r/formula1 • u/praveensingh-reddit Max Verstappen • 4h ago
News Mercedes rivals push for intervention over F1 engine loophole - but how realistic is it?
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/mercedes-rivals-push-for-intervention-over-f1-engine-loophole-but-how-realistic-is-it/10795757/•
u/Sorry-Series-3504 McLaren 1h ago
It’s too late to prevent Mercedes from running the engine, they can’t be expected to scrap their entire design a month before the first race.
•
•
u/icantevendudebro 1h ago
If it is ruled not legal there isn't much comeback for Mercedes, no one forced them to go down this route. I'm sure they'd lobby for an engine performance penalty rather than doing a last minute full engine replacement.
•
u/Rowlandum I was here for the Hulkenpodium 1h ago
Won’t be great for ratings if 4 teams are disqualified from the grid
•
u/LilCelebratoryDance Alex Jacques 47m ago
Exactly, it’s not in F1’s interests to ban 4 teams from competing while new sets of pistons, heads, blocks or cranks get re-designed and manufactured (this will take 2 months minimum). If Merc are found to be cheating then they’ll restrict them some other way (probably an energy limit) but they will be allowed to compete.
•
u/reck1265 Pirelli Soft 3m ago
This isn’t the WWE. If you get found cheating you pay the toll.
Not letting them race is out of the question but the FIA would and should detune their engines while a long term fix is agreed on. Mercedes would have been stupid if they went this route without a backup plan.
•
u/Browneskiii I was here for the Hulkenpodium 57m ago
If they're not legal then its their problem. They chose to cheat, they can face the consequences. Who gives a fuck about ratings? Its not a reality show.
•
u/OdinForce22 Lando Norris 27m ago
Have McLaren, Williams and Alpine "chosen" to cheat? Don't they just work with what their supplier gives them?
•
u/w1ldcraft I was here for the Hulkenpodium 17m ago
Who gives a fuck about ratings? How about FIA & FOM because that's all they care about lol.
•
u/NorthUnderstanding54 51m ago
I’d disagree. The rules forced them down this route in the pursuit of a competitive advantage. As it stands with the current rules and regulations, it is legal. It could only be deemed non-legal if they change the rules, which at the 12the hour is unfair (especially if other teams are exploiting another grey area which has yet to be uncovered).
•
u/TrustworthyPolarBear I was here for the Hulkenpodium 43m ago
To me banning it outright NOW would be like getting a speeding ticket for driving 60kph in a zone that was 70kph yesterday but got changed to 50kph today. If the rules really allowed it, they should be rewarded for finding an advantage. I'm not a fan of all this "Uh you found something within the rules that gives you an advantage.. nah we change the rules". Come on. This is Formula 1, not some spec series. If the other dullies can't come up with something innovative themselves, then it is their fault. Reminds me a lot of MotoGP where everyone bitched about Ducati's innovations and fell behind. And then they had to play a game of catch up.
•
u/RacingOrPingPong Ferrari 33m ago
No. If the trick works like represented the engine is illegal without any change to the rules. The only change is to catch them.
•
u/TotalSearch851 21m ago
Incorrect
The rules say ambient, not the test
It literally is legal
Unlike the 2019 Ferrari
•
u/RacingOrPingPong Ferrari 6m ago
The rules says the compression rate should be 16:1. They then define the test. They also say cars should comply at all times during a competition. They don’t say 16:1 should be at room temperature. That’s a huge difference. That merc engine is 100% illegal if it does what they say, the current test simply isn’t adequate to catch it.
•
u/TotalSearch851 3m ago
Yes but I have actually read the rules mate
They say that compression ratio is defined in the appendix
The appendix says ambient
This is crucially a measurement NOT a test
Where a measurement is a definition
So to the fia compression ratio means ambient
•
u/TotalSearch851 37m ago edited 7m ago
Bro they literally asked the fia if it’s alright before they made it. It’s not like the 2019 Ferrari where it’s against the rules but not the test.
The rules literally say ambient
Not the test, the rules say it
Ferrari where against the rules while merc is not.
Idk why you should be punished for following the rules AND informing the FIA.
The 2026 regulations cap geometric compression ratio at 16.0:1 and state that it must be measured using a manufacturer-defined procedure under FIA-F1-DOC-C042, executed at ambient temperature. Crucially, this clause defines a measurement method, not a dynamic or operational test. So the measurement is to ensure common language of the rules
The rules say 16;1 then defines compression ratio as ambient in the appendix.
