The Mercedes compression ratio trick? Blame Audi and Porsche…

The 2026 F1 regulations, compromise upon compromise Michael Schmidt is one of the most well-known and respected journalists in the F1 paddock and the recent episode of his podcast ‘Formula Schmidt’ has given many answers to those who wonder how an F1 regulation as complex and discussed as the 2026 one could have been created. The background – known and less well-known – reported by the German journalist are multiple and it is interesting to isolate different parts of it.
Who wanted 50:50? Why do these machines have superclipping? How did the Mercedes compression ratio trick come about? Here are all the answers from Michael Schmidt. Engines 50:50 fault of the F1 manufacturers “You have to admit, the regulations are terrible. They are written in a catastrophically poor way. They saw the train coming and now they are trying to stop it. But they saw it coming from the beginning…”, began Schmidt.
The German confirmed that it was “the CEOs of the various manufacturers” who insisted on the 50:50 between thermal and electric, because they firmly intended to promote the electric engine through F1. The superclipping caused by the fear of Audi and Porsche… Once the complex path of 50:50 was undertaken, the problem was the need to triple the electric power of the single-seaters (from 120 kW to 350). “We had three years to find solutions on how to recharge. It would have been enough to recover energy from the front axle. So we would never have talked about clipping, superclipping and these things”, explained Schmidt.
But why didn’t we go in this direction? “The reasons were purely political. The manufacturers already present in F1 did not want this solution because they thought that Audi and Porsche would have a huge advantage thanks to their experience at Le Mans”, underlined the journalist. …and then Audi and Porsche limited the compression ratio. And Mercedes finds the trick. In a game of crossed vetoes, Audi and Porsche however obtained the OK for their motion: “They insisted on inserting a supercharging limit and a compression limit. Another absurd choice. If this limit had not been inserted, the compression ratio would still be 18:1, as before. And Mercedes would not have had the advantage it has now”, Schmidt underlined. The background on the supercharging limit And on supercharging, the Auto, Motor und Sport journalist revealed that Audi was the main supporter of reducing the limit from 5 to 4.8 bar. Do you remember the reason for the disqualification of Gabriel Bortoleto’s Audi in the Miami Sprint? He broke the rules regarding engine intake pressure. In short, what he fought to obtain a limitation for…. Michael Schmidt then concluded: “Sport must be liked by people, most fans don’t know what a megajoule is. When these things are talked about, F1 has already lost. It simply should never have happened. The FIA ​​must not let itself be influenced too much.” Click here to add Formula Passion as your favorite source on Google Discover: you will find our content more easily!

Automobile Magazine – F1 English News , 2026-05-30 16:00:00