Petition to FIA - 2026 rules canceled, V10s in 2028

[JordanMugen]

F1 would ultimately devolve into a historical racing series. The manufacturers will leave, and without them it would cease to be relevant.

NASCAR run engines based on 1960's technology yet Honda are looking to leave Indycar and join NASCAR, whilst Chevrolet, Ford and Toyota are steadfast in their commitment to the series.

The assertion that manufacturers will leave simply doesn't connect with reality IMO.

LMP1 allowed for the most advanced engineering -- yet THAT was the series where all the manufacturers other than Toyota left!

Quite frankly, manufacturer participation seems to be a function only of cost and commercial profile, not technical sophistication. Even though LMDh is much less sophisticated than LMP1, manufacturers are falling over themsleves to join because it is very, very cheap.

Even though NASCAR is unsophisticated, manufacturers are happy because it is a high profile series.

Even though Indycar is somewhat more sophisticated than NASCAR, Chevrolet and Honda are unhappy with their involvement because the cost is too high relative to the profile.

Note too that WRC's Rally1 literally dropped its hybrid system in 2025, with no change to the manufacturers competing. Indeed the manufacturers wanted the lack of hybrid to cut costs...

So why shouldn't Formula One as the pinnacle of car racing also have naturally aspirated high-revving engines?

Because the manufacturers would leave.

This is addressed above and simply doesn't align with the realities discussed.

F1 has a high profile. As long as the cost is low (capped), it WILL be VERY popular.

With more sophisticated engineering, the high cost, technically advanced but low profile LMP1 lost all of its manufacturer other than Toyota.

We similarly have the World Rally Championship dropping hybridisation and losing no manufacturers at all.


[Do we have the likes of Ducati and Honda demanding road-relevant hybridised electric supercharging (with a generator/MGU-K on the engine) be introduced in the 'pinnacle' of motorcycle technology MotoGP? It's possible but I doubt it. If anything that would push costs up such that smaller manufacturers like Aprilia and KTM couldn't afford it and would probably leave, ironically... So it would lose manufacturers, as opposed to gain them.]

[Don't forget we have a literal simplification of the 2026 power units, removal of the MGU-H, to try to gain Porsche, Audi, Red Bull Ford and Cadillac. I.e., they all wanted a more basic engine, not a more sophisticated one. Even so the engines were still too complex/expensive for Renault and Renault has withdrawn and been lost. ]

[ACRO]

Interesting to say , the v10 were never meant to sound "good" , they just came because out of a 3litre NA it prooved to be the most balaced package between power / lenght / weight to win the race . The brutal "screaming" was simply the result of the goal to squeeze as much output as possible from a given displacement and in an atmo the only way are revs

In fact the 80,s 1.5l v6 or inline4 turbos sounded also very good because also here the goal was maximum output from a given displacement ans/or boost pressure. Nobody cared fuel flow and overall efficiency , the sound came as a free bonus .

Nowadays we have a new goal : to squeeze as much output as possible from a given amount of fuel . Since heat and soundwaves are a "waste" product of an ICE
Its the first what lacks now.

The sound of current engines is the ( lack of ) sound of cutting edge efficiency

[eyelid]

Just bring 2.0 V8 with Turbo without any fuel flow limit until something like 17 000rpm and you're good to go.

Unless you have a very low boost limit like CART/USAC did, then will be absolutely no reason to rev high though?

The current engine only rev above 11500rpm because they are not permitted full fuel flow until above that rpm.

Should a very low boost limit (I think it was around 1.2 bar gauge pressure only in CART) be set in this case? Far below the ~4 bar gauge pressure limit (IIRC) in the 2026 F1 regulations (and unrestricted in 2014-2025 regulations IIRC)?

Or does your wording mean that maximum fuel flow should only be permitted above 17000rpm? A return of the glorious CART sound to F1 would be lovely!

I think we could have couple of options to do it. But perhaps canceling the whole damn fuel flow limit would be the right answer and limit the boost level at the same time. We need revs and we need fuel to make the noise.

T

[mzso]

What YOU are trying to deny is that fans would like louder/better sounding engines. It's an obvious truth, and you have literally no evidence to suggest this isn't true.

There you again with the "obvious truth", which in fact is an obvious falsity. It can't be verified without a proper poll (and only proven if almost everyone is asked). And if you define fans as "people who usually watch F1", it's very doubtful based on the recent surge of F1 popularity.

ICE engines can be reasonably efficient and reliable. Maybe you've noticed that actual fuel tanks for modern F1 cars haven't changed much since the years before the hybrid systems were introduced? It's still about 100kg of fuel for the same race distances we've had all along.

You mean F1 level engines, I presume. It's certainly not the prevailing opinion. With two engines swaps per season and at least 900HP, maybe with a huge displacement low reving engine, but pretty much no-one actually wanted something like this.
And they certainly wouldn't be efficient compared to turbo hybrids.