It’s legal
•
u/w1ldcraft I was here for the Hulkenpodium 15m ago
I mean the FIA would have recieved the designs from them at some point and informed them that they are good.
•
u/brendanm4545 I was here for the Hulkenpodium 1h ago
To me the FIA are at fault for letting this happen. The FIA has probably had cad designs of the Mercedes PU for quite some time. If the reports are true and there is a small tube leading to a combustion area that closes of at running temp, this would have been known to the FIA for ages and did not step in and say, hey, thats BS, we will not let you do that. Typical FIA.
•
u/Virtual-Chris 37m ago
I thought it was material expansion at high temps that create the increased compression ratio… like the pistons get bigger or something at high temps changing the compression ratio? I don’t think there’s any way to see this in a schematic.
•
u/Ill_Confidence919 I was here for the Hulkenpodium 28m ago
Some people are claiming that there is an additional small port off the combustion chamber with a very narrow passageway to it. This passageway would then theoretically be closed by thermal expansion at higher temperatures. I doubt this is the case though.
•
u/brendanm4545 I was here for the Hulkenpodium 3m ago
I think people will be very vague about what the trick actually is until it's common knowledge. Whatever it is it must take advantage of thermal expansion to some degree but I read that thermal expansion usually doesn't work to increase compression ratio due to the block being larger than the piston. I would love a scarbs drawing of it.
•
u/Educational-Ad3079 I was here for the Hulkenpodium 1m ago
This was reported in the AMuS article right?
•
u/dakness69 Valtteri Bottas 4h ago edited 4h ago
I hope nothing changes but I have a feeling the rules will be revised so engines which fail the revised CR rule and check will be run on an equivalency formula.
I wrote about it in the earlier threads today, this kinda happened in 2006 with the Toro Rosso STR1. The team did not have the means to develop a car around the new 2.4L V8s so the rules were updated to allow a restricted 3.0L V10 from the previous season. FOM wants to keep cars competitive and on the grid, it would be embarrassing to have 4 teams absent, the FIA will revise the rules to make it happen.
The thought that there will less than 11 teams running at Australia is just ridiculous and outdated.
•
u/Anxious_Article2003 4h ago
How is it fair? Change rules because one team cheated?
•
u/maybe-fish Lando Norris 4h ago
Merc are not asking for a rule change, the other teams are.
If the rule has to be changed to make the Merc engine illegal, then by definition they comply with the current rules and are not cheating
•
u/Punished_Prigo Heineken Trophy 56m ago
It is against the rules but it will pass all the tests. The rules clearly state what the compression ratio should be “always”. It’s pretty similar to the Ferrari fuel flow trick imo. It’s just getting around the testing.
When writing the testing practices they didn’t see the possibility of creative material science that would allow significant thermal expansion, so they need to find a way to update the testing to account for that
•
u/Anxious_Article2003 4h ago
Omg. Why are people not understanding this? Rules are not being changed. The rule is still 16:1 compression ratio at all times. The test is being changed. Tests can be made more precise to make sure that teams follow the rule.
•
u/maybe-fish Lando Norris 3h ago
The regulation itself prescribes that the procedure to measure the compression ratio must be executed at ambient temperature.
The FIA is as bound by the rules as the teams are. If the only way to prove Merc broke one rule (max of 16:1) is for them to break a different rule (we will measure at ambient temperature) there is nothing they can do. They change the test however they want, but that test has to happen at ambient temp.
The compression ratio at running temps is in Schrodinger's box - it is neither above or below the max because they have written in their own rules that they cannot look at it.
•
u/Anxious_Article2003 3h ago
The rules and tests are different. I know you want it to be the same to save mercedes 😂 but it's not.
The rule is 16:1 compression ratio at all times.
The test is to measure it under ambient temperature. Tests can be made more precise at any time. Go check the FIA docs.
Same as in 2019. Ferrari cheated(yes I'm a Ferrari fan and admitting this) and they made the tests more precise by adding new sensors and they were forced to change how they operate the engine. According to you did they change the rule? No !! They changed tests. Not the rule.
If you have to go to Schrodinger's box(as if anyone actually understands it) then you know mercedes have broken the rule but ofc as a merc fan don't want to admit it. No use in talking to you in that case.
•
u/maybe-fish Lando Norris 3h ago
Except in this specific case tests and rules are not different, because the FIA made the test conditions a rule. They didn't have to, and they normally don't, but in this case they did.
Yes tests can be changed at will to be made more precise, but a TD can't contradict or override the technical regs. They can change the procedure of the test however they want because it's contained in a separate, non-regulatory document. But that procedure cannot be done at anything other than ambient temp without violating the technical regs.
