I have seen and appears to reduce in height but gain in width going rearwards. This tunnel will reduce the sensitivity of this very wide footplate when it gets nearer to the track surface. Think of that sensitivity problem being similar to the porpoising of yesteryear when the cars started bouncing because of a lack of control of the ground effect aerodynamics.

The nose is also fairly benign. This large radius highlighted in white on the front outer corners blending into the sides to the upper surface will entice airflow to spill off it and travel around the sides of the nose into the void under the nose. There, it will meet up with the airflow that passes through between the wing mounting pillars highlighted in red and together head off to the leading edge of the underfloor.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/image1--21-.jpeg)

And now for the more interesting part: the front suspension. Yes, it's similar to most in that it is a double-wishbone system with a pushrod-operated inboard springing and damping mechanism. But Aston Martin has pushed the limits just that little bit further on the overall packaging.

The highlight colours are different components that make up the double wishbone system. The top wishbone forward leg is dark blue, the rearward leg light blue, the pushrod red. What I believe to be the bottom wishbone forward leg is green, and the trackrod yellow.

The lighter extension of those colours going out to the coloured stars is why I say 'what I believe to be the bottom wishbone forward leg is green', because the stars are showing where I believe the intersection with the pushrod would roughly be. If it was at the yellow star then it would be too far into the wheel; however, the pushrod could be driven from the upright and not the bottom wishbone, so in reality it could then be either of those colours that is the forward leg of the lower wishbone.

Either way, as you can see with the upper wishbone forward leg inboard mounting, the complete front suspension system is mounted as high as possible within the current chassis rules for the upper surface profile of the chassis structure.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/3-Caster.jpeg)

However, the inboard pickup for the top wishbone rearward leg is much lower and further rearward than most others. This dark blue star shows the inboard pickup for the forward leg, the light blue star marks the inboard pickup for the rearward leg, and the light blue line connecting them shows the inboard pivot line. The light blue arrow shows the upper wishbone direction of travel as the ride height reduces with speed or under braking or when the car rolls.

The green line is a guesstimate of the lower wishbone pivot line, while the green arrow is its direction of travel as the ride height reduces with speed or under braking or when the car rolls.

Ride-height reduction with speed will happen depending on the vertical stiffness of the car. There will also be a slight movement with roll, but with this amount of anti-dive there won't be much, if any, movement under braking. It's only when you come off the brakes that the car will get back to its proper ride height for the aerodynamic load at the speed it is traveling at.

In effect, this suspension layout will increase the caster with speed, which can give more straightline stability and/or decrease caster as the speed reduces. This will reduce the steering load for slower-speed corners, giving the driver more steering feedback.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/4-Side-front-three-quarters.jpeg)

Moving to the middle of the car, the side view is where you start to see the aerodynamic differences mount up. The sidepods are reduced in cross-section. I wouldn't say they are narrow or 'zero' sidepods, but their volume runs more or less in line with what the airflow structure around them would want to do.

I have highlighted this with the orange arrows. Basically, after defining that shape, you then open up an inlet in the area that has the least negative effect on the overall sidepod flow structure. Aston Martin has returned to the 2023 Adrian Newey Red Bull-style duckbill inlet, highlighted in green.

It also has a vertical fin mounted beside the start of the headrest/driver's helmet. This is to contain and realign the airflow that is forced around the bluff leading edge to the headrest. Doing this means less negative effect of that orange highlighted overall airflow structure.

The airbox inlet, highlighted in green, also adds to the overall cooling flow volume. The area below that inlet and the top of the driver's headrest is aggressively undercut, which will reduce the potential of driver helmet buffeting. The engine cover volume above the actual engine is quite small, so I don't think that there are many of the cooling radiator requirements mounted that high up. A lower centre of gravity for any car is always positive.

The bargeboard area inside the red ellipse has the now-customary louvre sections drawing airflow from inside to outside of the overall component. When the regulations were introduced, this component was defined as a vertical surface starting wide at its most forward point and getting narrower as it went rearward. The intention was to generate inwash, or at least reduce that dreaded outwash. With these louvres and their position, inwash is the last thing they will produce.

Aston Martin also have the louvres, which are highlighted with the blue ellipse, in the floor section in front of the rear tyre. I can't see them in detail, but I believe they will connect the airflow on top of the floor in that area with what is called the outward tyre squirt. This is the airflow that is displaced when the tyre rotates onto the track surface. Doing it this way will reduce the tyre squirt going inboard.

It looks like Aston Martin has also discovered the potential opening in the diffuser sidewall, which I have highlighted above with a yellow arrow. This is what is being called, by some, a blown diffuser - basically, introducing high-energy airflow into an area where the airflow is getting a bit tired.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/5-Side-rearwards.jpeg)

A close look at the sidepod shows how little volume there is to store any radiator cooling cores. I have highlighted this area, top and bottom, with the yellow lines. You can also see how wide and long the leading edge undercut really is, with the light blue arrows showing how it comes from that front corner of the sidepods and gets a little narrower, forcing some of that airflow outwards.

It then opens up abruptly, which is highlighted with the red arrows just where the high pressure in front of the rear tyre needs to be relieved. This abrupt opening will entice that displaced airflow to go inside through what is called the Coke bottle area. Increasing this flow volume reduces tyre drag and improves the performance of the diffuser and rear wing, a win-win situation.

Now we come to what looks like a huge engine cover cooling outlet, which I have highlighted the trailing edge of with the orange line. Yes, it is rather large but part of that is because the inner surface of that outlet duct is basically a 'limpet' fit to whatever is housed under that section of the engine cover. This makes the outlet look bigger.

Also, it is further forward than the 'cannon' outlets (which aren't small) that we see at the rear of most other cars' engine covers. Being more forward means there is more time for the hot cooling airflow, which is highlighted with the red arrows, to mix with the free-stream airflow before it gets to the rear wing. These forward outlets don't require any major rear outlets where other cars have them in the area of the green ellipse.

My motto is don't fool yourself with the car's overall efficiency and downforce numbers by not running with adequate cooling for those hot races. Start there and when it's colder, you can always use a bit of duct tape on the radiator cores until you get your cooling balance and overall requirements sorted out.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/7-rear-crop.jpeg)

The rear suspension layout is interesting. Yes, it's a top wishbone and either a lower double-link or wishbone and toe link system, with a pushrod-operated inboard spring and damper mechanism, but it's the positioning of everything that is significant.

For a closer look I have cropped the above picture. This reduces its quality but it gives us more of an idea of that layout.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/01/image1--20---2-.jpeg)

The top wishbone forward leg is highlighted in dark blue and the rear leg light blue. One of the interesting features is how high the inboard end of the rear leg is mounted. It looks like it mounts on the central rear wing pylon. So what does that achieve?

To get a decent level of anti-lift on the rear suspension, it's the difference in relative heights of the inboard mounts of the top and/or bottom wishbones that matters. By having the rear leg inboard mount higher, it means that the forward leg inboard mount can also be higher. Basically, it gets that forward leg out of the way and should be better structurally as it will go nearer to the top surface of the gearbox outer surface, as opposed to it being in the middle of the side panel of that structure.

The pushrod is highlighted in red, the driveshaft shroud in magenta, and the lower wishbone - or link as it might be - in green. Again, this green link goes forward a long way and might even mount onto the engine, or at least the engine-to-gearbox interface.

I have highlighted the floor stay with a white arrow that is in front and inside of the rear tyre. However, there is another stay or link further rearward, again highlighted with a white arrow. It seems to mount inboard just between the top wishbone inboard mounts. I don't think it is anything to do with the suspension and it could just be a diffuser stay.

It's great to see a car that is a bit different, but that doesn't mean it's better than the others. However, it shows some lateral thinking and demonstrates that there are quite a few ways to achieve the same end result.

Adrian has been very good at that in the past, but today's cars are not the work of one person, so there will be many very intelligent brains who have contributed to what we are looking at. But the reality is that you still need one captain to decide in which direction the ship is travelling in, and that person at Aston Martin is Adrian Newey.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/gary-anderson-verdict-aston-martin-2026-f1-car-adrian-newey/

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G__QB_gWQAA6N1U?format=jpg&name=large)

11 things we learned from F1's first 2026 test

Formula 1's first test of 2026 has ended and despite it being closed off we learned an awful lot about a brand new era of cars and engines.

Testing's sleeper hit

Ferrari was the sleeper hit of this test – starting off quietly, and very productive, if not earning rave reviews like a certain other team, before jumping to the top of the times right at the end of the week.

Even before Lewis Hamilton's late surge, this was shaping up to be a strong week for Ferrari. As strong as we can judge with so many testing caveats of course.

Charles Leclerc had also got closer to Mercedes' benchmark on the final before handing the car over, so the SF-26 looks reasonably brisk.

But the team's also clearly well prepared, as when you factor in that its first day on-track was limited somewhat by awful weather conditions, clearing 2000km is even more impressive.

As Ferrari team principal Fred Vasseur said: "It's really early stages and most important is to be able to complete laps."

As well as already enjoying these cars, Hamilton reckons this pre-season has already started better than 2025. Given Ferrari considers this its 'Spec-A' car, with much development to come, that's a good place to be.

Mercedes the real benchmark

Mercedes still feels like the real early benchmark though, given it didn't run on the final day when track conditions were likely at their best.

By its own admission Mercedes could not have hoped for a better first week of testing, and set an unmatchable early standard in terms of mileage. Mercedes' own humblebrag pointed out that it lost more time because other cars were stopping on track than through its own issues!

It was also effortlessly quick, and feedback on the cars' traits in the real world versus simulation has been tentatively positive - the car feels better than it did on the simulator, and the drivers are happy with initial engine driveability even with greater electric power and no MGU-H.

Mercedes also looks a step ahead of its customer teams too, making full use of its works status with understanding the demands of these brand new engines.

You might remember Mercedes had a great first test with the new 2022 cars too, which was obviously no indication of what it would actually go on to achieve.

But if nothing else Mercedes was better prepared than any team for the start of testing and is now ready to take the next step in Bahrain.

Red Bull engine surprises

The work of Red Bull's new in-house engine division has not gone unnoticed at Mercedes with George Russell name-checking it on the opening day and then indirectly referring to the engine again on Thursday.

He said it was impressive, and quite surprising, to see what the new manufacturers have been capable of. And unless Russell's got a completely different view of Audi's running to everyone else that can only mean Red Bull-Ford Powertrains.

Russell was right to say that the first test for Red Bull's engine had gone much better than expected because "a lot of people anticipated the new suppliers to struggle".

Beyond some minor niggles, which everyone had, things ran very well in both the Red Bull and Racing Bulls camps - with a really healthy number of laps compared to the established manufacturers considering this is just a two-team programme.

Engine mileage
Team        Laps     Kilometres     
Mercedes    1132     5,271.72
Ferrari      989     4,605.77
RBPT         622     2,896.65
Audi         240     1,117.68
Honda         65       302.71


Max Verstappen said Red Bull had "hit the ground running quite well" with the engine and Racing Bulls chief technical officer Tim Goss lauded the driveability in particular, calling it "fantastic."

But, of course, we need to wait to see its ultimate performance.

Own goals for F1

One of the biggest discussion points among fans about the week was not the cars but the aggressive security lockdown and sometimes laughable sugar-coating of events by the official F1 channels when it came to coverage.

With F1's teams having come together to arrange their own closed test, the initial plan had been for a complete information blackout with media and creators banned.

In the end, compromises ensured some limited official F1 coverage – which some teams did not like and left some fans baffled.

With photos and video being put out, it was not a good look for F1 to then have security and the police threatening spectators and media with fines for watching from the hills overlooking the track.

And it wasn't missed that F1's own official reporting and highlights from the event went full-on propaganda and seemed to ignore any mention of red flags.

For example, there was widespread mocking of Isack Hadjar's big crash being referred to by F1 as a 'small off'.

The secrecy and spin was all so needless, considering those on the ground were getting information out anyway – and the cars ran so well.

Even teams that caused red flags, like Alpine and Haas, were able to rebound with monster final days completing 164 and 190 laps respectively!

What the drivers revealed about new cars/engines

Drivers had plenty of prior experience of these cars in the digital domain through simulator running, but it's only now that they've been able to experience this for real.

The nature of the private test and how information was carefully allowed out of it means that inevitably the messaging was positive, but we've learned plenty about these new cars.

As world champion Lando Norris says, the cornering speed is down thanks to the reduced downforce, which means the cars visibly scrabble for grip in the corners, but the straightline speed and acceleration catches the attention. Mercedes driver Russell even suggested after watching from trackside that during this test the cars were travelling faster than he's ever seen on the main straight at Barcelona.

And despite concerns about the extent to which drivers might not be able to express themselves behind the wheel, Liam Lawson reckons there's plenty of opportunity for drivers to make a difference.

The cars were also a challenge in the wet, as Hadjar discovered to his and Red Bull's cost when he spun at the final corner on the second day of running and backed into the wall.

Problems for 2025 pacesetters

This was a middling test overall for last year's pacesetters McLaren and Red Bull, as each team had setbacks to recover from in the middle of their programmes.

Red Bull ran on the first two days of the test immediately with its new car and in-house engine, which all seemed to be going pretty smoothly until Hadjar backed the car into the barriers.

The damage was such that the Red Bull didn't reappear for its final permitted day on-track until Friday, after spares were flown out from its Milton Keynes base.

No major track time was lost, at least, and Verstappen got a nice full day in the car on Friday, completing 118 laps – though the four-time world champion will hope there's plenty being held back given he was just over a second off the pace.

Team mileage

Team         Laps    Km
Mercedes      500    2,328.50
Ferrari       439    2,044.42
Haas          386    1,797.60
Alpine        349    1,625.29
Racing Bulls  319    1,485.58
Red Bull      303    1,411.07
McLaren       283    1,317.93
Audi          240    1,117.68
Cadillac      164      763.75
Aston Martin   65      302.71

And it was simply not as productive a test as other big teams managed, which also goes for McLaren.

Slow to get going on its first morning of track running, McLaren then lost even more time on the MCL40's second day because of a fuel system issue. Neil Houldey, McLaren technical director (engineering), described it as "small, niggly, little issues [that] cost quite a bit of downtime."

Friday was smoother, with its drivers getting a good amount of track time with 162 laps combined. That brought its total up to just about average but not as much over the week as McLaren had intended.

New Aston Martin's the wildcard

Aston Martin made us wait, and wait, and wait some more to see its first Adrian Newey design – but it was well worth it.

Visually different with some fundamentally different architecture and interesting aerodynamic choices, the AMR26 is definitely the wildcard in the pack.

Who knows if it's actually any good, because the extremely late arrival meant the car didn't run long enough or quickly enough to judge how well those novel solutions work in reality or what kind of state new engine partner Honda is in.

Gary Anderson's in-depth analysis of 2026 Aston Martin F1 car
Video: Aston Martin's aggressive car explained
Why new Aston Martin F1 car debuted with blue warning light

We believe the car is overweight, by quite a reasonable amount, so even by testing standards this could be the car currently furthest from its ultimate potential.

That just makes it all the better that we actually got sight of it after what Fernando Alonso called a "very, very intense" couple of weeks trying to get it ready.

Audi has a long to-do list

Audi's first F1 car and engine were signed off in a preliminary form to be able to run an early shakedown and rack up mileage here.

The final version of both should be more advanced but that initial caution wasn't really rewarded with a stunningly productive test.

Audi had costly problems on all three days it ran, causing two red flags and spending a chunk of Friday morning in the garage again.

A very good recovery on the final day, after the slow start, meant it managed 60% of its weekly running on Friday! But it still ended up one of the worst teams in terms of on-track productivity.

That's why project leader Mattia Binotto, formerly of Ferrari, says the list of things to do after this test is the longest he's ever seen!

Cadillac's deceptive deficit

Cadillac made a stuttering start to the test, managing just 44 laps on the first day with Sergio Perez's afternoon running plagued by issues.

This was all part of what Valtteri Bottas described as "the problem-solving phase" for F1's newest team.

Plenty was learned on the first day of running and the team spent Tuesday and Wednesday focused on off-track work before returning to action, and Perez said that they were even starting to get into set-up work.

But as well as limited running, it's no surprise that Cadillac's headline pace was nowhere.

Expectations should be set low for 2026 but there's no doubt the car will show more pace in the next test in Bahrain as the team with vastly more to do than any of its rivals works through its programme.

That's why team boss Graeme Lowdon said he's still "really happy" with a test Cadillac ended 4.6seconds off the pace and bottom on mileage out of the teams that completed their full three-day allocation of testing.

How new cars look and sound

While the security did its best to keep non-team personnel as far away from the track as possible, that did not stop many still being able to get a close look at the cars.

Early impressions from those inside, from teams and even drivers, and outside the circuit are that the 2026 challengers look better than their predecessor both aesthetically and on track.

They are a bit punchier coming out of corners too, with frequent wheelspin on display.

One thing that did stand out from those able to get a peek of the cars on the run to Turn 1 was how quick they get to top speed early on the straights.

And for those that care about the noise, the first impression is that they seem to be a step up from last year thanks to the muffling effect of the MGU-H having been removed.

From observing practice starts, it also seems drivers like their getaways to be done with some very punchy revs!

How the sole rookie got on

There's only one rookie on the grid this season and despite being a wildcard pick, he's made a good early impression with his new team.

Eighteen-year-old Arvid Lindblad will be the fourth-youngest driver in F1 history when he makes his debut in Australia and has been promoted to a Racing Bulls seat after just one promising but unspectacular year in Formula 2.

His speed at his best is very impressive, and Racing Bulls reckons he's already looking quick compared to team-mate Lawson.

But what's also stood out is his inquisitive nature - asking lots and lots of questions.

This reminded team boss Alan Permane of what Lindblad's predecessor Hadjar was like 12 months ago, which is no bad comparison given what Hadjar went on to do on-track.


https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/11-things-we-learned-from-f1-first-2026-test/

La McLaren F1 MCL40, bajo la lupa de N. Carpentiers:

La MCL40 à la loupe : la McLaren pour maintenir Norris au sommet ?

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-mclaren-mcl40_0-new.jpg)

McLaren prend tout le monde à revers avec une MCL40 déjà très aboutie... et très différente de ses rivales. Analyse en images.

Jamais deux sans trois ? Après avoir remporté les deux derniers titres chez les constructeurs, McLaren s'imposera-t-elle avec la MCL40 ? Rien n'est moins sûr selon Andrea Stella, qui avoue : "Nous sommes champions, mais nous n'emportons pas notre statut de champions avec nous en 2026. Tout le monde repart de zéro".

Par rapport aux autres F1 2026 dévoilées, la McLaren est sans doute la monoplace la plus aboutie, dans la mesure où elle n'évoluera pas beaucoup d'ici au premier Grand Prix en mars (contrairement à la Ferrari SF-26, appelée à changer considérablement avant l'Australie).

L'écurie britannique entend ainsi retarder l'introduction d'évolutions majeures sur sa MCL40 jusqu'à ce qu'elle dispose d'une bonne compréhension du comportement de sa voiture.

"Entre Barcelone et Melbourne, je pense que ce que vous verrez correspondra pratiquement à ce que nous alignerons lors de la première course, a expliqué le directeur technique Rob Marshall, qui fut longtemps le bras droit d'Adrian Newey chez Red Bull. Une grande partie de nos efforts sera consacrée à la compréhension de cette voiture. Elle est très compliquée. Tout est nouveau. Introduire des nouveautés très tôt compliquerait les choses."

"Nous devons aussi prendre en compte ce que font nos adversaires : nous devons nous inspirer de ce qu'ils pourraient — ou non — réussir, et de ce qu'ils pourraient — ou non — nous montrer. C'est pour cela que nous avons choisi de lancer la voiture dans sa configuration la plus compétitive possible."

Que peut-on alors relever sur cette MCL40 déjà bien mature ?

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-mclaren-mcl40_1-copy.jpg)

Une McLaren en version Grand Prix d'Australie

Pour les raisons que l'on vient d'avancer, l'aileron avant de la MCL40 apparaît plus élaboré que ceux observés jusqu'à présent sur les autres monoplaces.

La dérive latérale (indiquée par les flèches jaunes) est sans doute l'une des plus profilées et des plus complexes vues jusqu'ici. Elle est comme tordue, torsadée, avec un bord d'attaque amont orienté presque vers l'intérieur avant de s'ouvrir progressivement vers l'extérieur. Il s'agit d'une géométrie d'outwash, comme sur l'ensemble des autres F1 2026, mais dans une version plus aboutie (les formes de l'Aston Martin AMR26, plus simples, correspondent à une version de test).

La tendance de McLaren à utiliser des ailerons avant dotés d'une surface frontale sensiblement plus importante se poursuit par rapport au cycle de réglementation précédent.

On relèvera l'inclinaison vers le bas de l'ailette fixée perpendiculairement à la dérive (flèches rouges). Si cette orientation produit sans doute un peu de portance, elle vise surtout à contrôler la direction de rotation du vortex vers les côtés extérieurs (outwash).

À noter aussi que la MCL40 place l'ajusteur de volet à l'intérieur du nez, à l'image des Red Bull RB22 et Mercedes W17, et non à l'extérieur comme sur la Ferrari. Un orifice est visible dans un panneau amovible, juste au-dessus des actionneurs aérodynamiques actifs (il est probable qu'un outil permette d'ajuster les deux côtés de l'aileron via cette ouverture).

Enfin, bien que cela soit relativement difficile à distinguer, le profil situé sous le nez semble adopter une forme en V.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-mclaren-mcl40_2-copy.jpg)

Des choix guidés par l'aérodynamique

Les éléments de l'aileron avant sont fortement chargés au niveau central, puis s'évasent jusqu'au rayon maximal autorisé par la réglementation vers la dérive latérale. Cela génère très probablement un important upwash que gère ensuite la géométrie de la suspension. C'est l'une des raisons pour lesquelles la configuration à poussoir est un choix pertinent.

Ce choix s'inscrit dans la tendance observée sur la grille : sept des neuf équipes ayant dévoilé leur monoplace ont opté pour une suspension avant à poussoir, l'Alpine A526 et la Cadillac F1 2026 faisant exception.

"Plusieurs voitures utilisaient l'an dernier, et les années précédentes, des suspensions à poussoir ou à tirant », explique Marshall. Tout se résume à un choix aérodynamique : quelle configuration de suspension avant convient le mieux à votre nouvel aileron avant."

"Le choix est vraiment dicté par l'aérodynamique. Les deux solutions sont relativement simples à réaliser mécaniquement ; elles ne représentent pas un défi mécanique particulier."

Notons que la McLaren conserve sa suspension anti-plongée très marquée, contrairement à la Red Bull (comparez l'angle formé par les bras du triangle supérieur sur l'image ci-dessus).

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-mclaren-mcl40_3-copy.jpg)

McLaren conserve sa suspension multibras

Par ailleurs, la suspension avant reprend la configuration à multibras déjà utilisée par l'écurie en 2025.

Dans le triangle inférieur, les deux bras ne se fixent pas à la roue en un seul point, mais en deux points différents. Comme on le voit sur l'image ci-dessus, deux bras distincts relient le porte-moyeu en des points différents, créant ainsi un axe de direction virtuel.

Cette géométrie modifie le carrossage, le pincement et la hauteur de caisse en fonction de l'angle de braquage et du débattement de la suspension.

Elle aide à la gestion des pneumatiques et permet aussi de positionner la biellette de direction dans une zone aérodynamiquement intéressante.

Les bargeboards (ou stores vénitiens) de la MCL40, qui affiche une assiette très penchée vers l'avant, sont différents de ceux observés sur les autres voitures. Ils semblent davantage gérer la bordure du fond plat que le sillage des pneus.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-red-bull-rb22_2-copy-1.jpg)

McLaren s'écarte de Mercedes, Red Bull et Ferrari

Les pontons de la MCL40 sont plus complexes qu'il n'y paraît : la monocoque est visible sur le flanc le long de l'undercut.

 Cette découpe dans le bas des pontons souligne l'inclinaison prononcée et l'effet de downwash de ces derniers. L'objectif est de pousser les flux d'air vers l'extérieur afin de repousser le sillage des pneus avant (plein de turbulences) vers l'extérieur.

L'entrée d'air des pontons reste assez conventionnelle, et évoluera sans doute au cours de la saison. L'aileron de requin ("shark fin") est cranté sur le capot moteur comme sur la Ferrari SF-26, mais avec un espacement plus important entre chaque encoche. Cette découpe permet de générer un vortex et de stabiliser les flux aérodynamiques.

Étonnamment, la MCL40 ne semble pas comporter de découpe dans le diffuseur, contrairement à la Red Bull RB22, la Mercedes W17, la Ferrari SF-26 et la Haas. En revanche, le "mouse hole" (trou de souris) est traité de façon originale. Cette petite ouverture joue un rôle subtil dans la gestion des flux sous la voiture : elle agit comme une soupape, laissant s'échapper un filet d'air pour stabiliser le flux et maintenir l'efficacité du diffuseur.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-mclaren-mcl40_5-copy.jpg)

Des essais en demi-teinte

Sur l'image ci-dessus, on constate bien l'absence d'ouverture dans le diffuseur (qui est présente sur la Mercedes et signalée par la flèche bleue). Les différents composants du diffuseur sont bien visibles :

En blanc : la paroi latérale du diffuseur destinée à protéger le diffuseur des turbulences causées par la rotation des roues. Dans cette nouvelle réglementation technique, les diffuseurs sont beaucoup plus petits qu'auparavant, et les parois latérales ne descendent plus aussi près de l'asphalte.

En rouge : l'ailette fixée au diffuseur. La cascade d'ailettes générant un écoulement ascendant qui étaient montée sur l'écope de frein est désormais fixée sur le côté du diffuseur.

En jaune : le déflecteur arrière. Il s'agit d'une pièce standard, qui crée une barrière anti-intrusion face aux turbulences des pneus.

On note aussi le retour des dérives à l'intérieur du diffuseur, signalées en vert.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/01/f1-2026-mclaren-mcl40_6-new.jpg)

Si la MCL40 a montré un potentiel évident, le programme hivernal de McLaren à Barcelone n'a pas été totalement linéaire. Des soucis mineurs mais chronophages sur le système de carburant ont limité le roulage en début de semaine.

Avec 283 tours couverts au total, McLaren termine néanmoins loin du volume engrangé par Mercedes (500 tours) et Ferrari (439), et même en retrait par rapport à Red Bull (303). Un déficit de données qui ne remet pas en cause la qualité du concept, mais qui renforce l'ampleur du défi : transformer une voiture déjà très aboutie en référence durable, avec moins d'informations que ses principaux rivaux.

Chargée de succéder à la McLaren championne du monde, la monture de Lando Norris et Oscar Piastri a demandé des efforts de conception considérables, sans précédent pour Andrea Stella, le team principal très impliqué dans les choix techniques de son équipe.

"Il y a eu un travail colossal derrière la conception, la concrétisation et la construction de la voiture, à un niveau qui, de mémoire, est presque sans précédent, car jamais auparavant il n'y avait eu un changement aussi massif et simultané du châssis, du moteur et des pneus."

"Le travail mené chez McLaren au cours des vingt derniers mois a probablement représenté le plus vaste travail de conception — ou, plus largement, de gestion d'un nouveau projet de voiture — auquel j'aie jamais participé."

Rares sont les équipes capables de rester au sommet lors d'un bouleversement réglementaire majeur (l'exception étant Red Bull entre 2021 et 2022). La tâche qui attend McLaren avec sa MCL40 n'en apparaît que plus immense.

https://f1i.autojournal.fr/magazine/magazine-technique/la-mclaren-mcl40-a-la-loupe/

 :roto2rie:



Fórmula Directa @FormulaDirecta (https://x.com/FormulaDirecta) · 1min (https://x.com/FormulaDirecta/status/2017921353655968082?s=20)

⛵️ El circuito de Miami colocará un yate sobre su mar de plástico para el Gran Premio de 2026

El superyate de lujo contará con 4 plantas, 80,5 metros de largo, 29,3 metros de ancho y alcanzará los 15,2 metros de altura.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HAEX4QAXEAA9XVM?format=jpg&name=large)

Cita de: GoVal en Feb 01, 2026, 12:25 PM:roto2rie:



Fórmula Directa @FormulaDirecta (https://x.com/FormulaDirecta) · 1min (https://x.com/FormulaDirecta/status/2017921353655968082?s=20)

⛵️ El circuito de Miami colocará un yate sobre su mar de plástico para el Gran Premio de 2026

El superyate de lujo contará con 4 plantas, 80,5 metros de largo, 29,3 metros de ancho y alcanzará los 15,2 metros de altura.

A la increíble velocidad de crucero de... Cero millas por hora (que son americanos) :mosking:
Espero que las cañerías de "aguas residuales" les queden mejor que a su super portaviones del universo que tienen :mosking: , el USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) , 14000 millones $ , y se les llena de  :mierda:  :gaydude: (a cagar por la borda) :roto2rie:  :rofl:

Al lado del de Piastri, el coche de Häkkinen parece un micromachine  :roto2rie: .

Una pena que no volvamos a unos coches más pequeños y manejables como los de antes.

Como vídeo... :read: ... nosta mal :mosking: , pero... Ya!, IA, ia, ia...  :gaydude:  :laugh2:

Si Pillastri llegase a provocar el "desguace" del McLaren de Mika  :scare2: ... le fusilan al amanecer y sin consejo de guerra!  :laugh2:  :laugh2:  :rofl:

así que, se ve lo que le han dicho que tiene que poner :sherlock:  :nea: ... y no me extrañaría nada que el coche de Piastri esté sustituyendo a otro que estaba originalmente en la filmación  :sherlock:  :estudiar: , por lo que, de comparativa...  :scratch_one-s_head: ... poco. :ouchcomputer:

Pero si, esta bonita.  :yes4:  :smile3:  :good3:

Dos reuniones importantes esta semana para evitar una guerra "motorística":

https://f1i.autojournal.fr/infos/polemique-infos/guerre-des-moteurs-en-f1-la-fia-face-a-la-derniere-chance-deviter-une-crise-des-melbourne/

What we've learned about what 2026 F1 cars are actually like

We have been fed both scare stories and unbridled optimism about Formula 1's 2026 rules revolution for months now.

But with the first pre-season test now in the bag, we have finally been able to get some proper insights from the drivers about how the cars really behave.

Here are 10 fascinating things we've been told about F1's new generation of cars - some of which you may like, and some of which you probably will not.

Lift and coast could happen in qualifying

It is widely accepted that F1's super-powerful 2026 cars are going to be energy-starved, because they cannot charge the batteries as much as needed to go flat-out all the time.

But while many thought this would be a race-only problem, it has emerged that this could be a headache in qualifying too - which means the fight for pole could involve some lift-and-coast tactics.

According to Esteban Ocon, early qualifying simulation laps at the Barcelona shakedown showed that the fastest laptime was delivered if drivers backed off on corner entry.

It is all a consequence of needing to harvest as much battery power as possible.

"If you stay full throttle, you are basically putting the handbrake at the end of the straight," said Ocon. "If you lift and coast, it's not that much. So you feel quicker if you lift off."

