In the presence of FIA President Jean Todt, representatives from the FIA, FIA Formula One World Championship Commercial Rights Holder (F1) and current and potential Formula One manufacturer representatives met today, 31 October, in Paris to discuss regulations for the 2021 Power Unit.

In line with the objectives outlined by the FIA for the future of these regulations, which include a reduction in cost, maintaining road relevance with hybrid technology and improving the sound of the cars and the appeal for the fans, manufacturer representatives were presented with a roadmap for the development of the next generation of regulations.

The proposals shared today have been developed jointly by the FIA and by F1 using data and input from teams, power unit suppliers and outside experts, and the overall framework for the 2021 power unit definition will be in place and published by the FIA at the end of 2017.

In order to uphold the objective of cost reduction, work will continue over the next 12 months to define certain elements of the Power Unit, but the design and development of the complete Power Unit will not be possible until all the information is released at the end of 2018. This aims to ensure that manufacturers continue to work on the current specification Power Unit.

During the remaining part of 2017 and 2018, the FIA and F1 will also work with the teams to establish power unit test and development restrictions as well as other cost containment measures.

Manufacturer representatives were presented with the vision for the key new features of the 2021 Power Unit proposed by the FIA and F1. These are as follows:

1.6 Litre, V6 Turbo Hybrid

3000rpm higher engine running speed range to improve the sound

Prescriptive internal design parameters to restrict development costs and discourage extreme designs and running conditions

Removal of the MGUH

More powerful MGUK with focus on manual driver deployment in race together with option to save up energy over several laps to give a driver controlled tactical element to racing

Single turbo with dimensional constraints and weight limits

Standard energy store and control electronics

High Level of external prescriptive design to give 'Plug-And-Play' engine/chassis/transmission swap capability

Intention to investigate tighter fuel regulations and limits on number of fuels used

A series of meetings will now commence with all the interested parties to discuss and develop the proposal in the spirit of the widest possible cooperation.

"Today was a key step in the development of the Power Unit regulations for 2021," said FIA Secretary-General for Sport, Peter Bayer. "The FIA has been working with the Commercial Rights Holder to define a positive step forward for these regulations which maintain Formula One's place at the pinnacle of motor sport technology whilst addressing the key issues facing the sport such as cost, road relevance and fan experience at the racetrack. We felt it was important to bring the teams into the discussions today and explain the direction we are taking and I'm pleased with the response we have received."

"The 2021 power unit is an example of the future way the FIA as regulators, F1 as commercial right holders, the teams and the manufacturers as stakeholders will work together for the common good of the sport," added. Formula 1, Managing Director, Motorsports Ross Brawn. "The proposal presented today was the outcome of a series of meeting which took place during 2017 with the current teams participating in the FIA Formula 1 World Championship and the manufacturers who showed their interest to be part of the pinnacle of motor sport.

"Also, we've carefully listened to what the fans think about the current PU and what they would like to see in the near future with the objective to define a set of regulations which will provide a powertrain that is simpler, cheaper and noisier and will create the conditions to facilitate new manufacturers to enter Formula 1 as powertrain suppliers and to reach a more levelled field in the sport.

"The new F1 has the target to be the world's leading global sports competition married to state of the art technology. To excite, engage, and awe fans of all ages but to do so in a sustainable manner. We believe that the future power unit will achieve this."

LATEST NEWS

more news >

LATEST IMAGES

galleries >

Click to go to the main galleries section

READERS COMMENTS

1. Posted by MossMan, 10/11/2017 8:37

"@ Insane Reindeer:
'+ "High Level of external prescriptive design to give 'Plug-And-Play' engine/chassis/transmission swap capability" No, no, no, no, NO! This has to be a complete cop-out to Red Bull and McLaren. By forcing everyone to have the same shape and dimensions of their engines it pushes all the packaging work done by teams who can actually be ****d to build their own engines right out the window.'

Actually I read that quite differently - I think they're talking about common interfaces... so e.g. the engine can be completely differently shaped as long as it has the same mounting points and fittings for gearbox etc."

Rating: Neutral (0) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

2. Posted by Spindoctor, 02/11/2017 10:22

"@Insane Reindeer
I largely agree. I've been a "fan" of F1 since the early 1960's and there's a lot more to it than simply "overtaking". I'd like to add a couple of my own observations

There's an old saying that you can't drink from the same river twice, and that's particularly pertinent to F1. Like it or not the future does NOT include any V8,10 or 12 cylinder power plants. That was then, this is now.

