2026 F1 Cars - General Thread

[Zynerji]

2008 cars, IMHO, are the best size of all time. We have lost the term "nimble" from F1 since 2017...

Hard disagree, '92 F1 cars are the icons.

I edited in the things you get for free with a wider track, the things which would have motivated the McLaren designers to make their car 2150mm wide in '72 in the first place and hence the FIA to set that as the maximum width:

• Free roll stiffness
• Floor and sidepods less affected by the front tyre wake

Not that the '72 cars had sidepods as such, but by the time venturi tunnels came along, the wide track was most welcome indeed.

Going to 1900mm wide like F2 would be a compromise, and would avoid returning to F1 cars that looking that look squashed like '98 to '16.

2008 cars, IMHO, are the best size of all time.

So why exactly was the 2008 F1 car 10 centimetres narrower than a 2008 GP2 car?

I can tell you: the only reason is because the FIA said so... Not because a narrow track is better on a tarmac racing car than a wider one, even GP2-builder Dallara knows that!

Well, I watch F1 religiously. And when I watch the 2006-2008 seasons, they are by far the most exciting for me to watch.

The "magic carpet barges" of 2017-2021 just wallow in comparison.

Small, light, nimble, and more engine power than the chassis can handle. My ideal formula!

[Tommy Cookers]

gone !

[vorticism]

my car is old - but it does fiddle with the transmission logic settings after I make it think I'm driving the Popemobile

A Popemobile with wings would be right up LibertyTM's alley. The driver on full display, doing some current stupid social media dance trend memes while taking selfies of themselves whilst driving the car. I'll sell this idea for a billion rubles to mustache man if he's reading this. He liked my painted harbor idea so I think he might be amenable to this.

[jjn9128]

2008 cars, IMHO, are the best size of all time. We have lost the term "nimble" from F1 since 2017...

Hard disagree, '92 F1 cars are the icons.

I edited in the things you get for free with a wider track, the things which would have motivated the McLaren designers to make their car 2150mm wide in '72 in the first place and hence the FIA to set that as the maximum width:

• Free roll stiffness
• Floor and sidepods less affected by the front tyre wake

Not that the '72 cars had sidepods as such, but by the time venturi tunnels came along, the wide track was most welcome indeed.

Going to 1900mm wide like F2 would be a compromise, and would avoid returning to F1 cars that looking that look squashed like '98 to '16.

2008 cars, IMHO, are the best size of all time.

So why exactly was the 2008 F1 car 10 centimetres narrower than a 2008 GP2 car?

I can tell you: the only reason is because the FIA said so... Not because a narrow track is better on a tarmac racing car than a wider one, even GP2-builder Dallara knows that!

Well, I watch F1 religiously. And when I watch the 2006-2008 seasons, they are by far the most exciting for me to watch.

The "magic carpet barges" of 2017-2021 just wallow in comparison.

Small, light, nimble, and more engine power than the chassis can handle. My ideal formula!

Hard to disagree. I never minded the narrow track from 98-08. The 09-16 were a bit off but they were already growing to barge-like proportions with the silly rear wing.

[Vanja #66]

Think this thread should be moved to a technical section, so people could give some well-deserved upvotes in the future

[Zynerji]

Think this thread should be moved to a technical section, so people could give some well-deserved upvotes in the future

Or the emotional downvotes from those that just disagree with ideas...

[JordanMugen]

Small, light, nimble, and more engine power than the chassis can handle. My ideal formula!

Don't these wide '97 cars look just as nimble as the '98-'08 cars, despite being 2.0m wide just like the current cars?

1997 European Grand Prix

I just don't see how or why it is necessary for the cars to be narrow, in order to be nimble.

The "magic carpet barges" of 2017-2021 just wallow in comparison.

The weight gain from 2016 to 2017 was only 20kg, which is really not that bad considering the 2017 cars were literally 4-5 seconds per lap faster! I don't understand how a 5 second per lap faster car that is only 20kg heavier is suddenly a "barge". Care to elaborate on why 2017 is a barge compared to 2016?