Mercedes driver Kimi Antonelli said that lifting and coasting in qualifying, where drivers are normally on the limit, would take some getting used to.

"It is a bit more unnatural to do, because obviously in qualifying you just think to go as fast as possible," he said.

"It's something that we will have to learn, especially because the battery is so sensitive to the driving style as well."

Following in corners may be more difficult...

The overhaul of the chassis rules for 2026 was fuelled by two clear motives: to help reduce drag to better suit the new power units, and to improve the ability of cars to follow each other to help the racing.

That second step prompted the move away from full-on ground effect machinery, and a lot of work has gone into eradicating the dirty air problems that eventually marred the old ruleset.

But first impressions from Barcelona suggest that these new cars may not be any better at racing in another's wheel tracks. In fact, they could be worse.

Haas driver Ollie Bearman said: "It was a bit more challenging to follow. It picked up quite a big shift in balance compared to clean air, which seemed a bit more so than the previous generation of cars."

Team-mate Ocon said: "You seem to lose quite a lot of front load, a bit more maybe than before."

However, not all drivers felt that things were worse than last year, with Mercedes' George Russell sensing an improvement.

"Following definitely does seem easier, especially in the high-speed corners," he said. "It's firstly because you have less downforce, and you're going through the corners slower, so there is naturally less wake."

...but closing speeds on straights are huge

Even if the corners are a problem, early evidence of differences of car speeds on straights suggest that passing there could be more frequent.

Having watched the cars trackside, Mercedes boss Toto Wolff said: "George passed [Franco] Colapinto while Colapinto was doing his long runs – and it was a 50km/h straightline difference. That is super exciting. We are going to see much more overtaking."

But a 50km/h speed differential between cars does not come without risk - and Russell suggested it may become an issue in some instances.

"There are going to be some examples of major closing speeds," he said.

"I don't think that'll be a problem in dry conditions, but it would be a problem in low-visibility races. However, if there's low visibility, that obviously means it's wet. And if you're driving in the wet...because you're going around the corner so much slower and the braking distances are longer, you're reharvesting much more and you're spending much less energy."

Active aero is a missed opportunity

One of the most visible differences to the cars this year is active aero, with both the front and rear wings having different modes depending on whether a car is on a straight or in a corner.

But while the impression from the outside is that the use of active aero looks spectacular, the early feedback from the cockpit is that the tool is not as powerful as some hoped.

Ocon said he felt a bit disappointed that the end product had just basically added a front DRS over what they had before.

"It's more of an efficiency thing than really something that's giving us more tools to play with and stuff like that," he said.

"I would have preferred if we could set the front flap as we want for every corner, before we were driving. That's what I call active aero.

"The Pagani Huayra [road car] some years ago, that car had active aero on the front and it was setting it up for whatever corners you were taking and what you were needing in terms of balance."

Electric hit on straights feels 'brutal'

If there is one thing that became obvious from watching the cars at the Barcelona shakedown it was that they are pretty punchy coming out of the corners.

That is not just the result of the roughly 700kW, the equivalent of 1000bhp, on tap from the power unit. It is more that half of that power comes from the battery, so has loads of torque.

As Antonelli said: "We have got a lot more power from the electrical engine. The acceleration is quite brutal."

Ocon reckoned that drivers were hitting 350km/h on the run down to Barcelona's first corner, with the acceleration just keeping on coming.

"I never thought I would get to 350km/h that fast," he said. "We had an inconsistent deployment in one of the runs that we did and I had full deployment into the straight and I arrived at 355km/h in Turn 1 in Barcelona!

"The braking was very different to the laps before, but the way it climbs and the way you feel the speed climbing, it's something insane. Honestly, it's something I've never felt in Formula 1 or that I've never felt in any cars driving prior to that."

Cars feel lighter and more nimble

The reduction of the size and weight of the 2026 F1 cars might sound minor, but the drivers can already feel the difference it makes.

The wheelbase is shortened by 200mm and the width is down 100mm compared to last year's cars, while the minimum weight has dropped by around 30kg from the hefty 800kg of 2025.

"The best aspect is the car is a bit lighter, so in some places it feels a little bit more nimble," said Bearman. "And you still have an incredible amount of downforce."

Team-mate Ocon described the cars as feeling "more like the 2020s era, where it was less snappy and a bit more comfortable at high speed". In particular, he felt the difference in the sharpness of the change of direction.

"You definitely feel the weight reduction," he explained. "You feel how [noticeably] smaller the cars are as well.

"There isn't so much direction change, [there is] in Turn 1 and 2 but Barcelona had quite cold weather so the tyres are never feeling good. But Turns 10, 11, 12 you really feel when you change direction that it is pretty good on that side of things."

Antonelli felt the same thing, particularly when it came to turn-in and directional change.

"You feel the 30kg less and obviously the car being a bit smaller," said Antonelli. "You just feel it is more agile, especially in changes of direction and in slow-speed corners, which is a nice feeling."

Tyre degradation could be massive

Given the prodigious power of these cars in the corner-exit phase, drivers found they had to be wary on the throttle at Barcelona.

And when you consider that tyres are 25mm narrower at the front and 30mm narrower at the rear, to make a drag-reduction contribution, it poses a bigger tyre-management challenge than last year.

"Smaller tyres, more power, degradation might be higher, especially for the rear tyres," warned Antonelli. "It might be more difficult to handle with the amount of power we get out of the corners."

Ocon found the same thing, adding "we need to be very careful not to kill the tyres completely", pointing to the cars having "less grip than we had in the last couple of years".

It's not all about the power unit

While the new power units - with the notional 50/50 power split between the internal combustion engine and the MGU-K - mean that energy harvesting, deployment and management are critical this year, these cars still take some driving.

Russell admitted that was a concern before he drove the Mercedes W17 in the real world, but fears were allayed by his experience of the real car.

"That was a question mark that I had going into the test, whether it would be like Formula E, [and] you need an engineer to drive the car rather than a racing driver," said Russell. "But it felt much more intuitive to drive than expected."

This means there's still scope for the driver to have an impact beyond simply acing the intellectual challenge of energy management.

This is especially true as technique has an impact on how much energy you can harvest in a lap up to the baseline maximum of 8.5MJ.

"It's still a race car," said Ocon. "I was expecting that we would have to work so much on the hybrid power and try to get everything correct, which is the case for sure.

"You need to get everything correct, otherwise the laptime is not there at all. But we are still adapting the balance of the car, working on tyre prep, all of this. It's still a very big part of that.

"I was a bit afraid that we would not touch the car for the whole year and we would only touch the engine side and the electronics. It's been actually all right."

Drivers are no longer being battered

The new regulations reduced the reliance on ground effect underfloors, and as expected the elimination of the venturi tunnels means these cars no longer run as low as possible and super-stiff.

That means there's no problems with porpoising or mechanical bouncing, much to the delight of the Mercedes drivers.

"My back is having an easier time of things," said Russell.

Team-mate Antonelli suggested this means more flexibility when it comes to ride heights in cars that are now running rake, whereby the rear ride height is higher than the front.

This increases the angle of attack of aero surfaces and potentially means more downforce.

"We don't have bouncing anymore," explained Antonelli. "You have a bit more room as well to play with ride heights.

"Last year was all about putting it as low as possible without making it bounce, this year you can play a bit more with ride heights depending on the balance you have on the car."

But it is still F1

The cars may have changed dramatically, with the energy-management demands far beyond anything drivers have experienced before, but these are still stunningly fast cars in the finest tradition of grand prix machinery.

Asked by The Race whether these still felt like F1 cars, in the wake of concerns such as lifting and coasting in qualifying, Ocon said: "I think it is, because it's still the fastest cars in the world.

"We have to optimise as drivers the tools we have to go as fast as we can. It's still enjoyable to drive and still an F1 car."

Russell shared that view, underlining that F1 cars have always changed and evolved, with the demands on the drivers shifting while retaining the underlying challenge.

"It definitely still is Formula 1," said Russell. "It still very much feels like a race car, and you're still very much pushing the limits. But you are driving it differently.

"If you look back to the late '80s and '90s and you look at Ayrton Senna's driving style, where he's blipping the throttle through the apexes to spin the turbo, that's also a unique way of driving.

"And also in the same way as when you went from a gearstick to paddles on the back of your steering wheel. It's just different and it changes."

The cars will also evolve rapidly, with the power unit performance and the grip levels set to rise relentlessly as this ruleset matures.

The consensus from the drivers so far is therefore that the worst fears from last year, when early simulator models drew so much criticism, have not been realised and that these are still cars they must push and race to the limit.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/what-f1-2026-cars-are-actually-like-10-revelations/

Así ha ido pillando kilillos los F1. Este año se ha puesto a régimen.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HAO1Oq0WoAE4CDA?format=jpg&name=large)

SoyMotor.com @SoyMotor (https://x.com/SoyMotor) · 9h (https://x.com/SoyMotor/status/2018652165338759646)

🤔 ¿Por qué Aston Martin luchó contra el crono para llegar a Barcelona?

➡️ Adrian Newey lo explica: "El túnel de viento no estuvo a punto hasta abril y yo llegué al equipo en marzo, así que, la verdad, hemos empezado con retraso. Han sido 10 meses muy apretados y extremadamente ajetreados".

🗣� "No pudimos introducir una maqueta del coche de 2026 en el túnel de viento hasta mediados de abril", apunta.

➡️ Debido a todo esto, el coche se terminó de construir "en el último minuto" y pudieron empezar a rodar en Barcelona el jueves por la tarde.

Entrevista interesante a A. Newey:

- Llevan 4 meses de retraso.
- Auto con gran margen de desarrollo.
- Auto fácil de pilotar.

UNDERCUT | Adrian Newey wants you to keep an open mind

From the moment the AMR26 broke cover, everyone has been asking what Adrian Newey and the team have been cooking. Formula One's pre-eminent designer puts down his self-propelling pencil to discuss a busy 10 months for Aston Martin Aramco, the philosophy behind our 2026 F1 car, and why Team Principal is just a title.

Give the people what they want.


When the AMR26 departed Birmingham Airport for Girona on 28 January, it was the second-most tracked flight in the world.

Aston Martin Aramco mechanics worked through the night at Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya to prepare the car for its track debut, and when it finally broke cover in the final hour of the penultimate day of the Barcelona Shakedown, it caught everyone's attention.

The question on everyone's lips since: "What has Adrian Newey been cooking?"

In our latest UNDERCUT interview, we asked him.

Adrian, the AMR26 has finally broken cover – and it's got everyone talking. How did you determine what design philosophy to take?

"We took a really close look at the regulations and what we believe we want to achieve from a flow field perspective to suit them, and from there started to evolve a geometry that attempts to create the flow fields that we want. It's very much a holistic approach...

"...but, in truth, with a completely new set of regulations, nobody is ever sure what the right philosophy is."

Even you? The sport's greatest designer?

"[Laughs.] Even me. We certainly aren't sure what the best interpretation of the regulations is and therefore the best philosophy to follow.

"Because of our compressed timescale, we decided on a particular direction and that's the one we've pursued. Whether that proves to be the right one or not, only time will tell. But you have to choose your path and get on with it."

So is it an aggressive interpretation of the rules?

"I never look at any of my designs as aggressive. I just get on with things and pursue what we feel is the right direction.

"The direction we've taken could certainly be interpreted as aggressive. It's got quite a few features that haven't necessarily been done before. Does that make it aggressive? Possibly. Possibly not."


What areas of the car are you most satisfied with?

"That is a question I'm often asked. I honestly don't have a favourite, 'Look at that bit, Mum,' part of the car. To me, the design of a car is about the holistic package. There's no one individual part that's likely to make the difference. It's how all those parts come together. It's how they talk to each other to create a car that works in harmony with the driver and performs aerodynamically, mechanically, and in terms of vehicle dynamics."

So the standout is there is no standout?

"Yes." [The faintest grin tries to break out on Adrian's face.]

Can you break the design approach down a bit more?

"It starts with the overall packaging of the car: where is the car carried over the wheelbase, where are the main masses carried. Then it's worked through to the front and rear suspension – the front and rear suspension both have their own very important part to play in that manipulation of the flow field. You've got the front wing and the nose shape, which are somewhat different this year. You keep moving through to the sidepods, and the treatment around the rear of the car, which is certainly different to what we've done previously.

"Now, whether other people come up with a similar solution to ours, we don't know and we won't until we start seeing other people's cars. We've just tried to pursue what we think is the correct direction for us. Other people might have pursued other directions. It's part of the excitement of new regulations, seeing what everybody comes up with."

When you say the treatment around the rear of the car is different to what we've done previously, you're talking about how tightly packaged it is – a trait of many Newey-designed F1 cars?

"Yes. The car is tightly packaged. Much more tightly packaged than I believe has been attempted at Aston Martin Aramco before. [Adrian can't hide the grin this time.]

"This has required a very close working relationship with the mechanical designers to achieve the aerodynamic shapes we wanted. But I have to say that all the mechanical designers here have really embraced that philosophy. It hasn't made their life easy, quite the opposite, but they've really risen to the challenge."

I never look at any of my designs as aggressive. I just pursue what we feel is the right direction. The AMR26 has quite a few features that haven't necessarily been done before.

Is the scale of that challenge and the direction you've taken with the design of the car the reason why the AMR26 only ran on the final two days of the Barcelona Shakedown?

"2026 is probably the first time in the history of F1 that the power unit regulations and chassis regulations have changed at the same time. It's a completely new set of rules, which is a big challenge for all the teams, but perhaps more so for us.

"The AMR Technology Campus is still evolving, the CoreWeave Wind Tunnel wasn't on song until April, and I only joined the team last March, so we've started from behind, in truth. It's been a very compressed timescale and an extremely busy 10 months.

"The reality is that we didn't get a model of the '26 car into the wind tunnel until mid-April, whereas most, if not all of our rivals would have had a model in the wind tunnel from the moment the 2026 aero testing ban ended at the beginning of January last year. That put us on the back foot by about four months, which has meant a very, very compressed research and design cycle. The car only came together at the last minute, which is why we were fighting to make it to the Barcelona Shakedown."

Were you nervous

"Whenever a car is about hit the track for the first time, it's always a nervous moment.

"The team put in a huge amount of work to get the car ready. There's more to come – and lots to learn – but those first couple of days at the track have been important to start building an understanding of how the car behaves and complete those all-important first systems checks before pre-season testing in Bahrain."

Will the car be competitive straight out of the box come the season opener in Melbourne?

"We've attempted to build something that we hope will have quite a lot of development potential.

"What you want to try to avoid is a car that comes out quite optimised within its window but lacks a lot of development potential. We've tried to do the opposite, which is why we've really focused on the fundamentals, put our effort into those, knowing that some of the appendages – wings, bodywork, things that can be changed in season – will hopefully have development potential."

You're famous for your ability to interpret driver feedback and turn it into developments or lap-time. Will that be easier or harder with this generation of cars?

"The previous generation of ground effect cars from 2022 to 2025 became quite difficult to drive. The Aston Martin, unfortunately, was one particular example of that.

"With this new formula, we're trying to make a car that Lance and Fernando can consistently extract a good level of performance from."


This is your first car as a Team Principal. Does that change your mindset?

"I became a Team Principal towards the end of last year. In many ways, to me, it's simply a title. The role within the team is to try to provide a direction, an ethos, a culture, that we all work by. I try to lead by example, where possible. But really, it's about developing everybody; we're trying to develop at all levels so that we're working well together, which then means we'll get the best out of each other."

And is that working?

"I'll tell you later. [Laughs.] Ask me that question again at the end of the year."

On the subject of working well together, this is a huge year for some of our partners. Arguably, none more so than our Title Partner, Aramco.

"One of the key aspects of this year's regulations is the new power units, and with that comes the move to using fully sustainable fuel for the first time in Formula One. Aramco are absolutely pivotal for us here because of how they develop fuel, as are Valvoline, which is developing the oil, to suit the work Honda is doing and are a big part of a very complicated, but very important, equation.

"Without having a technical partner and fuel supplier with Aramco's expertise, Honda's development of the power unit would be restricted and that, in turn, would restrict us. The work Aramco are doing is going to stand us in very good stead."

Aramco are absolutely all-in on this project, aren't they?

"Becoming a technical supplier of ours has been a big change for Aramco."

How so?

"They've had to reorganise. They've had to expand their facilities in certain areas to suit what is a very specific challenge: developing a fuel for a Formula One team. They are already experienced in this area as supplier low-carbon fuels to other formulas, such as F2, F3 and F1 ACADEMY, but of course, Formula One being what it is, we want to take their knowledge and expertise much further. They are developing very specific fuels to suit the Honda engine and our needs."

Does the same apply to Valvoline in terms of the lubricants they're developing for us?

"It's a similar story with the engine oil. Efficiency is one of the big drives of this new formula and is a real source of performance, efficiency from the fuel, and also the lubricants."

They've been involved in motorsport for more than a hundred years. It's a cool brand to be working with, right?

"They're a legendary supplier within motorsport and have a long history of excellent products. The chance to work with them exclusively on this new formula is really satisfying."

Are they hooking you up with a few bottles of oil for your cars at home?

"[Laughs.] Not yet!"

The design of a car is about the holistic package. There's no one individual part that's likely to make the difference. It's how all those parts come together.

You touched on the topic of sustainable fuel a moment ago. What's your take on it as an energy solution and the role F1 can play in accelerating its development and wider application?

"Sustainable fuel is a huge energy solution for the future in terms of achieving carbon neutrality. It's really exciting that Formula One is embracing that, and it's a real opportunity for Aramco to leverage their global footprint of world-leading R&D centres and showcase its technology and innovation in this space."

So are sustainable fuels the answer?

"At the moment, synthetic fuels are still significantly more expensive than fossil-based fuels. That will change with time; production techniques will get better and better. It's a hugely growing area that can help us achieve the carbon neutrality that we all believe, of course, is absolutely vital for the future ecology of the Earth."

Not a fan of electric cars then?

"Everyone talks about electric cars and so forth, but the reality is there is no singular technology that will be the solution. It won't just be electric. It won't just be synthetic. Hydrogen may be involved. Biodegradable fuels will be involved. Synthetic will be a very important part of the solution, as will all the others."


You mentioned that work on the AMR26 in the team's new wind tunnel, now dubbed the CoreWeave Wind Tunnel, really only got going in April. You've seen a few wind tunnels in your time. How good actually is it?

"The CoreWeave Wind Tunnel is absolutely state-of-the-art. I would say it's probably the best wind tunnel in the world for Formula One application. It's very sophisticated, built entirely to our specification, with CoreWeave expertise woven into that. It's set to be a game-changer for us.

"Aerodynamics is the biggest single performance differentiator in Formula One. Our principal research tool for that is the wind tunnel. It's absolutely invaluable, and we are now reaping the rewards from it."

This isn't just a badge on a wind tunnel, is it? How is CoreWeave's tech used in it?

"Part of it is helping us with the operation of the tunnel. Part of it is helping with measurement, for instance, PIV (Particle Image Velocimetry), which is a way of visualising airflow by seeding particles in the air and then putting a laser across it to measure flow properties. It requires a very complicated post-analysis. Having CoreWeave's compute power and cutting-edge AI software woven into the tunnel enhances our ability to analyse that flow, manipulate it and then match it to other tools such as CFD."

The car that races in Melbourne is going to be very different to the one people saw at the Barcelona Shakedown.
AI seems to come up in almost every conversation these days. What's your take on it? Machine learning and AI have been used in Formula One for a while now.

"Machine learning has been around for a long time. It's been superseded, if you like, as a buzzword by AI – everyone knows what AI is now. In truth, the AI that most people are using day to day is mainly just internet search-based and it's pattern recognition."

Do you use ChatGPT?

"[Laughs.] What we are using machine learning, or AI, for is much more specific tasks and therefore how we use that AI is incredibly tailored. We're typically not using anything off the internet because we are too specialised for that, but there are instances of using pattern recognition to help with relatively simple tasks and even race strategy through simulation and game theory."

So what are these 'specific tasks' the team is using AI for? And in what ways is AI going to be used in the future?

"There are more advanced applications... which I'd rather not talk about at the moment.

"The thing about things like compute power, data processing, artificial intelligence, is it's all advancing so rapidly. What's new now will be pretty much out of date in 12 months. It's obviously incredibly exciting for us, and it's up to us to work with our partners to keep up with that because the opportunities it creates are absolutely immense. It's almost as if we have to keep reopening our minds to what's available, not on a daily basis, but certainly on a six-month basis, to take the most advantage as things evolve."

You get the feeling that might be a broader theme for this season: keeping minds open to what's available to take the most advantage as things evolve.

"Very much so. The AMR26 that races in Melbourne is going to be very different to the one people saw at the Barcelona Shakedown, and the AMR26 that we finish the season with in Abu Dhabi is going to be very different to the one that we start the season with.

"It's very important to keep an open mind."

https://www.astonmartinf1.com/en-GB/news/feature/undercut-adrian-newey-wants-you-to-keep-an-open-mind?ref=the-race.com

The 'scary' new element to qualifying in F1 2026

It's been known for a while that Formula 1's 2026 cars are going to be energy-starved, which means harvesting and deploying battery power will be critical to laptime.

Initially this seemed to be relevant to races, but first impressions of the cars at the recent Barcelona test have exposed an element that one team boss has called "scary".

It is that the available energy is on such a knife-edge that even qualifying efforts will be destroyed in 2026 if drivers get things wrong on their outlaps.

Haas team boss Ayao Komatsu has revealed how the fight for pole could be influenced heavily by small errors made in preparation laps.

He reckons that any trip up on this front will not just cost a little bit – it could see a driver lose around half a second per lap.

From Komatsu's perspective, this could become a major factor in dictating grids early on in the campaign.

"There is more vulnerability at the start of the season," he said. "I think if something goes wrong, I think it will be pretty obvious.

"If somebody is not deploying correctly, let's say opening a qualifying lap on the pit straight, or going into Turn 1, if somebody is not going very quickly, then you will realise straight away they didn't do it correctly. So I think it will be very visible, especially early on."

He added: "We're not talking about tenths. You can lose half a second, six tenths, seventh tenths very, very easily. That's the scary bit."

Outlap conflicts
What Komatsu is referring to is that, with cars not having enough battery to run laps flat out, drivers can't waste any energy on the outlap at all.

That means not triggering any more usage of the battery element of the package than is absolutely necessary.

But that is a very tricky thing to achieve properly – because drivers cannot just drive slowly to achieve that aim. The demands to warm the tyres, avoid traffic issues and keep up to the maximum delta time mean there is a requirement to get a hurry on as well.

Furthermore, there is no scope in the regulations to simply run a quick outlap on the internal combustion engine alone, as there are strict rules regarding power demand.

Article 5.12.1 of the Technical Regulations states: "At any given engine speed, the driver torque demand map must be monotonically increasing for an increase in accelerator pedal position."

This effectively means that the trigger for kicking in battery usage is throttle position - not a button on the wheel.

So in effect, the only way to avoid burning up any battery is to be very cautious on the accelerator.

There are therefore a host of conflicting demands of what drivers need to do to cover off tyre preparation, traffic, timing deltas and energy.

And the end result is a massive headache in how to get things nailed perfectly.

Komatsu said that Barcelona offered a first clue about how complicated things were when his team tried some qualifying simulations.

Haas quickly found out that how cars were driven in the final sector on a preparation lap ultimately decided how quick the subsequent qualifying effort would be.

"It's very, very important how you go through those last couple of corners," he said.

"If you don't carry enough speed out of, let's say, Turn 14 in Barcelona, by the time you come to the start/finish line, you don't have enough speed. So your qualifying lap is already ruined.

"But if you try to get the speed up, but then have too much throttle, you are deploying towards the end of the outlap, so you just waste the battery on the timed lap.

"There's a very clear conflict of demand about what a driver needs to achieve, and the system needs to achieve. So you have got to get it right."

Things could get even trickier at places like Baku, where there is the city section where you don't want to burn battery power, but also a very long straight before the start/finish line where you'll need battery to deploy.

"In the castle section, there's no point deploying electrical energy in between corners," added Komatsu. "That's going to do nothing in terms of straightline speed.

"But if you accidentally do that, go on the throttle a little bit too much, and then deploy MGU-K, or use MGU-K to basically engage turbo, then by the time you go to the main straight, you haven't got the necessary electric energy available. Then you pay a big price."

Komatsu believes that all teams face an uphill challenge to try to get on top of the situation as quickly as possible.

And that will be made even more challenging by the fact that preparations will be done in the tests in Bahrain – run on a Sakhir track with some good heavy braking zones that will allow for straightforward charging of the battery.

However, the season starts in Australia, with the Albert Park track one of the more challenging venues to harvest.

"Even if you get to the stage where you are very confident in Bahrain with consistency, then you go to Melbourne and it is a completely different condition," warned Komatsu.

"That's going to be a huge challenge. So I think it's going to be a steep learning curve for most of us."

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/scary-new-element-to-qualifying-in-f1-2026/

Primera imagen de la Williams FW48:

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/02/HAVJhkXWQAATGEm.jpeg)

What we've learned about F1 2026 driving styles so far

Oscar Piastri calls it "rewiring your brain"; Kimi Antonelli says "you have to be really-open minded"; Haas team principal Ayao Komatsu describes it as "counter-intuitive".

These are all references to the driving technique challenge of the new 2026 Formula 1 cars based on what was learned in last week's Barcelona test, underlining the extent to which those in the cockpit must adapt to get the best out of these cars.

The energy-management demands of the 2026 F1 cars are enormous.

With effectively a 4MJ battery powering a 350kW (469bhp) electric motor providing a little under 50% of the overall power of the cars, you need significant harvesting and discharging to lap quickly.

That will have a profound impact on what those behind the wheel do, but according to Mercedes driver George Russell, not to the extent where those requirements are overwhelming.

"That was a question mark that I had going into the test, whether it would be like Formula E [where] it's like you need an engineer to drive the car rather than a racing driver," said Russell when asked by The Race whether the energy-management imperatives of the 2026 cars overpower more traditional driving skills.

"It felt much more intuitive to drive than expected.

"Now, we have a few additional quirks, but you still have to brake as late as possible, carry as much speed through the corners. The faster driver will be the one who still comes out on top. I don't think it will be an engineering race from the cockpit."

The devil is in the detail. Small differences in braking technique, the way you approach corner-entry to achieve the required rotation, how you overlap throttle and brake and countless other factors all have an influence.

But as Haas driver Ollie Bearman explains, the fundamental feeling of the car and the driving style doesn't seem too different compared to last year.

"The first sensation is the lack of downforce compared to what we've been used to, particularly in the medium and the low speed [corners]," said Bearman.

"The high speed is what you expect. You have less load, but your braking zones are slightly longer, your combined traction is a bit more challenging just because you have even a bit more power in that phase and less load on the car, so less mechanical grip with smaller tyres.

"It's definitely a bit different. I didn't find the driving style to be too dissimilar. It just was more similar to your Monzas and your Mexicos where you have a bit less downforce.

"It's still very fun to drive. Even if the car's moving around a bit more, that's not necessarily a bad thing."

The driver's domain is the corner, as it's here that they can express their craft and gain laptime. However, the unusual characteristics of these power units means that the approach to the corner can start earlier than it once did owing to the need to maximise harvesting.

"At times it can," said Lando Norris when asked about drivers downshifting early towards the end of straights.

"The biggest challenge at the minute is battery management and knowing how to utilise that in the best way. You can explain it in quite simple terms: you have a very powerful battery that doesn't last very long so knowing how to use it in the right times, how much energy, how much of that power you use, how to split it up around the lap, and how you can recover the batteries as well as possible.

"And that's when it comes down to using the gears, hitting the right revs."

This is complicated further by the fact that different deployment strategies can vary the straightline performance from lap to lap.

As Norris points out, "If you suddenly have a bit more power you can end up going into a corner 5, 6, 7km/h quicker all of a sudden without potentially knowing why."

That then leads into a slightly longer, but still short, braking zone thanks to the reduction in downforce even once the car switches from straightline mode to corner mode.

The downshifts are also complicated by sometimes having to go to a lower gear than would have been the case last year.

The aggression of the downshifts could also change in terms of what revs the change is being made at because this can help increase the energy harvested.

There were occasions under the old regulations when Alpine, struggling with a relatively weaker charging capability in its Renault engine, would have slightly more savage gearchanges as a result.

This can have a dynamic impact on the turn-in of the car.

Then, while you want to maximise the speed carried through and out of the corner, there's also the question of ensuring you do that in an energy efficient way in terms of both what you are spending, and what you are harvesting. That includes being cautious on the throttle in slow sections given a certain level of pedal demand will mean the MGU-K kicks in when you don't want to be using battery energy.

"It's definitely challenging for the drivers and you have instances where, when you go around the corners faster, you're spending more energy and you're harvesting less, so you end up over the course of the lap having less energy to spend," said Russell.

"You may gain a few tenths in the corners, but you may lose a couple of tenths in the straight. So that takes a little bit of time just to get your head around it.

"However, once you do get your head around it, that would just be the normal way of driving. All the teams are having to use quite low gears through the corners, to maximise the harvesting, all of which we had question marks around. But it just feels like a race car."

Among all of this, the driver must keep in mind what Russell calls "the small techniques that will gain you a couple of percent of energy re-harvesting".

This could potentially be huge. If you can modify your technique to optimise that while still being quick through the corner, that will pay you back later in the lap.

The drivers who master this will likely be the most effective, but it cannot fail to have an impact on the car dynamically when on the limit and, as the struggle of Lewis Hamilton to adapt to the cars in the ground effect era shows, the requirements of car and driver might not always align.

"There's lots of counter-intuitive things everywhere in this regulation," said Komatsu, who had a long history as a race engineer before moving up the team leadership ladder, when asked by The Race about the driving style demands.

"From a pure driving perspective, lift and coasting potential in qualifying, and then gear usage and on throttle, etc.

"There's lots of conflicting objectives the driver needs to achieve. But I'm sure over time, we engineers will be able to design and hone both hardware and software so that drivers are able to do something much more intuitive to get performance out of it.

"It's the very, very early stages of the regulation. That's why there's lots of this contradiction and counter-intuitive things happening. It's a lot more hard work. They need to sometimes think differently.

"But then, there's a trade-off. Let's say certain things a driver has to do to maximise recovery makes the car very difficult to drive. Where's the right balance?

"Maybe you have to give the driver a more driveable car and accept that you're not going to be deploying as much energy down the straight? That is a very difficult optimisation problem to solve."

Then when it comes to getting the power down off the corner, there's the twin challenge of ideally needing to have the turbo spinning at a decent enough rate to minimise lag and avoid having to use too much electrical energy to compensate for any missing V6 power, and not overstress the tyres.

"We need to be very careful to not kill the tyres completely, because it's so much more than it was before," said Ocon.

"At the moment, we have less grip than we had in the last couple of years. The car itself is quite nice to drive because it slides a bit more. It's a bit more like the 2020s era, where it was a bit less snappy and a bit more comfortable at high speed. On that side of things, it was quite nice to drive."

And all that must be done in a race while using tools such as the boost button or, when available, overtake mode to battle with other cars.

