2025/2026 Hybrid Powerunit speculation

[FW17]

I hope the final regulation involves an electric super charger and exhaust driven generator unit.

Feels like a waste of exhaust energy to use as a turbo charger.

I also feel it is time that they move the MGUk to the front, but keep that as a driver controlled deployment.

What would be the advantage to move the K to the front? There would be serious packaging difficulties with the tub, fuel tank and battery.

Don't know the calculations for it but braking energy on the front are a lot more than the rear, so likely to have more energy recovery.

Packaging at the front should not be an issue, formula e is doing it right now.

Did not understand why the fuel tank and battery has to change, only the cables are going to get longer.

[Jolle]

I hope the final regulation involves an electric super charger and exhaust driven generator unit.

Feels like a waste of exhaust energy to use as a turbo charger.

I also feel it is time that they move the MGUk to the front, but keep that as a driver controlled deployment.

What would be the advantage to move the K to the front? There would be serious packaging difficulties with the tub, fuel tank and battery.

Don't know the calculations for it but braking energy on the front are a lot more than the rear, so likely to have more energy recovery.

Packaging at the front should not be an issue, formula e is doing it right now.

Did not understand why the fuel tank and battery has to change, only the cables are going to get longer.

Oh, front axle you ment. My guess is that it’s not precise enough yet, for racing at least. We’ve seen all the troubles and unbalances, “spungy” feeling of the BBW system on the rear. The right brake feel is still one of the key elements of F1 racing. In WEC it’s less of a problem, because cars are driven very differently.

[mzso]

I hope the final regulation involves an electric super charger and exhaust driven generator unit.

So something more complicated, than the H they are getting rid of, because of complexity.

[NL_Fer]

I read somewhere that the balance is less than 60/40. 60 at the front, so there is more to recover, but it is not like 80/20

[FW17]

I read somewhere that the balance is less than 60/40. 60 at the front, so there is more to recover, but it is not like 80/20

I don't know what that is and how this bias works when the weight transfers to the front when the driver hits the brakes.

[FW17]

I hope the final regulation involves an electric super charger and exhaust driven generator unit.

So something more complicated, than the H they are getting rid of, because of complexity.

I think the complexity is greatly reduced when you don't have the turbo and mgu on the same shaft.

[henry]

I hope the final regulation involves an electric super charger and exhaust driven generator unit.

So something more complicated, than the H they are getting rid of, because of complexity.

I think the complexity is greatly reduced when you don't have the turbo and mgu on the same shaft.

Agreed.

And further reduced if they reduce the electrical paths leaving only H to ES and ES to and from K.

[dave kumar]

I hope the final regulation involves an electric super charger and exhaust driven generator unit.

So something more complicated, than the H they are getting rid of, because of complexity.

I think the complexity is greatly reduced when you don't have the turbo and mgu on the same shaft.

One reason why the current hybrid PUs are so complicated is that MGU-H, MGU-K and combustion need to be all optimised for each other. Change one of these three components and you have to change the other two if you want to optimise your PU (for whatever parameters...). I'm paraphrasing Henry here based on discussions in another thread, so apologies if the terminology is a bit off.

Any proposal that wants to simplify the PU must break this interdependence between components. Then you can optimise component x without having to redesign component y. Don't know if FW17s proposal fits this bill but I believe this is an important criteria when evaluating new PU proposals. The ideal is that a team can mix and match components of the PU from different suppliers as there is no interdependence between them. You're more likely to have a host of suppliers willing to make an electrical supercharger for F1 compared to the challenge of making todays PUs.

[FW17]

To reduce the run away interdependence, it is better to have limits on how much each component generates and deploy.

So you have limits on how much the generator on the exhaust turbine generates

How much energy the super charger is supplied

How much the MUG K at the front generates and deploy.

Atleast at the beginning there should be limits before they make some of the deploy and generation open up.

[noname]

Any proposal that wants to simplify the PU must break this interdependence between components. Then you can optimise component x without having to redesign component y. Don't know if FW17s proposal fits this bill but I believe this is an important criteria when evaluating new PU proposals. The ideal is that a team can mix and match components of the PU from different suppliers as there is no interdependence between them. You're more likely to have a host of suppliers willing to make an electrical supercharger for F1 compared to the challenge of making todays PUs.

As long as they're part of the same system they are dependent. If one wants to squeeze every bit of performance every piece has to be optimised. It is the same story with "normal" engines; you can not bolt any turbo you want - it has to be matched to this particular engine (combustion, scavenging strategy, manifolds, etc.)

If complexity and cost is an issue, then kick out some of the e-gizmos and enforce spec engine. As long as PU can be developed, teams will pour as much money as they can on it.

BTW, few years back WRC teams could use any turbo from the list of units approved by FIA. However, there was only one company keen to finance development and production of rally-specific units.

[NL_Fer]

A FIA standard GU-H would have been a nice solution for large amount of Exhaust -> GU-H -> ES -> MGU-K recovery. It would hard limit the amount of recovery and reduce the moneypit it was for development.

But i suspect Scuderia and Renault didn’t care for the combustion part anymore. Redbull and Audi were against it, because the needed to start from scratch and Merc got something they wanted.

[Brian Coat]

Cars are going electric and Formula E has that covered.

F1 is based on IC engines which may be obsolete in a few decades.

It has to decide whether it wants to be marketed as a racehorse - obsolete but glorious. Or a true E-sport.

Today it attempts both … and fails at both.

[mzso]

Cars are going electric and Formula E has that covered.

F1 is based on IC engines which may be obsolete in a few decades.

It has to decide whether it wants to be marketed as a racehorse - obsolete but glorious. Or a true E-sport.

Today it attempts both … and fails at both.

I fail to see any validity in your claim. I see no reason for F1 being the prime racing series while being fully electric. It has little relevance to it.

However people can stop pretending that it's some sort of pinnacle of motorsport technology after a certain point, if it sticks with obsolescent ICE drive. And the certain point is nowadays-ish.

[djos]

Cars are going electric and Formula E has that covered.

F1 is based on IC engines which may be obsolete in a few decades.

It has to decide whether it wants to be marketed as a racehorse - obsolete but glorious. Or a true E-sport.

Today it attempts both … and fails at both.

FE is a total snooze fest, F1 will prolly move to a fully electric powertrain once the technology catches up to F1 requirements.

[Stu]

Not really sure where to put this, but very interesting!!

https://interestingengineering.com/a-ne ... -emissions