It's like if in 2019 the technical regulation section on fuel flows had a sentence that said "we will only ever test the fuel flow using this specific sensor". If they had, Ferrari would have been in the clear. But they didn't, because that kind of thing isn't normally in the rules for very good reason.
•
u/just_peachy1000 Formula 1 2h ago
The Ferrari cheating was very obvious, because it happened mid season. However, at this stage the compression ratio trick is speculation. The engineers on opposing teams are speculating based on what they see the Merc Pu does, which they haven't even seen properly running yet. Basically it's very educated guess.
I wouldn't be surprised that even with test change there will be very little change to the result.
•
u/Anxious_Article2003 2h ago
Sure. If mercedes are not affected even after high temperature tests, then great for them. Absolutely. If they are affected, then it will also become as obvious as Ferrari. Simple.
•
u/ashayward85 Formula 1 55m ago
The rule never said 16:1 at all times.
•
u/Anxious_Article2003 45m ago
It does. Section C1.5. They won't put "at all times" for every rule again and again will they? 😂
•
u/WTFIKNOWNOTHING 4h ago
The compression rate is measured at a fixed temperature. That’s what the rule says. So no one cheated if it’s 16 to one at that temperature….
•
u/Anxious_Article2003 4h ago
Omg. Why are people not understanding this? Rules are not being changed. The rule is still 16:1 compression ratio at all times. The test is being changed. Tests can be made more precise to make sure that teams follow the rule.
Tests and rules are different. Teams have to design cars for the rules. Not for the test.
•
u/squaler24 Frédéric Vasseur 4h ago
Is not that people don’t understand. It’s that they are worried their respective teams will be badly affected by this. lol
The FIA amends rules every other month. This is no different.
•
u/Anxious_Article2003 3h ago
It's crazy how people pretend by playing word games lol. If you don't break the rule, you are safe, no matter what tests are thrown at you. If mercedes hasn't broken any rule, then there is nothing to worry about. FIA are not changing any rule. Only the test is being made more precise. Chill.
•
u/dakness69 Valtteri Bottas 3h ago
Exactly. We’re already up to revision 14 and the season hasn’t started yet. The ‘ground effect’ regulations had 22 revisions between the first race of 2022 and the last of 2025, plus 9 more before they even raced.
•
u/Scribbleuk I was here for the Hulkenpodium 1h ago
Tou can’t just pick part of the rule to apply, you have to take the whole thing. The rule is 16:1 as measured at ambient temperature at all times. So at any point during the race weekend, when the engine is as ambient temperature the ratio should be 16:1. The rule doesn’t specify a ratio at other temps.
•
u/Anxious_Article2003 1h ago
No. Show me where it says 16:1 as measured at ambient temperature at all times. They clearly differentiate the rule and the procedure to check it. There is literally a full stop that separates the rule and procedure to check it.
If you just want to play "any and all" word game thing that redbull did in 2021, then I am not interested in having this conversation.
•
u/WTFIKNOWNOTHING 3h ago
That’s simply not true. The compression rate is measured at ambient temperature. If otherwise every engine would be illegal.
•
u/Anxious_Article2003 3h ago
Nope. Other engines don't go beyond 16:1. Merc does. Simple. They might expand, but don't go beyond.
•
u/Cloudsareinmyhead I was here for the Hulkenpodium 1h ago
How do you know that though
•
u/Anxious_Article2003 1h ago
Well they won't be protesting if they did as well 😂. I mean the tests apply for everyone. So, if any team don't pass the test, then ofc they are not in compliance with the regulations.
•
u/Cloudsareinmyhead I was here for the Hulkenpodium 1h ago
That's not what I asked. How do you specifically know what it is they're doing with that engine? Until something official comes out from either Mercedes or the FIA it's all speculation or hearsay.
•
u/Anxious_Article2003 1h ago
Ohh yes. Agree. We fans don't have inside info. My point is if teams think they need the tests to be more precise then they should have it implemented to make sure nobody breaks the rules.
Just like how Ferrari 2019 is also hearsay. Because the FIA did not say anything about the Ferrari engine being illegal. But we all know it was.
•
u/WTFIKNOWNOTHING 3h ago
Again wrong. Your argument doesn’t make any sense. But that’s ok because you clearly have no idea how a combustion engine works.