Setting aside the energy-management requirements, there's also the question of whether the move away from low-slung, ultra-stiff venturi tunnel cars will allow a wider range of set-ups and not force the drivers into a narrow driving style window. According to Bearman, there's an improvement on this score but how big an impact this will have is not yet clear.

"With this generation, we're a bit unsure," said Bearman when asked by The Race.

"We think as the regs mature a little, we're going to hopefully get a bit more flexibility and freedom with ride heights, but at the moment we don't have a crazy freedom like prior to the '22 regs, we're not anywhere near back at those levels. It's not like we're [at] those crazy rear ride heights as before.

"So we're certainly softer just by virtue of the fact of the SM [straightline mode] meaning you have flexibility to run the car a bit softer [as you are] not limited by ride height at the end of the straight, so that's a nice thing.

"But physics will tell you that the car is fastest at X ride height, [so] we run it at X ride height, our preference doesn't really matter.

"I believe at this stage, there's not really much flexibility to express yourself with set-up and things like that. Maybe as time goes on and maybe the more performant cars will be the ones that can produce load over a wider range of ride height. At this early stage it's not quite the case."

With the caveat that there hasn't yet been the opportunity to observe these cars from trackside to understand more about the driving styles being used, it does at least appear that it's not simply an energy-management exercise.

Efficiency has always been part of the competitive equation for the person behind the wheel and there's an artistry to being able to do so while driving these incredibly fast cars to the limit.

However, it's still early days.

There are legitimate question marks about whether the compromises forced by the need to harvest so much energy over a lap to be quick will be so large a part of the laptime equation that it neuters the best drivers in the world. But based on first impressions, F1 is far from that nightmare scenario.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/what-weve-learned-about-f1-2026-driving-styles-so-far/

La AMR26, bajo la lupa de N. Carpentiers:

AMR26 : le coup de génie d'Adrian Newey qui peut tout changer chez Aston Martin !

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/02/aston-martin-newey-f1-2026-000.jpg)

Avec son nez pélican et sa suspension arrière inédite, l'AMR26 impose déjà sa personnalité sur le plateau 2026.

L'AMR26 marque un tournant majeur pour Aston Martin. Il s'agit de la première monoplace conçue par Adrian Newey depuis son arrivée à Silverstone, après plus de vingt ans passés chez Red Bull. À première vue, la voiture apparaît comme une interprétation solide et cohérente du tout nouveau règlement technique 2026.

"C'est exactement la même chose [qu'en 2022], explique Adrian Newey. Quand j'ai découvert pour la première fois le règlement 2026, ma réaction initiale a été de me dire : mon Dieu, il ne reste pas grand-chose. Mais ensuite, quand on entre dans le détail, on se rend compte qu'il existe une marge de flexibilité raisonnable. Bien sûr, j'en voudrais toujours davantage, mais il y a une flexibilité acceptable."

Visuellement, l'AMR26 se démarque nettement du reste du plateau. Son architecture repose sur des choix fondamentalement différents, associés à plusieurs solutions aérodynamiques originales, qui en font sans doute la voiture la plus scrutée de cette première génération 2026. Reste toutefois une inconnue : le potentiel réel de ces partis pris, difficile à évaluer en raison d'un programme de roulage extrêmement tardif et limité, qui n'a pas permis de mesurer pleinement l'efficacité de ces concepts en conditions représentatives.

Fort bien, mais le développement de la première Formule 1 d'Aston Martin conçue par Adrian Newey a débuté avec un retard notable sur la concurrence. En cause : l'attente de la nouvelle soufflerie de l'équipe :

"La réalité, c'est que nous avons installé une maquette de la voiture 2026 en soufflerie seulement à la mi-avril, alors que la plupart, voire la totalité de nos concurrents disposaient déjà d'un modèle dès la levée de l'interdiction des essais aérodynamiques, au début du mois de janvier de l'année dernière."

"Cela s'est traduit par un retard d'environ quatre mois, ce qui a entraîné un cycle de recherche et de conception extrêmement comprimé. La voiture n'a réellement pris forme qu'à la toute dernière minute, ce qui explique pourquoi nous nous sommes battus jusqu'au bout pour être prêts à temps pour le shakedown de Barcelone."

Examinons les particularités de la monoplace de Fernando Alonso et Lance Stroll.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/02/f1-2026-aston-martin-amr26_1-copy.jpg)

Un nez pélican et une solution identique à Mercedes

L'une des particularités les plus visibles de l'AMR26 se situe à l'avant, avec un nez au dessin très spécifique, souvent qualifié de "nez pélican" (marqué en vert ci-dessus).

Sa silhouette rappelle celle d'un têtard, évoquant notamment des solutions déjà vues par le passé, comme sur la BAR 2001 ou la Williams 2009. D'un point de vue aérodynamique, l'objectif précis de ce choix reste difficile à déterminer.

À l'arrière de ce nez, Aston Martin a également retenu une configuration d'aileron avant qui la distingue de la majorité de ses rivales. Comme sur la Mercedes W17, l'équipe a choisi de fixer les pylônes du nez non pas sur le plan principal de l'aileron, mais sur le second élément (signalé en jaune ci-dessus). Cette architecture signifie que seul le dernier élément supérieur est mobile lorsque l'aérodynamique active est déployée, alors que le règlement autorise théoriquement le mouvement de deux éléments, l'un jusqu'à 60 mm et l'autre jusqu'à 30 mm. À première vue, ce choix peut sembler restrictif, puisqu'il limite la liberté de mouvement par rapport aux configurations les plus répandues.

Plusieurs raisons peuvent toutefois expliquer cette approche. En fixant le nez au second élément, la partie structurelle du nez peut être légèrement plus courte que sur la plupart des autres monoplaces, là où ce second plan s'aplatit. Cette solution semble également offrir davantage de liberté de dessin pour le plan principal, comme le suggère le profil de l'aileron avant de l'AMR26. Par ailleurs, cette configuration s'accompagne d'une répartition plus uniforme de la charge aérodynamique sur l'envergure du troisième élément, un trait également observable sur la W17, seule autre monoplace à adopter un choix comparable à ce stade.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/02/f1-2026-aston-martin-amr26_2-copy.jpg)

Aston Martin place la barre très haut

À l'avant, l'AMR26 adopte une suspension à poussoirs, comme la quasi-totalité des Formule 1 version 2026, à l'exception notable de l'Alpine A526 et de la Cadillac F1 2026. Aston Martin a par ailleurs retenu une architecture de suspension avant multibras, une configuration déjà vue chez McLaren en 2025 et reprise par la majorité du plateau 2026, dont la Ferrari SF-26 et la McLaren MCL40.

Sur le triangle inférieur, les deux bras ne convergent pas vers un unique point de fixation sur la roue. Ils sont reliés au porte-moyeu en deux points distincts, créant un axe de direction virtuel. Cette géométrie permet de faire évoluer le carrossage, le pincement et la hauteur de caisse en fonction de l'angle de braquage et du débattement de la suspension. Elle contribue ainsi à une meilleure gestion des pneumatiques et autorise le positionnement de la biellette de direction dans une zone aérodynamiquement favorable.

Sur l'AMR26, le bras avant du triangle supérieur est positionné aussi haut que le règlement l'autorise, ce qui se traduit visuellement par une légère bosse sur le capot avant (flèche jaune ci-dessus). Il est également implanté très en avant, quasiment en amont de la section AA (c'est-à-dire la première section de référence réglementaire définissant la géométrie longitudinale de la carrosserie). À l'inverse, le bras arrière du triangle supérieur est placé beaucoup plus bas (notez l'écart de hauteur entre les deux bras en rouge, différence symbolisée par la flèche blanche ci-dessus), générant un effet anti-plongée très marqué, à l'opposé de la philosophie retenue par Red Bull.

Un air de Red Bull 2023

Les pontons illustrent eux aussi une approche particulièrement agressive. Aston Martin a opté pour des pontons à fort effet de downwash, suivant une tendance globale du plateau, mais avec un niveau de compacité extrême. Le volume disponible pour loger les échangeurs thermiques semble très réduit (voyez la zone marquée en bleu ci-dessus), ce qui se traduit par un undercut à la fois très prononcé et exceptionnellement long.

"La voiture est extrêmement compacte, confirme Newey. Bien plus compacte que tout ce qui a, selon moi, été tenté auparavant chez Aston Martin."

L'examen détaillé de cette zone met en évidence la faible épaisseur verticale des pontons, tant dans leur partie supérieure qu'inférieure, accentuant encore l'ampleur de cet undercut sur toute la longueur du flanc (notez la zone vide signalée par les flèches bleu foncé).

L'entrée d'air des pontons présente une lèvre inférieure marquée, rappelant des solutions déjà observées par le passé, notamment sur la Ferrari SF-70 de 2017 ou la Red Bull RB19 de 2023. Dans leur philosophie générale, les pontons de l'AMR26 s'inscrivent dans la lignée de ceux de la Mercedes W17 et de la Ferrari SF-26, avec une surface supérieure fortement plongeante destinée à canaliser un flux d'air propre vers le diffuseur, associée à un undercut continu sur toute la longueur. L'ampleur de cet undercut apparaît toutefois particulièrement extrême en comparaison directe.

Au-dessus du pilote, l'agencement triangulaire de la boîte à air, accompagné de "cornes vikings" (flèches orange), rappelle les premières Ferrari à effet de sol conçues sous la direction de Cardile, même si l'on se souvient qu'Adrian Newey avait déjà exploité une solution similaire sur la McLaren MP4-20 de 2005.

Enfin, l'arrière de la monoplace se caractérise par une sortie de refroidissement du capot moteur particulièrement imposante, signe des exigences thermiques élevées des nouveaux moteurs.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/02/f1-2026-aston-martin-amr26_4-copy.jpg)

Une suspension arrière inédite[/u]

À l'arrière, Aston Martin a dû relever un défi structurel majeur en concevant sa propre boîte de vitesses, ce qui a permis à Adrian Newey de choisir les points de fixation de la suspension arrière.

Précisément, le bras postérieur du triangle supérieur de la suspension arrière (indiqué en jaune ci-dessus) de l'AMR26 n'est pas fixé directement au carter carbone de la boîte de vitesses, mais au pilier central de l'aileron arrière.

L'objectif de cette disposition paraît avant tout aérodynamique : l'écartement des différents bras réduit l'obstruction du flux, permettant à l'air de circuler plus proprement au-dessus du diffuseur.

Ce choix permet d'augmenter sensiblement l'effet anti-cabrage de la suspension arrière, un paramètre clé pour 2026, alors que les monoplaces disposeront d'un couple nettement supérieur et devront transmettre cette puissance à l'axe arrière avec un maximum de stabilité.

D'autre part, le bras supérieur arrière, sous l'effet combiné du transfert de charge et de l'appui aérodynamique, tend à s'abaisser jusqu'à devenir presque horizontal, lui permettant d'agir comme un élément aérodynamique additionnel.

(https://f1i.autojournal.fr/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2026/02/f1-2026-aston-martin-amr26_5-copy.jpg)

Aston Martin fait pencher les certitudes

L'Aston Martin présente d'une ouverture dans les parois externes du diffuseur (flèches violettes), une solution déjà observée sur la Mercedes W17, la Ferrari SF-26, la Red Bull RB22 ou encore la Haas VF-26.

Cette découpe permet d'injecter de l'air à plus haute énergie dans le diffuseur, améliorant l'extraction et, par conséquent, les performances du fond plat sur toute sa longueur. Notons aussi le curieux enroulement au bord du fond plat, devant le pneu arrière (flèche verte ci-dessus).

Lors du shakedown, l'AMR26 est apparue avec une hauteur de caisse très relevée à l'arrière, affichant un rake statique estimé entre 1,5 et 2,5 degrés (voyez le trait jaune ci-dessus). Si les voitures 2026 reviennent à des fonds plats globalement plus plats qu'avant 2022, la forme et les dimensions du diffuseur diffèrent sensiblement de celles des générations précédentes. Reste donc à savoir si un rake élevé constitue la solution optimale dans ce nouveau cadre réglementaire.

L'aileron arrière présente lui aussi des particularités notables, avec deux plis orientés vers le haut sur la dérive latérale de l'aileron arrière. D
es solutions similaires existaient avant 2022, mais positionnées plus bas.

Des doutes sur le moteur Honda

Des interrogations subsistent toutefois sur la partie moteur. Les ingénieurs ayant mené à bien le développement de la dernière unité de puissance hybride Honda chez Red Bull ont été dispersés au sein de l'entreprise, conséquence directe du retrait de Honda de la Formule 1 en 2021, suivi d'un retour décidé dix-huit mois plus tard.

En tant qu'unique équipe cliente, Aston Martin dispose d'un retour d'expérience encore limité sur ce tout nouveau moteur et sur ses modes de fonctionnement. À Barcelone, le kilométrage cumulé reste très inférieur à celui des moteurs concurrents, avec seulement 302,71 km parcourus, contre plus de 5 200 km pour Mercedes, plus de 4 600 km pour Ferrari et près de 2 900 km pour Red Bull.

Aston Martin aurait d'ailleurs indiqué à d'autres équipes que son programme d'essais incluait des runs volontairement effectués sans atteindre la vitesse maximale en ligne droite, afin que les pilotes adverses en soient avertis. La raison précise de cette limitation n'a pas été clarifiée.

Quoi qu'il en soit, malgré l'audace affichée par l'AMR26 à Barcelone, Adrian Newey a promis que l'Aston Martin présente au départ du Grand Prix d'Australie sera différente.

"L'AMR26 avec laquelle nous terminerons la saison à Abou Dhabi sera très différente de celle avec laquelle nous allons commencer l'année."

À ce stade, l'AMR26 semble afficher un surpoids non négligeable, ce qui en ferait, même dans le contexte des essais hivernaux, l'une des monoplaces les plus éloignées de son potentiel ultime. Son originalité ne garantit en rien une supériorité immédiate, mais elle témoigne d'une réflexion originale, bien dans la ligne du génial cerveau d'Adrian Newey.

https://f1i.autojournal.fr/magazine/magazine-technique/amr26-le-coup-de-genie-de-newey-qui-peut-tout-changer-chez-aston-martin/

A los motoristas "discrepantes" iniciales, parece que se les va a unir RBT/Ford. Quieren cambios para el inicio de temporada pero la FIA/FOM no están por la labor:

Mercedes' rivals are hoping to pull together a proposal to change Formula 1's engine compression ratio rules in time for the start of the season in Australia, The Race has learned.

However, even if they agree on a plan, any chance they have of new regulations being pushed through so quickly would still require support from the FIA and FOM - something that is far from guaranteed.

Amid the ongoing controversy surrounding Mercedes having potentially found a loophole to run its car at a higher compression ratio than the 16:1 limit stated in the rules, efforts have been ramping up among its competitors to stop any advantage it has.

The issue revolves around the current rules making it explicit that checks for compression ratio compliance are done at ambient temperature. It is suspected Mercedes has found a way to run at a higher level when the engines are hot.

Discussions have been ongoing over recent weeks among Mercedes' rivals to try to agree to a proposal for a different test procedure being implemented – which would involve compliance being measured when the power unit is hot.

Two further meetings have taken place with the FIA to discuss the matter in recent days. One involved technical experts on Monday and another the Power Unit Advisory Committee (PUAC) on Thursday.

There were some reports on Friday that coming out of these meetings new procedures for checking had been agreed for the start of the season. Multiple sources have said that this is not the case at all.

However, while the outcome of both meetings is that the current regulations and checks remain in place as defined in the rule book, this has not stopped efforts accelerating behind the scenes between Mercedes' rivals to get things changed.

Voting bloc
It is understood that the aim of Mercedes' competitors is to agree amongst themselves a new procedure to measure the compression ratio when engines are running hot.

Their plan would then be to put forward this new idea to the PUAC for a vote so it can be introduced - with sources suggesting it is seeking things to move in time for the Australian GP.

Several options for a different way of checking have been discussed, which include the use of sensors when the car is running out on track, or ensuring measurements are taken in the garages when engines are up to operating temperature.

And critically it has emerged that the trio who had initially been most animated about the matter and wrote a joint letter to the FIA – Ferrari, Audi and Honda – have now potentially won over the support of Red Bull too.

The fact that four manufacturers could be aligned on a proposal to tweak the regulations is significant because it opens the door for the necessary super majority vote that would be needed to make an immediate rule change.

Red Bull's stance is interesting because it was understood that it had found benefits from interpreting the regulations in the same way as Mercedes. However, it could be that it has found itself unable to produce the gains hoped for – which is why it may be more eager to shut that avenue down.

Under the governance procedures of the PUAC, for a significant immediate modification of the power unit rules to happen, it requires backing from four of the current five manufacturers, plus support from both the FIA and FOM.

Normally, the FIA and FOM vote in a bloc and it is very rare for them to not be aligned over matters.

So key to any hopes of Mercedes' rivals getting a swift rule change pushed through is whether or not any proposal they agree on would have backing from the governing body.

Up until now, every indication has been that the FIA is aligned with Mercedes' interpretation of the rules – in that compression ratios are always measured in ambient conditions.

The F1's 2026 power unit rules were altered on October 16 to emphasise this was the way measurements would be taken, and earlier this week, Mercedes boss Toto Wolff said such a viewpoint had been backed by FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem.

Asked about the risk of one of Mercedes' rivals protesting the matter in Australia, Wolff said: "The power unit is legal.

 "The power unit corresponds to how the regulations are written, and the power unit corresponds to how the checks are being done.

"The power unit corresponds to how these things are measured in any other vehicle. Everything else [the chances of a protest] I can't judge upon.

"That's how we see the world today, and that's what the FIA said. That's what the president of the FIA said, and he knows a bit about that. In that respect, let's wait and see. But we feel robust."

Too late
A sudden U-turn by the FIA in approving a last-minute rule tweak that altered the way that the compression ratio was measured would be a surprise - and could potentially have a huge impact on the competitive picture.

This is especially true because final homologation of power units takes place on March 1 so there is no time for anyone to change designs.

Despite an eagerness from Mercedes' rivals to get things changed from the start of the season, it is much more likely that if there is support for a new direction this would only be something for the longer term – potentially from the start of 2027.

But Wolff made clear earlier this week that he was frustrated about the way his team's competitors were spending so much time on this issue.

"I just don't understand that some teams concentrate more on the others and keep arguing a case that is very clear and transparent," he said.

"Communication with the FIA was very positive all along. And it's not only on compression ratio, but on other things too.

"Specifically in that area, it's very clear what the regulations say. It's very clear what the standard procedures are on any motors, even outside of F1."

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/mercedes-rivals-plotting-f1-engine-rule-change-for-melbourne/

https://f1i.autojournal.fr/infos/breaking-news/scandale-des-moteurs-en-f1-red-bull-change-de-camp-et-relance-loffensive-anti-mercedes/lotting-f1-engine-rule-change-for-melbourne/

Parece que los inicios de las carreras van a ser más a la "antigua" :sherlock:

Why F1 race starts will be much more difficult in 2026


Plenty has been said already about the energy management challenges that come with Formula 1's new 2026 cars.

But there is another key area where F1 drivers are going to face a bigger headache than before thanks to a combination of new systems and a fresh rule.

We are talking about race starts.

Anyone standing at the pitlane exit during F1's first pre-season test at Barcelona, to see drivers practicing their getaways, could not help noticing how different and clunky they looked.

From the perfectly balanced revs, clutch releases and getaways that became the norm with the previous generation of cars, early impressions of the 2026 cars are of things looking a bit more unrefined.

Once the car is stationary and the clutch is engaged, drivers are revving the engine a lot higher and for a lot longer than before.

But once the clutch is released, the high revs do not appear to translate to a lightning-fast getaway on the edge of perfect traction.

Instead the cars initially appear to bog down, and there seems to be a tremendous amount of inconsistency.

That external impression has been verified by those in the cockpit too - with world champion Lando Norris admitting that race starts are now going to be a step more difficult.

"It's quite a bit trickier," he said.

'Dodgy' gaps in power
The cause of this is three factors coming together: hardware changes on the car, reluctance to burn battery power for fear of running out later in the lap, plus a key new regulation regarding the initial getaways.

On the power unit front, F1's removal of the MGU-H has made turbo lag much more of a problem with the new generation of engines.

The MGU-H had previously been used as an electric motor to help spin up the compressor turbine, meaning it filled in power deficits triggered by lag so that acceleration remained instant and constant.

This is why starts were so good previously - because the turbo was primed to deliver the peak power for the getaway.

As Norris said about the new cars losing that tool: "You don't have the perfect amount of battery to kind of fill in the dodgy gaps."

Without the MGU-H, turbo lag can now only be overcome through two means.

One is to use the MGU-K and battery power to spool the turbo up, but this risks wasting energy that could be more useful later in the lap.

The other is to simply keep engine revs high, something which we have seen happening in corners as drivers aim to ensure the turbo is kept spinning so it's ready for the exit.

For the start, the option of using the MGU-K to keep the turbo spooled up is totally off the table.

Article 5.2.19 of the technical regulations states that when the car is on the grid prior to the start "the MGU-K torque may only be negative" - that is to say, charging the energy store - "except for torque requested by an MGU-K active damping strategy whose sole purpose is to protect the MGU-K mechanical transmission".

So drivers are not allowed to use the MGU-K to prep their turbo on the grid.

The only way to do it therefore is by keeping the revs super high so the compressor is spinning perfectly the moment the clutch is released.

But even once the clutch is released, restrictions remain in place for drivers which mean that any turbo lag still left in the system because they didn't execute things perfectly cannot be filled with the MGU-K.

In a perfect world, as the MGU-H did previously, the MGU-K would help fill in any power deficit to deliver the perfect start if drivers got it wrong before the lights went out.

Now, an all-new rule for 2026 outlaws any use of the battery power for the initial start phase.

Article 5.2.12 states: "During a standing start from the grid the MGU-K may only be used once the car has reached 50km/h."

The end result is that any driver that has not balanced the revs, clutch release and turbo speed perfectly for the getaway is going to have no means of recovering until they are up to at least this speed.

But even past the 50km/h point, it's not a given that drivers will want to tap into using battery power to help dig them out of a hole.

Right now, F1's 2026 cars are energy-starved, and that means drivers need to keep their batteries as charged as possible for the best points on each lap.

So while burning through energy would be logical in helping fill in for turbo lag on the run to the first corner, it would be wasted if that meant being left with an empty battery that makes you a sitting duck coming out of it.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/why-f1-race-starts-are-about-to-get-a-lot-less-predictable/

Entrevista a Fernando en el AS.


Alonso: "Vamos a ir de menos a más y eso me motivará para seguir"

El bicampeón habla con AS en la presentación del AMR26 del nivel actual del coche, "el factor Newey" y el futuro: "Me gustaría decidir en septiembre".

Jesús Balseiro · Corresponsal de Fórmula 1
Ithra (Arabia Saudí) Actualizado a 9 de febrero de 2026 22:26 CET


En la trastienda de la presentación del AMR26, después de cumplir con los compromisos televisivos, Fernando Alonso (Oviedo, 44 años) habló en exclusiva con AS. Desgrana en qué punto de desarrollo se encuentra este Aston Martin en comparación con otros monoplazas más rodados, explica qué es "el factor Newey", que tanto miedo infunde a rivales, y aclara cuándo le gustaría tomar una decisión sobre su futuro, dentro o fuera de la Fórmula 1.

—¿Qué nivel de ilusión le genera este coche? Porque es nuevo, porque lo ha diseñado Newey, porque cambian las reglas, porque entra Honda...

—Mucha ilusión, sobre todo por la llegada de Newey y por trabajar con él por primera vez. Al ser una nueva reglamentación está todo por descubrir y el piloto tendrá su factor de decisión en los puntos débiles del coche y en donde hay que trabajar. Eso te despierta un chip interior, por el hecho de que voy a ser importante no solo este año, sino también en los próximos cuatro o cinco años del equipo. Y tienes que ponerte las pilas.

—¿En qué punto está el AMR26 ahora? ¿Es grave, o irrelevante, el retraso antes de Barcelona?

—Estamos por detrás, seguro, estamos en el punto cero. No creo que hayamos ni empezado. En Barcelona pudimos rodar pero yo me lo tomé más como un 'filming day', un 'shakedown' que otros equipos hicieron en privado en Silverstone con 200 kilómetros que nosotros no pudimos hacer. Entonces Barcelona fueron esos 200 kilómetros para nosotros. Algunas partes del coche no estaban validadas para ir a la velocidad máxima y tuvimos que limitarnos a 280 kilómetros por hora en las rectas. Es solo un ejemplo de cómo la preparación iba al límite. Es difícil sacar ninguna conclusión, Bahréin será para nosotros el primerísimo test, la primerísima toma de contacto. Barcelona era solo arrancar el coche y ver que todo funcionaba.

—Entonces todavía no tiene una estimación, la sensación de si el coche puede ser bueno o no tan bueno.

—No, todavía no la tengo. Tomo Bahréin como esa primera toma de contacto. Soy consciente de algunos retos que tenemos y no los digo yo, los ha dicho Newey. Que íbamos unos meses por detrás de lo que él piensa que los demás equipos estaban haciendo; y lo mismo Honda, que han tenido más dificultades de las que esperaban en cuanto al motor. Creemos que tenemos algunos puntos que resolver en cuanto a competitividad del proyecto y no tenemos mucho tiempo, queda un mes hasta Australia. Algunos no se podrán resolver antes de Australia y tendremos que lidiar con ellos en las tres o cuatro primeras carreras.

—De cualquier equipo se hablaría de forma crítica cuando un coche llega con retraso o rueda poco. Pero el Aston despierta máxima expectación, ya escuchamos a Russell y a otras figuras del paddock. ¿Por qué?

—Esto es el factor Newey, siempre ha sido así. Nosotros lo hemos vivido en nuestras carnes siempre; cuando él presentaba el coche en unos test, fuesen bien, mal o regular, siempre tenías un ojo puesto en ese coche y en lo que podían hacer o lo que se podía copiar. Ahora le pasará a nuestros rivales. Aunque creo que este año, con el cambio de reglamentación y la importancia de la unidad de potencia y la gestión de energía; no digo que el coche sea menos importante que el motor pero necesitamos una buena unidad de potencia para optimizar el paso por curva. Me preocupa un poco menos, porque sé que Adrian tardará más o menos, o ya lo tendremos ahora, pero el coche no será un problema y hay que estar seguros de que todo el conjunto no lo sea (un problema).

—¿Cambiará la forma de correr por la gestión de baterías? ¿Habría sido muy diferente su pelea con Checo en Brasil 2023?

—No lo sé. Me queda un poco por ver eso, ya tenía dudas después de dar alguna vuelta en el simulador y sigo teniendo la misma duda. Creo que adelantar va a ser más difícil este año porque todo el mundo tiene el DRS en las rectas, el coche de atrás tiene el mismo DRS que el de delante. Y lo único que tienes es un poquito más de energía, pero no tienes libertad para usarla como quieras y donde quieras. Sigue dictado por la FIA y eso limita las batallas y la libertad del piloto. Está sobrerregulado.

—¿La experiencia será un factor a favor del piloto?

—Como está sobrerregulado, habría más diferencias si hubiese más libertad. Pero siempre ayuda. Si esto fuese tenis o atletismo, preferiría tener 25 años a tener 40. Pero en el motor, si estás bien físicamente, prefiero los 40 antes que los 25. He corrido en todos los circuitos, conozco muchas reglamentaciones diferentes y en cambios de energía como los que habrá, prefiero estar en mi posición a ser un rookie este año.

—Si su carrera deportiva fuera un partido de fútbol, ¿cuánto tiempo queda para marcar un gol? ¿Estamos en el descuento? ¿En la prórroga?

—Queda mucho partido. Estamos empezando la segunda parte, 45 minutos.

—Se hablará mucho de coches nuevos hasta Australia, pero luego se hablará mucho de mercado de pilotos porque todos los asientos están libres para 2027. ¿En qué momento se planteará si le apetece seguir a partir del 2027 o ha tenido suficiente?

—No lo sé, creo que este año hay que esperar un poco más porque la progresión y la evolución de los coches va a ser increíble. En vez de mejorar una o dos décimas con un paquete de mejoras, quizás mejoras ocho décimas o un segundo. Entonces creo que a lo largo de la temporada veremos grandes cambios de prestaciones por parte de los equipos. Tomar una decisión en abril o mayo puede ser acertada o equivocada en septiembre, depende de cómo vayan las evoluciones. Cuanto más se pueda esperar, mejor. Esa sería mi intención, esperar a septiembre para tomar una decisión. Pero lo veremos, no creo que sea solo por las prestaciones. Tengo que ver cómo me encuentro, cómo estoy de motivado, cuánto me pesan los viajes, los eventos, el márketing y todo lo que se hace fuera de la pista. Creo que el equipo va a mejorar mucho desde el principio del año, vamos a ir de menos a más, claramente. Eso va a ser motivador en cuanto a la posibilidad de continuar, ver que el coche va mejorando e iremos mejorando los resultados. Pero de eso a poder tomar una decisión cien por cien segura hay que esperar lo máximo posible... si el equipo aguanta. Porque una cosa es lo que tú quieras, pero si el equipo quiere saber en primavera si vas a continuar o no en primavera, para no quedarse sin opciones de otros pilotos que estén en el mercado, tendré presión por parte del equipo para tomar una decisión lo antes posible.


https://as.com/motor/formula_1/alonso-vamos-a-ir-de-menos-a-mas-y-eso-me-motivara-para-seguir-f202602-n/

:read:

Citar—Si su carrera deportiva fuera un partido de fútbol, ¿cuánto tiempo queda para marcar un gol? ¿Estamos en el descuento? ¿En la prórroga?

—Queda mucho partido. Estamos empezando la segunda parte, 45 minutos.

 :scare: No me lo creo,  :scare: , si la primera parte va desde 2001 hasta 2025  :scare: , le quedan otros 25 años antes de retirarse???  :scare:  Se va a retirar con 69 años???  :scare: ... :rofl:

Oye!, que por mi, como si no se retira  :scare:  :clapping:  :clapping:  :laugh2:  :laugh2:

Why Aston Martin's talking about a 2026 'long game' so early

Aston Martin has indicated it could begin the 2026 Formula 1 season "a bit behind" its rivals, but insists a potentially slow start will not mean its hopes for the entire campaign are over.

Amid uncertainties about the potential of the new Honda-powered AMR26, which only joined the first pre-season test at Barcelona late on the fourth of five days, Fernando Alonso has talked openly about a need to play the "long game" this year.

So even if weaknesses emerge in its package over the two forthcoming Bahrain tests, the first of which starts this week, there remains scope in both car and engine development to make a strong recovery.

It is why Alonso has played down early expectations; he stressed that early headaches will not necessarily mean that the Aston Martin project has failed in its ambitions to move forward in F1, as the true judgement for that can only come later in the year.

'Long-game' thinking
Aston Martin became the final team to reveal its 2026 livery in Saudi Arabia on Monday night.

Having been late to testing, the team is short of the same level of understanding of both its chassis and power unit as its rivals, especially as there have been suggestions that engine supplier Honda could be on the back foot.

But while he did not rule out a challenging start to the year, Alonso said on Monday that the mindset was not one that meant it was make or break for Aston Martin to hit the ground running for the start of the season in Australia in early March.

