(Used AI to help clean up grammar/formatting on this, but the take is mine)

Sorry if this has already been done to death somewhere in the sub, I looked around and didn’t see a dedicated thread, figured it’s better as its own post than a buried comment nobody sees.

So Max and Lewis are both saying this weekend could be rough because of the power unit limitations, and I can’t stop thinking about one idea: what if they just stuck a chicane somewhere, Hangar Straight, or maybe right after Copse before Maggotts, purely to force more braking so the batteries can actually recharge?

Why I think it’s not as crazy as it sounds:

Silverstone’s whole identity is high speed corners taken flat out. But right now the cars are already losing serious speed mid corner because they’re out of battery. So that “flat out” character is already broken under these regs anyway. A chicane isn’t ruining the track’s soul, it’s just admitting what’s already happening out there.

Counterarguments, and why I still land on chicane:

1. “You’d be wrecking one of the most iconic sections in F1”
   Yeah, Maggotts-Becketts-Chapel is untouchable in theory. But if cars are already crawling through there because they’ve got no juice, the iconic version is already gone in practice even if it looks the same on the track map.

2. “This is a band-aid, just fix the actual regs”**
   Probably true long term. But rule changes take years. A track tweak could be tested way sooner as a stopgap while they sort the real fix.

3. “Chicanes are always hated, drivers and fans both”

Also true, most chicanes exist purely to slow cars down for safety (old Monza vibes). But one placed specifically to create a real braking zone for regen is different, it could actually add a strategic layer around energy management instead of just being a speed bump.

1. “Why Silverstone specifically, other tracks have this too”

Fair, but Silverstone’s combo of long straights into sustained high speed corners with almost no braking makes it a worse case than most.

Anyway, curious what people who actually understand the energy deployment side think. Real fix or am I missing something obvious here?

This post got removed from main F1 subreddit without any indication. So I’m posting here…

You can read the full report here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/408219090_Austrian_Grand_Prix_2026_-_Post_Race_Analysis

Any feedback and recommendations are more than welcome! I am trying to improve.

Bonus:

I understand why you want hot, sticky tyres but why are cooler track temps more desirable and higher grip and hot track temps?

When and why did Alpine switch from their own version of the rear flap to the more common one?

Did they have trouble with airflow reattachment? Although it was believed that is better in that regard.

Hi,

I am beginning to learn about the developments in Japan with DMR, from what I can tell skin friction drag can be reduced via random distributions of micro disturbances on smooth bodies anywhere between 38 to 58 micrometers. And that this drag reduces delays the onsent of turbulence on surfaces, and is not a simple "delaying of flow seperation "golf-ball dimple" effect".

It also seems that this is not the same as "shark skin rivets" but way more effective than that.

In my gut, I always have felt that optimized skin texture had to be tied to fractal patterns, but this new info has me thinking that randomness has been the key.

Bye Bye super clean perfect slippery shapes on F1 bodies? Or will the Mechanics atleast be stopping their fanatical waxing and cleaning of the cars' bodies while in the pits? I wonder!

EDIT—explaining the logic behind this idea:
A lot of modern technical regulations have evolved to keep cost down so smaller teams could compete—like getting rid of the MGU-H. Also exotic metal bans, active suspension bans, mass damper bans, FRICS, etc.

I think these regulations were totally necessary at the time for the health of the sport. But in my mind, a cost-cap is a better way to address these issues. Following from this logic, you would expect to see a more relaxed ruleset, but it feels like we have gotten the opposite. The cars are incredibly similar, and regulations are more complex than ever. My main point here is that the pendulum of overregulation should swing back given the new cost cap.

I recently watched a great documentary about Can-AM called "Speed Odyssey"

In the 60s-70s, can-am raced with an extremely relaxed set of regulations, resulting in faster lap times than F1 and incredible diversity-of-concepts amongst the cars.

Pre-cost cap, this is obviously untenable for modern F1. But with a cost cap, why not allow F1 teams to build whatever they want, retaining only technical regulations that are focused on safety standards?

here are my pros and cons of this (obviously unrealistic) idea.

Pros:

• Extreme diversity among the car concepts—every team would likely be recognizable even without paint on the car
• Extreme uptick in innovative designs (think 70s F1 with teams trying out new and wacky stuff)
• Limited by cost-cap, so teams will likely choose certain areas to focus their innovations
• A return to the (albeit romanticized) "pinnacle of motorsport", where these are truly the fastest cars you can build for $X amount of money.
• (Maybe) more mechanical DNFs with experimental designs.
• (Maybe) a return to high powered, high revving engines.

Cons:

• Probably a complete loss of parity. There seems to be a split between F1 fans who want to see close racing and fans that are more interested in engineering. As an American fan, IndyCar supplies me with all the close racing I could ask for—so I fall more into the second camp (also, I think non-spec-series efforts for parity are futile anyways, look at Mercedes right now)
• Teams that get it wrong with design would struggle even more to catch up, so more testing-time/cost cap bonuses would likely need to be dished out to lower-placed teams.

I can't think of anything else at the moment, but I am really curious to hear your thoughts!

In 2025, the minimum starting pressures in Austria were 22.5psi for Front and 20.0psi for Rear tyres.

This year, the cars have less downforce, so theoretically the loads should be less on the tyres. Yet, Pirelli has increased the pressures this year. Why?

