F1technical.net

Variable nozzle turbo "VNT" would do the same, cheap and very commonly in use generally.

Could have been incorporated into these regulations.

Zynerji wrote: ↑

24 Feb 2026, 20:34

With the spooling/start issues, does anyone think a MGUH-Lite could help? Like a MU-H just for spooling with no regen ability?

a.k.a supercharger
Yes could help, but again it's going to use up the battery (will use up energy from the ICE, via MGU-K, that's more than what gets 'extra generated' from the ICE, from this 'quicker compressed' air). The idea of 'turbo' being , to use what would otherwise be wasted as exhaust. In other words, it would defeat the purpose of this 'we are carbon neutral' PR-centric regulation set.

For a race start, instead of building boost up, could they implement a valve on the exhaust side of the turbine that allows exhaust gases to bypass the turbo and exit naturally out of the exhaust, so that one could have a naturally-aspirated race start? It's initially less chance of wheel spin, and then when you get enough speed, engage the MGU-K, build up more speed, and then re-open the valve to allow the turbo to spin up to general operating speeds?

This could be new arm chair levels of thinking, but as I am no expert, I thought i'd throw it out there to those of who you who would be better equipped to answer. Perhaps there could be a fair trade off between no boost at the beginning but a good get away vs having boost at the beginning, but a high chance of wheel slip and having to be careful with throttle input up to at least 120KMH or more?

Vappy wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2026, 19:28

For a race start, instead of building boost up, could they implement a valve on the exhaust side of the turbine that allows exhaust gases to bypass the turbo and exit naturally out of the exhaust, so that one could have a naturally-aspirated race start?

Like a wastegate?

Vappy wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2026, 19:28

It's initially less chance of wheel spin, and then when you get enough speed, engage the MGU-K, build up more speed, and then re-open the valve to allow the turbo to spin up to general operating speeds?

More chance of hitting angi-stall and going nowhere.

Closing the wastegate after the start would still require 10s+ to get to the desired boost.

Vappy wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2026, 19:28

This could be new arm chair levels of thinking, but as I am no expert, I thought i'd throw it out there to those of who you who would be better equipped to answer. Perhaps there could be a fair trade off between no boost at the beginning but a good get away vs having boost at the beginning, but a high chance of wheel slip and having to be careful with throttle input up to at least 120KMH or more?

The difference between Ferrari, who can get the desired boost quickly enough, and Mercedes, who can't, seems to be 2-3 rows at the start, at least. For example.

wuzak wrote: ↑

26 Feb 2026, 01:35

Vappy wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2026, 19:28

For a race start, instead of building boost up, could they implement a valve on the exhaust side of the turbine that allows exhaust gases to bypass the turbo and exit naturally out of the exhaust, so that one could have a naturally-aspirated race start?

Like a wastegate?

Vappy wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2026, 19:28

It's initially less chance of wheel spin, and then when you get enough speed, engage the MGU-K, build up more speed, and then re-open the valve to allow the turbo to spin up to general operating speeds?

More chance of hitting angi-stall and going nowhere.

Closing the wastegate after the start would still require 10s+ to get to the desired boost.

Vappy wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2026, 19:28

This could be new arm chair levels of thinking, but as I am no expert, I thought i'd throw it out there to those of who you who would be better equipped to answer. Perhaps there could be a fair trade off between no boost at the beginning but a good get away vs having boost at the beginning, but a high chance of wheel slip and having to be careful with throttle input up to at least 120KMH or more?

The difference between Ferrari, who can get the desired boost quickly enough, and Mercedes, who can't, seems to be 2-3 rows at the start, at least. For example.

Thanks for the constructive reply. Not entirely sure how I forgot about the waste gate.

venkyhere wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2026, 00:00

Zynerji wrote: ↑

24 Feb 2026, 20:34

With the spooling/start issues, does anyone think a MGUH-Lite could help? Like a MU-H just for spooling with no regen ability?

a.k.a supercharger
Yes could help, but again it's going to use up the battery (will use up energy from the ICE, via MGU-K, that's more than what gets 'extra generated' from the ICE, from this 'quicker compressed' air). The idea of 'turbo' being , to use what would otherwise be wasted as exhaust. In other words, it would defeat the purpose of this 'we are carbon neutral' PR-centric regulation set.