Instead, he suggested it was important to consider the amount of progress that can be made over the season.

"The unique thing this year is that the rate of development is going to be very, very high for everyone, because of the new regulations and the complexity of the power units as well," he said.

"So I'm not really too concerned about Bahrain or the first couple of races, because the championship and having a good or bad season is going to play a little bit more in the second half of the season than in the first half of the season.

"For us it's important, finishing Bahrain [testing] with a good understanding of the car.

"And then from that point, think more in race seven or 10 or 12 or whatever, and have a clear path of development."

Designer Adrian Newey, who has also taken over as team principal, echoed Alonso's view that the rate of development would likely be intense this season.

"I'd imagine that for many teams, including to an extent ourselves, the car that they ran the Barcelona pre-season with will be a fair bit different to the car they actually race in Melbourne," he said.

"And that pace, I'm sure, will continue through the season."

The uncertainties about the AMR26 are matched by questions over where Honda stands. Alonso said that the constant-speed running he was doing on the straights at Barcelona meant the team has no clue yet where its power unit lies against the competition.

"Obviously we don't have much information," he said, when asked by The Race about what feedback he had from Honda on its progress.

"As I said in Barcelona, even with the limitation that we had on the straights with the constant speed and things like that, as it was a shakedown for us, we didn't have a clear picture of our power differences and things like that.

"I only know the information that you know, the messages that they were saying that they were a bit behind.

"This is, as I said, a long game and I'm sure even if we start a bit behind, there is plenty of time to catch up.

"The second part of the season is going to be more important than the first part, in my opinion."

Crunch week looming
While other teams were racking up the miles from the start of the Barcelona test, Aston Martin was in a race against time to even get out on track.

It only got its AMR26 into action at the end of the penultimate day of running after it elected to push manufacturing of the new challenger to the final minute.

That late arrival has left the team lacking miles compared to most of its competitors, which means it needs a smooth week in Bahrain.

For Alonso, who drove on the final day at Barcelona, the lack of performance running there meant there was no way to draw any conclusions about the car.

"It was really the first kilometres on the car, and we were not pushing the limits either," he said about the Barcelona test.

"We had to run a constant speed on the straights. There are different factors that were difficult for us to have an estimation, and we didn't really pay too much attention to that.

"We found things to improve from Barcelona to Bahrain. Some things are just pure comfort things, in the driving cockpit, seat, feet and things like that.

"There's more things that we need to investigate deeper or improve the cooling or improve the vibrations, whatever the things that are very normal for the first day of testing."

Alonso acknowledged though that the Bahrain tests would give the team a clear idea of what sort of state it was going to start the year in.

"I think by the end of Bahrain we will know where we are," he said.

"Yes, I think we have plenty of days and plenty of data and laps to really understand some of the strengths and for sure some of the weaknesses of the car.

"I think we will have more or less a picture of the first, let's say, three to five races of the championship."

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/why-aston-martin-is-talking-f1-2026-long-game-so-early/

Mark Hughes explains F1 2026's key car design differences

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/02/comaparison-front-end-top-teams-1.jpg)

Outwash and its opposite sibling, inwash, are the driving aerodynamic themes of the 2026 new generation of Formula 1 car.

Although in many cases the cars which ran at the Barcelona shakedown will be quite different come Bahrain and Melbourne (notably Ferrari and Aston Martin), there was enough to strongly infer the aims of the various design teams in response to these all-new regulations.

Perhaps the most influential FIA stipulation within the regulations is that of the 'inwashing' boards at the front corners of the floor beneath the sidepods.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/02/comaparison-sidepod-inlet-and-bargeboard-top-teams-1.jpg)

The idea was to massively limit the amount of outwash around the car so as to make the wake cleaner for the following car. The problem is, outwashing brings greater performance - and so the motivation of every team is obviously to counteract that regulatory intention.

It happened this way with the 2022 regulations, too; the teams found a way around the intent because they are competing. The '26 'inwash' boards are just a regulatory reaction to that. So almost by definition, subverting their intent is going to be where the low-hanging performance fruit is. We see that in the design of every '26 car.  But how each of the teams has gone about achieving that subversion varies greatly.

In simplistic terms, inwashing the turbulent wake from the front wheels to the underfloor reduces the amount of downforce the underfloor can generate. Ideally, that front wheel wake needs to be pushed out away from the car, giving it the chance to smooth out as it is then channelled inwards again (towards the rear) to meet the flow coming off the sidepod tops and the floor edge – with that combined flow then channelled between the rear wheel and diffuser wall to create a pressure differential which helps the air exiting the diffuser to speed up, thereby boosting the underfloor downforce.

The impact upon the overall designs of that one bit of floor board regulation is quite profound. It has varied the choices the teams have made regarding cockpit and front axle positioning, front wing design, nose design, sidepod design and the geometry of the boards themselves.

Even if we just confine ourselves to five of the 11 new cars – from McLaren, Mercedes, Red Bull, Ferrari and Aston Martin – the divergence in those choices is big.

Cockpit/front axle


(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/02/comaparison-cockpit-position--top-teams.jpg)

Within the 250mm leeway in how the cockpit is positioned relative to the front axle, McLaren (like Mercedes and Red Bull) appears to have brought them closer together than Ferrari and Aston Martin and because of the way the dimensions are defined, this has allowed a higher nose.

The higher the nose, the greater volume is available to feed the underfloor and the more the nose underside can be scalloped out with an undercut (creating a low-pressure area to speed up the flow).

McLaren has not taken as full advantage of the nose height as Mercedes, which has chosen to mount the W17's nose to the middle element of the wing rather than the conventional bottom element. This allows the nose to stop earlier and therefore leave more space beneath it.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/02/comaparison-front-end-top-teams.jpg)

https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/02/comaparison-front-end-top-teams.jpg

While there are benefits to feeding the underfloor, bringing the front wheels closer to the cockpit brings with it the downside of having even less distance to outwash the airflow around the wheels and thus there are concomitant limitations minimising the inwash caused by the regulation floor boards.

McLaren appears to have attacked this limitation with its aggressive treatment of the front wing and endplates to create spinning vortices. The wing is contoured with a highly-cambered mid section, with the elements dropping away in volume dramatically at the outboard and inboard ends. Although this will limit the overall wing-created downforce, the way the profile drops away at the outboard, in combination with dramatically-proportioned winglet-topped endplates, is clearly part of the outwash-aiding vortex creations.  The inboard drop-away clears some volume beneath the nose.

Mercedes, meanwhile, is using a wide sidepod top to create a massive undercut beneath, the low pressure of which will be pulling as much airflow as possible away from the in-washing floor boards. This undercut continues throughout the length of the sidepod, leaving a huge channel beneath to feed the airflow inside the rear wheel.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/02/image-1.png)

McLaren has a similarly wide sidepod top but the pods are much shallower and angled more steeply downwards. In contrast to the Mercedes, the undercut stops short of the coke bottle section.

Angling the pods downwards in this way creates a pressure drop which speeds up that airflow. A bigger undercut speeds up the flow along the floor edge. But those flows meet ahead of the rear wheels and their energy combines as it feeds into the gap between the tyre and diffuser.

Working out the best trade-off between the two will be key – and much of that will be determined by how the team has decided to package its radiator cooling.

Cooling/sidepods

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/02/comaparison-sidepod-inlet-and-bargeboard-top-teams.jpg)

Although the Red Bull's cockpit/front axle choice appears very similar to those of Mercedes and McLaren, the choices made elsewhere are very different.

Like the Aston Martin, the RB22 features a much wider nose than the Mercedes or Ferrari (with McLaren somewhere in between). While this effectively gives less front wing area, the nose underside is a useful downforce generator in itself. Furthermore, it will tend to push a high-pressure region further outward behind the front wheels. The higher this pressure, the more the air flowing around the outside of the front wheels will be encouraged to stay outward, avoiding the high-pressure area.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/02/G_rU_ZfWMAAU4Ta.jpeg)

The RB22's sidepod treatment is quite startling, with a tiny, heavily downwashing pod around the horizontal radiator inlets and an initially big undercut beneath. But with the lower part of the body then heading outwards to cut off the pod well before the coke bottle section – much further forwards than that of the McLaren and in sharp contrast to the Mercedes, Aston Martin and Ferrari which all have undercuts running the full length of the pod.

It would appear that Red Bull is manipulating the pressures in that three-dimensional triangle beneath the shallow 'tube' pod to pull the air away from those floor boards. Footage of the car running in the Barcelona rain suggested it was achieving this very effectively.

The very small radiator inlets, combined with a big airbox inlet, suggest that much of the Red Bull's radiator surfaces – probably including the intercooler – are further up around the centreline than on the others, something it shares with the related Racing Bulls car.


(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/02/pitlane-fom-pic.jpg)


The Aston Martin AMR26 has a similarly wide nose and thin 'tube' pods to the Red Bull, but with a fuller undercut and less extreme downwash. The free volume of exposed floor ahead of the rear tyre is enormous and should make for a powerful airflow, especially given the extreme lengths Adrian Newey has gone to in clearing a path once it gets through that gap.


(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/02/Screenshot-2026-01-29-at-17.50.15.png)

The super-high mounting of the upper wishbones into the rear wing pillar (together with the extreme offset plan-view spacing of the upper and lower wishbones) has left wide expanses in which to train the air. So far up are the upper wishbones that there could be some beneficial aero effect to the rear wing underside, thereby partly replacing the lower beam wing (deleted in the '26 regs).

The Aston Martin front suspension (a switch to pushrod, just like everyone except Williams, Alpine and Cadillac) is also extreme in its layout, with the rear upper wishbone mounting point stretching far, far back.

Quite how the vehicle dynamicists are going to want to move the centre of pressure at varying speeds is going to be interesting and the front suspension layout can be a big part of this. It should in theory be much easier to achieve a good balance at low-speed corners and high- than with the previous generation ground effect cars. The assumption that this would result in anti-dive front geometries falling out of fashion looks misplaced, given the layouts of the Aston Martin and McLaren.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/02/XPB_1393497_HiRes.jpg)

Ferrari has gone for a low narrow nose/generous front wing combination and its sidepod shape – together with the generously proportioned radiator inlets and small airbox opening – suggest it's carrying most of its radiator cooling low down. But that's still left space for a big, full-length undercut and significant downwashing sidepod top. It's perhaps the least extreme looking of all the top team cars but there's nothing to say that won't bring a winning combination of qualities.

Like the Mercedes and Red Bull, there is a generous 'mousehole' in the diffuser wall, which is usually done to introduce some external flow into the diffuser to keep the flow better attached. This is a little giveaway that generically the in-washing regulation may indeed have hurt the energy flow to the underfloors.

Floor boards
Interestingly, the McLaren didn't have this diffuser feature at Barcelona. It's been speculated that this might be connected to its very different treatment of the floor boards.

Teams create their own designs here within the boxes and dimensions stipulated in the regulations. In general outline they have to align inwards by 15 degrees but within the stipulated area the geometry is free and can contain up to three elements.

Teams have generally adopted the three elements horizontally and have placed them strategically to encourage outwash through the gaps between them so as to minimise the inwash of the board as whole.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/02/AMR26-vs-MCL40-side.jpg)

McLaren is the outlier here, having adopted a huge triangular upper element and two very compressed ones at the bottom. The aim seems to be to induce upwash, pulling as much flow as possible from entering the underfloor by pushing it upwards towards the undercut in the sidepod.   

Divergence is normal at the beginning of any new regulation set. It will be fascinating to observe which of these various approaches turns out to be the most influential.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/mark-hughes-explains-f1-2026-key-car-design-differences/

Hoy comienza una tanda de entrenamientos de pretemporada, que consta de 3 días. Algunos punos de interés pueden ser los siguientes:

Seven things to look out for at first Bahrain F1 2026 test

Launches are done. All 11 Formula 1 teams have (finally) run on track.

In this peculiar F1 2026 pre-season, the first of two tests in Bahrain is at the very least a step into the more serious stuff, now we're less than a month out from the season-opening Australian Grand Prix.

The three-day test begins on Wednesday at 10am local time and is the first 'official' pre-season running - although we know from the Barcelona 'shakedown week' test that some teams are heading into it with very different objectives to others.

So what should you expect and what are we keen to learn?

Are cars evolving already?

The early nature of the January Barcelona test plus the big production challenge of getting brand new cars ready meant some teams went for deliberately early sign-offs for their launch-spec designs.

Ferrari openly talked about having a Spec A to start with, while others are notably more basic than others (like Audi or new team Cadillac). This is all with the intention of layering on more detail deeper into pre-season.

Well, there's not actually much time to do that. We expect some teams to hold back on Australia-spec upgrades until the very last test in Bahrain as they will have wanted to maximise development time, but it will be interesting to see which cars are already evolving and by how much.

Of course, that doesn't mean teams will be immediately copying interesting things they spotted at Barcelona because the turnaround time is too short to have reacted already - at least in terms of big, meaningful designs. - Scott Mitchell-Malm

Is the Aston Martin-Honda package close enough?

The late-arriving AMR26 was on a different schedule to anyone else at Barcelona, and didn't run a whole lot. The laptimes were of pretty vague significance all across the pitlane in that test, but for Aston Martin that significance was a flat zero.

But that won't be the case in Bahrain. And though testing is testing and racing is racing, we should find out pretty quickly whether the package is competitive at all, and whether the Honda engine - which didn't get pushed on the straights at Barcelona - is potent enough as it stands.

Adrian Newey's AMR26 chassis design is clearly extremely ambitious. But as anyone who plays grand strategy games will know, an army only moves at the speed of its slowest unit.

We should know fairly quickly if the whole thing together is close enough to where any individual design flourishes can make enough of a difference. - Valentin Khorounzhiy

First real look at the battle out front

Bahrain will be our first real look at anything, never mind the battle to be top dog! But in all seriousness we should at least begin to get a better indication of who's nailed ground zero of this new ruleset.

I say 'better' because there's bound to be some sandbagging going on. If Mercedes really does have a three-to-four-tenth advantage lurking in that new power unit, there's no way the works team, defending world champion McLaren, or the Williams and Alpine teams are going to reveal that hand.

What we should get a half-decent read on is whose car looks well-balanced on track, whether any of the frontrunners are running into some early limitations - cooling, handling, stint length, tyre management etc - and perhaps who is in the best shape when it comes to all-important energy management.

Whatever performance runs on the softer compounds happen over the next three days will be useful to note, but keeping a close eye on those long runs and how the cars behave on track will be even more revealing. - Ben Anderson

Do engines really look close?
An interesting early takeaway from the first test was the notion from Mercedes and its customer team McLaren that the Ferrari and Red Bull engines look close.

This could just be a political play: being humble, for one thing, but also bigging up the notion that the playing field is quite equal given the background noise swirling about a sudden compression ratio rules clampdown that could impact Mercedes' design.

But it could be genuine. Bahrain should give us more of a clue. It's a second circuit, for starters, so another challenge in terms of charging the battery and managing energy deployment. Will any perceived patterns still be repeated on a very different track layout?

There is also the element of teams starting to push their packages more this week which means - while it still won't be the complete picture - we will get closer to finding out what the engines are capable of and maybe by extension how the impression of impressive reliability from Barcelona fares when everything get turned up. - SMM

How far off is the first Cadillac car?

The novelty of an actual honest-to-goodness Cadillac F1 car is still going strong - but it could be a long first season.

My colleague Edd Straw described Cadillac's shakedown pace, 4.6s off the test-topping Ferrari time, as "gently encouraging". It certainly is in terms of clearing the 107% start requirement - but not, as it stands, in terms of actually fighting anyone and having any more realistic ambitions than "reliable start and finish".

But the new team's mileage was also on the lower end at Barcelona, as was to be expected, and Bahrain should offer a much clearer picture of just how much of the deficit it can shave off - and what it can really dream of in its first season. - VK

How much did Barcelona absence hurt Williams?
There's enough pre-season testing this year that missing three days of warm-up running at a cold Barcelona need not be an irreversible blow, especially with two experienced, trustworthy drivers and a dependable race team around them.

The worry will be that missing Barcelona will be a symptom of something bigger at Williams. And there'll be no better time to dispel that notion than in the Bahrain test, marking the first public appearance of the FW48 and its ambitious front suspension design (bucking the pushrod trend).

Primarily, the car just needs to do laps and laps and laps, a target which the impressive new Mercedes engine should be very accommodating to.

But you'd also hope for it to be generally in range of its expected midfield rivals in terms of laptime, at least by the end of the test. - VK

The first public test

No more 'is it a test or just a Shakedown Week?' No more secret testing that isn't really secret because F1 keeps showing the world what you're up to because it makes good 'content'. This week is proper pre-season F1 testing as we've all come to know and expect.

That means the Bahrain desert, it means live timing that is readily available rather than pirated by YouTube streamers, it means a proper TV broadcasting of the final hour each day (budgets and attention spans won't stretch to full days for this week at least, it would seem), and fans can even buy tickets to get in.

I don't really know why you'd bother though, honestly - save your hard-earned money for an actual grand prix ticket and just let The Race fill in the gaps for you!

Testing is a mine of information and decent clues about the season to come, but a worthwhile public spectacle it really ain't. - BA

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/f1-2026-bahrain-test-one-what-to-expect/

Onboard de Leclerc.


https://x.com/F1BigData/status/2021641145991016493

PJ @SmilexTech (https://x.com/SmilexTech) · 1h (https://x.com/SmilexTech/status/2021638832907546859)

La Ferrari ha portato in pista quest'oggi le prime novità sulla sua SF-26: ecco la nuova ala anteriore e il nuovo fondo. Domani in pista tutta la giornata Leclerc. Altro nell'articolo #AutoRacer #F1Testing

https://autoracer.it/ferrari-sf26-p (https://autoracer.it/ferrari-sf26-prime-modifiche-test-bahrain-sviluppi/)


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA5NzNXXIAAyl7C?format=jpg&name=large)


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA5NzNYWsAAyycD?format=jpg&name=large)

Jon Noble (https://x.com/NobleF1)@NobleF1 · 1h (https://x.com/NobleF1/status/2021633068956860559?s=20)

Aston Martin has said that it was a data anomaly with the Honda power unit that limited Lance Stroll's mileage in testing on Wednesday to just 36 laps. Team will be back in action on Thursday with Fernando Alonso at the wheel. #F1

En el test de hoy, Lando ha sido el más rápido y Verstappen el que más ha rodado y ha marcado la mayor punta de velocidad.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA5ID8FaMAApKgz?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)

Los mejores tiempos de hoy y total de vueltas dadas.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA477EkWYAAJ97q?format=jpg&name=large)

Mejores sectores.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA49KXMXkAA7sUO?format=jpg&name=large)

Velocidades.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA49NrUbsAAXBIh?format=jpg&name=large)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA5A3Ryb0AAnF96?format=jpg&name=large)

McH, no sé si te servirán estas foticos.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA4L1IOaIAE99xz?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA4L2UtWoAAmt6Z?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)

No sabía que los coches de este año llevan balizas V16 en los retrovisores   :dntknw:  .



Formula 1 @F1 (https://x.com/F1) · 4h (https://x.com/F1/status/2021589828861661326?s=20)

🚨 New safety feature for 2026 🚨

Lights will flash on the wing mirrors and at the rear when:

👉 A car has stopped on track
👉 A car is going under 20 km/h outside the pit lane



En este vídeo se ve cómo se ponen en marcha, aunque de día no se ve mucho   :gaydude:  .


https://x.com/F1/status/2021589828861661326?s=20

Andrea Galante @AndreaGalante__ (https://x.com/AndreaGalante__) · 25min (https://x.com/AndreaGalante__/status/2021662097952944146?s=20)

#Ferrari has updated the front wing for the Bahrain tests. The main plane features a flatter and more linear shape, the endplates have a different curvature, and the third flap has been reshaped at the trailing edge. Gurney flaps have also been added.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA5i9AVbsAMm2qW?format=jpg&name=large)

Rosario Giuliana @RosarioGiuliana (https://x.com/RosarioGiuliana) · 17min (https://x.com/RosarioGiuliana/status/2021667553052176813?s=20)

First #Ferrari updates spotted: new floor and front wing


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA5naeaaAAAvpN2?format=jpg&name=large)


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA5nadVbsAId5SD?format=jpg&name=large)


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA5nodDbsAAcqDI?format=jpg&name=large)

Los de RaceFans han recopilado algunas fotos de hoy en este enlace:


https://www.racefans.net/2026/02/11/pictures-2026-f1-pre-season-test-two-day-one-bahrain/

Aprovechando que los datos de esta semana no son "de verdad" :gaydude: :roto2rie: , empezamos a probar los scripts de gráficas temporada 2026  :estudiar:  :read:

(https://imgur.com/KtC7pPy.png)

(https://imgur.com/8HfvbMr.png)

(https://imgur.com/lpIQMjP.png)

(https://imgur.com/u2GaqCr.png)

(https://imgur.com/qIZYGo0.png)

(https://imgur.com/GEVL8tx.png)

Hay más... en camino  :mosking:  :estudiar:

Cita de: GoVal en Feb 11, 2026, 08:11 PMMcH, no sé si te servirán estas foticos.
 ...

:Gracias: :Gracias: :friends: :Gracias:

Cita de: GoVal en Feb 11, 2026, 08:10 PM(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA5A3Ryb0AAnF96?format=jpg&name=large)

A ver si va a ser por eso, por lo que han tenido problemas de datos de temperatura de motor... :roto2rie:  :rofl:

Horemos :gaydude: para que no se vuelvan a poner de moda los modelos de tostadoras de Newey  :miedito:  :mosking:

The trick making Verstappen and Red Bull stand out from trackside

Early on the first day of Formula 1's Bahrain test it was apparent Max Verstappen was doing something others were not.

Verstappen has been an early proponent of using an unorthodox downshifting technique that offered us the first real sign of potential tricks to use high-revving engines to help charge the batteries.

Nothing crazy has quite come to pass but throughout Wednesday's running Verstappen was consistently using first gear where it would never normally be needed and where (initially) everyone else was using second gear.

Before this year, the slow Turn 10 left-hander would normally be taken in second gear – and by the majority, it still is. So the big spike in revs and the squirm under braking when Verstappen flashed into view on a push lap for the first time was striking.

For regular trackside insight throughout F1 testing, join The Race Members' Club - claim a free 7-day trial here

Verstappen downshifted to first gear while still doing a lot of the braking work, so the rev rise was significant - but obviously within the engine's tolerances - and the car behaviour shifted a lot too.

Anyone who has driven a road car with a manual gearbox, or even done simracing of some kind, will be familiar with the uncomfortable lurch and/or locking that can occur when downshifting overenthusiastically.

It is a familiar impact even on an F1 car and it is counterintuitive for drivers, who need to pre-empt it to deal with it most effectively, and requires good pitch control and stability from the car itself to not react too aggressively.

Verstappen was driving like this right from the start, throughout the day, and on both push laps and sustained running. It became a technique adopted or experimented with by a couple of others as the day progressed but feels like something that Red Bull is deploying as a deliberate tactic the most, and to the best effect, and Verstappen already seems relatively at ease in terms of mastering.

These approaches are all about the 2026 engines and the need to recharge the battery as much as possible in order to feed the much more powerful MGU-K. There are different ways of doing this, like more extreme lifting and coasting to what has become the norm of late to recover energy at the end of the straights, but harvesting energy from the rear axle under braking.

Another specific pattern, for example, was Verstappen seemingly downshifting in pairs as he moved down the gearbox – for example, doing fifth-to-fourth-to-third as a double downshift, then a slight pause, then third-to-second-to-first very quickly again. 

What Verstappen was doing all day in the Red Bull, Audi switched to quite early late in the morning having initially started in the more conventional manner. Both Gabriel Bortoleto in the morning and Nico Hulkenberg In the afternoon didn't look particularly comfortable with what the car was doing. It seemed a lot more disruptive and uncomfortable to deal with.

By comparison, the Red Bull looked relatively neat and tidy. There were a few slides, especially into Turn 10. That is a particularly tricky corner, coming from Turn 9, and there's a lot of wind there which caught a lot of cars out through the day. There was nothing particularly problematic, though, and it felt a world away from 12 months ago, where Verstappen was obviously displeased with the awkwardness of the car.

This is an entirely new generation, though, and the techniques that we are seeing are a great example of that. It might turn out to just be a period of experimentation over the course of this incredibly steep learning curve that all the teams and drivers are on, and the Red Bull technique might not be the same on Friday as it is today.

Other teams might change what they're doing, too, as Red Bull will not be the only team and engine manufacturer that knows 'if we downshift aggressively we can charge the battery'. But on Wednesday it was an area in which Verstappen and his car looked and sounded at odds with others.

The Ferrari, for example, is completely conventional (and not particularly planted). The same goes for its customer teams. The Mercedes engine cars seem to be eschewing this downshifting technique as well, although Alex Albon was maybe experimenting with first gear at Turn 10 early in the evening.

That's what it sounded a little bit like, but nowhere near as notably as Verstappen or the Audi drivers were, so it might have been a late downshift, closer to the apex – by which point the engine is further down the rev range so the downshift is less destabilising but also the less useful it'll be in terms of that extra bit of recharge.

It's not going to be the silver bullet for why Red Bull's engine seems to be quite encouraging in terms of how much it can recharge and therefore deploy the maximum of down the straights.

However, given Red Bull was making noises about the potential for extreme, high-revving tactics for nearly two years, it could be that the entire foundation of its engine design and energy recovery philosophy has been rooted in a high tolerance for aggressive treatment.

Maybe it will prove to be something others cannot replicate, maybe it is a different way of achieving exactly the same result.

Right now it is mainly just interesting to observe early on that it seems to be going down this route, and that Verstappen seems to have adjusted to it well.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/the-trick-making-verstappen-and-red-bull-stand-out-from-trackside/

First look at Audi's dramatic new sidepods in F1 testing

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/02/XPB_1393955_HiRes.jpg)

Audi has appeared at Formula 1's pre-season test in Bahrain with an interesting change of sidepod concept.

The team was one of the first to commit to an initial design specification for its R26, having had its car complete an initial shakedown at Barcelona in early January.

That version of the car ran through the first closed test at the same track at the end of the month, as Audi continued work at its factory on development parts that will likely come through up to the first race in Australia.

The first fruit of its efforts have now appeared with a change of design for the sidepods appearing on Wednesday morning in Bahrain as Gabriel Bortoleto began running.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/02/comaparison-2-sidepod-audi-bahrain-test.jpg)

The new sidepods mark a move away from the horizontal slatted inlet idea that appeared on Audi's launch spec version.

The inlets have been made smaller and more vertical – somewhat similar in the shape to the infamous and ultimately unsuccessful Mercedes 'zeropods' that it started the ground effect era with in 2022.

However, unlike that Mercedes, Audi has retained the sidepod bodywork.

This has been further refined from its original version though, with a more aggressively shaped upper surface that helps increase the downwash effect.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/02/XPB_1393954_HiRes.jpg)

Audi has also appeared with a different front wing design. As well as tweaks to the flap profiles, it features two large housings - although it is not clear if these are for the adjustment mechanism or are for measurement purposes.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1600/2026/02/comaparison-front-wing-audi-bahrain-test.jpg)

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/first-look-at-audis-dramatic-new-sidepods-in-f1-testing/

Gary Anderson's verdict on upgraded Audi 2026 F1 car

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/02/R26-sidepods-side-offset-angle-HLTS.jpg)

As Audi was the first team to run its 2026 car on track, it's only right that it's the first team to hit the track with visible updates, most obviously a dramatic change to its sidepods.

The difference between what it ran in the behind-closed-doors Barcelona shakedown and this first Bahrain pre-season test is dramatic, but as you learn about these new cars it's inevitably that's what we will be seeing.

The front wing has changed as part of this new package. This comparison shows the Barcelona front wing (top) and the Bahrain version (below).

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/02/Audi-1.jpeg)

The mainplane and its swoopy profile look very similar, but Audi seems to have added a small turning vane (red ellipse) to the rear of the front wing endplate lower tunnel. The trailing edge profile of the rear element (red highlight) has also been altered so is now more loaded inboard. Both of these changes achieve more of that dreaded outwash.

I am assuming that these two components (light blue ellipse) are the front wing actuators and not something just being used for testing. If they are, then the small vertical link that has the light blue arrow pointing to it means that they will be opening both flaps. In other words, the slot gap between the mainplane and the second element will open for the straightline mode.

On most others, we have seen them dropping the angle of the two flaps or as Mercedes and Aston seems to do, drop the angle on the rearmost flap.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/02/Audi-2.jpeg)

We talk a lot about airflow structure, which is how the airflow is affected by passing over the wing and body surfaces. This airflow also affects the performance of what's behind it. So what's coming along behind that front wing flow structure change? This shot is from Barcelona, and you can see that for this initial version it followed the path from 2025.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/02/Audi-3.jpeg)

However, the lower shot from Bahrain shows Audi has now headed off on a tangent. It is very different visually, a bit lumpier and bumpier but not unlike the Mercedes zero-sidepod solution of yesteryear, and will have a major influence on the airflow structure around the sidepods.

One thing we need to remember is that for 2026's active aerodynamics, the airflow coming off the front wing in straightline mode and cornering mode will be quite different. It's not just about optimising the car for a small front wing angle variation for different circuits, this large front wing angle variation will be happening each lap.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/02/Audi-4.jpeg)

Audi has gone to more of a swept-down top surface for the sidepod as opposed to a more compact Coke bottle. This will help get more airflow down into the back of the car, improving the performance of the rear wing and diffuser. It also reduces the airflow around the side of the sidepod, airflow that can have a negative effect on the underfloor performance by getting pulled into the low pressure area underneath the car.

The bargeboards for this year were intended to create inwash. By regulation, they go outwards from the front corner of the sidepods to the rear outer sidewall of the front tyre. This is to contain the wake behind the front tyre and means that your own car suffers from that turbulence as opposed to sending it outboard for someone trying to overtake you to deal with.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/02/Audi-5-1.jpeg)

These arrows of various colours are to show how the teams are going about mitigating that problem. Basically, the fact the bargeboards, by definition, are wider at the front than at the rear means they will create a low pressure area behind them. These horizontal slot gaps allow airflow to be pulled through them into that low-pressure area and then let it join up with the airflow coming through the sidepod front corner undercut.

The curved white arrow indicates a small opening or inlet duct. I'm not sure where this will lead to, but it's just part of the detail required to manage the overall cooling required for these cars.

You can just see how tightly everything is packaged. The red ellipse shows the cover of the upper foreword side impact structure. By regulation, it has to be enclosed in the sidepod body surface. I also love the detail of the mirror mounts (in magenta). It's this sort of detail on these current cars that we couldn't even have imagined about 30 years ago.

I'm also quite interested to see what Audi has done with the area below the radiator inlet. Between it and the floor entry, there is significant height available to exploit. It may just be a surface that creates a larger stagnation point to allow the underfloor to pull as much airflow as required for varying ride height.

It's great to see something different, that said, it will be the stopwatch that confirms if it is just different or better.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/audi-2026-f1-upgrades-gary-anderson-verdict/

The first clues from F1 testing's most meaningful data

After the imposed secrecy of Formula 1's first 'shakedown' test of 2026 in Barcelona, the Bahrain test is providing no shortage of data to sink our teeth into.

