Enzo Ferrari famously said that “aerodynamics are for people who can’t build engines.” Unfortunately for the founder of the Prancing Horse, it is now the engine that is limiting the ambitions of the Maranello team. The reasons are numerous, with some factors lying beyond Ferrari’s direct control. Nevertheless, the Scuderia must carefully assess the engineering decisions it has made. The ADUO concessions system could provide an opportunity to close the gap to Mercedes power units, but an important question remains: will Ferrari continue developing its current concept, or will it choose a more radical approach and start from scratch?
The underlying philosophy
On several occasions, Fred Vasseur has hinted that Ferrari’s power unit department did not prioritize outright horsepower. Instead, the engineers opted for a compromise philosophy that they believed would deliver better overall lap-time performance.
For example, the engine was designed to operate at higher temperatures than would otherwise have been possible. While this comes at the expense of thermal efficiency, it significantly reduces cooling requirements. As a result, Ferrari was able to install smaller radiators, gaining advantages in terms of weight reduction and aerodynamic efficiency.
The smaller turbocharger is only one visible aspect of a broader engine philosophy focused on responsiveness and strong corner-exit acceleration rather than maximum power at the end of long straights. After all, reaching top speed as quickly as possible is often more beneficial than achieving a higher ultimate speed later on. This approach also reduces the need to rely on hybrid power to compensate for engine lag and delayed throttle response.
Another important element is the FTM, the flap mounted behind the exhaust outlet that provides significant aerodynamic benefits. However, restricting the exhaust flow inevitably affects turbocharger efficiency and forces the engine to use more power to expel hot gases, reducing the amount of useful energy available for propulsion.
For this reason, Ferrari’s design choices cannot be judged purely by horsepower figures. Their effectiveness must be evaluated based on the overall competitiveness of the SF-26. At present, however, the Ferrari package remains significantly behind Mercedes. It will be fascinating to see whether Ferrari uses ADUO concessions to improve the existing power unit or whether it decides to introduce an entirely new concept, especially as future regulations continue to evolve.
The regulatory challenges
One of the most significant developments affecting Ferrari was the FIA’s decision to extend the starting procedure. The change was introduced to help manufacturers that struggled to spool up their turbochargers in time and launch cleanly from the grid.
While it would have been impossible to ignore such a safety concern, the final ruling had a major impact on Ferrari, and not only because it eliminated a potential advantage at the start. If Ferrari chose to pursue a less powerful but more responsive engine concept, part of the reasoning was to ensure reliable race starts. Maranello had repeatedly raised this issue with the FIA during the development phase.
The introduction of a five-second warning before the start lights effectively reduced the value of Ferrari’s foresight. In practice, it rewarded rival manufacturers that had pursued different design philosophies while eliminating some of the disadvantages associated with those choices.
Another important chapter was the controversy surrounding the increased compression ratio used by Mercedes engines. The Brixworth-based manufacturer successfully identified an opportunity within an ambiguous area of the technical regulations, catching the FIA by surprise.
FIA single-seater director Nikolas Tombazis insisted that the advantage gained by Mercedes power units is minimal, describing the intense media reaction as something close to collective hysteria. Even so, part of Ferrari’s performance deficit likely stems from this development, although it remains impossible to quantify exactly how much of the gap can be attributed to it.
For Ferrari, the major opportunity to address this issue could arrive in 2027. Next season, the cold-temperature measurement test will disappear, allowing manufacturers to design an engine with a higher compression ratio at ambient temperatures before stabilizing at the regulatory maximum of 16 once operating temperatures reach 130°C.
The challenge for Ferrari will be ensuring that it does not focus exclusively on this area. Even newcomer Red Bull-Ford is believed to hold a power advantage over Ferrari despite not using the same solution pioneered by Mercedes.
The fuel factor
One of the most significant changes introduced by the 2026 regulations is the adoption of sustainable fuels. As far back as 2024, Fred Vasseur identified fuel development as one of the key battlegrounds of the new era, arguing that performance differences would be heavily influenced by both fuel technology and battery systems.
That naturally raises the question of whether Shell’s decision to develop a fuel with a strong biological component, unlike the predominantly synthetic fuels used by several rivals, may have contributed to Ferrari’s current engine deficit.
In reality, the new fuels are not radically different from their predecessors in terms of chemical composition. They are still largely made up of hydrocarbons, meaning molecules composed of carbon and hydrogen. The key difference lies in the origin of those elements. Rather than coming from fossil sources, they are derived from highly sustainable organic and synthetic production processes.
The entire extraction and manufacturing chain must comply with strict carbon-emissions limits, effectively creating a carbon budget that influences the chemical composition manufacturers can achieve. In Ferrari’s case, Shell’s decision to emphasize biological components should be assessed within this broader framework. It is also important to remember that the final fuel formulation is developed in conjunction with the engine concept itself.
The 2027 development battle
One thing appears certain: Ferrari’s recovery will depend on improving thermal efficiency. Although the 2026 engines retain the same basic architecture and displacement as their predecessors, the new regulations have dramatically altered combustion strategies.
Key parameters like compression ratio, turbocharger pressure, fuel flow, and even the number of spark discharges per combustion cycle have all changed. These factors have transformed the way manufacturers extract performance from their power units.
Ferrari still has room to improve its interpretation of these regulations, but future development will also depend heavily on the direction chosen for the 2027 and 2028 rule sets. If fuel flow and internal combustion engine output are increased, some design philosophies may suddenly become more advantageous while others lose relevance.
This broader regulatory uncertainty, combined with the management of ADUO concessions, helps explain why Ferrari and Mercedes currently hold differing views on the future direction of Formula 1 engine development. The decisions made over the next 18 months could ultimately determine whether Ferrari can close the gap and return to the front of the Formula 1 power unit battle.
Leave a Reply