The Power Unit case tests the seriousness of FIA threats

Not even time to get on the track, as the FIA ​​is already dealing with the first controversy over the new regulations. Mercedes and Red Bull Powertrains would have managed to increase the compression ratio of the engine beyond the permitted limit, fueling the debate on whether the solution was correct or not. It is yet another case of a gray area in the regulations, recurring episodes in the history of Formula 1, but for 2026 the Federation had promised a zero tolerance policy. The similarity with flexible wings The German newspaper Motorsport-Magazin was the first to spread the news according to which the new Mercedes and Red Bull-Ford engines have a solution which, by exploiting the thermal expansion of the materials, would allow the engine’s compression ratio to be increased beyond the limit of 16. This is a dispute that is conceptually different from others of the past, such as the controversy over the flow meter of 2019-2020. In that case, in fact, the regulation specified a limit on the flow of petrol valid in all circumstances, with the suspicion that it was circumvented by exploiting a gap in the control sensor, an infringement however never publicly recognised. Technical directive 039 of 2022 was also similar in this, which among many points perfected the control over the density of the plank, which the regulation already required had to be uniform for the entire length. The regulation’s approach to the compression ratio is instead closer to that for flexible wings. With the spoilers, in fact, the FIA ​​recognizes that it cannot replicate the exact distribution of aerodynamic pressure when the car is moving during static tests. It is therefore accepted that it is not possible to impose a control in actual conditions of use, which is why it is sufficient for the wing to pass the load tests with the machine stopped to be considered regular. Photo by Clive Rose/Getty Images The situation is similar for the compression ratio, which the regulation states must be measured with the engine at room temperature, renouncing to monitor any alterations once the operating temperatures have been reached. Normally in these cases the FIA ​​could only take note of the literal compliance with the rule, despite violating its spirit, and possibly intervene for the following year, as happened with the DAS in 2020. This time, however, the legislators had expressed their desire to change the register. Tombazis’ warning Gray zones have always been part of the history of Formula 1. In the past the FIA ​​has often banned controversial solutions months or even a year late, both due to the difficulty in legally refuting a certain interpretation of the regulation and due to the time needed to make the necessary changes. For this reason, in view of 2026 the Federation had promised itself not to find itself in a similar situation once the game had already been played out, announcing a zero tolerance policy for anyone who had exploited a gray area without discussing it with the legislators. Photo by Qian Jun/MB Media/Getty Images A passage from the interview given last August to FormulaPassion by Nikolas Tombazis, director of the FIA single-seater department, is relevant again: “If a team devised a solution based on a certain interpretation of the rules without asking us for clarification, we would never listen to you. If someone developed a concept based on an ambiguous 50-50 interpretation, it would be suicide for that team” “For any clarification we are asked by the teams, if we believe that the question that was posed to us is such that it actually indicates a gray area with little clarity, we would make sure to send an identical communication to all the teams. If we take the similar case of the double diffuser in 2009, at the time there had been communications between the FIA and some teams, but not with all, therefore, there were people working with different interpretations of the regulations. At the moment, however, our absolute priority is that the regulations are understandable to everyone. The scenarios Keeping true to Tombazis’ words, valid both for the teams and for the engine manufacturers, Mercedes and Red Bull Powertrains should have asked the FIA ​​for clarification on the interpretation of the regulation for the compression ratio. At that point, the Federation should have also informed the other manufacturers whether the limit of 16 should be respected in all conditions or only at room temperature, so that everyone could work on the same basis. None of this happened and now we find ourselves once again in the uncomfortable position where it may be too late to intervene. Photo by Nicolas Economou/NurPhoto via Getty Images If the FIA ​​decided to ban Mercedes and Red Bull’s solution, many questions would arise. It will be necessary to see, for example, how the impact of any changes on the budget cap will be managed, not to mention the whole issue relating to the evaluation of the delay of the other engine manufacturers for the assignment of the ADUO, the extra development opportunities. Whatever happens, the decision will set an important precedent, but above all it will say a lot about the seriousness of the Federation’s threats for the future.