F1technical.net

AR3-GP wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2026, 00:46

Does anyone care to speculate about what is being hidden here?

https://i.postimg.cc/rmqS8Pj9/image.png

The real MGUK.

Juzh wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2026, 01:21

Honda throws cold water on the-race's absurd claims of lacklustre battery tech.

https://global.honda/en/F1/features/202 ... ry/kakuda/

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.”

What performance advantage? No one can look at the traces from last season and tell me Honda had better deployment than Merc.

Badger wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2026, 01:46

Juzh wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2026, 01:21

Honda throws cold water on the-race's absurd claims of lacklustre battery tech.

https://global.honda/en/F1/features/202 ... ry/kakuda/

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.”

What performance advantage? No one can look at the traces from last season and tell me Honda had better deployment than Merc.

I'd argue that was more down to Honda not developing the engine that Red Bull got access to, more so than anything else since 2022. They have essentially packaged and given Red Bull the same engine for four years. Other teams like Merc being in F1 developed their engines as long as they could write it off under reliability upgrades from 22-25. It is totally possible that internally Honda might have worked on battery tech once they decided to come back. As they even say, they developed battery tech, not limited to F1 alone. They have everything to succeed and will likely be fine.

michl420 wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2026, 17:43

Andi76 wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2026, 17:37

michl420 wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2026, 16:23

Is the MGUK there (in front) mainly for weight distribution reasons or must it be in the surviving cell?

I actually think that with narrower cars, greater attention is being paid to keeping the CoG low at all costs. This wasn't a top priority for the tanks of recent years, but now it's becoming much more important again. What I'm missing is the oil reservoir and the compressor...could Honda have placed the oil reservoir at the rear like Ferrari did in 2014? In general, it looks like a split turbo design with no compressor and no oil reservoir.

If they want a low CoG, they should locate the MGUK beside the crankshaft and use the lower part of the fuel tank for fuel.

Moves the CoG forward.

Having the MGUK at the side of the engine would likely cause too much weight on the rear wheels.

FW17 wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2026, 17:53

michl420 wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2026, 17:43

Andi76 wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2026, 17:37

I actually think that with narrower cars, greater attention is being paid to keeping the CoG low at all costs. This wasn't a top priority for the tanks of recent years, but now it's becoming much more important again. What I'm missing is the oil reservoir and the compressor...could Honda have placed the oil reservoir at the rear like Ferrari did in 2014? In general, it looks like a split turbo design with no compressor and no oil reservoir.

If they want a low CoG, they should locate the MGUK beside the crankshaft and use the lower part of the fuel tank for fuel.

Rules state in front of engine and same shaft as the crank

No, you can clearly see that the MGUK is offset from the crankshaft.

The MGUK has to connect to the crankshaft forward of 100mm behind the chassis mounting plane.

Whether the MGUK is forward or behind that point is up to the manufacturer.

Andi76 wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2026, 17:37

michl420 wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2026, 16:23

Is the MGUK there (in front) mainly for weight distribution reasons or must it be in the surviving cell?

I actually think that with narrower cars, greater attention is being paid to keeping the CoG low at all costs. This wasn't a top priority for the tanks of recent years, but now it's becoming much more important again. What I'm missing is the oil reservoir and the compressor...could Honda have placed the oil reservoir at the rear like Ferrari did in 2014? In general, it looks like a split turbo design with no compressor and no oil reservoir.

It can't be split turbo. The compressor and turbine can only be separated by 175mm.

So are they locating the compressor in the V of the engine block?

Or routing the pre-charge air through the intake area for cooling? packaging?

wuzak wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2026, 02:08

FW17 wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2026, 17:53

michl420 wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2026, 17:43

If they want a low CoG, they should locate the MGUK beside the crankshaft and use the lower part of the fuel tank for fuel.

Rules state in front of engine and same shaft as the crank

No, you can clearly see that the MGUK is offset from the crankshaft.

Maybe that was presentation. Do you expect the battery to be off center to the centerline?

FW17 wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2026, 04:06

wuzak wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2026, 02:08

FW17 wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2026, 17:53

Rules state in front of engine and same shaft as the crank

No, you can clearly see that the MGUK is offset from the crankshaft.

Maybe that was presentation. Do you expect the battery to be off center to the centerline?

Yes.

FW17 wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2026, 04:06

wuzak wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2026, 02:08

FW17 wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2026, 17:53

Rules state in front of engine and same shaft as the crank

No, you can clearly see that the MGUK is offset from the crankshaft.

Maybe that was presentation. Do you expect the battery to be off center to the centerline?

This video discusses the PU and specifically mentions that the MGUK and battery are offset. He points out the MGUK gearbox unit as well.

AR3-GP wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2026, 00:46

Does anyone care to speculate about what is being hidden here?

https://i.postimg.cc/rmqS8Pj9/image.png

Maybe just a PR gag that people talk or speculate about it.

DarkAlman wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2026, 03:13

So are they locating the compressor in the V of the engine block?

Or routing the pre-charge air through the intake area for cooling? packaging?

The compressor is in the V how that works with the inlet who knows maybe that's why they have 2 inlets

Badger wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2026, 13:07

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_FNFPtWEAA ... ame=medium
https://i.ibb.co/m5hMYZT9/honda-1.png What a bulky mess these new electrical components are.

No more split turbocharger? Compressor seems to be back in the position of the 2015 engine!!

PlatinumZealot wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2026, 07:28

Badger wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2026, 13:07

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/G_FNFPtWEAA ... ame=medium
https://i.ibb.co/m5hMYZT9/honda-1.png What a bulky mess these new electrical components are.

No more split turbocharger? Compressor seems to be back in the position of the 2015 engine!!

Split like previously is not allowed by the '26 regulations.

muzzytt wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2026, 06:28

DarkAlman wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2026, 03:13

So are they locating the compressor in the V of the engine block?

Or routing the pre-charge air through the intake area for cooling? packaging?

The compressor is in the V how that works with the inlet who knows maybe that's why they have 2 inlets

Brightened images seem to show an inlet at the front of the engine running through the vee to the compressor inlet, with the two throttle bodies and plenums either side to feed the cylinders.