[mzso]

From The Race:

Initially, Toyota planned to come in with a V12 engine. But in January 2000, the FIA World Motor Sport Council rubber-stamped rules mandating the use only of V10 engines.

- Edd Strawhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/1154217.stm

Toyota had to delay their testing program by one year and thus their F1 debut by one year from 2001 to 2002, having to redesign their engine from a 3.0 V12 to a 3.0 V10.

Hm. It would have been interesting to see them falter with a concept everyone in F1 abandoned years ago.

You seem to have the suggestion that F1 engines should not be scaled up naturally aspirated MotoGP engines as they were for much of F1's history^, but why should that be the case?

F1 never used MotoGP derived engines.

Banning or permitting supercharging and/or exhaust turbines (permitting as currently the case & the case in 2026, or banning as from 1989 to 2013) are BOTH valid.

Well, regulations can theoretically be anything.
But it seems people who have a say in F1 don't want to go back to short life, infefficient, heavier engines.

Is efficiency really more important than a fun spectacle loved by fans? I don't see how it is...

Engine noise has nothing to do with fun spectacle.

[zeph]

NASCAR run engines based on 1960's technology yet Honda are looking to leave Indycar and join NASCAR, whilst Chevrolet, Ford and Toyota are steadfast in their commitment to the series.

The assertion that manufacturers will leave simply doesn't connect with reality IMO.

F1 is not NASCAR.

I fail to see how your assertion is more connected to reality than mine. Yes they want to lose the MGU-H because it is the hardest, the most costly and has the least relevance to road mobility. They did that to lower the threshold for new entries.

But V10’s have near-zero relevance to road mobility. It is literally a step back in time, and that is not what F1 is about. What’s next, bring back manual transmissions, lose power steering?

That said, I’d be in favor of even more stringent resource restrictions, and a relaxing of the tech regs. Cap the amount of fuel and tires a team gets for the weekend, but allow more technical freedom.

If you only have -say- 200 kg of fuel per car per weekend, and you can make that work with a screeching V10, great.
My money is on the hybrids, I reckon we’d soon see the ICE as a generator only and have all propulsion done by electric motors. But if some genius figures out a NA ICE as powerful on just as little fuel, why not?

[JordanMugen]

What’s next, bring back manual transmissions, lose power steering?

Yes, please!

Obviously F1 cars have a bit too much downforce for manual steering, but obviously F2 and Indycar do just fine with manual steering. With lower downforce levels it would easily be possible to get rid of the power steering.

Mandatory h-pattern manual gearboxes would be a lot of fun also!

It is literally a step back in time, and that is not what F1 is about.

That's your opinion that Formula One is not about going back in time. Formula One literally banned turbochargers from 1989 all the way until 2013. They banned anti-lock brakes, they banned active suspension, they banned interlinked suspension, they banned suspension inerters, it goes on and on. There have been numerous technologies removed over the years, including turbosuperchargers.

It's really not an issue to have an anachronistic format (note the inefficient fully open wheels for example!), especially if Formula E is going to be the technologically advanced series - and have exclusive rights to being such.

The fact of the matter is that any combustion engine in a road car is archaic, sale of brand new combustion engine passenger vehicles will be banned in most Western European markets between 2030 and 2035. So Formula One is not going to fool anyone or score any green points with an only partially electric system.

If you only have -say- 200 kg of fuel per car per weekend, and you can make that work with a screeching V10, great.
My money is on the hybrids

I noticed you didn't address all the automakers other than Toyota leaving the LMP1 class despite the multi-option hybrid regulations. The notion technologically complex regulations = manufacturer interest is just not a 1:1 relationship.

But V10’s have near-zero relevance to road mobility.

While I don't have a V10, as much as an Audi R8 V10 would be lovely, it sounds like you don't still drive a high-revving naturally aspirated ICE manual transmission road car yourself, hence why you don't think these things are still relevant?

FWIW the Toyota GR86 is still on sale as an affordable entry-level sportscar with these attributes (a brand new 10 year old car), just not in Western Europe because it doesn't meet emissions in Western Europe anymore and the CO2/km is bad for Toyota's WLTP rating.

It's still a common sight on Toyota dealership lots in Australia and elsewhere, however.

{Ironically, the so-called "pro hybrid" Audi stretched out the life cycle of their V10 engine high-level sportscar too for that matter, also for as long as feasible until Euro 6E killed it. Even when it was surrounded by rival turbo and even turbo hybrid high-level sportscar from the likes of Honda in the market!]

[JordanMugen]

My money is on the hybrids, I reckon we’d soon see the ICE as a generator only and have all propulsion done by electric motors.

Yes I already mentioned that!

Whether the fan reaction would be positive to this 'optimal' solution remains to be seen.

You reckon the fans won't mind? They will sound worse than merely quiet electric racecars whoosing past, instead the constant 4000rpm single cylinder generator drone will be positively offensively bad sounding (unless it's muffled to be near silent, I guess).

