2026 Aston Martin Aramco Formula One Team

[Sasha]

I heard the CR test will not make a difference???

My guess it is related to the Pre-Chamber Design just like last time.
Last time Honda figured it out and made a better PU....Pre-Chamber in the Piston Crown.
Using modern metallurgy are they changing the Pre-Chamber's volume in the piston crown?
CC will have the legal CR but the PC will have much higher CR.
Moving more of the Combustion into the PC?
Very Smart and there is a lot more to gain!!!

[Farnborough]

I have problems with those ICE numbers. What is the source? How did they come up with those numbers.

The other thing is FIA on June 1st will change the CR tests. So the Canada HP was Mercedes's CR edge last hurrah. We will not notice until Spain, because of the nature of Monaco's track.

CR test won't make a difference.

Cylinder Pressure Sensors: Every F1 car runs highly accurate, mandatory pressure transducers inside the cylinders.

Were they not removed from specification for this rules set ? Also one of the reason to go with lower compression ratio in obviating the need to use the pressure sensor in judging how close to the knuckle they could run combustion characteristics ?

That's my understanding of the current situation, also being one of most useful implementation by Honda in last regulation set to fully exploit their combustion design and operation, now missing from these ICE units.

It was indicated that cost basis was ultimately responsible, being that they are extremely expensive, even for F1 budget and now capped on PU supply too.

[diffuser]

CR test won't make a difference.

Cylinder Pressure Sensors: Every F1 car runs highly accurate, mandatory pressure transducers inside the cylinders.

Were they not removed from specification for this rules set ? Also one of the reason to go with lower compression ratio in obviating the need to use the pressure sensor in judging how close to the knuckle they could run combustion characteristics ?

That's my understanding of the current situation, also being one of most useful implementation by Honda in last regulation set to fully exploit their combustion design and operation, now missing from these ICE units.

It was indicated that cost basis was ultimately responsible, being that they are extremely expensive, even for F1 budget and now capped on PU supply too.

Motor sport reported, starting in 2027 they'll be monitoring the pressure in operating conditions. So this year, the ICE will be put in an oven, then tested. Next year it will monitor live. So I can't see how they can do that without the sensor.

[etusch]

Put it in oven

Why not standart engine warm up process and some engine running until demanded heat level

[ispano6]

Or just bring back the MGUH. 60-40 is a step in the wrong direction, or was a step too far for the current MGUK only formula on the lesser energy density 100% sustainable fuel.

[Badger]

Cylinder Pressure Sensors: Every F1 car runs highly accurate, mandatory pressure transducers inside the cylinders.

Were they not removed from specification for this rules set ? Also one of the reason to go with lower compression ratio in obviating the need to use the pressure sensor in judging how close to the knuckle they could run combustion characteristics ?

That's my understanding of the current situation, also being one of most useful implementation by Honda in last regulation set to fully exploit their combustion design and operation, now missing from these ICE units.

It was indicated that cost basis was ultimately responsible, being that they are extremely expensive, even for F1 budget and now capped on PU supply too.

Motor sport reported, starting in 2027 they'll be monitoring the pressure in operating conditions. So this year, the ICE will be put in an oven, then tested. Next year it will monitor live. So I can't see how they can do that without the sensor.

There's no live monitoring this year. CR test won't make a difference.

[Farnborough]

Were they not removed from specification for this rules set ? Also one of the reason to go with lower compression ratio in obviating the need to use the pressure sensor in judging how close to the knuckle they could run combustion characteristics ?

That's my understanding of the current situation, also being one of most useful implementation by Honda in last regulation set to fully exploit their combustion design and operation, now missing from these ICE units.

It was indicated that cost basis was ultimately responsible, being that they are extremely expensive, even for F1 budget and now capped on PU supply too.

Motor sport reported, starting in 2027 they'll be monitoring the pressure in operating conditions. So this year, the ICE will be put in an oven, then tested. Next year it will monitor live. So I can't see how they can do that without the sensor.

There's no live monitoring this year. CR test won't make a difference.

They don't elaborate on what sensor or if it's one installed just for this examination process (external device) in the checks that are going ahead now.
The original "highly accurate" sensor are reported to be deleted in this PU regulation, and to facilitate that the compression ratio (geometric) was dropped to this, contentious, 16:1 specifically in facilitating that rule, as I understand it.

The report of those sensor costing $45,000 was floating about, and given as reason for the change. How true that is ? not clear.

Honda were reported to be one of the most effective users of those (highly sophisticated) sensor on monitoring and acting upon them in live report to run combustion effectiveness in "closed loop" response, ultimately to control the combustion in that narrow band of efficiency all while not overstepping tge boundaries into failure. That facility APPEARS to have been removed from thus regulation set ultimately to significant detriment, for Honda in their successful design and development path.