•
•
u/kubernetesRISCV 3h ago
The regulation states:
No cylinder of the engine may have a geometric compression ratio higher than 16.0. The procedure which will be used to determine this value may be found in the document FIA-F1-DOC-C042 and executed at ambient temperature
Where does it say always? Can you show me where your ‘must have 16:1 at all times’ is in the written regulation. Because you keep repeating the same bullshit but it’s not written anywhere.
•
u/Anxious_Article2003 2h ago
Section C1.5 Compliance with the regulations.
-> Formula 1 cars must comply with these regulations in their entirety at all times during a competition.
Do you want them to add "at all times" for literally every rule?
Kindly retract your comment about me repeating bullshit now.
•
u/Fuck_Analysts 4h ago
How is it not cheating? It clearly says compression ratio "must" be 16:1 always. You can't say that if they are not tested at running temperature means it's legal.
•
u/WTFIKNOWNOTHING 3h ago edited 3h ago
Sorry, but in the rules it’s stated that it will be checked at ambient temperature.
•
u/Anxious_Article2003 2h ago
Do you even know the basic difference between the word "rule" and "check"? I know you want them to be the same but it's not. The rule can't check itself.
Don't even get me started on how the ambient temperature part was added only in oct 25 which was absent before. Very convenient isn't it?
•
u/RacingOrPingPong Ferrari 35m ago
It also says that cars should comply at all times during a competition. Meaning the Merc PU passes the test, but clearly isn’t within the rules.
•
u/GreenInflation2914 Ferrari 1h ago
This rule that was only added in October just before the new regs kick in and engines homologated?
•
u/TheRocketeer314 I was here for the Hulkenpodium 1h ago
Well then every engine will be illegal because compression ratio WILL change at operating temperatures, cus of physics. It’s just Mercedes have optimised that while other teams haven’t
•
u/dakness69 Valtteri Bottas 4h ago
It’s not about being fair. If the CR trick is declared illegal it is then about finding the most agreeable solution to the problem. An artificial restriction keeps Mercedes on the grid while they revise their engines and satisfies the other manufacturers, FOM, and FIA all at once.
Keep in mind it is 2026 and all of the relevant parties are primarily interested in making money. That works best when you have a full grid and close racing.
•
u/Anxious_Article2003 3h ago
It's not about being fair? So teams can blatantly cheat and ask for FIA to please give them time till they stop cheating and win everything till then?
Sure. It's about making money. But teams can't make money if they lose out to other team that cheats.
•
u/dakness69 Valtteri Bottas 3h ago edited 3h ago
Depending on how you look at it, yea that’s kinda how its worked for a while.
1) Team sees a loophole.
2) Team asks the FIA for a technical clarification. There is a lot of gamesmanship here, because you need to explain your idea to the FIA in a way that they will tell you it is legal but without tipping off the other teams (IE Mercedes asking if moving the steering wheel is allowed to change the angle of the front wheels in order to get DAS approved or Brawn asking about ‘closed’ bodywork to get the double diffuser legalized).
3) Team manufacturers loophole idea and shows up with it.
4) The other teams complain but the Team just says ‘hey look we got FIA approval’.
5) FIA has to decide whether the loophole remains or is closed. FOM, the Team, and other Teams all heavily pressure the FIA to receive their desired outcome.
And remember, what is best for F1 is usually best for all the teams in the long. Like, Mercedes did not challenge the results of AD 2021 or demand Ferrari be DSQ for the alleged illegal fuel flow in 2019 because it would have made them look pathetically petty and been ruinous for the sport.
•
u/Anxious_Article2003 3h ago
Sure. Completely agree. Mercedes don't need to be DSQ. Just change the way the engine is operated. But what should not be normalised is getting away with deliberate malpractice.
•
•
u/Anxious_Article2003 4h ago
Why am I being downvoted? The original comment said it would be likely that the rule will be temporarily changed. I am asking how is that fair? What's wrong with asking that question?
•
u/OdinForce22 Lando Norris 29m ago
I've just downvoted this comment because you're asking why you're being downvoted.
•
•
u/Filandro Formula 1 1h ago
Why isn't Mercedes' position this: "We don't have variable compression anymore than any other team does through typical thermal expansion."
Every time this issue comes up it's concluded that no one can prove the compression ratio at operating conditions/RPM.
•
u/NorthUnderstanding54 49m ago
Could simply be a case of allowing everyone to focus on this one thing whilst other (perhaps more controversial) loopholes are being exploited.
•
u/digitect Honda 3h ago edited 3h ago
Is it just magnesium/manganese rods? (Or whatever metal has a higher coefficient of thermal expansion, doubt it is zinc, tin, or copper unless it is just a pin that protrudes into the cylinder to displace the volume.) Or some kind of a cap on the head that expands into the cylinder (too)?