The headline times have Lando Norris and the Mercedes-powered McLaren gaining an early edge, and the MCL40 is certainly not to be dismissed - but there's a lot more going on under the cover.

While McLaren - with first Oscar Piastri and then Norris - largely favoured shorter runs and did deliver an impressive time, some of its rivals were laser-focussed on pounding consecutive laps in the afternoon of the opening day.

And one rival in particular caught the eye.

In total, there were more than 30 runs you could reasonably classify as some semblance of a relevant long run - but a fair few of those were plainly off the pace, presumably used for basic engine testing or systems checks or anything of that nature rather than any meaningful performance running (especially in the earlier hours of the day).

Here are the 15 best long runs of the day by average laptime, with a long run being defined as having at least seven laps or more:

1 Max Verstappen (Red Bull) 1m37.663s, soft tyre for 7 laps
2 Max Verstappen (Red Bull) 1m37.926s, S 10
3 Max Verstappen (Red Bull) 1m38.072s, hard 9
4 Charles Leclerc (Ferrari) 1m38.371s, S 9*
5 Charles Leclerc (Ferrari) 1m38.587s, S 10*
6 Kimi Antonelli (Mercedes) 1m38.637s, H 8
7 Charles Leclerc (Ferrari) 1m38.722s, S 9
8 Max Verstappen (Red Bull) 1m38.880s, medium 10
9 Max Verstappen (Red Bull) 1m38.903s, M 10
10 Lando Norris (McLaren) 1m39.013s, S 9
11 Nico Hulkenberg (Audi) 1m39.399s, S 12*
12 Lando Norris (McLaren) 1m39.765s, M 9
13 Nico Hulkenberg (Audi) 1m40.106s, S 21*
14 Nico Hulkenberg (Audi), 1m40.331s, M 12*
15 George Russell (Mercedes) 1m40.368s, S 7

*denotes runs where mid-run laptimes were discounted from the average due to being clear outliers

Red Bull with Max Verstappen and Ferrari's Charles Leclerc dedicated the final two hours of the day to stint-running.

Mercedes sent out Kimi Antonelli in the final hour only, due to an issue with the car, but he too was doing long runs. There was another Antonelli run, in addition to the one listed above, that fell just short of our threshold for inclusion (over seven representative laptimes), but averaged out very similarly.

Verstappen's long runs, as much as they can be at this stage of testing, were particularly impressive. Across five stints on each of the available compounds (C3 soft, C2 medium, C1 hard), the Red Bull driver delivered extremely consistent laptimes and his averages never required any adjustment for 'throwaway' laps, because there were none.

Also out in the afternoon on an extensive long-running programme was Nico Hulkenberg in the Audi, undeterred by an early red flag-causing stoppage and logging a lot of laps, including in one particularly extensive soft-tyre stint of 21 laps (17 of them representative).

But what about the teams that aren't included above?

Racing Bulls logged several long runs in the morning, when the track was still clearly not in optimum shape and the car was presumably not being pushed all that hard. Its complete absence in the afternoon means there isn't even a hint of a real picture here.

Aston Martin was likewise a no-show after the midday break but had barely done any meaningful consecutive-lap running before then.

Haas dedicated itself to short runs in the afternoon. Esteban Ocon's most consistent earlier run averages out to a presumably meaningless 1m41.493s, though he also did a six-lap run that averaged out to 1m40.095s - by virtue of having two 1m38s laps, two 1m39s laps and two 1m41s laps. Disregard.

It's a similar story with Alpine, with Pierre Gasly's best run of six laps clocking in at 1m40.150s.

Williams did some tentative long runs with its car as it catches up after its shakedown absence. The best was a 1m40.900s with Alex Albon over seven laps on softs.

Cadillac had a handful of runs that resembled long-running, most notable a very gently encouraging 1m41.947s average across 10 laps (one discounted) with Valtteri Bottas in the first half of the day.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/the-first-clues-from-bahrain-f1-test-day-one-long-runs/

9 things we learned from day one of Bahrain F1 test

The opening day of F1's Bahrain test has already given us the deeper insight we've been waiting for – so here's everything we learned from the first proper day of watching 2026 F1 cars.

Mercedes' extraordinary Red Bull claim

Does F1 have a new early benchmark? That's what Mercedes boss Toto Wolff insisted with a surprise declaration fuelled by his team's analysis of the initial long-run pace and GPS data.

According to Mercedes, strong energy deployment meant Max Verstappen's Red Bull was gaining about one second per lap on the straights - consistently.

That would be a massive advantage if repeated in races, and a huge achievement for Red Bull's brand new in-house engine programme.

But there remains some scepticism in the paddock about whether there are some politics at play here at a time when Mercedes' own performance is under the spotlight amid F1's ongoing compression ratio controversy.

And talk of any team being clearly ahead is not universal. McLaren chief designer Rob Marshall reckons the reality is that everyone is super close.

If Mercedes really is on the back foot against Red Bull, though, this was a sobering day for the early pre-season favourite given it had a first major setback itself.

Kimi Antonelli only managed 30 laps right at the end of the day because an issue believed to be on the car side, not engine, left him on the sidelines for most of the afternoon.

What the early data tells us

While it was McLaren's world champion Lando Norris who topped the times on Wednesday, Verstappen was a close second and was on a very quick-looking lap that faded in the final corners.

And the Red Bull's consistency and speed in Verstappen's hands went unmatched over stints of any meaningful length.

Verstappen ran each of the available tyres - the C1 hard, the C2 medium and the C3 soft - in bursts of around 10 laps. He ran a high-1m38s average on mediums earlier in the day, but averaged just under 1m38s on the hard later on - and was then comfortably in the 1m37s range on softs towards the end of running.

Perhaps most impressive was that all of these runs came with zero anomalous laps, by which we mean cooldown laps or anomalies from errors. That couldn't be said of Red Bull's rivals.

It's still early and the usual caveats about engine modes, fuel loads and energy deployment apply. And Charles Leclerc and Ferrari had a handful of solid 1m38s runs late on, while Mercedes was in the same ballpark once it eventually returned to the track with Antonelli after his problem.

But Red Bull certainly made a strong impression.

Why Max stands out trackside

From trackside, Verstappen also stood out for an aggressive downshifting technique linked to the new engine demands.

Most notably at Turn 10, typically a second-gear corner, Verstappen repeatedly downshifted to first while still heavily on the brakes, causing a sharp rise in revs and visible car instability.

His approach, usually involving rapid double downshifts in sequence, is aimed at maximising energy recovery under braking to better charge the more powerful 2026 MGU-K.

Red Bull was the first to deploy the tactic in Bahrain and did so the most consistently and effectively, with Verstappen comfortable in managing the destabilising effects on the car.

Audi tried similar methods but looked less settled, while interestingly the Ferrari and Mercedes-powered cars largely stuck to conventional techniques.

Though unlikely to be a silver bullet, it makes an interesting early differentiator – and a potential clue that Red Bull's targeted tolerance for more aggressive tactics in energy recovery.

Ferrari's car seems really difficult

After an encouraging start in the Barcelona test, the Ferrari looks far from the most stable car early on in Bahrain.

That doesn't mean it's bad by any means, but it suggests there's work to do.

That impression was supported by Lewis Hamilton. He talked about how complex driving these cars is generally, joking that you need a degree to understand them.

He also described the run into the tight Turn 10, the left hander leading onto the middle straight, where Hamilton had an off today, as the hardest that it's ever been here.

Now, this is a tricky corner thanks to the curved approach through Turn 9 and plenty of drivers had difficulty, but it seemed particularly difficult for Ferrari.

The car certainly appears responsive on turn-in, but all around the track it looked like a handful mid-corner.

Ferrari needs to turn that responsiveness into consistency to get the best out of the car.

Aston Martin and Honda troubles

Aston Martin only managed 65 laps during the whole Barcelona shakedown test, and its game of catch up in Bahrain didn't start well as Lance Stroll managed just 38 laps on Wednesday thanks to a Honda engine problem.

Honda described this as a result of a data anomaly which was detected and required further analysis ahead of a return to the track on Thursday.

There are still five days of testing remaining, but the clock is ticking and Aston Martin is now well behind in terms of distance covered with just 431 miles logged compared to the 2618 of Mercedes. Even Williams, which missed Barcelona entirely, is ahead owing to today only.

Fernando Alonso has already indicated that Aston Martin expects to start the season behind.

But based on the first day of running at Barcelona, it's still in the 'falling even more behind' phase. And that doesn't bode well.

Audi with a bold new design

Audi was the first team to run this year way back on January 9, and appropriately enough it's the first to introduce a big upgrade package - or at least, one that's very visually obvious.

It includes a change to the front wing, with a small turning vane added to the rear of the front wing endplate lower tunnel and a tweak to the top flap to make it more loaded inboard. This should help to induce greater outwash.

But what really caught the eye was the sidepod change. The previous, more letterbox-shaped inlet is replaced by a tall, narrow one as part of a major overhaul of the sidepods. That includes the move to a more aggressively downwashed top surface guiding airflow to the rear of the floor.

It's just the first salvo in what's set to be a fierce development war.

How the cars really sound

The few videos we were served of the cars from Barcelona offered a bit of a clue that the new engines sound quite different to before.

Hearing them in person the sound is always quite different to what comes through on television, and they are all subtly distinctive. We wouldn't go so far as to say they are drastically different from the previous generation of engine, but the absence of the MGU-H does make them sound less muffled. They are a bit more aggressive in some ways.

The Red Bull and the Audi sound the meanest although with Audi that is because it sounds a bit less refined. The Honda didn't come past enough to get a great read on it, but it sounds a little bit louder and more raw. By comparison, the Mercedes and the Ferrari engines seem kind of quiet and conventional - the closest to what came before.

There are also different sounds to get used to with the turbo seeming a bit more prominent, lower gears being used in a lot of corners, and more lift-and-coast and energy strategies down the straights resulting in the odd unusual noise. Practice starts appear to require more revving, too.

Williams is overweight, but it works

After deflecting rampant speculation over the winter about its car being overweight, Williams has admitted that it will need to get its FW48 on a bit of a diet over the first few races.

While claims about it missing the target by 20-30kg appear to have been on the extreme side, team boss James Vowles admitted that its official claim of being 772.4kg – just 4.4kg over the minimum weight – was just "a press pack figure"...

Although Vowles fell short of revealing what the car weight actually is, he has said that efforts will be made after the start of the season to shed some excess.

The early good news for Williams though is that having missed the first test, it has at least started to rack up the miles.

And that decent foundation means it can at least avoid being unprepared if there is performance being left on the table with the car itself.

More cars should have this design...

Shout out to the teams that have put their race numbers on the shark fin of the engine cover: Ferrari, Red Bull, Racing Bulls.

Watching trackside it's so much easier to identify these cars with the numbers plastered on the side. The Ferrari has white numbers on a red background, so it's particularly easy to spot.

The other teams have either got a blank section or used it for a little bit of a sponsor logo, which is a little bit of a shame, if unsurprising.

It'd be great if this could be mandatory, because you don't just have to have the car right in front of you, side on, to see the number – it's actually visible from quite far away and even at an angle.

So if you're watching from the grandstands at an F1 race, it's going to be easier to spot those cars. And that might seem insignificant, but visual identifiers matter especially as drivers aren't exactly easy to spot in these cars.

It's not a big thing. But it's a worthy, fan-friendly service, and was a notable aesthetic lesson from our first experience trackside.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/9-things-we-learned-from-day-one-of-bahrain-f1-test/

El "minuto a minuto" de la primera jornada de pruebas:


https://as.com/motor/formula_1/test-de-pretemporada-f1-en-bahrein-hoy-en-directo-resultados-y-clasificacion-de-alonso-y-sainz-en-vivo-f202602-d/

MCL40:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA4_oDVbEAIr_po?format=jpg&name=900x900)

@ScarbsTech
·
15h
Aston Martin have what appears to be the same intercooler layout as Red Bull.
An Air-Air intercooler over the engine.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA4mFpGWYAA3HbP?format=jpg&name=small)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA4mFskWMAACeYN?format=jpg&name=small)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA4mFyxbYAAN94E?format=jpg&name=small)

@AlbertFabrega
·
17h
El Red Bull Ford  sin la tapa motor.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HA4VvjUWMAE3jyO?format=jpg&name=900x900)

AMR26: Fotos AMuS

(https://img.auto-motor-und-sport.de/_/bg:FFFFFF/f:best/h:996/rt:fill/w:1770/plain/2271386.jpg)

(https://img.auto-motor-und-sport.de/_/bg:FFFFFF/f:best/h:1238/rt:fit/w:2200/plain/2271387.jpg)

(https://img.auto-motor-und-sport.de/_/bg:FFFFFF/f:best/h:1238/rt:fit/w:2200/plain/2271388.jpg)

(https://img.auto-motor-und-sport.de/_/bg:FFFFFF/f:best/h:1238/rt:fit/w:2200/plain/2271390.jpg)

(https://img.auto-motor-und-sport.de/_/bg:FFFFFF/f:best/h:1238/rt:fit/w:2200/plain/2271391.jpg)

(https://img.auto-motor-und-sport.de/_/bg:FFFFFF/f:best/h:1238/rt:fit/w:2200/plain/2271392.jpg)

(https://img.auto-motor-und-sport.de/_/bg:FFFFFF/f:best/h:1238/rt:fit/w:2200/plain/2271395.jpg)

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/formel-1/aston-martin-technik-details-adrian-newey-seitenkasten-aufhaengung/

(https://imgur.com/uzTHCPb.png)

(https://imgur.com/N2Yz07l.png)

(https://imgur.com/XomGstV.png)

(https://imgur.com/xkrEdTz.png)

(https://imgur.com/arqn9iC.png)

(https://imgur.com/x7HVLL1.png)

Para quien note "algo raro" :sherlock: en las gráficas de meteorología, solo decir que, estoy harto de que se pierdan las señales de telemetría durante las sesiones.
Ayer se perdío a media jornada, hoy a media tarde... :ouchcomputer:

Ni os cuento cómo salen la gráficas en base a tiempos de sesión... :ouchcomputer:  :mierda:  :ouchcomputer:  :ireful2: (por eso no las pongo, porque parecen cuadros de Polloc :roto2rie:  :ouchcomputer:  :SHABLON_padonak_06:

Fastest laps by driver
1 Charles Leclerc (Ferrari) 1m34.273s, Day 2
2 Lando Norris (McLaren) 1m34.669s, Day 1
3 Max Verstappen (Red Bull) 1m34.798s, Day 1
4 Ollie Bearman (Haas) 1m35.394s, Day 2
5 George Russell (Mercedes) 1m35.466s, Day 2
6 Esteban Ocon (Haas) 1m35.578s, Day 1
7 Oscar Piastri (McLaren) 1m35.602s, Day 1
8 Lewis Hamilton (Ferrari) 1m36.433s, Day 1
9 Isack Hadjar (Red Bull) 1m36.561s, Day 2
10 Gabriel Bortoleto (Audi) 1m36.670s, Day 2
11 Pierre Gasly (Alpine) 1m36.765s, Day 2
12 Valtteri Bottas (Cadillac) 1m36.824s, Day 2
13 Nico Hulkenberg (Audi) 1m36.861s, Day 1
14 Alex Albon (Williams) 1m37.229s, Day 2
15 Arvid Lindblad (Racing Bulls) 1m37.470s, Day 2
16 Carlos Sainz (Williams) 1m37.592s, Day 2
17 Kimi Antonelli (Mercedes) 1m37.629s, Day 1
18 Liam Lawson (Racing Bulls) 1m38.017s, Day 2
19 Fernando Alonso (Aston Martin) 1m38.248s, Day 2
20 Sergio Perez (Cadillac) 1m38.653s, Day 2
21 Lance Stroll (Aston Martin) 1m39.883s, Day 1
22 Franco Colapinto (Alpine) 1m40.330s, Day 1

*every driver's best time set on C3 soft tyres apart from Norris, Stroll, Colapinto (all C2 medium) and Antonelli (C1 hard)

Fastest laps by driver (gap to leader)
1 Charles Leclerc 1m34.273s
2 Lando Norris +0.396s
3 Max Verstappen +525s
4 Ollie Bearman +1.121s
5 George Russell +1.193s
6 Esteban Ocon +1.305s
7 Oscar Piastri +1.329s
8 Lewis Hamilton +2.160s
9 Isack Hadjar +2.288s
10 Gabriel Bortoleto +2.397s
11 Pierre Gasly +2.450s
12 Valtteri Bottas +2.551s
13 Nico Hulkenberg +2.588s
14 Alexander Albon +2.956s
15 Arvid Lindblad +3.197s
16 Carlos Sainz +3.319s
17 Kimi Antonelli +3.356s
18 Liam Lawson +3.744s
19 Fernando Alonso +3.975s
20 Sergio Perez +4.380s
21 Lance Stroll +5.610s
22 Franco Colapinto +6.057s

Fastest laps by team
1 Ferrari 1m34.273s
2 McLaren 1m34.669s
3 Red Bull 1m34.798s
4 Haas 1m35.394s
5 Mercedes 1m35.466s
6 Audi 1m36.670s
7 Alpine 1m36.765s
8 Cadillac 1m36.824s
9 Williams 1m37.229s
10 Racing Bulls 1m37.470s
11 Aston Martin 1m38.248s

Total laps by team
1 Williams 276
2 Ferrari 271
3 McLaren 261
4 Haas 245
5 Audi 236
6 Red Bull 223
7 Cadillac 216
8 Racing Bulls 208
9 Alpine 174
10 Mercedes 143
11 Aston Martin 134

Total laps by driver
1 Charles Leclerc 219
2 Lando Norris 207
3 Arvid Lindblad 158
4 Pierre Gasly 146
5 Carlos Sainz 146
6 Max Verstappen 136
7 Ollie Bearman 130
8 Alex Albon 130
9 Nico Hulkenberg 120
10 Gabriel Bortoleto 116
11 Valtteri Bottas 116
12 Esteban Ocon 115
13 George Russell 110
14 Sergio Perez 100
15 Fernando Alonso 98
16 Isack Hadjar 87
17 Oscar Piastri 54
18 Lewis Hamilton 52
19 Liam Lawson 50
20 Lance Stroll 36
21 Kimi Antonelli 33
22 Franco Colapinto 28

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/full-2026-bahrain-f1-test-one-results-fastest-times-total-laps/

Ferrari blocked F1 race start change - What you need to know

Formula 1 looks set for fresh talks about potential changes to the start sequence at grands prix, The Race has learned, despite a previous move to alter the rules being blocked by Ferrari.

The issue has been triggered by safety concerns about the complicated procedures needed to make good getaways with the 2026 cars.

As previously reported, early testing of the new challengers has highlighted the great difficulties drivers face in preparing for race starts.

The perfect launch now involves ticking off a host of competing demands – which includes keeping the turbo spooled up for around 10 seconds to minimise turbo lag for the getaway, while also avoiding over-charging the battery.

Audi driver Gabriel Bortoleto is one driver who could not hide how big a challenge things were right now.

"Oh man, it's complicated," he said when asked by The Race about how he was finding the practice starts.

"Yeah, the 10-second thing and then after five seconds, I already lost the count.

"Then the engine's revving up, it's gear in and out, and you need to release the clutch. It's quite a mess.

"It was much easier last year. Let's see how we end up in Melbourne."

A safety issue

The difficulties that a number of teams and drivers have faced while practicing starts during testing, and the ease with which things can go wrong, has prompted paddock talk in Bahrain about this now being a potential safety concern.

This is because there is an increased chance of drivers getting things badly wrong – with one driver suggesting that analysis suggests 1 in 20 starts are being fumbled.

This effectively means that the likelihood of at least one car hitting trouble at every race is high.

When things go wrong, drivers risk being super slow away from the line – and that could open the door for potential accidents.

Furthermore, questions have been raised about whether there is going to be enough time for drivers to be able to spool up their turbos before the start sequence gets going.

This could be a particular problem for drivers at the back of the grid, who normally have very little time between forming up and the light sequence being triggered.

Cadillac driver Valtteri Bottas, whose five-place grid penalty at his next race means he will likely be starting at the back in the Australian Grand Prix, said he doubted there would be enough time to be fully prepared for the light sequences.

"The only concern for me is the example of, let's say in Melbourne, with my five-place grid penalty, if I'm towards the back of the grid, is there enough time when the light starts to go on to actually get that turbo spinning?" Bottas explained.

"Now it takes like 10 seconds, so that's one thing we've got to figure out."

Rule change debate

Multiple drivers and senior team figures have told The Race that they think the matter needs bringing up with the FIA to discuss whether or not changes can be made to help minimise any risks at race starts.

The first opportunity for this could be at next week's F1 Commission meeting on Wednesday, which is set to debate a range of matters involving the 2026 rules.

Any discussions with the FIA over the matter are likely to revolve around whether or not potential changes can be made to the start sequence to help avoid the risk of drivers hitting problems.

Two options appear to be on the table.

The first is delaying the minimum time between when the final car forms up on the grid and the lights sequence begins.

Some compromise had already been made on this front last year, when the rules were amended to mandate a minimum time for the five-light sequence to play out.

Previously there was no restriction on how quickly the lights could go on – whereas for 2026 the rules now state: "the time interval between the illumination of each of the five red lights in the sequence described above shall be one second."

One option to help give drivers enough time to prepare their turbos could be to impose a minimum time between the final car getting into position and the lights coming on.

Another possibility could be to revise restrictions laid down about the use of the battery off the line – which would help get rid of the requirement to spool up the turbo in the way it needs right now.

Under the current rules, drivers cannot use the MGU-K for extra battery power until the car has reached 50km/h – which means they have to rely on the internal combustion engine entirely for the initial getaway.

The rules also lay down that the MGU-K torque can only be negative – so charging the battery – when the car is stationary.

This rules out any assistance in filling in any gaps with turbo lag. So a change here could also be useful in making starts more consistent.

Ferrari resistance

However, despite the matter being up for imminent discussion, any move to get the start procedure changed may not be straightforward to achieve after it emerged that last year Ferrari resisted a previous effort to revise the rules.

The challenges faced by drivers at the starts with the new cars had been predicted by teams during early work on the 2026 cars.

The Race has learned that, as a result, last summer a proposal to revise the start light sequence had been put forward by F1's Sporting Advisory Committee to the F1 Commission.

However, sources have revealed that the idea was blocked by Ferrari team principal Fred Vasseur – who argued that the problems with turbo lag had been well known by teams during the design of their power units.

So any outfit that had made concept decisions that did not work with the start regulations as laid down had to live with it – as it would be unfair to force those who had made compromises to deliver good starts to make accommodations to suit those who had not.

This suggests Ferrari may have designed its engine in a way that minimises turbo lag - so the start issues are not such a problem for it.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/ferrari-blocked-f1-race-start-change-what-you-need-to-know/

Seven things we learned from day two of F1's Bahrain test

Formula 1's first Bahrain test continues to drop more and more hints about the likely shape of the 2026 pecking order.

Here's everything our team on the ground in Bahrain learned from the test on Thursday:

Where drivers are turning on the 2026 rules

F1's hopes of keeping a unified spirit of positivity surrounding the 2026 rules are over after Max Verstappen lobbed a verbal hand grenade.

Verstappen labelling the new cars as "anti-racing" and like "Formula E on steroids", just one day after Lewis Hamilton started the ball rolling by questioning the complexity of the rules, means that driver unease about F1's new era is now in the public domain.

It was no secret that the new cars would be powerful but energy-starved, and it is the latter aspect that is at the root of unhappiness.

As performance has started to be unlocked from the new cars, and the energy management aspect thrust front and centre, it is no surprise that top-line racing drivers don't like driving in economy mode and having to lift and coast early.

But the real headache for F1 is not that the negativity has started now.

It is instead how bad things could get when we get to even more energy-challenging tracks like Melbourne, and drivers get to experience what the racing is really like with battery annoyances. - Jon Noble

Aston Martin and Honda aren't just lacking laps

"Engine, balance, grip" - Lance Stroll's summary of where the Aston Martin is lacking makes for grim reading as Thursday revealed that its problems run deeper than just lacking laps.

There is a link between the two. If the AMR26 had hit the track sooner and completed more laps than a disrupted single day (of meaningful running) at Barcelona, or the paltry 36 Stroll managed in Bahrain on Wednesday, it would be a lot further along its obvious early curve troubleshooting.

Fernando Alonso had a much more productive Thursday, at least, falling just short of a century on 98 laps - but all that has done is expose the various weaknesses of the Aston Martin-Honda package.

It looks prone to front and rear locking under braking, stiff, awkward to drive and lacking grip on both axles. The engine's not strong, the car's heavy and far from being optimised.

All that will save this combination from a deeply underwhelming start to the season is if there's a lot of low-hanging fruit by finding big, big chunks of laptime just by dialling out various problems quickly – but it seems some limitations are more baked-in than that. - SMM

Where the Ferrari engine is an outlier

How good the Ferrari is remains a mystery in this test as there are moments on track where it still looks tough to control, but others where its pace on short and long-ish runs looks quite good.

Charles Leclerc's test is over after a full day in the car on Thursday, and he said the feeling is "OK" – but we didn't get to hear from him properly, so he is yet to elaborate.

The main thing that day two really confirmed about Ferrari is on the engine side, and where it is an outlier. Its cars are the only ones that seem to be eschewing the high-revving tactic most are adopting.

The technique of dropping the first gear as much as possible – seemingly mastered earliest by Verstappen and Red Bull – has become commonly adopted as this test has progressed. Unless you're driving a Ferrari, Haas or Cadillac.

It seems the Ferrari engine and gearbox are designed around a shorter first gear and that ratio means the shift from second to first is too disruptive to each of the cars dynamically.

If it's worth crucial extra energy harvesting, it might be something out of reach for Ferrari – although it is important to note it could be prioritising recharging through other methods. - SMM

An extreme Audi approach comes with a price

If Verstappen and Red Bull are the leaders in getting on top of extra downshifts in Bahrain, Audi is definitely top of the pile for how extreme the approach gets – but it comes at a high price.

The Audi drivers regularly arrive on the scene bashing through the gears quickly and early but that tends to leave the car all over the place and not looking comfortable to drive at all.

Gabriel Bortoleto seems to be taking a bit more time to get used to this than Nico Hulkenberg and when we asked how bad the downshifts are in terms of how much instability it's causing, it's telling that Bortoleto replied: "It's a great question" and in his answer said: "Let's put it this way, we are working a lot to improve that."

If Audi can, it will go a long way to helping its drivers because there is an awful lot of scrambling around trying to catch a lairy rear end and make it to the apex at the moment. - SMM

Race starts are weird and complex

As drivers have begun to unlock the complexities of the new F1 2026 rules, some aspects have emerged as being more challenging than others.

One of the big headaches at the moment is race starts – which are proving to be a massive step more difficult than they were in the past.

Demands to spool the turbo up for around 10 seconds, not over-charge the battery, and then balance revs for the perfect getaway have resulted in a number of fumbled practice attempts – and opened concerns about startline issues occurring when things get real in Melbourne.

Some now suggest that F1 should look at tweaks to the start procedure, to either give drivers more time before the start lights come on to properly prepare things, or even just make their life easier by allowing them to use the battery and not need to cover from turbo lag gaps.

But getting changes across the line will not be easy, after it emerged that Ferrari blocked a previous attempt at a rules tweak last year – because it felt it would be unfair to those who had prepared their engines in a certain way. - JN

Red Bull has its first real setback

Yes, Isack Hadjar crashing on the second day of the Barcelona test wasn't ideal - it meant Red Bull had to ship out spare parts so it could participate on the final day of the test - but in pure mileage terms, it didn't cost the team much.

So Thursday in Bahrain was Red Bull's first proper testing setback as an issue meant Hadjar could only log a single installation lap right at the end of the morning session.

He did get back out in the afternoon and clocked 86 more laps, leading to the post-session claim that "the morning disruption hasn't affected our overall plan" because Hadjar was able to work through plenty in a short timeframe.

Hadjar will share the car with Verstappen on Friday for the final day of what has been a solid, if now not bulletproof, test. - Josh Suttill

Cadillac's first show of pace

Cadillac seemed to be building up some speed on day two in Bahrain.

On day one, Cadillac was four seconds off the pace with Sergio Perez 14th and Valtteri Bottas 16th out of 18 drivers. Today, Bottas was just over 2.5 seconds off the pace (although Perez was still around four seconds off).

And, despite Bottas's mirror falling off at one point, Perez was able to reflect positively on the team's showing.

"In general it's been a more productive day," he replied to a question posed by The Race. "We still have some work to do, but generally I think we're getting the maximum out of the car and hopefully in the coming weeks we are able to improve more."

Recharge might be a contentious feature of the new breed of F1 cars but Perez said the team had made a proper step up with its Ferrari engine.

"Mainly, it's been the progress we've been able to make, understanding on the engine side - it's a tremendous change... a lot of understanding to do as well, so [I'm] looking forward to getting on top of all those things."

It's not just raw pace, but consistent pace that Perez says the team is working on - given the variation of "half a second to one second on each lap" in this new era. - Samarth Kanal

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/what-we-learned-day-two-of-f1-bahrain-test/

The car that looks most difficult at F1 testing

Aston Martin's tough start to Formula 1 testing with Honda is laid bare when watching the car trackside.

In the hands of Lance Stroll and even the great Fernando Alonso, it looks the most difficult of all 11 cars on track. At its best the AMR26 is constrained and slow, and at its worst it looks plain bad.

No drivers seem to be consistently grappling with the same problems like the Aston Martin pair. The concentration of lock-ups – and big lock-ups, too – into Turn 10 was remarkable even by the standards of this test, in which several drivers have been caught out by the off-camber left-hander.


What is hard to discern is how much of this is car, and how much is engine. The two parts of the package are more co-dependent than ever due to the increased demands of the engine's energy recovery system, and how that impacts the behaviour of the car under braking and on throttle.

On the first morning of the test, Stroll locked up three times in four laps entering Turn 10. The front of the car looked very stiff, and sensitive to the bumps, which suggested the car's mechanical set-up could be more to blame.

This continued early on day two, now with Alonso in the car. Three laps in a row, three lock-ups – one particularly massive one that ended in Alonso aborting the corner entirely. After regrouping, his next two push laps featured rear locking, one time midway into the braking phase and the other just at the apex.

When the rear locking occurred, it sounded as though there was silence from the engine for a split-second – a sound (or silence!) that anyone who has locked the rear axle of a kart or rear-wheel-drive car might be familiar with. Whatever this was, to be clear, it is not normal to hear in an F1 car...

The question is the cause. Is the car's mechanical platform so stiff, and awkward, and maybe heavy, that it is prone to front locking and then the rear locking occurs because the brake balance is being moved backwards, or the engine braking is being increased? Or is this linked to the performance, or lack thereof, from the Honda engine?

Asked by The Race how downshifting impacted the car's behaviour, Stroll replied tellingly: "It's not great at the moment, that's for sure."