The 2017 cars were so much faster than the 2016 cars in the corners, there was no comparison. Qualifying actually became thrilling again with how aggressively the cars could be driven and pushed. They did not wallow at all IMO. You can't compare to the lighter, less safe cars with naturally aspirated engines that's unfair, compared to the 2014-2016 cars with similar safety equipment and the same heavy hybrid power units, the 2017 cars were a welcome improvement in spectacle.

Well, I watch F1 religiously. And when I watch the 2006-2008 seasons, they are by far the most exciting for me to watch.

So what do you make of 1989 to 1992? Why do you find 2006-2008 more exciting than 1989-1992? Why should the later era be more aspirational than the former?

An example: 1989 Australian Grand Prix ("Senna only has three wheels, my goodness!" ... "My goodness, it is Mansell out!) It's very wet, so that makes it hard to tell whether the cars are agile or not, but there is no shortage of excitement! The full width cars look so great (why should a Grand Prix car be narrow?), the gradual reduction in car width & tyre width was such a death by 1000 cuts by FISA/FIA.

You seem to forget the complaints of inability to overtake that dominated in the mid-2000's era. Heck in 2001, 2002, & 2004, all you heard were complaints of how Schumcher wins all the time...

I watched those 2006-2008 seasons at the time (well, 2001-on is when I started watching Grand Prix racing regularly), they were fine, but for me that 1989-1992 era is more exciting: better looking cars (much better looking cars, arguably the best looking (purpose-designed) winged Grand Prix cars of all time -- putting aside the converted cigar-type Grand Prix cars with wings added on afterwards which are mostly very pretty), the variety of different engine configurations, still some teams with manual gearboxes.

Banning turbochargers (and old man Enzo lobbying against mandatory V8s by ironically building a V8 Indycar) inadvertently created this wonderful era of highly developed naturally aspirated engines that far surpassed the old DFV in terms of performance, technology, sound etc.

Hard to disagree. I never minded the narrow track from 98-08.

But there's no reason for a winged Grand Prix car to be narrow, is there? Let alone 10cm narrower than F3000 and GP2, it's totally arbitrary. While we got used to the narrow cars with grooved tyres, a comparison with the 1997 cars at 2.0m wide with slick tyres showed clearly to me that the '97 cars had nicer proportions IMO.

IMO neither the narrow track or grooved tyre rules were useful, these rules just made a whole era of Grand Prix cars look atypical from the rest of the historical series for no reason. Otherwise we could have had nice wide cars and nice slick tyres all the way through, it's a shame really.

IMO both the narrow track and grooved tyres were a mistake and should never have been put into the rules.

So we finally have nice 2000mm wide cars back (albeit with oversized front tyres, but the traditional size rear tyres)... So let's get rid of them and go back to narrow cars (and narrow tyres?)... What?!

Is it even confirmed that 1800mm wide cars race better than 2000mm wide cars or 2150mm wide cars? The racing in the late-90's, early-2000's, mid-2000's was, to the contrary, notorious for how difficult it was to overtake -- quite often the only overtakes for position happened during refuelling pitstops.

We had the infamous Trulli train where everyone was stuck behind great qualifier and poor racer Jarno Trulli, and unable to overtake! That the cars were 20cm narrower than 2022 or 35cm narrower than 1992 seemed to be of no assistance whatsoever.

While going to narrower cars and narrower tyres in 2026 might save 20kg (going by the 2016 to 2017 example), it would also make the cars slower (certainly reducing the mechanical grip considerably) and IMO should not be viewed as some elixir to create more agile cars that can race better.