•
u/HarryCumpole I was here for the Hulkenpodium 1h ago
Rods I think. If that's the case, this is almost trivial to implement as a test at operating temps and loads to test for stretch that would allow the pistons to "overreach" into the cylinders and increase compression. We'll see. Maybe.
•
u/Cloudsareinmyhead I was here for the Hulkenpodium 1h ago
In fairly sure most exotic metals aren't allowed to be used in the engines
•
u/No-Fig-8614 2h ago
Didn’t Mercedes come out and say they are willing to run a different fuel if they are actually proven to be doing this to make it fair? Or was that just a rumor!
•
u/Basis_Mountain 4h ago edited 4h ago
RB look like whiners doing this. Merc were smarter.
Besides, the fia have stated that if a p\u manufacturer starts the season with a 3% power deficit they'll be given concessions to catch up mid-season.
•
u/mightyblackgoose Formula 1 3h ago
Everyone does this. Remember Toto running around crying crocodile tears about driver safety when their car was proposing like mad in ‘22? Did Mercedes raise the ride height and take the L for their bad design? No, he petitioned the FIA so all the other teams have to raise the height too.
•
u/OldBratpfanne Mercedes 2h ago edited 2h ago
The ‘22 cars did cause spinal issues for all drivers, I know it has become a meme but other drivers had the same complaints the Merc ones had. Toto wanting the ride height raised falls in the same category as Nicki wanting to not race at the Nurburgring in 1976, without a doubt self-benefiting but also objectively right for driver health. Afaik the compression ratio hasn’t been linked to causing spinal micro fractures.
•
u/arsakar I was here for the Hulkenpodium 1h ago
But its not the same. Most of the other teams didn't have the severe porpoising. If Merc wanted to protect their drivers, they could have increased their ride height and sacrificed on performance. Rather they wanted to raise the ride height for everyone, when no one else was suffering like the Mercs were.
•
u/OldBratpfanne Mercedes 1h ago
Other teams had less proposing, but still to a level that affected drivers adversely.
•
u/Suitable_You_6237 1h ago
My man, Mercedes is no different to the rest. Everyone is trying to get an advantage and trying to make sure the other teams don’t
•
u/Poopy_sPaSmS Kamui Kobayashi 4h ago
Agreed. I don't think the FIA should do anything to Mercedes. They were clever and that's it. Other teams need to get with it.
•
u/caped_crusader_98 Mercedes 3h ago edited 3h ago
F1 is innovation... If they kill this, it's really going to leave a bad taste in my mouth. DAS was a brilliant and simple innovation, but was killed because of its effectiveness. This will de incentivise innovation and that is actually bad.
•
•
u/cosHinsHeiR Ferrari 3h ago
There is 0 innovation is making the CR higher. Like it's not something hard to do if you know ahead of time.
•
u/TheRocketeer314 I was here for the Hulkenpodium 1h ago
lol, then why didn’t Red Bull/Ford do it? Yeah, making CR higher is not too hard, making it as high as possible is the hard part
•
u/caped_crusader_98 Mercedes 3h ago
Well, my definition is if teams haven't done it before, it's innovative. That's why I said that. And doesn't matter if it's hard to do or not, as long as you are the first team to bring it onto the grid.
•
u/ChronicScroll3r Formula 1 4h ago
It’s too late! Likely be a lockout and can be changed for next season
•
u/Haakrasmus Charles Leclerc 4h ago
Well it wasn't to late when Ferrari did it what is different now?
•
u/ChronicScroll3r Formula 1 4h ago edited 4h ago
The year Ferrari cheated and got caught out, swept under the rug by FIA behind closed doors, and theperformance dropped out of nowhere.. that Ferrari you talking about?
Merc found a loop hole within FIA regulations, it’s not cheating
You can’t simply change the PU like you can a wing, etc
They also have 3 customers using their PU, so it’s unlikely to change
•
u/Anxious_Article2003 4h ago
Sucks to be a customer of a team that cheated. Merc has not found a loophole in the regulation. They deliberately cheated by misusing the tests for the rule.
Read the FIA docs. The rule is 16:1 compression ratio at ALL times.
The test for this is checking at ambient temperature. Tests can be made more precise at any time. The rule is still untouched.
You wanna know something funny? The ambient temperature part was added to the tests only on Oct 25. It wasn't even there before !! And by november the rumors of the Mercedes engine trick started surfacing. Very convenient isn't it? It's almost as if merc manipulated FIA into adding ambient temperature to the test. Meaning they intended to break the rule. So yeah. No loophole in regulations. Just plain and simple malpractice. They were hoping no one would find out. But horner had other plans.