Later on in the day, Alonso could be seen locking up yet again at low speed and catching snaps at higher speed, so there is not one isolated area of trouble. Rather it looks like a package that is further than any other from being refined and is surely the furthest from its potential. It could become a good F1 car, maybe even a very good one, but it doesn't look like that right now.

This is not to say the Aston Martin is F1's slowest car. And others are not great either, and have their own ills.

At low speed the Audi looks awfully unstable as the drivers mash through the gearbox all the way into first. The Williams appeared quite a handful, early on Thursday evening at least, and Carlos Sainz didn't seem to be having a good time at all.

Meanwhile, newcomer Cadillac – as sure-fire a team likely to be behind Aston Martin as there is right now – just looks grip-limited front and rear, and is simply a slow car by F1 standards.

Every team is working through issues to some degree, and every team is on a different programme with massive swings in performance possible. So the times are still hard to read into, even if Alonso's end-of-day deficit of four seconds was bang on how far away Stroll hypothesised Aston Martin is at the moment.

But how the car looks on track tallies with the initial driver feedback that there's a lot to improve.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/what-makes-aston-martin-so-bad-to-watch-on-track/

Full 2026 Bahrain F1 test one results: Fastest times + total laps

The first of two pre-season tests at Bahrain marks the first official on-track running for the 2026 Formula 1 teams - as the five days at Barcelona in January was held behind closed doors and dubbed the 'shakedown week'.

With the first week of Sakhir running complete, below you'll find a summary of each driver's quickest laptime of the test as well as the total mileage completed per team.

Fastest laps by driver
1 Kimi Antonelli (Mercedes) 1m33.669s, Day 3
2 George Russell (Mercedes) 1m33.918s, Day 3
3 Lewis Hamilton (Ferrari) 1m34.209s, Day 3
4 Charles Leclerc (Ferrari) 1m34.273s, Day 2
5 Oscar Piastri (McLaren) 1m34.549s, Day 3
6 Lando Norris (McLaren) 1m34.669s, Day 1
7 Max Verstappen (Red Bull) 1m34.798s, Day 1
8 Ollie Bearman (Haas) 1m35.394s, Day 2
9 Esteban Ocon (Haas) 1m35.578s, Day 1
10 Franco Colapinto (Alpine) 1m35.806s, Day 3
11 Nico Hulkenberg (Audi) 1m36.291s, Day 3
12 Isack Hadjar (Red Bull) 1m36.561s, Day 2
13 Alex Albon (Williams) 1m36.665s, Day 3
14 Gabriel Bortoleto (Audi) 1m36.670s, Day 2
15 Pierre Gasly (Alpine) 1m36.765s, Day 2
16 Liam Lawson (Racing Bulls) 1m36.808s, Day 3
17 Valtteri Bottas (Cadillac) 1m36.824s, Day 2
18 Carlos Sainz (Williams) 1m37.186s, Day 3
19 Sergio Perez (Cadillac) 1m37.365s, Day 3
20 Arvid Lindblad (Racing Bulls) 1m37.470s, Day 2
21 Fernando Alonso (Aston Martin) 1m38.165s, Day 3
22 Lance Stroll (Aston Martin) 1m39.883s, Day 1

*every driver's best time set on C3 soft tyres apart from Norris, Sainz and Stroll (all C2 medium)

Fastest laps by driver (gap to leader)
1 Kimi Antonelli (Mercedes) 1m33.669s
2 George Russell (Mercedes) +0.249s
3 Lewis Hamilton (Ferrari) +0.540s
4 Charles Leclerc (Ferrari) +0.604s
5 Oscar Piastri (McLaren) +0.880s
6 Lando Norris (McLaren) +1.000s
7 Max Verstappen (Red Bull) +1.129s
8 Ollie Bearman (Haas) +1.725s
9 Esteban Ocon (Haas) +1.909s
10 Franco Colapinto (Alpine) +2.137s
11 Nico Hulkenberg (Audi) +2.622s
12 Isack Hadjar (Red Bull) +2.892s
13 Alex Albon (Williams) +2.996s
14 Gabriel Bortoleto (Audi) +3.001s
15 Pierre Gasly (Alpine) +3.096s
16 Liam Lawson (Racing Bulls) +3.139s
17 Valtteri Bottas (Cadillac) +3.155s
18 Carlos Sainz (Williams) +3.517s
19 Sergio Perez (Cadillac) +3.696s
20 Arvid Lindblad (Racing Bulls) +3.801s
21 Fernando Alonso (Aston Martin) +4.496s
22 Lance Stroll (Aston Martin) +6.214s

Fastest laps by team
1 Mercedes 1m33.669s
2 Ferrari +0.540s
3 McLaren +0.880s
4 Red Bull +1.129s
5 Haas +1.725s
6 Alpine +2.137s
7 Audi +2.622s
8 Williams +2.996s
9 Racing Bulls +3.139s
10 Cadillac +3.155s
11 Aston Martin +4.496s

Total laps by team
1 Williams 422
= McLaren 422
3 Ferrari 421
4 Haas 390
5 Audi 354
6 Red Bull 343
7 Racing Bulls 327
8 Cadillac 320
9 Alpine 318
10 Mercedes 282
11 Aston Martin 206

Total laps by driver
1 Charles Leclerc 219
2 Oscar Piastri 215
3 Carlos Sainz 214
4 Alex Albon 208
5 Lando Norris 207
6 Lewis Hamilton 202
7 Ollie Bearman 200
8 Max Verstappen 197
9 Esteban Ocon 190
10 George Russell 188
11 Nico Hulkenberg 178
12 Gabriel Bortoleto 176
13 Franco Colapinto 172
14 Liam Lawson 169
15 Sergio Perez 167
16 Arvid Lindblad 158
17 Valtteri Bottas 153
18 Isack Hadjar 146
= Pierre Gasly 146
20 Lance Stroll 108
21 Fernando Alonso 98
22 Kimi Antonelli 94

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/full-2026-bahrain-f1-test-one-results-fastest-times-total-laps/

Why Newey's 2026 Aston Martin is so far behind already

Aston Martin is "clearly behind" at the start of its new Honda-powered era under the leadership of Formula 1 technical great Adrian Newey.

Newey, F1's pre-eminent design genius, joined Aston Martin in March 2025 to spearhead the team's development for the new 2026 car rules alongside a new works partnership with Honda off the back of the Japanese manufacturer's title-winning seasons with Red Bull.

But the new AMR26 has had a troubled start. It was late joining the Barcelona test and struggled for mileage on the only full day it ran there, which continued into the start of this week's test in Bahrain.

Days two and three have been more productive but the car looks difficult on track and Lance Stroll claimed on Thursday that Aston Martin is four seconds adrift. Team representative Pedro de la Rosa said on Friday "no one is happy when you are a second slower than what you were expecting" – indicating Aston Martin already thought it was in for a difficult start, and it is worse than that.

How this could be possible for a Honda-powered Newey design has been the obvious question given that combination, along with further big recruits like ex-Ferrari technical chief Enrico Cardile, the construction of a brand new factory, and a state-of-the-art windtunnel, has led to grand expectations for the team and F1's new 2026 rules were meant to be the first step towards the success demanded by such significant investment.

Asked this by The Race, de la Rosa indicated it is a consequence of Newey not arriving until March last year – something Newey himself said put aerodynamic development four months behind rivals – and the 18 months Honda spent in the wilderness between technically abandoning its F1 project and then agreeing to a 2026 Aston Martin deal.

"Looking back is always easy, in terms of how we should have, shouldn't have – it doesn't work in motorsport," said de la Rosa.

"But if we had possibly started earlier, if Adrian would have been here not March 2, but a few months earlier, if Honda wouldn't have gone and then come back - it's ifs and buts.

"Bottom line is we are slow, we're not where we want to be, let's get a plan together. We know exactly what's wrong, and work on it.

"So let's look ahead, not look back at what went wrong, what we didn't [do]. It's very easy to blame the time and that we started late. It was many reasons.

"The important thing is that we know what they are, really. That's what gives us the confidence that slowly, gradually, the difference will shrink."

As previously explained by The Race, while Honda is the same manufacturer that grew to achieve massive success in recent years, this Aston Martin project is a fresh start beyond just being based around new rules.

Honda technically withdrew from F1 at the end of 2021, and though its engines continued to be used by Red Bull through to the end of last season with Honda assembling and maintaining them based on frozen specifications, the F1 research and development programme was gutted.

Resources were diverted to other projects within Honda, as that was the whole point of quitting F1, which meant it had to effectively start up again from scratch.

In addition to Honda's development issues, it is working with an unproven (in F1) fuel supplier in Aramco, at a time when the championship switches to more complicated advanced sustainable fuels.

Plus, Newey has joined Aston Martin when it has yet to prove itself capable of designing and then sustaining a frontrunning car – so while his arrival and Cardile's are undeniably positive, they cannot address an entire organisation's shortcomings immediately. Any existing weaknesses in tools or processes still have to be identified and ironed out.

The result, based on Bahrain so far, is a car and engine that are far from optimised – tricky to drive, overweight and down on power and efficiency. The two sides are intrinsically linked in this new rules era given the need to charge the battery to power the 300kW MGU-K, which is providing almost half the engine's total power output.

What the car and engine does under braking is critical to charging the battery, for example, but the Aston Martin has been constantly locking up at both axles and looks very unpredictable in the hands of both Stroll and Fernando Alonso.

"We are clearly behind," de la Rosa said. "And as Lance said, we are four, three or five [seconds].

"We are clearly behind and when you are losing or you're missing that amount of time, it's clearly the overall package.

"You cannot say it's this or the other, because a lot of areas where we have already identified clearly and we are already working in Silverstone to address them.

"It won't be an overnight fix, it's not a five-minute job, it's obviously a lot of work involved, a lot of learning, a lot of optimising.

"But we have the confidence that we have the team, have the resources, we have everything in place.

"So yes, we are not where we want to be, but we have the people. And this is the most important thing."

Being late in building the car, then suffering reliability issues, has also left Aston Martin further back in its understanding.

Asked by The Race if the mileage limitations at least meant there was some low-hanging fruit to make bigger gains in the short-term, de la Rosa agreed and highlighted examples like the car not even completing a proper long run yet, and only doing a representative run on the C3 compound on the third day in Bahrain.

"We are on this steep learning curve," de la Rosa added. "Obviously we were, until yesterday [Thursday], the team that had completed, less laps between the Barcelona shakedown and Bahrain.

"So we are behind schedule, clearly. We are catching up. We are learning. And we are basically in the part of the process where you are starting to learn about your package and about the new rules.

"That's where we are. Clearly, we are behind other people. We are not in a stage where we are changing the set-up to learn, to see what the car has, optimising the set-up.

"We are just keeping the car as it is  and just trying to achieve as many laps as possible, doing aero mapping, learning about deployment, about harvesting and all the usual stuff."

De la Rosa said he can "can't imagine how difficult it has to be" for Stroll and Alonso, given the expectations for the project, but backed the team at Silverstone to improve the car significantly under Newey.

"Since Adrian has arrived, his leadership is unquestionable," said de la Rosa.

"The biggest difference I felt is, for example, yesterday, after a very difficult day testing here in Bahrain he spoke on the technical briefing: his leadership is so strong that all the team knows exactly what they have to do.

"This is very different from previous years, where everyone would have their own theory about things. Adrian is very clear what has to be done. And no one raises the hand to question it.

"Therefore you have this massive amount of resources working in one single direction.

"I know it might not sound convincing to you, but believe me, sitting there and listening to these comments was very inspiring for us. Especially when things go wrong.

"When things go right, we don't need a leader. It's when things go wrong."

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/why-adrian-newey-2026-aston-martin-is-so-far-behind-already/

What we've gleaned from F1 testing race sims so far[/i]

Formula 1 still has three more days of testing before the start of the 2026 season, but any fears teams would be under-prepared have already been long put to bed, as several proved themselves race-ready in this first Bahrain test.

Teams were doing simple long runs on day one but by day three many were doing what appeared to be proper race simulations - which were made trickier to take stock of given F1's timing system suffered persistent outages.

But around those outages enough of a picture did form, with race simulations by expected frontrunners Mercedes, McLaren and Ferrari captured either fully or at least substantially.

Here's what we've gathered from teams' race-like running so far in Bahrain.

For the purposes of clarity, only flying laps are tallied here - meaning several of the 57 race laps that make up the Bahrain Grand Prix are discounted even for those who logged a 'full' race sim. Time spent in the pitlane here isn't really relevant, nor are individual laps lost to traffic or driver error (even though this can of course be informative of what the car is like to drive) or what-have-you.

Race runs
Kimi Antonelli, Mercedes
Start: Friday 5.37pm

Stint 1: Soft, 16 laps (1m40.128s avg)
Stint 2: Hard, 12 laps* (1m38.547s avg)
Stint 3: No data

Lewis Hamilton, Ferrari
Start: Friday 5.14pm

Stint 1: Soft, 17 laps (1m40.280s avg)
Stint 2: Hard, 17 laps (1m38.929s avg)
Stint 3: Medium, 6 laps* (1m37.461s avg)

Oscar Piastri, McLaren
Start: Friday 4.57pm

Stint 1: Soft, 11 laps (1m40.947s avg)
Stint 2: Medium, 20 laps (1m39.604s avg)
Stint 3: Hard, 18 laps* (1m38.472s avg)

Sergio Perez, Cadillac
Start: Friday 4.02pm

Stint 1: Soft, 15 laps** (1m43.432s avg)
Stint 2: Medium, 15 laps (1m41.577s avg)
Stint 3: Hard, 21 laps (1m41.275s avg)

Esteban Ocon, Haas
Start: Friday 4.00pm

Stint 1: Soft, 8 laps (1m41.772s avg)
Stint 2: Medium, 12 laps (1m40.510s avg)
Stint 3: Hard, 16 laps (1m39.869s avg)

Alex Albon, Williams
Start: Friday 3.57pm

Stint 1: Hard, 17 laps (1m43.074s avg)
Stint 2: Hard, 17 laps (1m41.754s avg)
Stint 3: Medium, 18 laps (1m40.241s avg)

Franco Colapinto, Alpine
Start: Friday 3.41pm

Stint 1: Hard, 18 laps*** (1m42.285s avg)
Stint 2: Soft, 11 laps (1m40.640s avg)
Stint 3: Medium, 13 laps (1m39.565s avg)

George Russell, Mercedes
Start: Friday 11.47am

Stint 1: Soft, 16 laps (1m40.752s avg)
Stint 2: Medium, 17 laps (1m39.729s avg)
Stint 3: Hard, 19 laps (1m39.247s avg)

Isack Hadjar, Red Bull
Start: Thursday, 3.57pm

Stint 1: Medium, 15 laps (1m40.941s avg)
Stint 2: Medium, 13 laps (1m39.994s avg)
Stint 3: Soft, 12 laps* (1m38.628s avg)

Arvid Lindblad, Racing Bulls
Start: Thursday, 4.14pm

Stint 1: Hard, 13 laps (1m42.526s avg)
Stint 2: Medium, 14 laps (1m41.666s avg)
Stint 3: Soft, 5 laps (1m40.318s avg)

* denotes stints with laps lost to timing issues
** a very substantial break between first and second stint, but laptimes suggest continuity
*** car remained in pits for a handful of minutes

Test laptime analysis is precarious at the best of times, much less when a healthy chunk of the timing data is missing.

But there are things that can be deduced at this point in time.

The race run executed by Oscar Piastri around the same time as Lewis Hamilton was running in the Ferrari (and Kimi Antonelli soon joining them in the Mercedes) did indeed seem a considerable step behind those two, as corroborated by McLaren team principal Andrea Stella.

While the race runs executed by team-mates Charles Leclerc and Lando Norris on the day prior are currently almost wholly unavailable, it was suggested by Stella that those too fitted this pattern, and that Leclerc's was particularly competitive.

As for Hamilton versus his Mercedes replacement Antonelli, they are close in their respective first stint (on the same C3 compound), with Hamilton starting faster but his pace dipping enough for Antonelli to make up the difference at the end of the stint.

Antonelli is then quicker initially in the second stint, and notably so, but because of the timing crash we do not know what the pay-off is.

However, cutting off the available Friday race runs at the Antonelli mark of around 28 relevant laps in (but only those that only used two sets up to that point) does paint a good picture for Mercedes.

Antonelli 46m24.611s
Hamilton +7.484s
Piastri +18.038s
Russell +21.406s (morning)
Colapinto +1m02.548s
Albon +1m25.047s
Perez +1m26.208s

Ocon time excluded due to too-short first two stints

The Haas currently does appear best of the rest, but there's every sign right now of a considerable gap between the top teams and the midfield teams, albeit with much more of a midfield spread than we're used to.

Of the two teams whose race runs were conspicuously absent on Friday, the Red Bull had a handful of shorter stints generally in the 1m38s margin that not much can be gleaned from besides from the car being generally in the ballpark, and the Aston Martin only did a couple of true long runs, both just not particularly fast at all.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/what-weve-gleaned-from-f1-testing-race-sims-so-far/

Bahrain F1 test one winners and losers

Formula 1's first official pre-season test is complete after three days of running in Bahrain, with what feels like a highly uncertain true 2026 pecking order right now.

But from what we've seen, there have been some winners and losers emerging from the first of two Bahrain tests...

Loser: Aston Martin

Is Aston Martin's much-anticipated Adrian Newey-led F1 era about to begin with a complete dud of a car?

We were so excited when Newey's extreme-looking Aston Martin AMR26 broke cover at the Barcelona shakedown, but early indications from Bahrain testing suggest this is going to be another long season for a team that's become all too familiar with those over the past couple of years.

The team placed so much stock in this grand rules reset of 2026, hoping to utilise Newey's genius and Honda's expertise to make a giant leap out of midfield mediocrity.

Yet first impressions of the AMR26 are that it is too slow and very difficult to drive - and that's not just us saying that! That's also the downbeat verdict of the drivers after three days of running in Bahrain - with Lance Stroll saying Aston Martin is already facing a deficit of four and a half seconds to F1's leading teams, a figure team representative Pedro de la Rosa didn't dispute.

Fernando Alonso pointed to Aston Martin being late to the Barcelona shakedown as one of the main reasons for its current struggles, effectively missing out on hundreds of laps where basic problem-solving could have been done in advance of the Bahrain test rather than during it.

Aston Martin's main problem at this stage seems to be a combination of 2026 car development falling four months behind schedule while the team waited for Newey to finish his gardening leave after leaving Red Bull, plus new engine partner Honda being significantly behind the curve on power unit development.

Aston Martin probably isn't going to be F1's slowest team when the season starts for real in Melbourne (sorry Cadillac!), but as things stand, with one pre-season test to go, it's certainly a contender to be the biggest disappointment. - Ben Anderson

Winner (for now): Mercedes

The original 2026 pre-season favourite hasn't done that much this week to shed its tag.

Yes, there were some reliability issues that weren't there at Barcelona - Kimi Antonelli lost most of Thursday to them and had his running limited by them on Wednesday too - but Mercedes showed strong pace once more.

And while George Russell claims Mercedes "took a step back" in Bahrain, many of its rivals think Mercedes is sandbagging, holding back the pure performance of its engine.

Which, as Max Verstappen hinted, could be seen as a deliberate ploy just before the potentially crucial F1 Commission meeting next week, the topics of which include the engine compression ratio saga.

So Mercedes is a winner, but only for now. But its own admission it's "screwed" if the FIA decides it wants to change the compression ratio testing rules. And that certainly looks more likely than it did when the controversy first emerged last December. - Josh Suttill

Winner: Cadillac

F1's brand-new team might have caused a few red flags this week - including for a gone walkabout wing mirror - but that shouldn't detract from what was actually a really strong three days for Cadillac.

After all those stoppages didn't actually result in meaningful amounts of downtime, so Cadillac ended up in the middle of the mileage totals for the week.

And pace-wise, it wasn't even the slowest car, with Sergio Perez's day three lap, a respectable +3.696 seconds off Kimi Antonelli's test benchmark. Turn up to Melbourne with anywhere near that deficit and Cadillac can be pleased, given the mountain it has climbed to get here.

And its long runs, while not troubling the midfield, were at least complete and respectably slow rather than embarrassingly slow. - JS

Winner: Ferrari

When it emerged Ferrari had missed the engine compression ratio trick this past winter, you'd be forgiven for wondering whether it was in for more pain in 2026.

And it still might be, but you can't help but be impressed by what it has shown in Bahrain so far, especially when you delve deeper into the long-run data.

Lewis Hamilton completed a long run on the final day that was quicker than Oscar Piastri's McLaren run while they were both on-track, and Charles Leclerc had compared favourably to Lando Norris on Thursday, too. That led to McLaren team boss Andrea Stella's belief that Mercedes and Ferrari are the two teams to beat right now.

Now, of course, those wouldn't be the first impressive long runs to be explained away via varying fuel loads or power unit modes, but you can't generate that kind of long-run pace without something resembling a strongly performing car.

Plus Ferrari appears most on top of the chaotic 2026 start procedures right now, as its engine seems able to minimise turbo lag better than its rivals.

So, coupled with a strong sleeper hit arc at Barcelona, Ferrari can tentatively head into the final test with some optimism for at least starting 2026 on the right foot. - JS

Loser: F1's 2026 engine formula

Following the behind-closed-doors Barcelona test, the public Bahrain test was always going to be our first proper chance to know what the drivers really think about the new cars.

And while there was plenty of split opinion - the likes of Lando Norris "enjoyed" driving the cars - the most headline-grabbing take was that of Verstappen's extraordinary verdict on the "Formula E on steroids" cars.

He called them "anti-racing", "not fun", and "not like F1", with Red Bull's livery and the proportions of the cars the only redeeming features for Verstappen.

That was the strongest view, but he isn't alone in his criticism, many of the older guard, in particular, Lewis Hamilton and Fernando Alonso for example, have criticised the management side of these new cars and power units.

Their criticism is of the fundamentals of the 2026 regulations, so it's not as if their concerns can be eased by any quick changes.

Instead, F1's probably going to have to grit its teeth and expect more fire on its shiny new product from some of its biggest stars. - JS

Winner: Red Bull's engines

Verstappen might hate these 2026 F1 cars, but he might be driving one of the most competitive cars in Melbourne if the evidence of testing is anything to go by.

Red Bull's first-ever power unit continues to impress. At Barcelona, it was the solid reliability, but in Bahrain, it was the data traces that started catching the eye of Red Bull Powertrains' superior deployment versus its rivals.

This was the proof Mercedes boss Toto Wolff had to declare Red Bull the new "benchmark" and say it was a second a lap quicker on the straights.

Regardless of whether you agree with that claim, in the words of Red Bull's technical director, Pierre Wache, the new Red Bull F1 engine certainly isn't looking "stupid on track".

And that is a monumental achievement, especially when you look at how far ahead Red Bull is of Aston Martin - with former engine partner Honda - and Audi, the other first-time engine builder.

No wonder Isack Hadjar couldn't hide his delight at how well the engine's debut has gone. - JS

Loser: The Brawn GP dream

The beauty of a regulations reset is all the possibilities it offers of turning things upside down - which would be quite neat for F1 given things have felt very 'locked in', really, all through the hybrid era. Yes, Red Bull usurped Mercedes, McLaren rose up, Aston Martin had its brief flirtation with frontrunning - but by and large every year the winners kept being drawn from the same pool.

But in a full revamp, those built-in institutional advantages can be at least briefly negated by a stroke of genius or even a stroke of luck. So it's heartening to see that as it currently stands the favourites to be doing all the winning early on are... uhhh, Mercedes and Red Bull? And maybe Ferrari? And maybe McLaren? The same teams that locked out the top four in the constructors' last year, and also the year before that, and also the year before that?

On the evidence of testing so far, the F1 of haves and have-nots lives on, with not much in the way of social mobility. Whether that's good or bad is for everyone to decide individually - but for now, kudos to F1's 'ruling class', which seems to have averted any glimmers of a midfield-led revolution. - Valentin Khorounzhiy

Winner: Haas

The smallest team on the grid has much to be happy about after the first test in Bahrain - partly by virtue of other teams struggling conspicuously.

There does appear to be a Premier League appearing in the F1 constructors' standings, but Haas, at least after the first week's showing and some solid mileage numbers in Barcelona, appears to be towards the top of the next tier.

Ollie Bearman set the eighth-fastest time of the test and Esteban Ocon the ninth-fastest, but more impressive is Haas's place in fourth in the mileage charts - just shy of 400 overall.

Team boss Ayao Komatsu was elated with the team's start to 2026 - understandably so - as it really hasn't had a major hitch in Bahrain, and only one on Wednesday in Spain.

Unremarkable? Maybe. Maybe it's remarkable just how decent Haas looks right now. - Samarth Kanal

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/winners-losers-from-first-f1-2026-bahrain-test/

10 things we learned from the first Bahrain F1 2026 test

From big pecking order clues to political games, from 2026 rule problems to a clear team in trouble, Formula 1's first official week of testing at the Bahrain Grand Prix venue in Sakhir properly delivered in terms of big storylines.

Here are nine major takeaways.

Teams are desperate not to be favourite

Mercedes left Barcelona as the champion of pre-season. Red Bull took that mantle on Wednesday in Bahrain. Ferrari was turning heads on Thursday. By Friday it was Mercedes again.

And all the while everybody tried to shift the spotlight onto someone else, because all the top teams are desperate not to be labelled fastest.

Ferrari thinks Mercedes is deliberately hiding its pace, the unspoken implication being that it was doing so to downplay a perceived engine advantage and reduce the likelihood of a late compression ratio rule change. Something Max Verstappen was more explicit about, insinuating that Mercedes would suddenly be a lot quicker on the straights in Melbourne.

Mercedes and its customers, for their part, have waxed lyrical about Red Bull all week, praising the preparation and subsequently the performance of its brand new in-house engine.

Red Bull has batted that away emphatically, as it also believes Mercedes has plenty more to show, and thinks it is only fourth-fastest itself.

But Mercedes customer McLaren seems to be keen to claim that fourth position for itself too, as it argues this ruleset favours works teams given the intense energy demands and the benefits of having your car and engine perfectly designed for each other and getting access to key engine information at the earliest opportunity.

What the laptimes tell us

Persistent timing system crashes and Red Bull not doing a race simulation on the final day mean the race sim picture is incomplete - but at least there is a picture.

The McLaren of Oscar Piastri, the Ferrari of Lewis Hamilton and the Mercedes of Kimi Antonelli all did race simulations on Friday afternoon - Antonelli going about half an hour later than the other two.

There was not a ton here between Mercedes and Ferrari, at least not conclusively. In stint one, which both cars ran on the C3 soft, Hamilton was faster to start with, but Antonelli kept the pace better. In stint two on C1 hards the Mercedes did appear to have a decisive advantage - but data is missing after 12 laps.

RACE SIMULATIONS (MORE IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS HERE)

STINT 1

Antonelli - Soft, 16 laps (1m40.128s avg)
Hamilton - Soft, 17 laps (1m40.280s avg)
Piastri - Soft, 11 laps (1m40.947s avg)

Stint 2

Antonelli - Hard, 12 laps* (1m38.547s avg)
Hamilton - Hard, 17 laps (1m38.929s avg)
Piastri - Medium, 20 laps (1m39.604s avg)

Stint 3

Hamilton - Medium, 6 laps* (1m37.461s avg)
Piastri - Hard, 18 laps* (1m38.472s avg)

* timing cut off when Antonelli was in second stint, and Hamilton and Piastri in third

What is clear enough is that the McLaren was a step back, across all stints, maybe by as much as half a second.

Red Bull engine a 'reality check'

Red Bull has been winning praise for the work done on its first F1 engine since the Barcelona test, but that was mainly because it was surprisingly reliable straight away.

In Bahrain, that surprise and respect has turned into low-level fear. Mercedes asserted the Red Bull is a second quicker on the straights because it has unmatchable charging capabilities, so is deploying electric power more around the lap.

The work done on the gearbox, too, has clearly facilitated a great package in terms of making first gear quite pleasantly usable for its drivers, a rarity in modern motorsport. This means Red Bull can maximise battery charging potential with aggressive downshifts without terribly destabilising the car.

Mercedes driver George Russell thus described this test as a "bit of a reality check for us" because after a winter of speculation that his team was in the best place, in Russell's own words Red Bull has now "knocked it out the park".

Russell's adamant "they're very much the team to beat" even though Mercedes hit the top of the times on the final day. He says making improvements across testing at the same circuit is more straightforward, but it's Red Bull's pace at the starts of these tests that's caught his eye.

Come Australia, Russell is already convinced Red Bull will be ahead.

Starts are a 'recipe for disaster'

What first emerged in early testing as a bit of intrigue about the high-revving nature of F1 2026's race starts has turned into a full-on safety issue.

With a good start demanding drivers rev engines for around 10 seconds to spool the turbo up, while at the same time not overcharging the battery, finding consistency is proving very difficult.

And if repeated mistakes are happening in low-stress conditions of pitlane exit practice getaways, it is only going to get worse amid the stress of a real start at a grand prix.

But what has alarmed drivers – and now several team bosses – is that when things go wrong with the starts, they go badly wrong. And that means there is a risk of drivers being left stranded.

Throw into the mix cars on cold tyres being in straight mode, with minimal downforce, and it is little wonder that Piastri has labelled it all a "recipe for disaster".

Calls for changes to the start procedure have grown very loud – with the FIA set to come under pressure over the matter at next week's F1 Commission meeting.

Williams recovery has a pace question mark

Having failed to make the Barcelona test, Williams achieved its primary objective for Bahrain by completing more laps than anyone else.

DISTANCE COVERED (km)

1 Williams 2245
2 McLaren 2240
3 Ferrari 2213
4 Haas 2072
5 Audi 1867
6 Red Bull 1823
7 Racing Bulls 1769
8 Cadillac 1704
9 Alpine 1683
10 Mercedes 1461
11 Aston Martin 1098

This, combined with the fact it had completed two filming days before this test started, has proved the Williams is reliable and allowed some serious work to be done.

However, there are bigger question marks over the performance of the car. Yes, it looks comfortably in the midfield - but not at the head of it. And as this is a team that sees fifth place as its new baseline, that means not everything is all right yet.

The car doesn't look as comfortable on track as the Haas and Alpine. There's a hint of perhaps running a little bit stiffer than ideal, and the grip suffering as a result. The race simulation on Friday afternoon was notably slower than that of the aforementioned teams, too.

But Williams is behind on running, so the key for the next Bahrain test is to understand the data, improve the car set-up and unlock the performance that could take it to the head of the midfield.

The team in the most trouble

Brand new car and engine rules meant there was a good chance a 'crisis team' emerged in testing this year.

Aston Martin might not go quite that far, but it is the team most in trouble. After the bold AMR26 turned heads when it appeared in Spain, its only headlines have been for negative reasons here.

Starting the test unreliably, looking awkward on track all week, and seemingly being seconds off the pace, is a nightmare beginning for a partnership that promises so much.

This is far well short of the standards expected for a team led by Adrian Newey, backed by the financial might of Lawrence Stroll, powered by a works Honda engine, and led on the driving side by Fernando Alonso.

The good news is there's a whole other test still to go to make progress - but as team principal Mike Krack said, the main lesson this week is there's a lot of work to do.

