F1 2031 cars: options on the table and the risk of repeating the 2026 mistake

Formula 1 is working on two fronts, balancing short- and medium-term adjustments to the current regulations while already looking ahead to the next technical cycle. There is no shortage of proposals regarding the direction to take with the new engines, but the real challenge will be not to lose sight of the priorities. The risk is to repeat the same mistake made with the 2026 regulations: designing the car as a sum of individual components rather than as a complete system.

Engine options

The latest rumour regarding the 2031 engines comes from Auto Motor und Sport, which reports a proposal to scale down or even eliminate the hybrid component. In such a scenario, environmental sustainability would rely on synthetic and/or bio-based fuels, although their carbon footprint would not be zero.

This raises questions about the characteristics of the internal combustion engine, starting with the choice between turbocharged and naturally aspirated units. The latter would be more appealing in terms of sound, while maintaining turbocharging would benefit efficiency, fuel consumption and overall fuel weight.

As for engine configuration, there are no strict constraints, with strong performance achievable whether opting for 10, 8 or again 6 cylinders. From a purely technical perspective, there could even be scope to allow manufacturers freedom in engine architecture, given that current regulations already define a budget cap, a minimum power unit weight and, above all, fuel energy flow limits. However, such an approach is unlikely, as there are concerns it could create large performance gaps.

The future of hybrid systems

Another major issue concerns hybrid technology, with even the possibility of removing the electric component entirely being discussed, especially given the slowdown in electrification within the automotive industry, particularly in Western markets. However, caution is required, as not everyone agrees with this direction.

“The power unit must include some form of hybrid system,” said Koji Watanabe, president of Honda HRC, in an interview with FormulaPassion a few weeks ago. “That is a requirement for Honda to be involved in Formula 1.”

It is realistic to assume that this view is shared by other manufacturers such as Toyota, which continues to monitor Formula 1 while considering a possible return.

Even if power units retain an electric component, it is highly likely that the hybrid system will be simplified. This is not only about reducing its power output, but also about redefining its role — providing short bursts of extra performance rather than sustained assistance throughout the lap. IndyCar, for example, has adopted this approach, favouring supercapacitor-based systems over lithium-ion batteries due to their superior power-to-weight ratio.

Chassis priorities

Unfortunately, most of the current rumours focus only on engine proposals, raising the risk of repeating the same mistake made with the 2026 regulations. The core issue was not so much the balance between internal combustion and electric power, but rather the decision to define the power unit first and only later address aerodynamics. This approach persisted despite simulation warnings highlighting the risk of creating an unusual and potentially flawed Formula 1 product.

Fortunately, aiming for a less powerful hybrid system in the next cycle reduces some of these risks. However, failing to design the car as an integrated whole from the outset would still represent a missed opportunity.

The main priorities for the chassis are reducing weight and dimensions, as well as minimising aerodynamic disturbance. These goals are interconnected: shorter and narrower cars would naturally be lighter, while also requiring less aerodynamic load to achieve sufficient grip in corners. This also ties into engine power targets, since less downforce results in lower drag on the straights.

Much will also depend on decisions regarding active aerodynamics. Continuing to open wings on straights could make sense in terms of reducing fuel consumption and onboard fuel weight, but this would require less powerful engines to avoid excessively high top speeds.

The overtaking challenge

There is also another risk: underestimating the challenge of overtaking, especially as the current problem is the opposite. With a reduction in hybrid influence, the issue may return, as closer performance levels make overtaking more difficult. What is needed is a system capable of creating temporary performance differences without reverting to the old DRS concept, which primarily benefited the attacking driver.

One possible solution could be a push-to-pass system similar to IndyCar, allowing drivers to activate extra power from the internal combustion engine and/or hybrid system via a button, with limited usage over a race or lap and potentially available to both attacking and defending drivers.

However, any study of overtaking cannot be separated from track characteristics, especially with a calendar increasingly dominated by street circuits. Beyond circuit layouts, the ease or difficulty of overtaking also depends on the cars themselves, as clearly demonstrated at Suzuka when comparing different regulatory eras.

Ultimately, the success of the next regulatory cycle will depend on the ability of the FIA and teams to learn from past mistakes, designing the Formula 1 car of the future as a complete system rather than a collection of separate parts.