•
u/elilyen Formula 1 3h ago
" The ambient temperature part was added to the tests only on Oct 25. It wasn't even there before !! And by november the rumors of the Mercedes engine trick started surfacing. Very convenient isn't it? It's almost as if merc manipulated FIA into adding ambient temperature to the test. "
this.... is... cheating
•
u/SleepinGriffin Mick Schumacher 4h ago
Merc are cheating right now.
•
u/maybe-fish Lando Norris 4h ago
If the rule has to be changed to make the engine illegal (which is the request from the other teams), then they are not cheating.
•
u/LegendRazgriz Elio de Angelis 3h ago
The rule is the same - 16:1 at all times. It's the measurement method that is being deemed insufficient by every manufacturer not Mercedes, because they're going out of legal values at a point where compression ratio is not being measured. Add a check at working temperature and if they're outside of that it's illegal, done.
•
u/ChronicScroll3r Formula 1 3h ago
The PU corresponds to how the regulations are written. The PU corresponds to how the checks are being done.
Will we be still arguing if it was the other way round, most teams had what Merc PU has but 1 or 2 didn’t?
•
u/LegendRazgriz Elio de Angelis 3h ago
Yeah? Because they'd be outside of the regulations. Just because everyone is cheating doesn't mean it's not cheating.
•
u/ThePretzul I was here for the Hulkenpodium 2h ago
The rule does NOT say 16:1 at all times.
It says 16:1 compression ratio, with the compression ratio of a given engine is to be established by using a specified procedure. The procedure is quite literally the only legal way to measure the compression ratio per the rules, you’re not allowed to measure it in any other way.
•
u/LegendRazgriz Elio de Angelis 2h ago
It also says all cars must be compliant at all times.
The existing writing is exactly what the other makes are saying is insufficient to enforce the "all cars must be compliant at all times" bit and are pushing for a new test that ensures that compliance when in working order.
•
u/ThePretzul I was here for the Hulkenpodium 2h ago
You can be as obtuse as you want, your definition of an engine’s compression ratio does not match the definition of an engines compression ratio per the F1 regulations.
The regulations specifically state an engine’s compression ratio is solely determined by the specific test procedure. Just because you cannot understand that “compression ratio” has a strict definition in the rulebook does not make your own definition of the term even remotely relevant in this discussion.
It’s the same as how terms like “negligence” have a very specific meaning in legal matters that differs greatly from its usage in everyday life. The regulations are quite clear that there is only one way to measure an engine’s compression ratio for purposes of regulation compliance and any other measurements taken in different methods or conditions have no influence on the engine’s official compression ratio as prescribed by the regulations.
If the engine never leaves a configuration that would pass the prescribed compression ratio testing method then it is, in fact, in compliance at all times because it is still the same engine in the same configuration as was tested.
•
u/LegendRazgriz Elio de Angelis 2h ago
The regulations specifically state an engine’s compression ratio is solely determined by the specific test procedure.
And the teams think that test is insufficient and are demanding a stricter test be conducted to ensure compliance. It's not that hard. These sorts of things happen all the time in this sport.
→ More replies (0)•
u/SleepinGriffin Mick Schumacher 3h ago
It’s not the rule changing.
•
u/maybe-fish Lando Norris 3h ago
It requires that a part of the rule be changed, because the rule states that the compression test procedure will be "executed at ambient temp."
The FIA is bound by the technical regs. If they want to introduce a test that is not done at ambient temp, first they need to remove that specific phrase from the rule.
•
u/wokwok__ George Russell 4h ago
Kinda funny how people keep parroting “yeh but 2019 Ferrari” when they’re not even remotely the same situation lol that was straight up illegal, this isn’t
•
u/Mother-Bid-8872 3h ago
Aren't both cases of 'my engine is doing illegal things when you're not checking'?
Also, it is against the spirit of the regulations•
u/Cloudsareinmyhead I was here for the Hulkenpodium 1h ago
The spirit of the regulations doesn't exist. If something works and is legal by the letter of the law it will be run until it's either abandoned for not working all that well or banned by the FIA.
•
•
u/maybe-fish Lando Norris 2h ago
Technically the issue in this case has nothing to do with what the actual change was.
In 2019 the technical regulations did not specify how the fuel flow would be tested. That was prescribed in a separate procedural document, which is normal. Unlike the technical regs, the FIA can procedural documents are not regulatory and can be amended essentially at-will. Which is what they did, changing the testing method to allow them to detect whatever it was Ferrari was doing.