The best midfield team...by default

The smallest team on the grid has much to be happy about after the first test in Bahrain - partly by virtue of other teams struggling conspicuously.

The top four teams from the end of 2025 look a cut above the rest, but Haas, at least after the first week's showing and some solid mileage numbers at Barcelona, appears to be towards the top of the next group.

Ollie Bearman set the eighth-fastest time of the test and Esteban Ocon the ninth-fastest, but more impressive is Haas's place in fourth in the mileage charts - just shy of 400 laps overall.

Team boss Ayao Komatsu was elated with the team's start to 2026 - understandably so - as it really hasn't had a major hitch in Bahrain, and only one at Barcelona.

Unremarkable? Maybe. But maybe it's remarkable just how decent Haas looks right now compared to some others...

Cadillac's had the best start possible

Cadillac logged over 1700 kilometres in Bahrain - more than Alpine, Mercedes and Aston Martin. It also showed respectable pace, ending up 3.7 seconds off on headline laptimes - and 10th-fastest of the 11 teams, ahead of Aston Martin.

As a result, attention has turned to exploiting more of the potential of the car even though no proper performance runs have yet been attempted. All of this means the team has created a firm foundation to build from.

All this points to backmarker respectability. For a start-up team, that is as good as a win given the scale of the challenge.

There were no major problems, it looks the part on and off track and while there is still a huge amount of work to be done, the performance in Bahrain is testament to how rigorously the process of building up the team has been executed.

The real Audi isn't amazing - but isn't bad
Even though Audi ran its 2026 car so early it was always likely to be the one that changed most by Australia, we were surprised by just how different it was this week.

In aerodynamic terms it is close to a B-Spec. The bodywork has been totally revised, with vertical sidepod inlets that somewhat resemble the Mercedes zeropods, little details popped up here and there like slots in the keel floor, and Audi even changed the entire front wing with a different activation system.

The real Audi turned up in both design and function. It's not stunningly good, but it was never expected to be. There's work to do to make the car more compliant and tune the engine better, as it is clearly not as far along as fellow newcomer Red Bull Powertrains.

But it's more reliable, seems reasonable in the midfield, and it now has a sturdier foundation than the one it started building in Spain.

Qualifying prep tactics are odd

While it is too early for Pirelli to know how degradation is going to be with the new 2026 cars and tyres, as nobody is running close to the limit, it is seeing the first evidence of some quirks with its products.

One of these is a potential impact on qualifying – as teams and drivers now have to balance the need for tyres to be in the right operating temperature with having a full battery.

Achieving both those targets is proving to be too difficult for a single lap, as the speed needed to keep the rubber in check ends up burning through too much energy.

Early indications are pointing to teams potentially favouring double preparation laps before qualifying efforts this year – which will give them enough time to get their ducks in a row.

With an extra two cars on the grid this year, if everyone ends up doing extra laps in qualifying it could lead to a few more 'traffic paradise' moments for everyone.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/bahrain-f1-test-nine-things-we-learned/

@ScarbsTech
·
20h
Some details on Ferrari's unique diffuser geometry
The diffuser is a little wider than the regs, as the wall is merged into the FIA deflector stack
They've also made an extension to the inner diffuser roof, which is topped by a flap with a long preceding strake

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBCF0UJa4AAIpfx?format=jpg&name=small)

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBCF0T9bIAAqLkk?format=jpg&name=small)

@ScarbsTech
·
21h
This screenshot from #F1 youtube shows the diffuser extension may have been damaged (pitstop practice ?).

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBCF1aIXAAAQErm?format=jpg&name=900x900)

@xavigazquez
·
22h
Hi guys again,

And here we have the rear of the McLaren, truly exquisite and very well crafted.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBBvAEjXUAA7duv?format=jpg&name=900x900)

@xavigazquez
·
21h
Hi guys,

An overview of the rear of #AudiRevolut 🧐

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBB8LzcW8AAp0XX?format=jpg&name=900x900)

McLaren wants fix for 'recipe for disaster' 2026 F1 starts

Oscar Piastri fears that Formula 1 risks creating a "recipe for disaster" if start procedures are not changed for the beginning of the season.

Amid growing concerns about the complexities of getting the new cars off the line, many drivers and team figures think that the matter needs to be addressed with urgency.

The combination of the complicated getaways, which includes revving the engine for up to 10 seconds to spin up the turbo, and the fact that when things go wrong on starts it can cause accidents, has triggered worries from many within the paddock.

Piastri is clear that the issue is not just that there is a risk of drivers just being slightly slow away, it is of several cars being stranded on the grid.

"The difference between a good and bad start last year was you got a bit of wheelspin or you had a bad reaction time," he said.

"This year it could be effectively like an F2 race where you almost go into anti-stall. You're not just losing five metres or so. You can be losing six or seven spots if it doesn't go well."

There are also the potential risks involved with cars having lower downforce off the line because they are in straight mode.

As Piastri said: "It's whether we use straight mode at the start or not as well, because I think a pack of 22 cars, with a couple hundred points less downforce, sounds like a recipe for disaster to me."

George Russell has admitted the starts are "challenging" and a "nightmare" for engineers to help manage.

But he also raised the issue that while practice starts in testing were done when drivers had waited for the optimum turbo boost, on a real race start drivers have to go when the lights are out, without consideration for the time to spool the turbo correctly.

"I'm only doing my launch when I'm in a given window, but we are very conscious that, for a race start, you go when the lights go out," he said. "You don't go when your specific turbo is in the right window."

The possible solutions
While the 2026 cars are more complicated to get off the line, the solutions to the problems do not involve a total revamp of the technology.

The main issue is one of timing; where drivers risk being rushed while stationary on the grid to get their turbo boost into the sweet spot and that could expose them to making mistakes or not provide enough time.

It is a situation that will be worse for drivers at the back of the grid, as they normally have less time once into their grid slot before the start light sequence begins.

Haas driver Ollie Bearman said that the differences between a good start and a terrible one were miniscule.

"It's really on a knife-edge to get it right and it's a matter of milliseconds," he said. "If you're too late or too early by half a second then it doesn't work.

"It's complicated and so far we haven't been consistent at all with the practice starts, which is a bit worrying."

One solution to help could be to impose a minimum time between the final car forming up on the grid and the start light sequence beginning.

Another option could be to allow drivers to use their battery off the line to help fill in any power gaps from turbo lag, with it currently banned from use below 50km/h after the start.

While such solutions would be simple to implement and not involve any modifications to the cars, getting approval may not be easy.

Last summer Ferrari rejected a proposal at the F1 Commission to delay the start lights coming on to alleviate concerns about potential risks of cars stopping on the grid.

This was because team principal Fred Vasseur had warned about the need to make such a change many months before, but his concerns had been dismissed by others.

As a result, Ferrari set about creating its engine concept around one that would be more suitable for a short start sequence, so it would not need the turbo spun up for so long.

So when those that had not made the same compromises with their engine design suddenly came back with demands to extend the start sequence, Vasseur felt he was well within his rights to not support something that could potentially benefit others who had not heeded his earlier worries.

Alpine managing director Steve Nielsen acknowledged that it was only when he saw the practice starts on the real cars in Barcelona that he realised there could be a problem.

"It's one thing to see these things on paper and discuss them before you've actually seen them in real life," he said. "But I was surprised when I first saw it in Barcelona.

"You see these enormously long, what looks like pre-start revs, but it's actually the drivers building [turbo] boost.

"Then you start thinking, well, we've got 22 cars this year. You imagine them coming around to the grid - and that procedure is very different for the guy on pole than it is for the guy in 22nd. I think it is something that may need looking at."

McLaren boss Andrea Stella, who has called for FIA action over race starts, lift and coast and overtaking concerns before the season opener, is well aware that changing rules does not come without political considerations.

However, he feels the situation is one that is of the utmost importance.

"This is a bigger interest than any competitive interest," he said. "So I think all teams and the FIA should play the game of responsibility when it comes to what is needed in terms of race start procedure."

And even Ferrari customer teams were in favour of making some changes - even though they could in theory benefit.

Haas boss Ayao Komatsu felt that things needed looking at now the reality of the situation had become clear.

"We discussed it last year, but of course we didn't know last year exactly what we were dealing with," he said.

"It's not a total surprise. I think it's important that we have regulations such that everybody can do a decent start and we have normal racing."

False picture from fumbled F1 test
The safety debate around the 2026 getaways was further fuelled by the images of a shambolic practice start right at the end of F1 testing in Bahrain this week.

As seven cars went through a test start sequence in the closing minutes of the session on Friday, it was far from smooth.

Alpine's Franco Colapinto nearly crashed as he arrived at his grid spot after being caught out while trying to warm up his rear tyres.

Then, when the lights went out, Piastri on the front row did not get away at all, while only half the cars behind him moved.

But although it gave the impression of things being out of control, the strange situation was actually a failure of procedure rather than technical problems related to how hard the starts are.

Drivers were not supposed to launch until the car ahead of them had moved – to help minimise the risk of any accidents.

However, while some followed that procedure, others from behind did not.

As Piastri later explained: "I think the start today was just a mix up in instructions. I got told to wait until whoever was in front of me had gone – so do my own launch and not do it to the lights.

"Clearly, some other people had a different idea. So that was nothing to do with the power units."

But whatever the outcome of efforts to change the start procedure, there seems no doubt it will be a big focal point of interest for the new season.

As Alpine's Pierre Gasly said: "I advise you to be sitting with your TV on in Australia, because it could be one that everybody remembers!"

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/why-f1-2026-starts-are-a-recipe-for-disaster-and-how-to-fix-it/

Our trackside verdict on every F1 2026 car so far

Three days of testing in Bahrain meant spending hours trackside studying the class of Formula 1 2026.

Here is an early assessment of every car from what Edd Straw and Scott Mitchell-Malm observed across multiple stints to various corners across the stint.

FERRARI
The Ferrari never looked like the most planted car, particularly when Lewis Hamilton was at the wheel. During Friday morning's running, there was a clear example of that in the comparison of his fastest lap of the morning compared to George Russell, which were set minutes apart but night and day in terms of how stable the car appeared through the Turn 6 right-hander in the middle of the sweepers and into Turn 8.

Hamilton described these cars as like "rallying" sometimes and that comes across more in his hands than Charles Leclerc's from trackside. Hamilton had the rear sliding a lot more, which sometimes seemed a consequence of him trying to work the front harder on entry – but other times just seemed to be a hint of lingering rear instability.

It is also noticeable that the Ferrari-engined cars have to stay in second gear when others are dropping to first to keep the turbo speed up. That partly reflects what's reckoned to be the smaller turbo in the Ferrari, but also the extra downshift just seems to unsettle them too much: Leclerc tried it once but the instability seemed to put him off experimenting further.

AUDI
The Audi misbehaved monstrously under braking early in the test, with both drivers visibly struggling with the impact of trying to downshift to ultra-low gears in the slow stuff to keep the turbo working hard, then struggling with getting the power down on exit anyway.

Whether that was the sole cause of the turn-in instability that was evident at times, or just compounding it, remains to be seen. While it improved as the test went on, the car only ever got to a level where it looked to be towards the rear of the midfield pack.

There were also hints it was one of the softer cars in terms of mechanical platform, which wasn't a problem but just an emerging characteristic in these cars that run less low and stiff than last year.

RED BULL
The Red Bull was visually and audibly impressive from the very first day, as its capacity to smash down through the gearbox all the way to first gear so smoothly highlighted just how well-prepared and sorted this new package seems to be.

It was not all smooth sailing. Verstappen caught a big slide at Turn 10 on day one, and on day three he went in so hot he was never going to make the corner – so just booted the throttle when deep into the run-off, and carried on pushing! There were also times when rear instability in the entry phase led to a couple of bites being required for the corner.

Max Verstappen, Red Bull, F1
Another encouraging thing is that Isack Hadjar seemed to cope well and beyond seeming to struggle just a tiny bit more with the rear instability that came with the car demands, he was adjusting his driving well through stints and so it tended to get neater rather than more lairy.

ALPINE
The Alpine was generally just that bit behind the leading group of four cars when it came to grip. Often, you could see both Pierre Gasly and Franco Colapinto having to be that little bit tentative on corner exit to keep the rear end in place.

Sometimes it looked really well-sorted, other times, like when Colapinto had to bail out of a way-too-hot entry into Turn 11, it just didn't seem to have the grip required to handle what the drivers wanted the car to do.

The overall impression was that this was the most 'midfield' of the midfield cars, which is not a criticism, and in terms of consistency it had the edge over the Williams.

MERCEDES
A standout feature of watching the Mercedes trackside is that, as the test progressed, there was nothing particularly standout about it. That's a big positive because even when the laptimes were fast, it rarely looked as difficult as most of the other cars.

At Turn 10 it didn't catch the eye or the ear in the way the Red Bull does by going down through the gears quite so aggressively, or having the same rotation. But it looked and sounded neat and tidy, moving on well from a sometimes trickier opening day when its drivers had the occasional moment, as most did at some point.

The end of the test is when it stood out most. Watching at Turn 11 during a late Kimi Antonelli long run, it was striking just how confident and aggressive he seemed to be.

Antonelli was comfortable opening up the corner wider than anyone else over the outside kerb, and turned in sharply and committed every time. The car complied well and looked good all the way to the exit, which definitely couldn't be said for some others.

CADILLAC
It visibly struggled for grip compared to most other cars, and looked perhaps a little less compliant than it ideally would be, but the impression was that this was a solid enough car in terms of behaviour that simply lacked overall grip.

There were occasions in the Turn 4 right-hander where the drivers would find themselves with some correction to do as one axle or the other gave up. And it was perhaps the most prone of any car, except the Aston Martin, to some front-locking into the tricky Turn 10.

First and foremost, it just needs more aerodynamic load - and adding that might expose some of its underlying balance limitations, but it looks like a car that's destined for backmarker respectability that would count as a huge success for this new team.

McLAREN
There was not much consistency to the McLaren trackside. It could look very good – some push laps from Lando Norris on day two, hammering down to first gear at Turn 10, were particularly impressive – but it also seemed unruly as well.

Coincidence or not, as fuel loads could have a huge impact on this kind of behaviour, the unruliness seemed to happen more with Oscar Piastri behind the wheel. He seemed to have a tougher time with the car moving around under braking and locking up the fronts, and also the rear stepping out at higher speed.

Even on the final afternoon, Piastri was inconsistent in Turn 10, with the car variable in how it reacted on turn-in - and therefore sometimes wider than anticipated and other times seeming to respond more then he would have wanted.

Where there was a clear trend across both drivers was a tendency for the engine to rev aggressively on traction and have wheelspin up to third and fourth gear, which is consistent with a team still not quite as refined on battery charging and deployment as the works team.

HAAS
We're used to the Haas keeping a low profile during testing to focus on heavy fuel work and it was probably the car that grabbed the least attention during the Bahrain test. That's meant in a good way, for it seemed to be the car that, if not had fewer moments than others, was likely having more minor and contained ones.

As it's not a car that is blessed with class-leading downforce, things inevitably looked harder on longer stints. Ollie Bearman could be seen starting to grapple with some understeer on a longer Thursday evening run, which turned to rear instability as he presumably tried to compensate with some brake-setting changes.

But overall it's a solid car that looks unremarkably decent, runs well and for which, as Bearman says, "driveability has been good from the beginning".

ASTON MARTIN
So many of my (Scott's) trackside notes regarding Fernando Alonso and Lance Stroll reference a lock-up, or a slide. Three in four laps for Stroll on day one, four in a row for Alonso on day two, which included the biggest I think I've ever seen at Turn 10 - which, when I told him that on Friday, caused a real 'yeah, that's what I'm dealing with' kind of grin.

This is a car that usually looks difficult to drive and when it doesn't, it looks slow - maybe because the drivers just have to be so restrained, maybe because the energy recovery capacity of the Honda engine means there's more saving to do.

It could also be the engine and the new gearbox are just not comfortable with the aggressive downshift demands of this energy formula, and that the package is not that well-refined – hence front-locking turning to rear-locking very quickly, either as the drivers try to manage the car behaviour with brake balance or engine braking changes, or as the energy recovery demands change lap to lap.

Ultimately, it just reflects a package that is a lot less well-understood than all its rivals'.

RACING BULLS
The Racing Bulls appeared to be grappling with the effects on car dynamics of the power unit behaviour more than most. In both slow and fast corners, there were moments where the expected grip simply was not there, including on Friday morning when Liam Lawson found the rear end not sticking as expected in the fast sweepers and took to the run-off after collecting the resulting moment.

The car could be erratic on turn-in and was also often a handful when it came to putting down the power in traction zones out of slower corners. But those problems likely started before the corner given the inconsistency on corner approach and the tendency to be variously under- or over-rotated.

WILLIAMS
The number of times the Wiliams went past was probably more impressive than the manner in which it did so, topping the mileage charts for this test.

Williams didn't leave a midfield-leading impression by any means. Sometimes its car looked pretty tidy but others it was hard to slow down and there was one stint where Carlos Sainz didn't look like he was having a good time at all.

Perhaps the high rake means it's having to run a little stiffer, which is creating its own problems, but that might be eased as it catches up on set-up work following its delayed start.

It's decent for a car that started the week well behind the others but there is quite a bit of room to improve.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/bahrain-f1-test-trackside-verdict-every-2026-car/

@JunaidSamodien_
·
20h
A beautiful picture of the flow-viz on the left hand side of the SF-26 floor. #F1Testing

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBHSef8bAAEXexW?format=jpg&name=small)

What weird F1 2026 starts are really like to watch

Starts are a massive talking point with Formula 1's new engines and what stands out in person more than the complexity, inconsistency, and alleged safety risk, is simply how peculiar the 2026 procedure is.

With so much new this year, it is hardly surprising that there are some counterintuitive experiences for those driving the cars, and those observing them.

Bashing down the gearbox aggressively to first, hearing the revs rise and seeing the cars lurch around from the engine braking, is a good example. But witnessing practice starts during F1 testing was by a clear margin the most unusual experience of the lot.

Without the MGU-H, the new engines don't have an electrical assist to pre-spin the turbo. So sustained revving is required to increase exhaust energy, spin the turbine faster so it is closer to its effective operating speed, and eliminate the lag before the boost kicks when the driver wants to accelerate.

Videos of practice starts at the Barcelona shakedown showed drivers spending several seconds longer than normal on the throttle, revving the engine for a long time before launching. So this was a known, unusual phenomenon going into Bahrain - but is maybe another 20% or so weirder to experience in person.

Looking for more expert insight from F1 2026 testing? The Race Members' Club is the place to be - join today to start a seven-day free trial

The car pulls into position, the driver engages the clutch and selects first gear, the revs rise - and the car just sits there revving for what feels like an eternity. Some sound more piercing than others - the Audi made for a particularly eardrum-bashing listen in my experience - but overall it is quite jarring compared to the usual hold of a few seconds that came before.

Ollie Bearman in the Ferrari-powered Haas was the first to arrive. He revved the engine for just over 11 seconds before pulling away - but the sound isn't consistent. Even if the revs only change subtly there are small but noticeable crackles, presumably as Bearman slightly modulates his throttle input to go with the clutch bite point.

Next up, Gabriel Bortoleto's distinctive Audi. He revs the engine for a whopping 13.5s before pulling away and the oscillations are unique. I'm not sure if this makes much sense, but it has a very 'metallic' sound: a high-frequency rasping that's not as clean as the Ferrari or the Mercedes, which I heard via Lando Norris's McLaren. The exhaust note is a lot higher and the revs change more before the launch too, although that could obviously just be differences in how quickly the driver settles into the level he wants to launch with.

Lewis Hamilton's practice start in the Ferrari was impacted by waiting for another car to pass, but even so, revving that for some 15-16s was quite something even though it was almost certainly Hamilton just taking his time. Valtteri Bottas taking 11s in the Cadillac despite waiting a few for another car to pass is probably a better indicator of the reduced turbine-spinning requirement the supposedly smaller Ferrari turbo demands.

The works Ferrari's process, probably unsurprisingly, is more refined than its customers. The engine sounds a lot smoother, consistent rpm, and the exhaust note is quite dampened by comparison.

This cannot be said for Lance Stroll's Honda-powered Aston Martin. For one thing, he restarted the process (which, when backing off the throttle, sounded so odd it was almost like a misfire), but when that car sits there for seven seconds, it is crackling and popping so much, on top of a low, guttural exhaust.

It's like the engine has a cold and though some of this will reflect a genuinely distinct-sounding engine it also surely reflects how unrefined the Honda is compared to other engines that have logged a lot more real-world running.

It contrasts sharply with the McLaren, which has an eight-second hold on the throttle, sounds extremely clean (in the circumstances) and has the best bite-point find and rpm consistency of any of the car/engine combinations we got to hear.

The shortest launch process we watched was Liam Lawson's in the Red Bull-powered Racing Bulls. The hold was only six seconds, but it was all a bit messy - revs rising and falling, causing a pitch of the very distinctive, mean Red Bull engine sound to fluctuate, culminating in a slightly flat launch.

Bearman also fluffed a pull-away - interestingly after just six or so seconds on the throttle - when we were watching a different start, and a couple of others weren't particularly clean either. That's before even factoring in how differently the cars react when the 350kW from the MGU-K kicks in. So it served as an interesting set of case studies for how long, how complex and how inconsistent the starts are at this stage of testing.

"It's a lot more complicated and a bit more inconsistent, that's for sure," says Bearman.

"Now we have to spend a lot longer doing the wait phase prior to doing the actual start and it's really on a knife-edge to get it right.

"It's really a matter of milliseconds, if you're too late or too early by half a second then it doesn't work.

"So it's complicated and so far we haven't been consistent at all with the practice starts, which is a bit worrying, but I think we start to understand why and as we understand the engine more things will get easier.

"It's not as easy as a throttle position equals a certain power from the engine. And then of course you have the transition to MGU-K at a certain speed as well, which is proving challenging to implement properly.

"It's tough for everyone, that's for sure. You see everyone sitting on the grid for 20 seconds with their rpm all over the place and it shows that we're not the only ones struggling with that."

What connects them all is they are loud, aggressive in a way, and disconcerting mainly because it's so unfamiliar. That goes for the drivers, too. One told me that they almost feel bad doing it, because it is so counterintuitive, and that they are wincing a little bit for fear of the engine going bang. It won't, or it shouldn't, because it is built with a very high tolerance, but it speaks to how irregular the whole thing is.

It will become more normal in time, and it may not be something broadcast viewers notice much given the picture choice and where the audio is drawn from for the world feed in those moments before the lights come on probably doesn't need to feature cars at the front of the grid revving their engines weirdly early.

Unless anything changes there, it's just a 2026 idiosyncrasy they need to get used to and accept - as do all of us watching.


https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/what-weird-f1-2026-starts-are-really-like-to-watch/

Mark Hughes: 2026 F1 cars could've been even more flawed

Max Verstappen's disparaging comments on Thursday in Bahrain testing regarding how the energy management demands of this generation of car have made for a style of competition which is "anti-racing" left no room for doubt about his disapproval. Coming on top of the similar comments from Lewis Hamilton, it's not the sort of messaging the commercial masters of F1 would have chosen from their two highest-profile stars.

In one sense, that's refreshing; the drivers haven't been tamed by the marketing demands of the vast commercial entity. But how we got here is everything to do with commerce.

The awkward energy usage - trading off corner approaches and entries for energy deployments on the straights - which Verstappen and Hamilton are railing against is just another corollary of the original big decision to configure a near-50/50 electrical/combustion split and deleting the previous ERS-H technology.

That decision was all about trying to attract new automotive companies into F1 and to retain the existing ones. Electrification was the direction the industry was moving and the sophisticated, highly F1-specific hybrid technology of the 2014-25 generation was deemed too complex and non-relevant for new automotives.


Massive batteries and no ERS-H has given us an ICE which needs to be used as a generator for the battery and therefore placed a huge complexity of demands upon the driver and a move away from the traditional craft of being faster than the next guy by taking more speed into the corners. Now it's about being smarter with how you retain battery charge to be deployed down the straight. The traditional demand is in direct opposition to the new one.

Although this is only now being experienced by the drivers, it's something which has been known about since the very formation of these regulations years ago. But that was the direction F1 had chosen to go. Given the severe challenges of getting a raceable car from such severe energy starvation (huge batteries and not much recovery capacity with which to charge them), the regulators and F1 engineers together have done an amazing job to produce the cars we have. An amazing job in navigating through the obstacle course set by the decision to do what the automotive sector was asking for.

So yes, we now have a generically flawed car in terms of what skillset it demands of a driver and of how appealing that might be to the fanbase. But it could have been so much worse.   

Which begs the question of should F1 be following the wishes of automotive manufacturers? If we think of the automotive future, it's towards full electric, driverless and domestic appliances rather than sporting charisma.

How this new era is received by fans and how much that reception might be influenced by the opinions of its highest-profile drivers will be crucial in determining the direction of F1 after the end of these regulations.

A return to smaller batteries (or none at all)? Back to traditional driver demands? Or will the fanbase have been weaned off such values by then? And will F1 have lost Verstappen to another category in the meantime?

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/f1-2026-cars-could-have-been-even-more-flawed-than-verstappen-thinks/

Tendremos F1 en Montmeló en 2028, 2030 y 2032. Lo peor de la noticia es que se alternará nada menos que con SPA  :roto2rie:  :cray: .


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBSx_3ta8AAHqWR?format=jpg&name=large)




Catalunya acogerá el Gran Premio de Fórmula 1 hasta 2032

El Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya será sede del campeonato mundial en los años 2028, 2030 y 2032, además de acoger la prueba prevista para 2026.

16 febrero, 2026 | Formula 1

El Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya, que ha acogido 35 ediciones de la Fórmula 1 desde su inauguración en el año 1991, mantendrá su lugar en el calendario más allá de 2026, cuando finalizaba el anterior contrato. La renovación ha sido firmada por los representantes de Circuits de Catalunya, SL, sociedad participada mayoritariamente por la Generalitat de Catalunya y adscrita al Departamento de Empresa y Trabajo, con Formula One World Championship Limited (FOWC) en relación con el Gran Premio de Barcelona-Catalunya como prueba del Campeonato del Mundo de Fórmula 1 para los años 2028, 2030 y 2032, además de la prevista para 2026.

A partir de este año, la cita llevará el nombre de Gran Premio de Barcelona-Catalunya en lugar del habitual Gran Premio de España. El Circuit de Barcelona-Catalunya acogerá entre el 12 y el 14 de junio de 2026 la 36ª edición del campeonato del mundo, la primera bajo la nueva denominación.

Más ---> https://www.circuitcat.com/es/noticias/circuit/catalunya-acogera-el-gran-premio-de-formula-1-hasta-2032/

Más #aeroporn (https://x.com/hashtag/aeroporn?src=hashtag_click) del gran Xavier Gàzquez.


Xavier Gàzquez @xavigazquez (https://x.com/xavigazquez) · 2h (https://x.com/xavigazquez/status/2023440416415379918)

Hi guys,

Details of the #Mercedes tea tray while conducting aero tests 😜😜
.
#xaviimages #aeroporn #f1technicalphotographer #F1Tech #formula1 #F1 #grainingf1tech #BahrainTestF1


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBS0UYhbcAI0fsi?format=jpg&name=large)

Comparando morritos.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBTDuPUWAAABrh8?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)

Craig Scarborough @ScarbsTech (https://x.com/ScarbsTech) · 5h (https://x.com/ScarbsTech/status/2023399377386262670)

Amazing shot of the Willians and Mercedes packaging from @crosaleny
.
Despite the outer bulky appearance the packaging inside is quite tight. It wouldn't be difficult to see very sidepods shrunk around the rads.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBSPArraMAAVNvT?format=jpg&name=large)


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBSPApXboAAD5gb?format=jpg&name=large)




Also the Merc PU packaging shows the plenum sits with inlets pointing up, much the 2014 PU. The pipe feeding them turns down. Suggesting the intercooler sits below, fed from the compressor. With the airfilter also feeding through the V. There's some careful insulating going on.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBSPBNxaoAAozwb?format=jpg&name=large)


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBSPBF1XAAANdfr?format=jpg&name=large)




Albert Fabrega @AlbertFabrega (https://x.com/AlbertFabrega) · 3h (https://x.com/AlbertFabrega/status/2023425845239701506?s=20)

Yep! See this from Merc to "hold" the sidepod


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBSnE4_aoAEvLTH?format=jpg&name=large)

nicolas carpentiers @carpentiers_f1 (https://x.com/carpentiers_f1) · 4h (https://x.com/carpentiers_f1/status/2023409539954135517?s=20)

On the #Alpine, the trailing edge collapses while the leading edge stays fixed, creating an "extension" of the mainplane that helps maintain attached airflow.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBSYGo5WsAE3VV1?format=jpg&name=large)


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBSYGq0bsAA3zEl?format=jpg&name=large)


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBSYGpZagAAK9uE?format=jpg&name=medium)

Craig Skinner, diseñador jefe de Red Bull, ha dimitido de manera inesperada. Estaba en el equipo desde 2006.



Fuente -----> RacingNews365.nl (https://racingnews365.nl/breaking-hoofdontwerper-red-bull-stapt-plots-op?utm_source=x&utm_campaign=breaking-hoofdontwer&utm_medium=social_organic&utm_content=14256239)



(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBTNDQXW8AAPkaT?format=jpg&name=large)

Espero que recogieran algún dato útil :roto2rie: .



(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBTZbM8bkAALH0d?format=jpg&name=large)

Para la segunda semana de test en Baréin, Pirelli va a llevar toda su gama de neumáticos.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBSTksdbIAAFEkW?format=jpg&name=large)

Estos son los neumáticos elegidos por cada equipo para esta segunda semana en Baréin.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBSTUbgWAAAG4a1?format=jpg&name=large)




Nachez @Nachez98 (https://x.com/Nachez98) · 3h (https://x.com/Nachez98/status/2023442007985672383?s=20)

🚨 OJO

⚠️ Los equipos podrán usar los neumáticos que no usaron en la 1ª semana o que tengan menos de 10 vueltas de uso

👉 Aston Martin solamente usó un neumático duro C1 (le quedan 3) y llevó 16 C2 y no usó todos

CALMA

Cita de: GoVal en Feb 16, 2026, 09:32 PMEspero que recogieran algún dato útil :roto2rie: .

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBTZbM8bkAALH0d?format=jpg&name=large)

Qué malo es el peyote cuando tienes que hacer algo... :gaydude:  :roto2rie:  :rofl:

Pensé que era por una promoción de Halloween o algo así  :roto2rie: :roto2rie: parece que han llenado el coche de telarañas  :bruji3: :tirapelos: :pelosdepunta:

Messy 2026 F1 cars leave a deeply disturbing impression

Bahrain testing was Formula 1 2026 finally beginning to showcase itself to the world at large (tentatively) after the attempted secrecy of 'shakedown week', and like everyone else I was curious to see how these all-new cars would perform under the glare of TV cameras and the Bahrain lights.

I'm not on the ground in Sakhir like my colleagues Jon Noble, Edd Straw, Scott Mitchell-Malm and Samarth Kanal, so in actual fact the onboard video of the fastest lap of day one, by Lando Norris's McLaren, put out on YouTube by Formula One Management, was my first properly considered interaction with F1's new cars.

