In the upcoming year, substantial alterations will be made to both the framework of the vehicles and the mechanics of the engine. A number of seasoned professionals within the Formula 1 community have described these adjustments as the most significant revisions implemented over the past half-century.
Alongside apprehensions expressed by drivers regarding the overall nature of the races, there exists a concern that these modifications could establish a scenario where a single manufacturer maintains a dominant position for an extended period. Recollections of 2014 persist, a year when Mercedes’ engine demonstrated a noticeable advantage over its competitors, propelling the factory team to secure every world championship title up until 2020.
Reasons Behind the FIA’s Confidence in Avoiding a Repetition of Mercedes’ 2014 Dominance
However, the FIA expresses assurance that history will not replicate itself as Formula 1 enters its new phase commencing in 2026. Nikolas Tombazis conveyed to Autosport, “I do not foresee a situation where a solitary manufacturer possesses such a considerable edge, as was evident in 2014.”
The FIA’s director for single-seater vehicles posits that the revised engine specifications are less intricate, despite the substantial surge in electrical capacity. Tombazis stated, “The engines are still not as uncomplicated as we would have preferred. Our aim was to simplify them further; however, we encountered significant opposition to additional regulatory simplification. Consequently, certain aspects remain that we wished to streamline even more, although they are still simpler than the existing engine generation. The MGU-H is absent, and several components have stricter constraints, leading us to believe that the disparities will not be as pronounced as in 2014.”
During that period, the MGU-H proved to be a crucial element in differentiating performance, albeit at a considerable expense. Both factors contribute to its removal in 2026, a modification anticipated to foster a fairer environment for newcomers while simultaneously curtailing development expenditures.
Understanding the Operation of the Concessions System
Despite these measures, the possibility remains that one manufacturer might exhibit a notably superior start compared to the others, particularly given the FIA’s acknowledgment that not all power unit manufacturers exhibit equal transparency or willingness to exchange data concerning their novel engines.
Photo by: Charles Coates / Motorsport Images
Nevertheless, even in the scenario of one manufacturer asserting dominance in the upcoming year, the FIA has assimilated knowledge from the events of 2014. The revised regulations incorporate a protective measure, enabling manufacturers lagging in performance to diminish the disparity through mechanisms referred to as concessions.
Tombazis stated, “We are integrating newcomers, and there consistently exists a potential risk at the inception of a new cycle that some divergence may initially manifest. Moreover, we currently have a cost disparity among PU manufacturers.” This implies that manufacturers trailing behind cannot simply allocate unrestricted funds to their engine ventures. To afford them opportunities to progress, the FIA has integrated a novel system into the 2026 regulations.
Tombazis elaborated, “For this purpose, we have introduced a concept termed ADUO, an abbreviation for Additional Development and Upgrade Opportunities. This concept is the result of extensive deliberation. It was incorporated from the regulations’ inception, and in recent months, further detail has been added to precisely define its operational mechanics.”
This prompts the fundamental question: How does it function? “In essence, the average performance of each PU manufacturer will be assessed every five to six races. Those performing below a defined threshold, with the degree of the shortfall influencing the benefit, will accrue this benefit over the course of the year. This benefit will manifest in three forms: additional development funding, increased dyno hours, and the potential for a new engine homologation. Consequently, entities lagging behind will possess the capacity to accelerate and bridge the gap.”
The technical regulations for 2026 stipulate that this assessment will be conducted following the initial five race weekends of each season: “Over the initial five Competitions of each Championship Season spanning the 2026-2030 period, the FIA will oversee the performance of the Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) component of all Power Units furnished by each PU Manufacturer to its customer Competitors. An average power output will be computed for each ICE provided by the PU Manufacturers. The methodology for computing this power output is detailed in the Appendix to the Regulations. Any PU Manufacturer whose ICE power output falls more than 3% below that of the highest ICE power output recorded among all PU Manufacturers will be granted Additional Development and Upgrade Opportunities.”
These supplementary opportunities pertain to a table within Appendix 3 of the technical regulations. A distinct ADUO column delineates the ICE components that may still undergo refinement if a manufacturer is granted the special status by the FIA. Several of these components are otherwise subject to a development freeze over a specified duration; however, with ADUO status, they may still be modified to diminish the deficit.
Nikolas Tombazis, FIA Single Seater Director
Photo by: Andy Hone / Motorsport Images
The FIA Rejects “Absolutely Any Suggestion” of Performance Balancing
The system is architected to deter prolonged periods of dominance; however, Tombazis emphasizes that it should not be interpreted as a Performance Balancing mechanism, as employed in series like the World Endurance Championship.
“I wish to emphasize my complete rejection of any assertion that this constitutes a Balance of Performance or anything akin to it, primarily because the regulations are uniformly applied to all participants. It is not a scenario where we are granting increased cubic capacity, additional fuel, or any similar concessions.”
“Secondly, the absence of a cost ceiling would prompt them to allocate substantial funding to it. When Honda faced a deficit in 2016 and 2017, they were compelled to expend significantly more to catch up for a specific duration. The presence of a cost ceiling introduces the potential risk of perpetual inability to do so, resulting in enduring inferiority. Such a scenario would be unequivocally unfair, and I must acknowledge the remarkable collaborative spirit exhibited by PU manufacturers on this matter.”
Finally, the FIA is formulating a safety net for manufacturers encountering significant reliability challenges — a contingency that cannot be dismissed at the commencement of a new era.
“An additional initiative is underway to address scenarios where a PU manufacturer faces substantial reliability issues from the outset. Consider a situation where an engine fails in each race weekend, incurring considerable expense per engine. This could rapidly deplete their cost cap, necessitating a reduction in development to remain compliant, an obviously undesirable scenario.”
“Accordingly, we are pursuing initiatives currently undergoing discussion and, we hope, will be sanctioned imminently, wherein exceeding a specific number of engines triggers a certain level of cost cap alleviation.
“Your engines, after you pass that threshold, will carry a very small cost from a cost-cap perspective. This does not mean the actual costs of course, those stay the same. But it will save manufacturers from the awful position of being unable to react to the cost cap. That would be truly unfortunate.”
Coupled with a power unit formula that is somewhat simpler, this strategy should prevent the recurrence of the 2014 situation, sustaining competitiveness within Formula 1, at least in the domain of engines.