In its simplest form, compression check is through tbe spark plug installation hole, engine turned without firing to record psi. Tbey haven't as yet given any published method they'll be using, or not generally publicly available. Its all a little shrouded and tastes of a "fudge" to appease criticism and overall public scrutiny, especially given the flack around tge new regulations that are flying around.

[collindsilva]

Motor sport reported, starting in 2027 they'll be monitoring the pressure in operating conditions. So this year, the ICE will be put in an oven, then tested. Next year it will monitor live. So I can't see how they can do that without the sensor.

There's no live monitoring this year. CR test won't make a difference.

They don't elaborate on what sensor or if it's one installed just for this examination process (external device) in the checks that are going ahead now.
The original "highly accurate" sensor are reported to be deleted in this PU regulation, and to facilitate that the compression ratio (geometric) was dropped to this, contentious, 16:1 specifically in facilitating that rule, as I understand it.

The report of those sensor costing $45,000 was floating about, and given as reason for the change. How true that is ? not clear.

Honda were reported to be one of the most effective users of those (highly sophisticated) sensor on monitoring and acting upon them in live report to run combustion effectiveness in "closed loop" response, ultimately to control the combustion in that narrow band of efficiency all while not overstepping tge boundaries into failure. That facility APPEARS to have been removed from thus regulation set ultimately to significant detriment, for Honda in their successful design and development path.

In its simplest form, compression check is through tbe spark plug installation hole, engine turned without firing to record psi. Tbey haven't as yet given any published method they'll be using, or not generally publicly available. Its all a little shrouded and tastes of a "fudge" to appease criticism and overall public scrutiny, especially given the flack around tge new regulations that are flying around.

How can a sensor costing $45K be a issue when the budget is excess of $100 million for a year.

[Farnborough]

There's no live monitoring this year. CR test won't make a difference.

They don't elaborate on what sensor or if it's one installed just for this examination process (external device) in the checks that are going ahead now.
The original "highly accurate" sensor are reported to be deleted in this PU regulation, and to facilitate that the compression ratio (geometric) was dropped to this, contentious, 16:1 specifically in facilitating that rule, as I understand it.

The report of those sensor costing $45,000 was floating about, and given as reason for the change. How true that is ? not clear.

Honda were reported to be one of the most effective users of those (highly sophisticated) sensor on monitoring and acting upon them in live report to run combustion effectiveness in "closed loop" response, ultimately to control the combustion in that narrow band of efficiency all while not overstepping tge boundaries into failure. That facility APPEARS to have been removed from thus regulation set ultimately to significant detriment, for Honda in their successful design and development path.

In its simplest form, compression check is through tbe spark plug installation hole, engine turned without firing to record psi. Tbey haven't as yet given any published method they'll be using, or not generally publicly available. Its all a little shrouded and tastes of a "fudge" to appease criticism and overall public scrutiny, especially given the flack around tge new regulations that are flying around.

How can a sensor costing $45K be a issue when the budget is excess of $100 million for a year.

This is my understanding, across different sources of discussion, from contributors within the industry. There may be some variance to in depth factual reality, but it has been discussed.

They look to be on a individual cylinder basis, that to detect/report in real time (each single combustion event) as that cylinder breaches or impinges upon critical failure parameters, then to control the next combustion event, for that cylinder.
Which would make six for each PU, and with lifing issues too. All this to search for marginal gains in, ultimately, lean combustion and facilitate carrying less fuel.

There's reasonable overview in a Pat Symonds presentation of the topic covering this, and publicly available (been linked on here before) but with the caveat that he gives of not being fully disclosed by each and every PU manufacturer.

One of the aims in going to lower CR was to move the whole process away from such critical failure margin, and so reduce dependency along with cost on component that have very little true use in these PU or general development.

[collindsilva]

They don't elaborate on what sensor or if it's one installed just for this examination process (external device) in the checks that are going ahead now.
The original "highly accurate" sensor are reported to be deleted in this PU regulation, and to facilitate that the compression ratio (geometric) was dropped to this, contentious, 16:1 specifically in facilitating that rule, as I understand it.

The report of those sensor costing $45,000 was floating about, and given as reason for the change. How true that is ? not clear.

Honda were reported to be one of the most effective users of those (highly sophisticated) sensor on monitoring and acting upon them in live report to run combustion effectiveness in "closed loop" response, ultimately to control the combustion in that narrow band of efficiency all while not overstepping tge boundaries into failure. That facility APPEARS to have been removed from thus regulation set ultimately to significant detriment, for Honda in their successful design and development path.

In its simplest form, compression check is through tbe spark plug installation hole, engine turned without firing to record psi. Tbey haven't as yet given any published method they'll be using, or not generally publicly available. Its all a little shrouded and tastes of a "fudge" to appease criticism and overall public scrutiny, especially given the flack around tge new regulations that are flying around.

How can a sensor costing $45K be a issue when the budget is excess of $100 million for a year.