The current 2.0m wide cars with enormously wide tyres can race just fine! Sure, the 2022 cars are a little clumsy for various reasons, but the 2017-2021 cars were not particularly clumsy IMO, to the contrary they were rather spectacular and evoked the golden era of the early-90's in many ways (most obviously with the titanium skid blocks of course, but also the slick tyres with the very wide rears, the wide track etc).

We even have Ferrari running a lovely 640 tribute livery this year to further add to the early-90's nostalgia! Why bring in 2006-2008 nostalgia instead, I don't get it, I don't agree that 2006-2008 produced more exciting racing than 1990-1992.

[Zynerji]

Yeah, I'm a needs-justify-decisions kind of guy.

Smaller cars just appear to be better to me. The SUV size and weight is not on my wish-list.

I'm all about 1000HP go-karts with wings. Limousines with tunnels just are not my cup of tea.

Maybe my big push back is the speed/twitch driving that we had in the 2006 era is my real break-point... Those on-board vids are rectum clenching.

[Mogster]

Re-watching 2007 at the moment. The cars are sharp and nimble but look slow in the corners, I assume that’s the lack of lateral grip with the narrow rear tyres. In some ways it’s like watching current F2.

2M cars seem about right for a pro level single seater. I hope they don’t return to 2M cars for 2026.

Wheelbase needs to be and it seems can be reduced. I’m really not sure why it wasn’t reduced by more for 2022.

[jjn9128]

Re-watching 2007 at the moment. The cars are sharp and nimble but look slow in the corners, I assume that’s the lack of lateral grip with the narrow rear tyres. In some ways it’s like watching current F2.

2M cars seem about right for a pro level single seater. I hope they don’t return to 2M cars for 2026.

Wheelbase needs to be and it seems can be reduced. I’m really not sure why it wasn’t reduced by more for 2022.

Originally the wheelbase limit was 3.4m but got bumped up to 3.6m by the teams. It's one of those that FOM wanted but were willing to budge on to get their way elsewhere.

What do you mean by "2M" cars?

[mclaren111]

Re-watching 2007 at the moment. The cars are sharp and nimble but look slow in the corners, I assume that’s the lack of lateral grip with the narrow rear tyres. In some ways it’s like watching current F2.

2M cars seem about right for a pro level single seater. I hope they don’t return to 2M cars for 2026.

Wheelbase needs to be and it seems can be reduced. I’m really not sure why it wasn’t reduced by more for 2022.

Originally the wheelbase limit was 3.4m but got bumped up to 3.6m by the teams. It's one of those that FOM wanted but were willing to budge on to get their way elsewhere.

What do you mean by "2M" cars?

Width...

[jjn9128]

What do you mean by "2M" cars?

Width...

But F1 cars have been 2m wide again since 2017? Why hope F1 doesn't go BACK to 2m wide cars when they already are?

[mclaren111]

What do you mean by "2M" cars?

Width...

But F1 cars have been 2m wide again since 2017? Why hope F1 doesn't go BACK to 2m wide cars when they already are?

I know...

[johnny comelately]

As part of the discussion re car width....
While watching the McMurtry Speirling car what was apparent after the speed was the size, small and narrow.

Firstly the FIA rules are largely unneeded, there are not many aspects, that would not be taken care of via cost cap and Darwin. Safety should be their main remit. They have almost lost their charge of lawmaking after this years effort with Formula Bounce. It was notable how little if any dolphining there was on the McMurtry Speirling car and from the limited viewing there was good compliance over bumps. So what if there is active suspension.
At this point I pose a question: who would be quickest around Monaco handling wise? Of course Monza would be a different story but...
What can be taken from this in relation to F1? Somewhat smaller cars in terms of length and width, bearing in mind they have to have crowd appeal seeing it is a circus; a different approach to aero WITH an appropriate suspension that should be free.
Narrower cars would be slightly better for overtaking.

[hollus]

It was notable how little if any dolphining there was on the McMurtry Speirling car

Wasn’t it a fan car? Fundamentally different way to may floor downforce, much less sensitive to instantaneous ride height.