[rhetorical flourish alert] If we must have 'plug 'n play' engines, then why not go the whole hog and have a single supplier?

Yes, the PU's are obscenely expensive, but a huge chunk of the costs of F1 come from aerodynamics, the very aero which makes it near impossible to follow and overtake even in much faster cars. Lewis Hamilton's comment that he needed a delta of 1.4 secs faster to overtake even with DRS was pretty eye-opening.
Of course its a compromise, and some teams (Ferrari?) seem to have sacrificed the nth degree of aero performance in order to make it easier for their drivers to "cut through traffic".
But this doesn't really help that much aero is very expensive, and not great for racing.

Insane Reindeer puts it brilliantly:

' If what you want are some of the best drivers in the world driving some of the most technologically advanced cars on the planet while covering ground at an obscenely fast rate then get behind the sport. Or just stop watching and go and spend your weekends watching YouTube videos of BTCC races from the 1980’s. '
"

Rating: Neutral (0) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

3. Posted by Mad Matt, 01/11/2017 21:04

"I've been watching since the 70s and it's true that there have been long periods where the racing has been dire but that's no excuse to continue down that road.

I agree with a number of other points though, the electric turbo idea is clearly catching on elsewhere.

You don't have to go back to the 80s to enjoy BTCC, every race weekend this year has something worth seeing and mostly there was a lot worth watching.

I'm not asking that we get two hours of overtaking but cars need to be able to run close to each other so there can be more chances of overtaking.

With regard to qualifying I wouldn't be adverse to the odd reverse grid or some method of mixing things up. Not so much that being on pole is worthless but something to make the race more interesting."

Rating: Neutral (0) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

4. Posted by Insane Reindeer, 01/11/2017 18:06

"I am, broadly speaking, in favour of these. The new upper rev limit and the clamp down on the fuel are great. The reworking of the MGU-K and the flexibility to use it in more constructive ways are also great news.

Things I don't like in no specific order:

+ No MGU-H! What the actual heck is all that about? Even last year it was obvious that these "electric turbos" were becoming a thing on road cars and had some excellent properties. Removing these means the MGU-K is now going to be needed to help fill in that torque curve again.

+ "High Level of external prescriptive design to give 'Plug-And-Play' engine/chassis/transmission swap capability" No, no, no, no, NO! This has to be a complete cop-out to Red Bull and McLaren. By forcing everyone to have the same shape and dimensions of their engines it pushes all the packaging work done by teams who can actually be ****d to build their own engines right out the window. If I was the proper three teams I would be having a total fit over this. If a team wants to buy an engine then it is not up to the FIA to make sure it's easy to fit into your car.

+ No mention of more fuel or forcing teams to use more fuel. I would really of liked to see every car forced to start each and every race with 120 kg of fuel on board. And I am sure the FIA could of come up with some rules that would of forced the teams to make sure that each and every car used a minimum of 105 kg of that fuel in each race. (Weather etc permitting)

+ The reaction of the so called "F1 fans" in this comment section who seem to think that F1 is all about the racing. Because I have been watching F1 religiously since 1984 and I can't remember a single season when the racing was any better than it has been this year. Some people like to point to the battles that Senna and Prost had, but no one seems to care that McLaren won all but one race in 1998. Just because McLaren happened to have two of the greatest ever drivers, at their prime, in the same car at the same time everyone goes all "rose tinted spectacles" about it but forgets that for the rest of the grid those seasons were bloody awful. Schumacher and Häkkinen had some great duels but that was just a two team race for several seasons. When was the last time, seriously, that an F1 season had more two teams that could legitimately win races with another one there or thereabouts when the top two screwed up or just keeping the top two honest? And when was the last time that any team had two drivers of the calibre of Prost and Senna who were honestly left to race each other without team orders?

If F1 got rid of qualifying and picked the starting order out of a hat every Sunday morning then I do believe that the teams would of long since figured out how to make these cars easier to pass with. However when you look at some of the battles that the likes of Williams, Force India, Torro Rosso and Renault have had this year it seems obvious to me that those teams have compromised their out and out speed to a degree to aid them passing other cars. Which is just fine with me. So instead of complaining about the aerodynamics or pleading for a return to ancient technology V10’s, if want you really really want in F1 is “racing” or two hours of overtaking then what you need to be doing is pleading for an end to qualifying as it is now, or for that matter, has been for as long as I can remember. If what you want are some of the best drivers in the world driving some of the most technologically advanced cars on the planet while covering ground at an obscenely fast rate then get behind the sport. Or just stop watching and go and spend your weekends watching YouTube videos of BTCC races from the 1980’s. "

Rating: Negative (-3) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

5. Posted by Mad Matt, 01/11/2017 9:54

"The cars can't run close together because of the aero. Fans want to see close racing and overtakes.... so we'll change the rules for the engines!!!!