This is my understanding, across different sources of discussion, from contributors within the industry. There may be some variance to in depth factual reality, but it has been discussed.

They look to be on a individual cylinder basis, that to detect/report in real time (each single combustion event) as that cylinder breaches or impinges upon critical failure parameters, then to control the next combustion event, for that cylinder.
Which would make six for each PU, and with lifing issues too. All this to search for marginal gains in, ultimately, lean combustion and facilitate carrying less fuel.

There's reasonable overview in a Pat Symonds presentation of the topic covering this, and publicly available (been linked on here before) but with the caveat that he gives of not being fully disclosed by each and every PU manufacturer.

One of the aims in going to lower CR was to move the whole process away from such critical failure margin, and so reduce dependency along with cost on component that have very little true use in these PU or general development.

It seems that Honda PU was in advantage due to this sensor.
What is stopping Honda from installing the same, will it make the engine invalid.
just asking..

[Farnborough]

How can a sensor costing $45K be a issue when the budget is excess of $100 million for a year.

This is my understanding, across different sources of discussion, from contributors within the industry. There may be some variance to in depth factual reality, but it has been discussed.

They look to be on a individual cylinder basis, that to detect/report in real time (each single combustion event) as that cylinder breaches or impinges upon critical failure parameters, then to control the next combustion event, for that cylinder.
Which would make six for each PU, and with lifing issues too. All this to search for marginal gains in, ultimately, lean combustion and facilitate carrying less fuel.

There's reasonable overview in a Pat Symonds presentation of the topic covering this, and publicly available (been linked on here before) but with the caveat that he gives of not being fully disclosed by each and every PU manufacturer.

One of the aims in going to lower CR was to move the whole process away from such critical failure margin, and so reduce dependency along with cost on component that have very little true use in these PU or general development.

It seems that Honda PU was in advantage due to this sensor.
What is stopping Honda from installing the same, will it make the engine invalid.
just asking..

Yes, I agree with you and that's my view, that Honda made particularly good use of the method and equipment (from that 2021 PU onward) along with thorough development in MGUK facilities, to provide a very competitive package of ultimate deployment.

Presumably Mercedes led this avenue as most manufacturers then went in same direction. It seems that all PU builds would have been using this type of sensor.

Its banned, as far as I understand, to use that method in these PU regulation, and so not part of their options. Same for everyone though. Clearly the collective thinking within MB and (by staff experience going to RBPT) has encompassed running in these specification, without such facility, a little advantage currently.

Honda do ultimately always get on top of combustion refinement and output, but behind at this point it would appear.

[diffuser]

Motor sport reported, starting in 2027 they'll be monitoring the pressure in operating conditions. So this year, the ICE will be put in an oven, then tested. Next year it will monitor live. So I can't see how they can do that without the sensor.

There's no live monitoring this year. CR test won't make a difference.

They don't elaborate on what sensor or if it's one installed just for this examination process (external device) in the checks that are going ahead now.
The original "highly accurate" sensor are reported to be deleted in this PU regulation, and to facilitate that the compression ratio (geometric) was dropped to this, contentious, 16:1 specifically in facilitating that rule, as I understand it.

The report of those sensor costing $45,000 was floating about, and given as reason for the change. How true that is ? not clear.

Honda were reported to be one of the most effective users of those (highly sophisticated) sensor on monitoring and acting upon them in live report to run combustion effectiveness in "closed loop" response, ultimately to control the combustion in that narrow band of efficiency all while not overstepping tge boundaries into failure. That facility APPEARS to have been removed from thus regulation set ultimately to significant detriment, for Honda in their successful design and development path.

In its simplest form, compression check is through tbe spark plug installation hole, engine turned without firing to record psi. Tbey haven't as yet given any published method they'll be using, or not generally publicly available. Its all a little shrouded and tastes of a "fudge" to appease criticism and overall public scrutiny, especially given the flack around tge new regulations that are flying around.

The regs show that the sensor is still allowed to be used. Manufacturers might have been using the sensor to measure other statistics. They just banned the use of the frequencies used to measure pressure. So the sensor might still be in some or all ICEs.

[FNTC]

Will be interesting in Monaco with the wings closed the whole lap. But I think the Aston is still too under powered and possibly overweight (until the B-spec) do do much, even there. Will see.

[OnEcRiTiCaL]

Will be interesting in Monaco with the wings closed the whole lap. But I think the Aston is still too under powered and possibly overweight (until the B-spec) do do much, even there. Will see.

We will see ? What? How many season you see? How many times the Williams, Haas the "back runners" was won the Q3? Aston literally started the season after Japan. As we inow in f1 no miracle ...

[FNTC]

I was talking more about the chance of maybe a miraculous 1 point if it rains or something, don't misunderstand me. Also said " But I think the Aston is still too under powered and possibly overweight (until the B-spec) do do much,".