Almost a year ago, the alarm bells began ringing in the FIA’s luxurious home in Paris at the Place de Concorde. Formula One’s governing body called an emergency meeting scheduled for the Bahrain Grand Prix weekend to discuss the flaws in the specifications for the all new power units coming in 2026.
Concerns had grown over the electrical elements of the new powertrains specifically that the 50% contribution to total power was overstated. Christian Horner, then team principal of Red Bull Racing, had in 2023 raised the spectre of the all new cars for this year becoming “Frankenstein” monsters.
His concerns were that the reliance on the electrical output would see the all new F1 cars running out of power at circuits where there were particularly long straights together with a lack of opportunity around the lap for the cars to regenerate the electrical power they required.
F1 manufacturers refuse FIA’s Bahrain overtures
In Bahrain 2025 the FIA restated these concerns and requested the power unit manufacturers consider reducing the electrical contribution from 50/50 to 40/60, a software induced restriction which meant the architecture of the all new PU’s could remain the same.
Audi made their stance crystal clear stating their decision to join Formula One as a works outfit was based on the championship being committed to a future of hybrid power with a strong focus on the electrical power contribution. Honda too, who had initially decided to withdraw from F1 come 2026, were adamant their decision to remain was heavily influenced by the all new hybrid power trains.
Such was the impending crisis the FIA even proposed extending the previous power unit regulations for two more seasons before a return to V8/10 combustion engines with a modicum of electrical input similar to the 2009 KERS designs.
To effect any change to the 2026 PU specifications, the FIA required all but one of the manufacturers to agree to their proposals, however Audi and Honda in particular proved to be stubborn obstacles to any revisions of the 2026 specifications.
Mercedes boss exit as season start imminent
Audi/Honda complaints over rivals power units
Now the German and Japanese F1 manufacturers find themselves on the wrong side of F1’s latest row as they seek to persuade the FIA to modify their rules on how the compression ratio’s of the new V6 PU’s is measured.
It is widely claimed that Red Bull Racing and Mercedes have exploited a grey area in the new PU rules which allows them to deliver compression ratios inter internal combustion engines, higher than the FIA’s stated 16.1 standard. By designing certain components to flex when at high temperatures, this allows the pistons to travel a little further during the compressions cycle meaning a higher rate can be achieved.
Some have estimated this to be as much as 0.4 of a second around a lap at a track like the Circuit de Catalunya and Audi and Honda are demanding the FIA reconsider its regulations on monitoring compression ratio’s. Currently the compression in the internal combustion engine is measured at ambient air temperature and with a stationary car. This of course means Mercedes and Red Bull will pass the FIA tests but when their cars are up to speed and the PU hot, the ratio’s will climb.
However, so far the FIA has been unmoved by Audi and Honda’s protests with the director of F1 day to day operations, Nicolas Tombazis, making the FIA’s position clear. “When we have new regulations, I think it is normal that there will be some discussion points, some areas which need a bit of clarification or adjustment, and that’s what we are currently discussing with the various stakeholders,” Tombazis told The Times.
Binotto pressing for rule changes
“We have an objective to make sure that procedures are interpreted and understood in the same way. We are confident the rules can be clarified and I would say that I’m sure it will no longer be a talking point very soon,” he concluded.
Yet this statement will provide little comfort for Audi and Honda given the FIA restated this month their procedures for measuring compression ratio’s were clearly stated in the technical regulations. Although Mattia Binotto, the Audi F1 project leader, believes it is possible to introduce new FIA tests which prove Mercedes and Red Bull have strayed beyond the spirit of the PU rules.
“It’s simply we are trying, all together, to really develop a methodology where we can measure it in real time while the car is running,” he said this week. “My hope in that meeting is not clarity on the regulation itself, but more to define a methodology for the future.”
However, this is a fanciful notion from the former Ferrari team boss given the time and expense it would require for the FIA to commit to this process. It is more likely, the FIA will stand its ground regarding the current ICE compression measuring procedure, thus allowing other teams to design their own expanding ICE components and copy the Red Bull and Mercedes idea.
FIA’s catchup process as fast as a snail
The FIA have made it clear they will instigate a catch up procedure for any PU manufacturer(s) who have fallen behind the rest of the field. Output measurements will be taken by the FIA across the first six F1 race weekends and any manufacturer found to be outside of the stated tolerance will be allowed to redesign their PU.
The problem here though is the time it takes from concept to production for a PU, is way longer than that for any chassis or aerodynamic redesign as Red Bull Powertrains technical director, Ben Hodgkinson explains. “The bit that I don’t think is fully understood amongst the rule makers is that the gestation time of an idea in power units is much longer than it is for the chassis.”
“So if I need to make a change, firstly, I’ve not just got two cars to update, I’ve got a whole fleet of engines in the pool. So I could have 12 engines that I need to update. That takes time. But also, because we’re homologated, you can’t really take a flyer on something that isn’t well proven, because you could be signing up to a world of pain.”
If Ferrari fires Hamilton, here’s the plan…
F1 gods issue payback to Audi/Honda
The Red Bull PU guru argues that from concept to production a revised high precision PU component would consume 12 weeks of time, then to ensure reliability is up to expectation another 12 weeks of dyno testing comes next. Then a further 12 weeks is required for the manufacture to bring the revisions to the entire engine pool.
The problem for Audi and Honda is that even were they certain of what Red Bull and Mercedes were doing – which they are not – it will be close to the end of the season before any properly considered redesigns will find their way onto the race cars.
Whilst nobody is suggesting the FIA will operate out of spite towards Audi and Honda for refusing to play ball in Bahrain, the latent drag in the process to redefining the rules to implement new ICE compression measuring procedures is likely to serve as payback for the manufacturers’ intransigence ten months ago.
FIA emergency meeting looms as Audi protest Mercedes/Red Bull engine trick
Mercedes and Red Bull’s trick with the Ford engine: Audi fears being at a disadvantage – Ahead of the 2026 Formula 1 season, the FIA is facing growing pressure as concerns mount over a potential performance loophole that Mercedes and Red Bull Powertrains/Ford may exploit. Several engine manufacturers believe that their rivals may have found a way to generate more power without technically breaking the rules, a situation that could have major competitive ramifications.
These concerns are expected to dominate discussions when the FIA meets with representatives of the Formula 1 power unit manufacturers on 22 January. While no formal protest has yet been lodged, there is clearly growing unease within the paddock, particularly among manufacturers preparing for the new engine era…. READ MORE
A.J. Hunt is Senior Editor at TJ13, where Andrew oversees editorial standards and contributes to the site’s Formula 1 coverage. A career journalist with experience in both print and digital sports media, Andrew trained in investigative journalism and has written for a range of European sports outlets.
At TJ13, Andrew plays a central role in shaping the site’s output, working across breaking news, analysis, and long-form features. Andrew’s responsibilities include fact-checking, refining editorial structure, and ensuring consistency in reporting across a fast-moving news cycle.
Andrew’s work focuses particularly on the intersection of Formula 1 politics, regulation, and team strategy. Andrew closely follows developments involving the FIA, team leadership, and driver market dynamics, helping to provide context behind the sport’s biggest stories.
With experience covering multiple seasons of Formula 1’s modern hybrid era, Andrew has developed a detailed understanding of how regulatory changes and competitive shifts influence the grid. Andrew’s editorial approach prioritises clarity and context, aiming to help readers navigate complex developments within the sport.
In addition to editorial duties, Andrew is particularly interested in how media narratives shape fan perception of Formula 1, and how reporting can balance speed with accuracy in an increasingly digital news environment.