But if you go to that length you might as well just turn it into an MGU-H, since you already have the hardwarr there. Just spin the motor in reverse with exhaust gases and it will generate electricity.

The best way of reintroducing the MGU-H is with a relatively unsophisticated, spec MGU-H hooked up to a small battery that is disconnected from the main battery. At that point you have a pure anti-lag device with a tiny weight penalty.

Except a MGUH is not permitted.

wuzak wrote: ↑

26 Feb 2026, 01:35

Vappy wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2026, 19:28

For a race start, instead of building boost up, could they implement a valve on the exhaust side of the turbine that allows exhaust gases to bypass the turbo and exit naturally out of the exhaust, so that one could have a naturally-aspirated race start?

Closing the wastegate after the start would still require 10s+ to get to the desired boost.

Unlikely that 10s+ lag would exist under loaded conditions.

gruntguru wrote: ↑

27 Feb 2026, 07:28

wuzak wrote: ↑

26 Feb 2026, 01:35

Vappy wrote: ↑

25 Feb 2026, 19:28

For a race start, instead of building boost up, could they implement a valve on the exhaust side of the turbine that allows exhaust gases to bypass the turbo and exit naturally out of the exhaust, so that one could have a naturally-aspirated race start?

Closing the wastegate after the start would still require 10s+ to get to the desired boost.

Unlikely that 10s+ lag would exist under loaded conditions.

OK, maybe not 10s+, but still significant.

The premise was to leave the line with no, or little, boost, so it's still got to build up to the desired turbo rpm and boost.

Teams will be beefing up the clutch system to do the start on full throttle and boost.

FW17 wrote: ↑

28 Feb 2026, 09:09

Teams will be beefing up the clutch system to do the start on full throttle and boost.

The teams that have specified a lowered 1st ratio do look to be "on point" with what we've seen so far.

We've obviously yet to see a live and fully competitive launch with 22 cars yet though.

Getting the clutch fully closed with that lower ratio will prompt earlier build of boost too, with Ferrari apparently favouring a smaller turbo, then it does look to be stacked in their favour through erudite planning.

A variable geometry turbo would help, but those are banned in F1 despite being around and used on street applications (Porsche, BMW, etc), big diesels, and motorsports for 60 years now. Audi has experience with them on their turbo diesel Miller cycle LeMans engines, which means other teams would have likely veto’ed the idea on that alone.

https://www.quattroworld.com/audi-r18-e ... s-success/

There is a much bigger write up and CAD drawings on this particular combination here:
https://www.highpowermedia.com/Product/ ... -issue-100

They'll be in the powerband most of the time. Only a few seconds are spent at the starting line and pitting, across the ~5400s of a race. They wouldn't want to add weight and complexity (durability and cost) if they can avoid it, in terms of crafting the rules. At worst, can't they just append the sporting regs and allow revving for 5s prior to the five lights?

Farnborough wrote: ↑

28 Feb 2026, 19:32

FW17 wrote: ↑

28 Feb 2026, 09:09

Teams will be beefing up the clutch system to do the start on full throttle and boost.

The teams that have specified a lowered 1st ratio do look to be "on point" with what we've seen so far.

The teams that use 1st gear for recharging would, surely, have raised the ratio of 1st so that it is more usable?

wuzak wrote: ↑

01 Mar 2026, 01:59

Farnborough wrote: ↑

28 Feb 2026, 19:32

FW17 wrote: ↑

28 Feb 2026, 09:09

Teams will be beefing up the clutch system to do the start on full throttle and boost.

The teams that have specified a lowered 1st ratio do look to be "on point" with what we've seen so far.

The teams that use 1st gear for recharging would, surely, have raised the ratio of 1st so that it is more usable?

Trade-offs, that's the beauty of this sport.