2026 Scuderia Ferrari HP F1 Team

[sucof]

If the team are officially saying around 8, it’s probably more like 18.

I agree with the idea that the numbers are surely not true. It is every teams interest to not to share correct numebrs and to downplay their own performance.

[dans79]

Even if the numbers were 100% true, the effect would be greater than than what's reported.

[Jambier]

It is a joke right ?
We expect something like 30hp to be meaningful

[sucof]

It is a joke right ?
We expect something like 30hp to be meaningful

Well if according to ADUO Ferrari is around 4% behind in ICE performance, then it is about 20HP.
So +30HP sounds a lot more than a minimum to be meaningful right?
10HP would already mean a lot, as it is not only at acceleration using ICE but also at charging.
And add to all these, that Horsepower is a super simplistic measurement in 2026... You have RPM regions which mean a lot more than others, so where you have the plus, matters. You have fuel consumption as a huge factor, same HP but lower consumption is a win too. And its combination as well.
You have the cooling requirements, so if Ferrari has a new ICE that is +5HP in raw performance, but consumes a little less fuel, needs a bit less cooling, then the overall win in laptime is a lot more what 5HP would bring alone.
We will see if they did a good job.

[dans79]

Yep the real world gains are never as simple as a single number.

[Just_a_fan]

A simple 10hp increase to peak is one thing, raising the entire curve by 10hp is quite another. One might even publicly "boast" of a 10hp peak gain whilst hiding a mid curve rise of multiples of 10hp.

Any additional power available once the car is not grip limited is going to give you a lap time improvement.

[venkyhere]

A simple 10hp increase to peak is one thing, raising the entire curve by 10hp is quite another. One might even publicly "boast" of a 10hp peak gain whilst hiding a mid curve rise of multiples of 10hp.

Any additional power available once the car is not grip limited is going to give you a lap time improvement.

Actually, compared to road cars to whom peak power (or power number around peak power RPM) isn't that important ; in F1 cars peak HP is a very reasonable measure of performance, vide the simple fact that the % duration of full throttle and % duration of near-peak RPM (in all gears) over a laptime duration, is a much much higher proportion.

If you throw in something like a hybrid battery system which needs recharging, thus necessitating an 'actual torque demand' that is heavily translated/transformed version of 'driver torque demand' , the relevance of peak power number becomes even more pertinent, because the engine's operating point is going to shift towards 'higher than typical RPM' by the driver choosing 'lower than typical' gear or by designing a 'shorter than typical' gearbox. Due to the need to produce more energy than what the tyres require, a hybrid ICE is going to run at higher RPMs than the equivalent vanilla ICE would, and inherently have shorter geared powertrain (or asks to be driven at lower gears) than the vanilla ICE would, because F1 engines have to be oversquare and lighter (packaging reasons) and hence derive their 'bang for buck' from petrol via "RPM" rather than via "brute torque".

[deadhead]

petrol

Blasphemy

[Juzh]

There was a video at one point of James Allison during the weekend of Singapore 2015 I believe explaining how much 10 HP is worth in lap time. 8 HP would be around 0.125 or so if memory serves. Not that much but every little bit helps, the gap to pole was 0.064 last week, half as much as the theoretical gain.

Depends on the length of the track.

10hp is not worth the same amount around A1 and Spa for example

Hasn't been A1 for a decade and a half.

Depends on the length of the track.

10hp is not worth the same amount around A1 and Spa for example

With SM, the numbers from 2015 are meaningless!

I'd think so as well. SM and the structure of the new PUs. The split was 80/20 back in 2015, now it's 50/50 the ICE is responsible for much less of the power output. How that shakes out exactly I'll leave to the engine gizmo heads, I'm not nearly steeped enough in that department to understand.

10 HP today is worth more than 10 hp in 2015, because in % terms it amounts to higher relative gain.

It is a joke right ?
We expect something like 30hp to be meaningful

30 hp increase is a pipe dream

[Sevach]

30 hp increase is a pipe dream

Under the current rules that's more than 5% increase, aduo 2.

And maybe Ferrari could get close to it if they change every decision they made against engine power, exhaust, turbo, cooling.
But then they might be ordinary where they are currently "special".

[Luscion]

Enrico Gualtieri confirms ferrari are bringing the new engine this weekend

https://racingnews365.com/ferrari-confi ... -announced

Also looks like theyve gotten Merc's diffuser banned

The toothed diffuser proposed by Mercedes heading towards a ban, with almost immediate effect. Ferrari's legality check office had requested clarification from the FIA, while the aerodynamicists were ready to bring back to the car an even more extreme version of the concept.?

[Just_a_fan]

Actually, compared to road cars to whom peak power (or power number around peak power RPM) isn't that important ; in F1 cars peak HP is a very reasonable measure of performance, vide the simple fact that the % duration of full throttle and % duration of near-peak RPM (in all gears) over a laptime duration, is a much much higher proportion.

Any power you add lower down the rev range will bring a benefit - the cars don't go from idle straight to maximum revs, they build and any additional power added during that rising rev phase will absolutely accelerate the car harder. That allows more punch out of a corner, for example, and thus enables top speed to be reached sooner.

[dans79]

Any power you add lower down the rev range will bring a benefit - the cars don't go from idle straight to maximum revs, they build and any additional power added during that rising rev phase will absolutely accelerate the car harder. That allows more punch out of a corner, for example, and thus enables top speed to be reached sooner.

Exactly this. This is the exact reason why if you integrate the area under the power curve, the engine with the most area is almost always the best.

[S D]

The extra power out of the curve needs to be managed. Kimi Raikkonen had issues in the hairpin in Montreal years ago.

[Badger]

Actually, compared to road cars to whom peak power (or power number around peak power RPM) isn't that important ; in F1 cars peak HP is a very reasonable measure of performance, vide the simple fact that the % duration of full throttle and % duration of near-peak RPM (in all gears) over a laptime duration, is a much much higher proportion.

Any power you add lower down the rev range will bring a benefit - the cars don't go from idle straight to maximum revs, they build and any additional power added during that rising rev phase will absolutely accelerate the car harder. That allows more punch out of a corner, for example, and thus enables top speed to be reached sooner.

Not so sure about this logic because cars really aren't "lower down in the rev range" in the power limited parts of the track. The only time a car really goes below 10k rpm whilst on throttle is out of some of the slower corners, and on initial acceleration out of those corners you are far more traction limited than power limited, especially with 350 kW of MGU-K helping. By the time the car actually needs the full grunt from the ICE you are already back in the optimal rev range and pulling gears.