In the lead-up to the season’s inaugural race in Melbourne, the phrase “compression ratio” has been a dominant theme in discussions across the paddock. Ever since competing teams discovered that Mercedes adheres to the 16:1 limit during stationary checks at room temperature, yet achieves a higher ratio while the engine is in operation, the matter has become politically charged and overblown.
During the inaugural week of pre-season testing held in Bahrain, Toto Wolff affirmed that Mercedes had consistently engaged the FIA throughout the development of its latest engine. He expressed absolutely no reservations regarding the legality of his new power unit, characterizing the situation on Thursday as a “tempest in a teapot.”
This, however, begs the question of why the FIA still found it necessary to initiate a vote on the subject.
“There are many subtleties when discussing such a matter, because there’s the intended spirit of the rules, and maintaining the compression ratio at 16:1 was a primary goal when the regulations were finalized with the power unit manufacturers back in 2022,” stated Nikolas Tombazis, the FIA’s single-seater director, when questioned by Autosport.
“And there’s also the exact wording of the regulation. It became apparent that, based on what was written in the regulations, there could be avenues through which one might achieve a higher compression ratio.”
Tombazis is eager to underscore that this situation pertains to the need for regulatory clarification, rather than any manufacturer having actually violated the established guidelines.
“As for whether there’s any discussion of someone cheating or someone breaking the rules, that has never been the subject of our discourse. So while there’s been a lot of emotion around the topic, I don’t believe the FIA has ever taken the stance that someone is acting illegally.
Nikolas Tombazis, FIA Single Seater Director
Photo by: Andy Hone / Motorsport Images
“When regulations require enhancement because they don’t fully accomplish their aim, we endeavor to introduce amendments. Our intention is to keep the rules centered on their objective, rather than allowing them to gradually shift as interpretations might have stretched them somewhat in one direction or another.”
This exemplifies a classic dynamic where approximately twenty FIA staff members aim to tighten regulations against hundreds of team personnel seeking advantageous interpretations.
“As I’ve articulated a few times, there are perhaps 15 to 20 individuals within the FIA who manage regulations. We engage in frequent discussions with teams, power unit manufacturers, technical directors, and so forth. However, each team then has 200 or 300 people solely focused on performance, crafting components, striving to generate downforce or boost overall performance, and the same principle applies to the power unit manufacturers.
“It’s inevitable that with novel regulations, certain areas will emerge where solutions are discovered that go beyond the rules’ original intent. So, what we aim to achieve with this vote is to put this discussion to rest and, hopefully, arrive at a resolution.”
What comes next in the Formula 1 power unit debate?
This dictates that all manufacturers, the FIA, and Formula One Management are allotted 10 days to submit their votes online, with a supermajority being a prerequisite. For the proposed alteration to be adopted, four out of the five power unit manufacturers, along with the FIA and F1, must reach an agreement.
Should the proposition successfully pass the vote and subsequently gain the endorsement of the FIA World Motor Sport Council, the compression ratio will be assessed using two methodologies from August 1st onward: the existing examination under ambient conditions, and an additional verification at a representative operational temperature of 130 degrees Celsius.
Should a manufacturer – such as Mercedes, for instance – be required to modify its engine for the latter half of the F1 season, the regulatory framework makes provisions for this, and such changes do not fall under the ADUO system.
George Russell, Mercedes
Photo by: Mark Thompson / Getty Images
“There exists a process for necessary adjustments,” Tombazis stated. “Within the appendix that defines power unit homologation, there’s also a procedure for adapting to regulatory amendments, so that is entirely achievable.”
An important observation is that such adjustments are indeed accounted for within the budget limits set for power unit manufacturers.
It also prompts the inquiry as to why the FIA has specifically chosen August 1st as the implementation date. While changes before the Australian Grand Prix were not practical, why introduce this mid-season rather than postponing it until 2027?
“Our view was that there was no indication of anything illegal, and teams had dedicated time to designing their engines and solutions. We felt it would be unfair to implement something for the start of the season; we believed that would have been incorrect,” Tombazis elucidated.
“But we also perceived it as something that diverged from what we believed was the intention of the rules. Consequently, we felt it was appropriate not to allow it to continue for too long. As I’ve said, there’s a degree of subjectivity involved. I cannot assert that this is the sole solution any individual could devise, but we considered it a balanced approach.”
Tombazis further noted that adjusting an engine to conform to a potential rule modification is not as drastic an undertaking as some within the paddock might suggest.
“The magnitude of the difference in compression ratio, if you calculate the figures, considering the cylinder diameter, the stroke, and how much we’re discussing in terms of millimeters, is an extremely minute amount. It is quite simple to fine-tune an engine from one setting to a slightly different one. We are not talking about discarding everything.”
Toto Wolff, Mercedes
Photo by: Sam Bloxham / LAT Images via Getty Images
Is this controversy truly a minor issue?
The FIA underscored its belief that the matter holds less importance than some manufacturers might believe, and that the disparity in horsepower is also less substantial than indicated.
“I’ve experienced working on the other side, within a team, and people become incredibly fervent about performance. They are intensely competitive. The stakes are significant, which is why they get extremely animated,” Tombazis remarked.
“When individuals are so emotionally invested, they sometimes tend to lose a degree of perspective regarding the argument, and they often view things from a somewhat biased standpoint. I encounter this when I play backgammon with my wife. We temporarily set aside our affection, and occasionally dispute a point. It’s an exceedingly competitive game.
“Formula 1 magnifies that intensity by a factor of 1,000. So, people become a bit too impassioned, and I don’t think this topic ever needed to garner such an extensive level of attention. I’m not suggesting it’s without importance, but does it warrant all this agitation for many months? Frankly, no.”
However, to prevent the issue from persisting throughout the entire season, Tombazis stated that the FIA indeed felt compelled to intervene: “Yet, I must emphasize that I believe this matter is not nearly as critical as people perceive it to be.”