But it would certainly be nice for the next set of engine regulations to take this in mind, because people absolutely do want it.

I wouldn't be surprised if the instructions are considered unclear and the end regulation result is a 900cc single (not connected to the wheels) running at a constant 4000rpm as a generator!

[zeph]

That's your opinion that Formula One is not about going back in time. Formula One literally banned turbochargers from 1989 all the way until 2013. They banned anti-lock brakes, they banned active suspension, they banned interlinked suspension, they banned suspension inerters, it goes on and on. There have been numerous technologies removed over the years, including turbosuperchargers.

It's really not an issue to have an anachronistic format (note the inefficient fully open wheels for example!), especially if Formula E is going to be the technologically advanced series - and have exclusive rights to being such.

All fair points but context is relevant.
Turbos were banned because of safety. Chassis and aero tech at the time couldn't keep up with the immense power and after several deadly accidents, it was outlawed.
Anti-lock brakes and active suspension were deemed to reduce the need for driver skill.

But your point about open wheels stands. I don't follow or know anything about Formula E.

The fact of the matter is that any combustion engine in a road car is archaic, sale of brand new combustion engine passenger vehicles will be banned in most Western European markets between 2030 and 2035. So Formula One is not going to fool anyone or score any green points with an only partially electric system.

I have a suspicion that hybrids are gonna be around for a while, at least until we finally run out of oil. In terms of over-all efficiency they still do better than BEV's, and the EU's myopic focus on emissions only is already proving to be untenable. But that is political discussion and outside the scope of this thread.

FWIW, I would not be surprised if F1 absorbs FE at some point. I would also not be surprised if it goes away completely.

Liberty Media has given it a new lease on life, but it remains to be seen how much of the recently acquired audience will stay interested.
My son got interested thanks to DTS and stayed on for about two or three seasons, but as life happens his attention waned and now he only follows it occasionally from the periphery. I would not be surprised if this is true for many other Gen-Z'ers.

I noticed you didn't address all the automakers other than Toyota leaving the LMP1 class despite the multi-option hybrid regulations. The notion technologically complex regulations = manufacturer interest is just not a 1:1 relationship.

I don't follow nor know anything about WEC. I thought Ferrari had just successfully joined?

While I don't have a V10, as much as an Audi R8 V10 would be lovely, it sounds like you don't still drive a high-revving naturally aspirated ICE manual transmission road car yourself, hence why you don't think these things are still relevant?

I drive a van

I do enjoy driving analog cars, although I absolutely hate operating a clutch in LA traffic. On a Sunday morning on mountain roads it's fun to operate a high-revving manual, but to be honest, so is driving a Tesla!

My point is, to my knowledge naturally-aspirated V10's are no longer sold in any road-going vehicles. Ferrari has hybridized (if that's a word) almost its entire lineup. It's the way of the world.

There are several historic racing series, mostly powered by a small but loyal fan base and sheer enthusiasm of the participants. I think F1 should be mindful not to become a historic racing series.

Casual fans may not care what powers the cars, but being the "technologically most advanced" is a crucial selling point, as hollow as it is and even if nobody really knows or agrees on what that actually means.

For manufacturers, success in "technologically most advanced" sport has commercial value. Success in a historic racing series does not sell vehicles on Monday.

[zeph]

My money is on the hybrids, I reckon we’d soon see the ICE as a generator only and have all propulsion done by electric motors.

Yes I already mentioned that!

Whether the fan reaction would be positive to this 'optimal' solution remains to be seen.

You reckon the fans won't mind? They will sound worse than merely quiet electric racecars whoosing past, instead the constant 4000rpm single cylinder generator drone will be positively offensively bad sounding (unless it's muffled to be near silent, I guess).

My impression is that a small but very vocal subset of fans complain about the lack of noise. They are very active online, so it may seem like a majority opinion, but I'm not convinced it is.

I don't understand why anybody enjoys attending a GP having to wear hearing protection. It was a deterrent for me back in those days.

I actually posted on this forum back in 2014 how cool and futuristic the new hybrids sounded. A low and menacing growl, and the whistle from the regen under deceleration, it was like spaceships came to race.

It's possible I'm alone in this. On this forum the noise seems to be more popular.

[hollus]

Since we are focusing so much on noise… when and how and why were CVTs banned in F1. (yes, memory inspired by a post a bit above).
It was many, many moons ago, so relevance is questionable.

[Tommy Cookers]

for 1994 F1 mandated 4 - 7 gears and banned CVT
Williams having in 1993 demonstrated that CVT gave an F1 car better performance

[mzso]

Since we are focusing so much on noise… when and how and why were CVTs banned in F1. (yes, memory inspired by a post a bit above).
It was many, many moons ago, so relevance is questionable.

They way I heard it Ecclestone didn't like it, so got it banned quickly. Maybe Williams should have been secretive about it. But a lot of footage of the car and Coulthard and others talking about it is availabe: