Formula 1 is facing a critical weekend of political brinkmanship as the FIA sets a strict deadline to push through emergency technical alterations for the 2027 engine regulations. Despite intense friction within the paddock, the sport’s governing body wants a definitive framework signed off before the cars hit the track for the upcoming Barcelona-Catalunya Grand Prix.
The intervention follows widespread driver and fan backlash against the current 2026 power units. Last month, the FIA announced an in-principle agreement among engine manufacturers to overhaul the heavily criticised 50/50 hybrid split. The proposed layout aims to shift the ratio to a healthier 60/40 split in favour of fossil fuels by increasing internal combustion engine (ICE) output by 50 kilowatts (67 bhp) while downscaling the electrical motor by an identical margin.
This shift would require adjustments to the rate of fuel flow, which was reduced from 100 kg/h to 75 kg/h under this year’s regulations. While an approximate 15% increase in fuel usage obviously conflicts with the FIA’s broader green agenda—which continually presses for ever-increasing efficiency—the fact that the governing body is considering sanctioning it proves just how seriously these problems are being taken.
Currently, drivers are being forced to perform weird and frustrating driving techniques just to harvest as much hybrid energy as they can. Boosting the power of the internal combustion engine will mitigate that to some degree and, hopefully, bring an end to onboard TV shots where cars visibly slow hundreds of metres before a corner’s actual braking zone.
The Canadian Splinter and Ferrari’s “Political Football”
Following the Miami Grand Prix, it appeared there was some consensus on this “fix.” However, when the technical details came to be discussed in Montreal, paddock opinion quickly splintered.
Audi decided they were opposed to the measure. Given that this is their very first season in F1, any baseline data they collect on their current power unit would become null and void in 2027 under the new framework.
Yet, it requires two power unit manufacturers to block the FIA’s proposition, and Ferrari decided to use the discussion as a political football. In Monaco, discussions once again stalled as the Scuderia argued the regulation overhaul would actively disadvantage them.
Maranello believed that opening up engine changes to all manufacturers would hinder their pursuit to reel in Mercedes’ current advantage. They anticipated that under the FIA’s power unit catch-up programme—known as the Additional Development and Upgrade Opportunities (ADUO) framework—they would be awarded exclusive opportunities to redesign their powertrain and close the deficit to Mercedes.
Of course, switching the baseline fuel flow rates would mean Mercedes too would be able to rejig the core architecture of their engine, completely nullifying Ferrari’s anticipated advantage under the ADUO concessions.
The Real Engine Hierarchy Revealed
However, Ferrari’s position may well change following the FIA’s recent bombshell performance report, which unexpectedly extended development concessions to Mercedes as well. Across the first five race weekends of 2026, the FIA has been measuring the exact power output of the grid’s various combustion engines.
To the paddock’s surprise, it is Red Bull Powertrains that possesses the most powerful internal combustion engine. Mercedes is trailing between 2% and 4% behind them, earning them a single upgrade concession. Ferrari is even further back—sitting at more than a 4% deficit to the Milton Keynes squad—which allows the Italian team two upgrade concessions.
Meanwhile, Audi remains highly resistant to changing the goalposts before they’ve even arrived on the grid. Audi CEO Gernot Döllner told The Athletic that the brand prefers to stay with the existing parameters to focus on optimising its current drivetrain architecture under a strict cost cap.
“It would take away money from other areas that we would prefer to put the money to,” Döllner warned, though he conceded that Audi remains part of the ongoing process.
The Japanese manufacturer Honda has maintained a similarly ambiguous stance, with insiders indicating significant apprehension regarding the financial burden of changing hardware layout targets—especially while their primary focus is fixed on fixing immediate performance and reliability shortfalls. Having a completely revised fuel flow system to redesign would simply be one more complex item on a long list for Honda to sort out.
The Supermajority Voting Game
In long-standing tradition, General Motors/Cadillac is expected to vote alongside Ferrari, who are supplying their customer engines under the current regulations.
Crucially, under the modern Concorde Agreement framework, the FIA does not require absolute unanimity to enact its wishes. The voting structure requires only a supermajority of four out of the six registered power unit manufacturers to be in favour to pass a 2027 change, meaning the governing body only needs to win over two uncommitted brands. However, the FIA strongly prefers a unanimous vote to avoid a messy, public airing of grievances that could damage the sport’s commercial stability.
Should the paddock reach a complete gridlock, a watered-down fallback option is reportedly on the table: a minor 5% fuel flow increase. This micro-adjustment would not require manufacturers to radically redevelop their engine architecture or expand their chassis fuel tank layouts, but it would have a drastically diminished effect on curing the underlying hybrid “super clipping” issues.
While a smaller change would merely serve as a stepping stone for further adjustments in 2028, Formula 1 is desperate to avoid a continuous cycle of regulatory tinkering. Commercial rights holders and engineers alike want the technical regulations stabilised—especially as attention is already shifting toward the post-2030 blueprint, where FIA President Mohammed Ben Sulayem is aggressively trying to bring forward a return to pure, sustainable V8 combustion engines by an extra year.
Ending the Era of Manufacturer Control
Ultimately, Ben Sulayem has made it clear that the era of the tail wagging the dog—where automotive manufacturers dictate the exact technical specifications of Formula 1—will soon be over.
“If you ask me what is my dream, my dream is that we have a combustion engine with a very, very little electrical power. Not even a hybrid. The internal combustion engine with sustainable fuel. This is my target,” said the head of the FIA.
“It’s coming. At the end of the day, it’s a matter of time. In 2031, the V8, the FIA will have the power to do it, without any votes from the PUMs [Power Unit Manufacturers]. That’s the regulations. But we want to bring it one year earlier [2030], which everyone now is asking for.”
With F1 currently in rude financial health, the sport’s desperation to appease global automotive manufacturers at any cost is over. If the German and Japanese obsession with hybrid marketing eventually sees them take their ball home, there will be plenty of independent, third-party engine suppliers ready to step up—companies that can easily afford to build a much simpler, significantly less costly F1 power unit.
Would you like to see more TJ13 Formula 1 coverage? Add us to your favourites list on Google to receive trusted F1 news.
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.