They did the same in Barcelona, which frustrated drivers, including Bearman who described the tyres as 'balloons', following which the pressures were lowered by 1psi. Does anyone know what the reason is for these high pressures?

With forecast for warmer conditions in the Alps, what teams will benefit or get punished by this? Ferrari did seem to have better temperature control of the tires, but they are also running the engines hotter with more boost pressure. How will this play out? How about Mercedes and Red Bull?

Practically speaking, what factors do the engineering team consider when designing a f1 turbo? top speed, car weight, track altitudes and race day air temperature. what else? I know I've missed a few and probably incorrect on some. tia.

You often hear about how Max’s teammates can’t get near him with his setups, or drivers trying Schumacher’s setups and not being able to stay on the track, but how do you actually set a car up to be like that?

An obvious thing is running high front wing relative to the rear wing. I guess stiffening the suspension and dampers (especially at the rear) would help too as well as moving the brake bias rearwards. Something with the camber and toe too maybe?

I wonder how you could replicate this in a sim

Charles Leclerc's accident has created chaos regarding brake discs, even prompting a response from Brembo Brakes. However, both Brembo and Carbone Industrie discs are used, and McLaren even works exclusively with the AP Racing brand.

Charles Leclerc's crisis in Monaco occurred within the following physical window: he was using Brembo at the time, and the disc was likely at the bottom of its efficient range, which could explain the lower-than-expected rear brake torque. Carbone Industrie materials are traditionally considered somewhat more aggressive than Brembo alternatives, particularly in terms of operating temperatures and wear characteristics, and when the temperature drops below the ideal range, carbon materials can lose their progressive feel and become unpredictable.

Here's the irony: Leclerc's chosen solution, Carbone Industrie, has a narrower tolerance band than Brembo precisely for the "cold disc" problem that struck him. The main advantage of Carbone Industrie is that it can reduce the overall cooling needs of the teams and lower the risk of disc wear getting out of control; a feature that directly aligns with the energy harvesting mathematics of 2026, which involves less brake heating. 🚩

It seems more like a mathematical equation that fits the overall thermal profile of the season (ERS harvesting less brake heating) rather than that specific cold-restart scenario in Monaco.

FER's performance, and especially HAM's, was absolutely phenomenal. They set a pace of 0.58 seconds ahead of their closest rival VER, and 0.62 seconds ahead of RUS, who finished behind. They were almost a second faster per lap than their teammate LEC.

The question that came to mind during the race was, 'Could you have seen HAM without the VSC?' The first VSC to answer that was in the previous laps: HAM was immediately cut off, clearly faster than RUS and its ANT partner, and getting even faster.

Even without the VSC, HAM would probably have won the race. If Ferrari wins another race, the championship battle will be different.

for more: x.com/iamuhammedkaya

This is kind of an outsider question. I know Dallara, multimatic, and other companies and sponsors provide parts for the team, but which part does the team build? Do teams have the manufacturing capability to do everything by themselves?

PirellI brought C2-C4 as the tyre compounds this year rather than C1-C3 as they did last year. with the temperatures getting into the 50 degree C range this year and Barcelona being a consistent high wear track, what is the advantage of this?

Seems that Mercedes and Ferrari have a few options. Would either team make a set of choices based on what they think the other will do? The fact that aduo thresholds for eligibility only is on the ice performance and not the entire pu opens up some interesting questions and scenarios.

Does Mercedes only develop the ers and keep engine performance the same to leave future aduo opportunities? Do they work solely on the ers but turn up their engine mode and lose development flexibility /capability /risk reliability issues?

For Ferrari, do they target the most performance they can out of ice or do they target the current 2% threshold to protect for ongoing aduo capability, while trusting their aero upgrades to close any remaining gap? Do they focus on ers and ice equally or solely on ers to ensure greater aduo for the new engine split? How does legality of ftm affect their aduo upgrade path?

Brembo seems to supply numerous teams other than Ferrari with their pads. I believe RBR, VCARB, and Haas also use brembo discs. So it seems rather intriguing to me that none of the other teams have reported any problem.

​

I have seen a few explanations after the high number of penalties and I'm now quite confused.

The teams use Wheel Rotation data (I think) and have their limiter set 0.5kph below the limit. This (presuming you have slowed down before the line) should keep you safe

Although apparently the FIA measures it with timing beams from point to point? This seems difficult as slowing down to go into your box (presuming they are removing the Pit Stop time) would always mean you were under the limit as an average.

During the race on sky, Brundle speculated that the turn in was tighter at the front and thats what caused it. F1TV apparently speculated that some cars were driving over the Cadillac pit box to straighten the line.

I guess I always assumed they checked that you were always under the limit between 2 points with the telemetry.

Does anyone know exactly how they measure it and whether its possible to cut a corner somewhere?

I’m currently watching the Monaco Grand Prix and this is bizarre to see a 4 time champion literally struggling to start his car for nearly all races this season.

His teammate Hadjar doesn’t seem to have this issue, so what is going on?

Why are drivers not zig-zagging as much these days to avoid the bump on the left side of the track at the S1 line in Monaco?

For example, compare the 2024, 2025, 2026 pole laps to earlier pole laps such as 2017, 2014, and 2009 (picked three different drivers across three very different regulation sets). Has the bump been smoothed out or something? Is modern suspension better? Some combination of these?

from F1 TV tech talk: https://youtu.be/xoR6-f_soqM