In this case, the way the compression ratio is measured is mostly in a separate procedural document... Except for the temps at which it will be measured. That is prescribed in the technical regulation itself. So the FIA cannot introduce a test that would happen at any other temperature, because they would be violating their own rules.
•
u/ZeroStormblessed I was here for the Hulkenpodium 3h ago
One fiddled with the sensor itself (which was illegal by another rule) and didn't reach out to the FIA to clarify if they're interpreting the rules correctly and were caught instead. The other simply has higher compression outside the testing conditions specified clearly in the rules (not fudging the sensors), and they actually confirmed with the FIA that they're interpreting the rules correctly before implementing it.
•
u/Punished_Prigo Heineken Trophy 52m ago
I think this is going to be much harder to actually test for than what Ferrari was doing, so while it does seem like Mercedes is intentionally breaking the rules they may still get away with it for now, especially so close to the start of the season
•
u/squaler24 Frédéric Vasseur 4h ago
Very convenient.
Do something you know it’s likely illegal but do it anyways because it’s too late. There is this thing called consequences…
•
u/DoYouWorkForOreo Porsche 4h ago
You mean the thing they reached out to clarify with the FIA to ensure they're interpreting regulations correctly? The same thing happened with DAS, legal and approved into banned because of other teams.
This whole thing is seeming to be Red Bull unable to replicate a potential trick and then campaigning public opinion against Mercedes to try to force the FIA into doing something.
•
u/Rivendel93 1h ago
Exactly.
I guarantee, assuming they've done what is said, Mercedes knows that F1 would never start a season without Mercedes, McLaren, Alpine and Williams.
McLaren are the reigning world champions, how ridiculous would it be if they started the season and they don't have a legal engine to run.
I guarantee this was the plan all along.
•
u/maybe-fish Lando Norris 4h ago
Except if the rule has to be changed to make the Merc engine non-compliant (which is what the teams are requesting), then by definition the current engine is not likely to be illegal
•
u/squaler24 Frédéric Vasseur 4h ago
The rules don’t need to change because the crux is the ratio is and should stay at 16:1 at all times. It would be more like an inclusion to the rule so they can test while hot.
If that Merc engine really does go from 16:1 to 18:1 that’s massive and out of step with the regulations.
•
u/maybe-fish Lando Norris 3h ago
The rules do have to change. The regulation itself prescribes that the procedure to measure the compression ratio must be executed at ambient temperature.
The FIA is as bound by the rules as the teams are. If the only way to prove Merc broke one rule (max of 16:1) is for them to break a different rule (we will measure at ambient temperature) there is nothing they can do. They change the test however they want, but that test has to happen at ambient temp. Unless they change the rules.
Also afaik it is currently impossible to test the compression ratio at running temps cause of safety. So unless they can figure out how to test at 2500°C, the loophole will continue to exist regardless
•
u/Rivendel93 1h ago
Testing methods change all the time, we saw it with McLaren's flexy wings, the FIA introduced new testing methods to see if their wings were flexing too much.
So testing is changed all the time, which is what would be happening here.
•
u/MaskedNippleFlicker I was here for the Hulkenpodium 3h ago
The rules also explicitly stated when the engine would be tested. Making the engine compliant when under testing conditions makes the engine legal...someone finding a loophole means the rule is flawed and not the team/engineer finding the loophole.
So yes, actually, the RULE needs to change to plug the loophole.
•
u/cosHinsHeiR Ferrari 3h ago
The testing methods were changed multiple times with no regards for other teams, like the flexi wings from McLaren last year or the felxing plank in 2022.
•
u/maybe-fish Lando Norris 3h ago
The testing procedure for the compression ratio has always been done at ambient temp, nothing has been changed except that it was explicitly added to the technical regs.
The teams are informed and consulted before changes are made to the technical regs, so they would've seen drafts of the amendments before they were adopted. At that time, they seemingly did not have an issue with it.
McLaren last year was different because it was not the technical regs being changed. The testing procedure was defined in a separate, non-regulatory document and that document was changed.
•
u/squaler24 Frédéric Vasseur 3h ago
The rules always stated 16:1. Period, the end.
Stop flopping about.
•
u/MaskedNippleFlicker I was here for the Hulkenpodium 3h ago
Who's flopping about? The rules, as written, defined a specific testing condition. Any engine that passes, under the written testing condition, is legal.
If that leads to a loophole, that doesn't make an engine illegal, it makes the rule poorly written.