And I'm sorry to say the impression it left me with was deeply, deeply underwhelming.

You can visibly see how starved of power the car is through the higher-speed corners in particular. Turns 12 and 13 are what really did it for me - the car just looks and sounds broken, like the throttle has suddenly been limited to 50% or has failed in some way.

The driving challenge through what used to be one of the most demanding parts of this circuit is now so neutered that Fernando Alonso reckons Aston Martin's team chef could drive the car at the speeds F1 drivers are carrying through there.

"Historically, Turn 12, a very challenging corner, so you used to choose your downforce level to go [through] Turn 12 just flat," Alonso explained. "So you removed downforce until you are in Turn 12 just flat with new tyres. It was a driver-skill decisive factor to go fast.

"Now in Turn 12 we are like 50km/h slower, because we don't want to waste energy there and we want to have it all on the straights. So to do Turn 12, instead of 260km/h [we do it] at 200km/h, [and] you [the media] can drive the car; the chef can drive the car in Turn 12 at that speed."


'The chef can drive the car in Turn 12 at that speed'. To my mind, that is an incredibly damning statement, from someone we can all agree absolutely knows what he's talking about.

I wanted to be sure my eyes hadn't deceived me, so I watched Kimi Antonelli's onboard from the final day. He set the fastest lap of testing so far, a 1m33.669s, a full second quicker than Norris managed on day one.

But honestly it looked the same, an energy-starved mess of a lap. Too much lifting and coasting, too much coasting in general.

Obviously there is a degree of circuit dependency at play here (and maybe a bit of Mercedes engine sandbagging), but it seems the cars are basically so energy-starved on the straights now that pretty much all the corners have to be sacrificed at the altar of harvesting - whether it's literally coasting through what should be the fastest and most challenging corners, or having to do that weird 'Verstappen technique' of mashing the downshifts as low as possible through the slower turns to recycle energy through the battery.

It's horrible to watch, and so I'm not surprised Verstappen has gone on the attack and described this all-new F1 as basically not what F1 should be.

I agree with him. Lighter cars that move around are no fun if basically the threshold of power and grip is so low that it is easily achievable for every driver on the grid - and probably many others who aren't. Are the drivers now really driving the cars, or are they just operating them?

That story about Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri wondering how on earth Charles Leclerc could carry the speed he did through Tabac at Monaco last year - that game of who might dare to tread where few others can - I just don't see it happening with these cars as they are now.

We might get there some day. Norris is right to point out that it's very early days, and that grip and performance is nearly always initially sacrificed when new rules arrive. But I'm not sure I trust him when he says it's still "fun". It doesn't look fun.

Sure, he's right to say it's more fun than many other humdrum things these guys could be doing for a living. But coasting through fast corners 50-60km/h slower than you know you could go if the engine worked better, to a racing driver, is surely the very definition of frustration.

And don't take my word for it, just reference Liam Lawson's answer when he was asked directly whether these F1 cars are actually fun to drive. One long, drawn-out "Ummmmmm"...

I remember when the hybrid engines first arrived in 2014, and ex-F1 drivers long retired, such as the late Niki Lauda, complained that F1 cars had become too easy to drive. I remember the likes of Alonso bemoaning that early generation of hybrid F1 because the laptimes were too close to GP2 (in the days when GP2 cars were five seconds quicker than Formula 2 cars are now) and everything was so tyre-limited, especially in the races.

I think F1 made a smart move by chasing more outright performance from 2017 onwards: bigger (and heavier) cars, yes, unwieldy and difficult to engineer, especially once ground effect came back in from 2022, but they were bloody fast! The tyres were still a problem, but even that element started to improve, particularly over the past couple of seasons.

Now the cars are travelling so slowly through the turns I don't see how they heat the tyres up, never mind overheat them. The cars have suddenly become too slow for the circuits, unable to achieve sufficient power, when traditionally F1's problem has been the opposite. I can see Monaco being just about all right, but everywhere else these cars are potentially going to look ridiculous.

That people are talking about even what should be flat-out qualifying laps being a challenge of energy management is deeply disturbing. From what we can see of these 'push' laps so far in testing, it's going to be Sunday driving for these guys even on a Saturday...

The fact we've begun 2026 with so much political in-fighting, before the first race has even happened, really doesn't bode well either.

Ferrari versus everyone else on F1's start procedure, because Ferrari has designed an engine to cope with spooling up the turbo from scratch in a way others haven't; Mercedes versus everyone else over compression ratios designed to claw back as much lost power as possible; McLaren arguing the rules need to change already because the sheer lack of battery power available means the cars aren't going to be able to race each other properly and the closing speeds are going to be chaotic.

It's potentially a bit of short-term fun in a narrative sense, but it's a right mess. And so is what we're seeing on track with this extreme lifting and coasting and weird low-speed recharging and drivers looking like they're steering broken cars through high-speed corners.

And how is there going to be any proper 'last of the late brakers' racing and overtaking in this formula if everyone is having to lift and coast everywhere to recharge their batteries?

Never mind Verstappen's unflattering comparisons with Formula E, this is Formula 1 as Frankenstein's monster - rules designed to get Audi through the door (and entice Honda to return), but at a real cost: cars that must have movable aerodynamics, low-drag tyres and wheels, and a much lower minimum weight because otherwise they would be even more dog slow and unsatisfying to drive than they are now.

I know it's very early days, and Norris is right to say performance will likely improve, but it just looks like such a low bar to begin with, and I worry how many people will switch off before we get there, despite F1's best efforts to encourage everyone to toe the 'this is great' PR line (and that's already not working when it comes to Verstappen and Lewis Hamilton).

We can now visibly see those forecasted problems with this new ruleset. Instead of something holistic, we've ended up with completely neutered hybrid engines and then the FIA trying to build a wacky chassis formula around them to somehow claw back the lost performance. So far, the gap between one and the other looks like a yawning chasm.

You can see why, in the early part of last year, such serious and panicked considerations were given to adopting V8s/V10s with sustainable fuels, rather than this halfway house ditching of some parts of the hybrid. I never ever thought I'd say this, but Bring Back MGU-Hs!

Audi and Honda wouldn't be here, sure, but at least the cars would work properly. I worry the new, faster version of Albert Park that hosts the season opener could end up being an embarrassment for F1 in terms of spectacle, with cars desperately trying to avoid running out of energy through that long, high-speed stretch from Turn 6 to Turn 11.

Will the high-speed left/right of Turns 9 and 10 remain the fearsome challenge it once was, or will everyone have to coast through there now to make sure they have enough battery power to make it to Turn 11 without looking like a total shambles?

I really, honestly, don't care for what I've seen of F1 2026 so far. So now I'm just hoping Norris's crystal ball is correct and this mess somehow sorts itself out, through ingenious engineering yet to be determined and the good old fashioned passage of time. In the meantime, I'm a bit worried about what 2026 will bring.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/messy-2026-f1-cars-leave-a-deeply-disturbing-impression/

'Not pleasant at all' – What an F1 driver sees trackside in testing[/b]

Years of experience watching Formula 1 cars trackside pales drastically in comparison to the expertise of driving the real thing.

One of the first rules of observing cars on-track in F1 testing is that you spot the bad stuff first. It's more obvious, more pronounced. Why that might be happening, and what's going on when the big dramatic lock-ups turn into much subtler limitations, becomes a harder task to work out.

Not so much for those who have felt these experiences with their fingertips, and through their backsides, though. Hence the insight of former Alpine F1 driver and now Haas reserve Jack Doohan proved so valuable during a trip trackside to Turn 10 during the first Bahrain test.

The start of the lesson was delayed by a red flag just as we arrived. In a quirk of fate, Doohan's former team was the cause. But before long the cars hit the track.

"He's not able to stop the car earlier," Doohan quickly tells us of Arvid Lindblad, who was circling at the same time as Isack Hadjar in the Red Bull for a great point of comparison.


"He's turning in slightly sooner because he's not stopped the car, because he's not putting as much brake pressure on.

"He's sitting in mid-corner, front scrubbing, understeering and having a much later rotation."

It immediately crystallised a limitation observed in the Racing Bulls throughout testing - a car that did not handle the aggressive downshift demands of the Red Bull Ford Powertrains engine nearly as well as its bigger brother, and looked like hard work for both drivers all week long.

Turn 10 is an established favourite vantage point for The Race. It is a bumpy, off-camber corner and a great spot to see if drivers are able to apply high brake pressure combined with steering, versus being scared of locking up, and any car imbalances that arrive on entry, apex or exit as a result of that.

And it stands out even against the general challenges of the new 2026 cars. There's been a lot of locking observed early in this generation, which Doohan reveals is partly a consequence of this year's active aerodynamics on both the front and rear wings: "Typically with straightline braking, where they have the new fancy wing mode, depending on which wing is closing first and at which rate it can heavily dictate what axle of the car is loaded first, and that then really dictates locking.

"But Turn 10 is obviously different, because there's no fancy wing mode between Turn 8 to Turn 10. It can simply be down to how the car is on ride. It's always a limitation.

"There's a lot of front-left locking on the braking into there, but we're seeing the cars that may be struggling a little bit more, which aren't in a nicer window - which is your Aston Martin, your Williams.

"The Audi has been getting better and better over the three days, but we were seeing they had weaknesses in other areas. I think it really comes down to how the cars are riding over the bumps."

One of those Audi weaknesses was the big dynamic reaction the car had in getting down to first gear, which its drivers seemed to be trying to do earlier than most but then had quite dramatic rear instability to deal with.

Doohan hasn't experienced that in reality but is familiar with it from early 2026 simulator work in years gone by and says it was "quite interesting to see how the cars were behaving" in reality - "even the cars that were getting away with it a little bit more".


"Your Mercedes, your McLaren, your Red Bull - over one lap, it looks fine," he says.

"The Red Bull is obviously very good at getting down to first gear very early. Seems honestly whether it's gear ratio or what they're able to do, it's handling it very, very well.

"But you see over that long-run distance, after lap three-four-five, where the rear starts to be struggling a little bit more, isn't in prime condition, you can still see on that downshift to first gear, that small, slight little bit of instability that is coming with it.

"They're handling it, yes, but it's still not pleasant.

"However, you see the Aston Martin, the Audi, each lap, it's very rare to see them come through clean on that first-gear downshift.

"When we were there watching, there's probably eight out of 10 laps with [Gabriel] Bortoleto on the Audi, he had a moment with the first-gear downshift, and also in the first-to-second gear upshift on power.

"It's not pleasant at all, especially when it's so short."

This is the most unorthodox thing a racing driver can be asked to do. Especially in F1 where first gear has never really been a factor on the track itself outside of race starts or anomalies such as the Monaco hairpin.

It has become a key early part of seeing the 2026 cars in action because the early downshift is needed to spike the revs and help charge the battery for one thing but also spin the turbo to assist with reducing turbo lag off the corner, as these engines do not have the MGU-H to handle that electronically anymore.

And the reaction the car has to the driver forcing first gear is aggressive.

"Obviously, your first gear ratio is much shorter, and you get much more of a braking sensation from the engine," says Doohan.

"Imagine you're in a road car, you're in neutral, there's no friction, the car is just free-rolling. But if you're rolling at 50km/h in neutral, and then put in the first gear, you are going to have a very unpleasant surprise!

"When you release the clutch the rear wheel is going to lock up, the rpm is going to spike like crazy, you don't know what's going on and think you've just blown up your pride-and-joy wagon!

"And it's similar, in a more controlled environment of a racetrack, but the same sort of sensation of abnormalities and not understanding how you're going to make this work. Because all we've known for so long with first gear is either pulling out the garage, pulling off the start line, or if you've got an issue on track and pulling back on.

"First gear is: clutch, gear, and away you go. So it's strange, but with new regulations, and vast new regulations, comes new challenges and new areas for improvement.

"And first gear with high rpm, with deployment being such a huge factor, not just over the lap but it being deployed and recovered many times throughout one lap, means extreme measures are having to be explored."

We tell Doohan the day after going trackside, having quizzed Hadjar on what we had seen, that he had a big grin on his face answering how well the Red Bull's handling the first-gear anomaly.


"Yeah, well I'm sure they're stoked about it! They're very happy they're able to handle it very well," he says.

"I'm sure they're pretty stoked about it getting into first gear 30 meters before anyone else is, and it not jolting the car. So well done to them."

It is a key early point of distinction because every team is having to handle the phenomenon bar the Ferrari-engined drivers, believed to be a result of that engine having a smaller turbo and not needing to be spun up as much. Those drivers tried it during The Race's other trips trackside but the car/engine package didn't like it.

How each engine and gearbox is designed will determine how much it needs but can also withstand in terms of how aggressive to go with the downshift, and then the car platform will go some way to mitigating the extent of the effect. Hence the Red Bull looking better than the Racing Bulls with the same engine.

And it's something that cannot just be easily solved, as Doohan explains: "You could say, 'OK, why don't we just bolt on a longer first gear ratio and have an amazing Turn 10?' But the consequences that come with that is, 'OK, now we're going to go into anti-stall every time we leave the pits' - or at pitstops, or the launch off the grid.

"There's so many complications that come with it. So it's not as easy as, 'Ah, let's just bolt in this longer gearing and it'll be happy days'. There's plenty of compromises that are going to have to be solved."

One thing that became apparent on our trip is that the Cadillac, on a longer run, was struggling. Not with particularly dramatic vices as it didn't look bad in the 'this seems impossible to drive' sense, it just looked grip-limited on both axles.

"It's slower, it's got understeer, but the balance "doesn't look horrendous", Doohan says: "It looks like it doesn't really have the trust to push the entry, mid-[corner] and combine so highly, and then it doesn't really have the traction to put the foot down.

"It looks like they're tiptoeing around a little bit, sliding on top of the tyre. And that's the issue sometimes - the balance can actually feel OK and be in a window, but you end up just being grip-limited, so you push a little bit more and the car snaps.

"When you're inside that limit, it actually feels like a good lap, but you can be two-three seconds off, and that's a very hard, hard thing to fix. Whether that's just lacking aero, plain and simple - which can be the case, I don't know, but it would make sense.

"Mainly it looked more on the degradation side, when they were 12-plus laps into the stint, that it seemed like on traction, or late-combined braking into Turn 10, it was starting to struggle, where up until that point the race pace didn't seem so bad."

A caveat often applied to any of our trackside work is that any individual moment we witness is only a snapshot, which is why we stay out as long as possible, keep going back, and move around the circuit when we can.

Doohan says you "100%" need to be wary of drawing firm conclusions from a single trip but agrees repeat visits help build a relevant picture.

"The corners here to get a pretty good idea of how a car behaves are Turn 8 to 9/10, and also Turn 11," he says.

"You get to see a very low-speed balance and medium-to-high speed balance, you're not going to go to Turn 12 and see the car go through Turn 12 and dictate what the car is doing.

"Within two corners you could really start to see where the cars are at."

That's the 'where', then. Then there's the 'what'. What are you seeing, and what's it really telling you?

"With varying fuel loads, you can make a car look very poor," Doohan says.

"It doesn't look like it's stopping, locking the front left. But the car's got 100kg more fuel in it and the driver's still trying to push like there's 30kg.

"They're going rearwards on the [brake] bias, now the rears are overheated because you're eight laps into a long run. So instead of locking the front left, you're pinching the rears.

"It's very easy to come to a conclusion that might not necessarily be so accurate."

Which brings us to the 'when': "Knowing that between 5.45pm to 6.30pm most cars are going to be on a new C3 tyre, between 30kg to 50kg fuel, in a window to do a quali sim, that'd be your best time to go out and obviously have an understanding of where the cars are at.

"You don't need to go and see every single corner, because that can vary also, driver to driver.

"But if you have a key slow-speed corner, a key medium-to-high-speed corner, you can have a rough idea of where a car's at or not."

Which makes for a very handy guide for when The Race returns trackside for the final test...

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/f1-2026-testing-trackside-jack-doohan-what-we-learned/

nicolas carpentiers @carpentiers_f1 (https://x.com/carpentiers_f1) · 1h (https://x.com/carpentiers_f1/status/2023797469805768743?s=20)

Interesting to see how much Williams has moved the steering rack forward #Williams #FW48 #F1 #TechF1


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBX5Dtoa8AAa0BN?format=jpg&name=large)

PJ @SmilexTech (https://x.com/SmilexTech) · 1h (https://x.com/SmilexTech/status/2023797916062884321)

La Mercedes non aggiorna solo il fondo ma anche le pance della W17, che ora sono meno spigolose nella parte posteriore. Il cofano è ora chiuso, senza gli sgoghi intermedi #AutoRacer #F1Testing
Mercedes ha actualizado no solo los bajos, sino también los pontones del W17, que ahora son menos pronunciados en la parte trasera. El capó ahora está cerrado, sin las salidas de aire intermedias #AutoRacer #F1Testing

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBX4pkgasAECK1y?format=jpg&name=large)

Juan Cruz Alvarez @Juanito77ok (https://x.com/Juanito77ok) · 2h (https://x.com/Juanito77ok/status/2023786372746932313?s=20)

Delante de la rueda trasera es una de las pocas superficies del piso donde se puede trabajar con cortes/deflectores aquí vemos la comparacion entre Aston, Alpine, Haas y Cadillac.


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBXu-ZCWoAADGDT?format=jpg&name=large)

Un onboard comparando el Ferrari F2004 con el SF-26.



https://x.com/JunaidSamodien_/status/2023687748008243485?s=20

Uno de los temas recurrentes esta pretemporada es  el de la conducción "raruna" que imponen estos autos esta temporada.

A continuación, se muestra una comparativa telemétrica de las mejores vueltas para el primer día, de las pretemporadas 2025 y 2026, realizadas por el mismo piloto, NOR.

En el canal de "velocidad", se ven inconsistencias, no existe un patrón que indique que los autos esta temporada sean más lentos o más rápidos. Además se puede observar lo que comentaba ALO, que en la curva 12, el año pasado, circulaban a 271 km/h y este año ellos a 200 km/h, bueno NOR a 231 km/h :risitas:

En el canal "Acelerador" se puede observar la cantidad de veces que NOR, se obligado a levantar el pie del acelerador en los finales de las rectas, el famoso 'lift & coasting'.

(https://i.postimg.cc/YSQQjKp0/comp-telem-day1-pretemp-25-26.png) (https://postimg.cc/94FDNkwH)

Se han modificado las metodologías de programación de los algoritmos ("algos") y hasta que no me 'cosque', en ocasiones, tengo que volver a los gráficos básicos. Sorry.

Este es el canal 'RPM' para las dos vueltas mostradas con anterioridad de NOR. La línea azul, corresponde a la temporada 2025 y la naranja, a la temporada 2026. Se observa como "sobrerevoluciona" el coche, esta temporada, en varias ocasiones durante la vuelta rápida:

(https://i.postimg.cc/MKKTQkYj/3.png) (https://postimages.org/) 

gráficas del primer día de la segunda semana, 18/02/2025

(https://imgur.com/fkry422.png)

(https://imgur.com/ruRRbxC.png)

(https://imgur.com/82gseK5.png)

(https://imgur.com/zF8eRVb.png)

(https://imgur.com/bdEYchJ.png)

Comparativas telemétricas para "vuelta rápida":

RUS vs PIA: Misma motorización, distinto chasis. RUS por delante aunque haya realizado la vuelta haciendo mucho más 'lift&coasting'

(https://i.postimg.cc/hPNPx6jW/2026-BAHREIN-Test-Pretemporada-semana-2-dia-1-TELEMETRIAS-(V%C2%AAR%C2%AA-n%C2%BA-63RUS-V%C2%AAR%C2%AA-n%C2%BA-29PIA)-Tipo-1.png) (https://postimg.cc/CzHgpvkm)

(https://i.postimg.cc/nVk3Xf3M/2026-BAHREIN-Test-Pretemporada-semana-2-dia-1-TELEMETRIAS-(V%C2%AAR%C2%AA-n%C2%BA-63RUS-V%C2%AAR%C2%AA-n%C2%BA-14LEC)-Tipo-1.png) (https://postimg.cc/bdZx5Wcj)

(https://i.postimg.cc/FFkDxCg6/2026-BAHREIN-Test-Pretemporada-semana-2-dia-1-TELEMETRIAS-(V%C2%AAR%C2%AA-n%C2%BA-29PIA-V%C2%AAR%C2%AA-n%C2%BA-14LEC)-Tipo-1-h.png) (https://postimg.cc/c6ZRxmz7)

F1 engine manufacturers to vote on mid-season 2026 rule change

Formula 1's engine manufacturers will vote next week on a mid-season introduction of an additional compression ratio test to bring an end to the ongoing technical controversy, The Race can reveal.

Following weeks of discussion between the FIA and manufacturers over the potential loophole that Mercedes has found in the regulations regarding compression ratios, it is understood that a final resolution is now on the horizon.

Sources revealed to The Race that an e-vote has been put forward by the FIA to members of the Power Unit Advisory Committee (PUAC) for revised testing procedures surrounding the 16:1 limit to be implemented this year.

The FIA later confirmed this with the following statement.

"Over recent weeks and months, the FIA and the power unit manufacturers have collaboratively developed a methodology to quantify how the compression ratio changes from ambient to operating conditions," an FIA statement read.

"Following validation of this approach, a proposal has been submitted whereby, from 1 August 2026, compliance with the compression ratio limit must be demonstrated not only at ambient conditions, but also at a representative operating temperature of 130°C.

"The vote has been submitted to the Power Unit Manufacturers, and its outcome is expected within the next 10 days and will be communicated in due course.

"As with all Formula 1 regulatory changes, any amendment remains subject to final approval by the FIA World Motor Sport Council."

Sources claim that feedback for the e-vote has been requested by the end of this week, with the deadline for votes being slotted in for next Tuesday.

It is understood that this e-vote scenario is what Williams team boss James Vowles was referring to when he suggested on Wednesday that the compression ratio controversy would soon be sorted.

"There will be a resolution," he said. "Frankly, it will go away probably over the next 48 hours, is my guess."

For the addition of the extra hot test to be implemented for August, it will need to secure a super-majority within the PUAC – which requires support from four of the five manufacturers, plus the FIA and FOM.

With Ferrari, Audi, Honda and Red Bull all seeming to be eager to implement some form of hot test, their backing does seem likely.

Key then to it passing is what the FIA and FOM prefer, but the existence of the new rule proposal in the first place would suggest that the governing body feels it is important enough to act upon.

So it would be logical to suggest that it would approve the implementation of the new test procedure if the majority of manufacturers supported it.

It is not clear how representative a new 130C test will be compared to full operating conditions.

However, anything that clarifies what teams can and cannot do with regards to the compression ratios will likely be welcomed by Mercedes' rivals.

Red Bull team principal Laurent Mekies said in Bahrain on Wednesday that key for his operation was to get a clear answer on the rules.

"We don't really mind if the regs goes left or if the regs goes right," he said. "What we absolutely want is clarity on what we can do and what we cannot do,

"That's what we are working with the FIA and the other power unit manufacturers to have this absolute clarity. I'm confident that we will reach that point."

It is not clear if any new hot test procedure will require any modifications to the Mercedes power unit to comply fully.

However, whatever the outcome of the e-vote, it means Mercedes will be able to start the campaign with a green light to continue running based on the current compliance checks that are conducted at ambient temperatures.

Any early talk of rivals wanting to take the matter to a protest has also faded away, with Ferrari last week ruling out a protest being lodged at the Australian Grand Prix.

Ferrari team boss Fred Vasseur has a similar view to Mekies, in that key for him is getting an answer on what is and is not allowed.

"We are not there to make a protest," he said. "We are there to have a clear regulation and to have everybody with the same understanding of the regulations. But [we] don't speak about protest."

Clarity over the test procedures coming in for August would also allow its rivals to  potentially work on designs themselves that exploit the compression ratio limit.

The Race has learned that, with the compression ratio matter being one that involves the manufacturers rather than teams, it was not discussed in Wednesday's F1 Commission meeting.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/f1-engine-manufacturers-set-for-vote-on-mid-season-2026-rule-change/

Gary Anderson explains Mercedes' final test upgrade package

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/size/w1000/2026/02/W17-FW-BAH-W2-D1--1.jpg)

Mercedes has arrived at this second Bahrain 2026 Formula 1 test with quite a few updates or, depending on how you look at it, additions.

The team ended the last test first and second on the timesheet, so it's obviously not afraid to show its hand in public before Melbourne, and it has further updates to shakedown here.

From front to back, we have the following on the altered W17.


(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/02/image8--1-.jpeg)

Mercedes has now added that horizontal vane (red ellipse) to the outer surface of the front wing endplate. That splitter will do exactly what it says on the box: split the airflow that is arriving at the tyre, and as opposed to it getting pulled over the top of the tyre, that lower flow will be directed downwards and around the wheel. It has retained the small vane (green arrow), which is there to generate outwash.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/02/image1--22-.jpeg)

The team has also reduced the bulk of the front brake duct (red ellipse). The larger the opening between the inside of the front wheel assembly and the side of the chassis, the less effect it will have on the performance of the airflow coming off the front wing. Also, the greater the volume of airflow that can get through between the inside of the front wheel assembly and the side of the chassis, plus what can get through the opening below the chassis, is what the rest of the underfloor has to work with. So the more airflow, the better.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/02/image3--13-.jpeg)

A small airflow directional vane (red ellipse) has also been added to the upper surface of the sidepod. It is just behind the rear-view mirror vertical stay; this will work in conjunction with what Mercedes has also done with the cooling exits below.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/02/image5--6-.jpeg)

This picture shows that airflow turning vane (red ellipse), but also the addition of a small hot air radiator exit. The vane will direct the mass airflow and that airflow will improve the exit airflow from the internal radiator system.

It may be that with the radiator layout it has, Mercedes had a small stagnation problem in that area so opening up an exit has simply improved the overall cooling by making full use of the radiator area.

The picture below shows that exit (green ellipse) on the other side. To me it looks a little larger than on the driver's right hand side. Normally the radiator layout is asymmetric, so perhaps Mercedes was having more of a problem with what it was cooling on the driver's left-hand side versus the right-hand side.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/02/image7--1-.jpeg)

It also shows that Mercedes has removed the exits (red arrows) on the sides of the engine cover and even reduced the size of the rear exit (yellow line). I have moved the yellow line, which is positioned on the edge of the new engine cover exit, across to the older version and I believe it's a little narrower.

Cooling exits are the thing we see the teams change from circuit to circuit. They are dependent on circuit characteristics and ambient temperature. From what I am seeing, it looks like the heat rejection from the Mercedes power unit is well under control, as it's by no means cold in Bahrain.

(https://www.the-race.com/content/images/2026/02/image6--2-.jpeg)

It has also altered the flow detail on the floor just in front of the rear tyre. Mercedes has gone from inlet louvres to connect the airflow that is on top of the floor to what is called the tyre squirt, which the teams are trying to get to go around the outside of the tyre contact patch, to what looks like a turning vane (red ellipse). It looks like it goes inwards, but I would need to see more of it to try to understand its influence on the airflow.

The area highlighted with the red arrow looks like it has been modified, perhaps to go with what that vane has done to the airflow.

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/mercedes-final-test-upgrade-package-gary-anderson-verdict/

What happened on first day of final 2026 Bahrain F1 test

George Russell ended day one of the final Formula 1 2026 pre-season test on top with a new fastest time of the Bahrain testing fortnight.

The Mercedes driver, who was one of 10 drivers in for the day's second session only, set his 1m33.459s with just over 30 minutes left on the clock to beat Oscar Piastri's previous best by 0.010 seconds.

Russell's effort was his second attempt at a push lap on a short stint on the C3 tyre. He had set the fastest first sector of all on his first attempt, only to snatch a brake into the tight Turn 10 left-hander and run deep.

Prior to that, Russell had reeled off an impressive nine-lap run on the C2 tyre where his average laptime was a 1m36.527s.

His 76-lap total was also the highest any driver managed.

The times set by Ferrari's Charles Leclerc, Piastri's McLaren team-mate Lando Norris and Mercedes' Kimi Antonelli in the first session were good enough for third, fourth and fifth in the end-of-day times.

And the top seven - all from F1's 'big four' teams - were covered by 0.840s, with Isack Hadjar (Red Bull) and Lewis Hamilton (Ferrari) sixth and seventh.

Hadjar recovered some lost ground for Red Bull after he had been limited to just 13 laps in the first session, adding 53 more after the lunch break.

He attempted a qualifying simulation towards the end of the day, though his final run on the softer C4 tyre did not yield an improvement.

Hamilton meanwhile had two extended spells of more than 20 minutes in the Ferrari garage that limited his total to 44 laps.

Williams's Carlos Sainz - on the C4 tyre - Franco Colapinto (Alpine) and Audi driver Gabriel Bortoleto completed the top 10.


Aston Martin was responsible for the only car-induced red flag of the day when Lance Stroll spun at the end of the first hour after the lunchbreak, the AMR26 appearing to lose drive as Stroll downshifted for the Turn 11 left-hander.

He did manage 26 laps by the end of the day, and the 15th-fastest time, 2.515s off the pace, but Aston Martin's combined lap total was still the lowest of all - with Stroll and Fernando Alonso completing 54, five fewer than Cadillac pair Valtteri Bottas and Sergio Perez managed.

The final 10 minutes of the session were reserved for procedural checks, which included the FIA testing a new start procedure on the grid that every car except for the Aston Martin took part in.

Test 2, day 1 times
1 George Russell (Mercedes) 1m33.459s, 76 laps
2 Oscar Piastri (McLaren) 1m33.469s, 70 laps
3 Charles Leclerc (Ferrari) 1m33.739s, 70 laps
4 Lando Norris (McLaren) 1m34.052s, 54 laps
5 Kimi Antonelli (Mercedes) 1m34.158s, 69 laps
6 Isack Hadjar (Red Bull) 1m34.260s, 66 laps
7 Lewis Hamilton (Mercedes) 1m34.299s, 44 laps
8 Carlos Sainz (Williams) 1m35.113s, 55 laps
9 Franco Colapinto (Alpine) 1m35.254s, 60 laps
10 Gabriel Bortoleto (Audi) 1m35.263s, 71 laps
11 Alex Albon (Williams) 1m35.690s, 55 laps
12 Liam Lawson (Racing Bulls) 1m35.753s, 61 laps
13 Ollie Bearman (Haas) 1m35.778s, 42 laps
14 Pierre Gasly (Alpine) 1m35.898s, 61 laps
15 Lance Stroll (Aston Martin) 1m35.974s, 26 laps
16 Esteban Ocon (Haas) 1m36.418s, 65 laps
17 Fernando Alonso (Aston Martin) 1m36.536s, 28 laps
18 Nico Hulkenberg (Audi) 1m36.741s, 49 laps
19 Arvid Lindblad (Racing Bulls) 1m36.769s, 75 laps
20 Valtteri Bottas (Cadillac) 1m36.798s, 35 laps
21 Sergio Perez (Cadillac) 1m38.191s, 24 laps

https://www.the-race.com/formula-1/what-happened-on-first-day-of-final-2026-bahrain-f1-test/