In Bahrain, a significant meeting took place within the Formula 1 paddock, focusing on the future of engine regulations and the framework for 2026. This gathering followed a media briefing featuring Nikolas Tombazis in China, where the director of the FIA’s single-seater commission posed two crucial questions regarding the long-term vision for F1 engines. The first query revolved around the potential adoption of a V10 engine utilizing sustainable fuels by 2031 or potentially even sooner. The second question addressed the necessary actions leading up to that timeline. During the media session, the FIA presented two options: either shorten the current cycle of regulations or eliminate them altogether.
As anticipated, the outcome of the subsequent meetings with manufacturers indicated a strong consensus against the latter option. Sources from Motorsport.com revealed that three manufacturers were resolutely against scrapping the new regulations right from the start of the discussions. It’s no secret that Audi and Honda entered—or remained in—F1 with a focus on electrification and regulations that align with their sustainability objectives. Mercedes, represented by their team principal Toto Wolff, also made its position clear both prior to and during the meeting. Wolff has consistently emphasized that F1 needs to be a “reliable partner” and that making last-minute regulatory changes undermines that reliability.
During the Bahrain meeting, Ola Kallenius, the CEO of Daimler, participated virtually and echoed similar sentiments. With Audi and Honda opposing the idea of discarding the new regulations, this proposition was swiftly taken off the agenda, as any amendments would require a supermajority. If even one manufacturer expressed dissent, ratification would have been tricky, but it was still a situation the FIA preferred to avoid. Tombazis reiterated that any alterations should be made with a “broad consensus” in mind.
The discussions, however, extended beyond the 2026 regulations and included considerations regarding what the future engine should encompass. The FIA underscored in its statements that “a degree of electrification will always be part of future considerations.” One of the commonly discussed options is a V10 or V8 engine equipped with KERS (Kinetic Energy Recovery System). Yet, this idea is not as straightforward as it might seem, as some manufacturers consider this technology to be overly heavy, especially given the increased fuel requirements it entails.
Moreover, there are some parties advocating for turbo engines, with Audi arguing that they hold greater relevance for technology transfer to consumer vehicles. Conversely, some drivers, including Esteban Ocon, have expressed dissatisfaction with the current engine sound. Ocon remarked, “It’s not the sound that we loved when we were young,” suggesting a shift back to naturally aspirated engines—be it V6, V8, or even a five-cylinder engine—could rekindle that auditory appeal. The chief issue lies with the turbo engines, which have diluted the audio experience of racing.
The intricate nature of these discussions illustrates why the topic of engines is a long-term consideration. The FIA has made it clear that any future formula post-2031 will require a delicate balance among various interests, including sustainability, safety-related weight reduction, performance, relevance to road vehicles, sound quality, and audience engagement. The ongoing talks have highlighted that prioritizing sustainability and road relevance is crucial to retaining manufacturers in F1—an objective that both the FIA and F1 are keen to uphold, despite any proclamations regarding V10 engines.
Amid these discussions, a pressing concern persists regarding the 2026 regulations. This subject is politically charged and reveals that apprehensions about the new rules have not yet dissipated. These concerns manifest in two primary areas: the overall impact of the regulations on the racing experience and the fear that a single manufacturer could dominate the competitive landscape.
Carlos Sainz articulated one aspect of this unease during a media day in Bahrain, stating, “I wouldn’t be too vocal supporting the comeback of a V10 engine if I liked what I saw from 2026. But as I don’t really like what I see from 2026 in terms of what the car is going to do, the engine’s going to do, the way everything is going to work, I would say yes – I would like a V10 engine with a few tweaks to make it back sooner rather than later.” While a return to V10 engines is unlikely, Sainz’s comments underscore the dissatisfaction among some drivers regarding the current trajectory of the 2026 rules.
This sentiment is echoed throughout the F1 paddock. However, McLaren’s team principal, Andrea Stella, emphasized the importance of maintaining a positive perception among fans. He remarked, “We haven’t even started 2026, and we are already talking about something else. I would like to invoke a sense of responsibility from all stakeholders, because we are here to protect the interests of the sport. I wouldn’t want us to undermine what could actually be successful regulations. They may need some tuning and adjustments—but that’s what we are here for. Let’s all work collaboratively toward the interest of the sport, which comes when we have a good product.”
Navigating these discussions is complex, as differing opinions abound on what constitutes the “best interest of the sport.” This complexity pertains to both the nature of racing that the 2026 rules will produce and the concern that one manufacturer may gain a competitive edge over others. To address the latter issue, initiatives have already been introduced in Bahrain and during the F1 Commission meetings. For instance, mechanisms are being established to provide teams that are lagging behind with additional testing time and further development options under the engine budget cap, rather than relying solely on a token system as in the past.
Conversely, addressing the first concern has proven to be more challenging, as it involves sensitive discussions about whether the 2026 regulations necessitate adjustments—specifically regarding the balance between electric power and the internal combustion engine during races. This aspect represents a critical intersection between what is deemed best for the sport and what serves the interests of individual manufacturers.
Red Bull has raised alarms about potential pitfalls if the ratio between electric and combustion power isn’t recalibrated, warning of a scenario that could detract from the sport’s excitement. Christian Horner from Red Bull mentioned, “This is something that we asked to be looked at two years ago, and it’s not something that we’ve pushed to be on the agenda this week at all.” He further noted that the FIA has conducted research and aims to avoid excessive lifting and coasting during races, which could diminish the spectacle for both drivers and fans.
In contrast, Wolff has offered a different perspective, suggesting that the agenda set by the F1 Commission is somewhat amusing, likening it to reading outlandish political commentary. He expressed a desire to refrain from commentary but emphasized that the situation is laughable. Both sides are motivated by competitive interests; Wolff believes it may be too late for alterations to be made for 2026, while Horner contends that the discussion should have taken place earlier. Nevertheless, Horner maintains that there remains ample time to address these concerns before the racing season begins.