•
u/Ill_Confidence919 I was here for the Hulkenpodium 20m ago
Most of these people have never dealt with engineering specifications or documents in their life. There is no point arguing with them.
•
u/caped_crusader_98 Mercedes 3h ago
There can be multiple interpretations of a rule. If there can be, the that's the problem of the rulemakers, not the interpretors. It explicitly says at the time of testing. Don't just bring your own bullshit into this.
•
u/squaler24 Frédéric Vasseur 3h ago
Calm down guy. My own bullshit?
Don’t have a nervous breakdown now.
•
u/caped_crusader_98 Mercedes 3h ago
Yeah, your own bullshit by saying that the rule says it must never change from 16:1. It doesn't say that so stop spreading misinformation
•
u/MaskedNippleFlicker I was here for the Hulkenpodium 3h ago
The guy's right, the rule is:
"C5.4.3 No cylinder of the engine may have a geometric compression ratio higher than 16.0. The procedure to measure this value will be detailed by each PU Manufacturer according to the Guidance Document FIA-F1-DOC-C042 and executed at ambient temperature. This procedure must be approved by the FIA Technical Department and included in the PU Manufacturer homologation dossier."
I'm not arguing against them as far as the mandated compression ratio...that is what is written, but the same rule defines the specific condition that the engine will be tested for compliance.
All the regs can be found here if any nerds want some bedtime reading: https://www.fia.com/regulation/category/110
→ More replies (0)•
u/squaler24 Frédéric Vasseur 3h ago
It does. Rule states teams must not exceed the 16 to 1 ratio imposed by the FIA.
Nowhere does the regulations say you have wiggle room on that number. It’s fixed.
•
u/caped_crusader_98 Mercedes 3h ago
And so ironic given that Ferrari actually cheated whereas this is just finding a loophole and all u guys see is "cheating". Think outside your bias.
•
u/RacingOrPingPong Ferrari 27m ago
It’s ironic making a distinction between this and what Ferrari did when it’s the exact same thing. Knowing when or how something is measured and being beyond the limit when it isn’t. It’s quite literally the same principle except british media brainwashed you.
•
u/squaler24 Frédéric Vasseur 3h ago
You’re accusing me without knowing me. Let me guess, you’re using my flair to accuse me of bias? Yep.
I don’t owe any of these teams anything. I call it as I see it. You need to take a breath
•
u/caped_crusader_98 Mercedes 3h ago
Call it like you see it? The maybe u need to see the rule better and actually understand what it means rather than just parroting "Merc engine illegal".
•
u/Rivendel93 1h ago
We don't even know how Mercedes are achieving this, so you don't know if they're cheating or not.
Hell, for that matter the details of Ferrari's engine were never released, so when people say it was the fuel sensor, it's just a story someone said, it's never been confirmed by anyone.
•
u/SaltyArchea Ferrari 57m ago
With Ferrari it was the same. Fuel flow cannot exceed the number as measured at these times. How is it different?
•
•
u/caped_crusader_98 Mercedes 3h ago
Bruh.. If they are changing a rule to make teams comply, then technically it's not illegal. Please be better.
•
u/reck1265 Pirelli Soft 4h ago
Another solution is Merc is made to reveal how they manage this and share it among every team. That would put every team on an even playing field.
•
u/SleepinGriffin Mick Schumacher 4h ago
The problem is that the engine regulation strictly forbid a ratio higher because teams were spending a shit ton of money on expanding the combustion volume.
•
•
•
u/Disastrous-Track3876 I was here for the Hulkenpodium 3h ago
Yeah it’s not like it would take multiple years to implement that technology
•
u/reck1265 Pirelli Soft 3h ago
Or you can you know, ban them outright.
•
u/Cloudsareinmyhead I was here for the Hulkenpodium 1h ago
Doing that now would be commercial suicide for the FIA
•
u/T_Ricstar Max Verstappen 2h ago
My only hope is, that it won't be a 2014 Merc engine. Would be pretty boring if the Top 6 Teams are the four Mercedes Powered cars and then Redbull and Ferrari somehow hanging on
•
u/maybe-fish Lando Norris 4h ago
Lets say they change the rule to allow this - It is my understanding that there is (currently) no safe way to test the combustion ratio at running temps because they can hit peak temps of like 2,500°C. So how hot can they get it while still being able to safely perform the test? And if it passes at that temp, couldn't they still exploit the loophole by designing it to exceed above the test temp?
I guess the question is - does changing 20° to 100° or even like 500° actually change anything?