You couldn't make this stuff up."

Rating: Positive (2) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

6. Posted by nonickname, 01/11/2017 5:40

"Ross should have stayed away fishing."

Rating: Positive (1) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

7. Posted by NS Biker, 31/10/2017 23:25

"Amazing that they have focused on the fuel issue .... this is a problem THEY created.
They let the teams formulate their own fuels from just about anything so long as it was organically derived. And it took them all this time to figure out this has ZERO relevance to you and I. And how much has Esso, Petronas et al spent working on exotic and special blends.??
3000 RPM extra ... so what. There is no need to run to the limit with the current rules. Why not make it 22,000 RPM. Would look good on JT's CV. Something he should be sprucing up as he should get Tossed.
This makes it pretty simple for Aston Martin ... as Monty Python suggests .... Run Away ....Run Away ..."

Rating: Negative (-2) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

8. Posted by meatball, 31/10/2017 19:40

"Jean Todt has to go. He's going to crater F1."

Rating: Positive (5) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

9. Posted by Rob, 31/10/2017 19:18

"I can remember when it was announced that the engine limit from 1966 would be three liters displacement.

So simple. "

Rating: Positive (3) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

10. Posted by Rhaycen, 31/10/2017 18:21

"This is the biggest pile of nonsense in F1 that I've read in a while, so we're just going to go a small step backwards and then pretend like it is progress.

These KERS (MGU-K) style engines will still be crazy expensive, are still complete nonsense that add nothing to the sport. Why is it that whomever works for the FIA always seem to loose the ability to speak truthfully ...

When you claim you want to make F1 cheaper and give independent engine makers a chance to come into F1, but then think up a "new" engine formula that does almost nothing for making them cheaper and are still almost as complex as the current batch of engines.

Congratulations FIA, you've come up with an idea that neither the team or the fans will be happy about, while at the same time also loosing some "road relevance". (though that last one is nonsense anyways)"

Rating: Positive (8) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

11. Posted by Schnauzers, 31/10/2017 17:37

"Such a shame they’ve dropped the mike in the tail, thought that was a really “out of the box” idea and would really have put people off F1...

Honda could have joined forces with neighbours Sony and made a “Killing you softly” out of it....."

Rating: Positive (1) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

12. Posted by F1 Yank, 31/10/2017 17:15

"It is interesting how many elements dictate the pace of a car and the one following. It seems the drivers are mostly driving to preserve their tires and fuel load. The aero makes the cars quicker but you cant get close enough to pass. Not sure why you would develop an F1 car with the intention to run it in a historic race in the first place. All cars today should be some form of a hybrid. We need to embrace technology not hinder it. The FIA should simply the major elements so they are competitive across the board. Why was Mercedes able to get it right and not Ferrari, Renault and Honda?"

Rating: Positive (2) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

13. Posted by GrahamG, 31/10/2017 17:06

"Please get rid of the daft restrictions on number of engines which can be used in a season (and equally daft penalties) as this is actually increasing cost. One engine for every two races, free gearboxes, allow 4wd and tyres which have a wide working range and will last a whole race to eliminate forced pitstops. "

Rating: Positive (1) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

14. Posted by Ro, 31/10/2017 16:31

"WHAN AN ABSOLUTE LOAD OF HOGWASH. These engines will NEVER be used on the road, so why keep on developing them ? Not only that, in the future no one will be able (and allowed) to run the current cars in any historic races. Bring back a V10 engine limited to a certain rev range. Standardise all gearboxes and get rid of the Batman-style wings, this way it wont matter a jot how close you run to a car, currently too much emphasis is places on aero. But I guess us, the fans dont get a say. F1 is near to dying so why ruin it completely ?"

Rating: Positive (1) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

15. Posted by bfairey, 31/10/2017 15:11

"Rubbish lets have a 2.4L v6 and no gimmicks."

Rating: Negative (-1) Rate comment: Positive | NegativeReport this comment

Proposal for 2021 engine formula revealed

LATEST NEWS

RELATED ARTICLES

LATEST IMAGES

POST A COMMENT

Post your comment

READERS COMMENTS

Share this page