F1 teams agree MGU-K allocation-limit increase with 2020's 22 races
Formula 1 teams have reached a compromised agreement on an increased allocation of MGU-K parts to help cope with the addition of a 22nd race in 2020
Some teams and power unit manufacturers that have been picking up power unit-related grid penalties with the current level of 21 races had been pushing for an increase in allocation of elements.
Those outfits that were more confident in their reliability were resisting any change. But in the end it has been agreed that allowing the use of a third MGU-K - on a par with the V6, turbo and MGU-H components - was the best compromise for the extended season.
The energy store and control electronics allocation will remain at two per season. Speaking about the agreement, Renault team boss Cyril Abiteboul told Autosport that the move "makes sense".
"It was planned for 2021, so we are applying the principle that was agreed for '21 to '20, even though it wasn't in the regulations for '20, he continued.
"Despite common sense [not] always applying in F1, and indeed it was a bit of a struggle, we reached that compromise in Budapest.
"I understand it was a bit difficult to get people to stick to their word [in the summer break vote], but eventually this is what happened."
The MGU-K is regarded as the most vulnerable of the three elements currently limited to two per season.
Even Mercedes, which has no reliability concerns over a 22nd race being added to the calendar, has acknowledged the increase in MGU-K allownace as a positive step.
"It's good in particular for the mechanics in the garage," said Abiteboul.
"At the moment there is a discrepancy between the number of internal combustion engines and the number of MGU-Ks [per season] - three and two.
"And that can create chaos for the mechanics. The MGU-K is mounted on the ICE, so it makes an awful lot of sense to get the same allocation for both.
"Some people in F1 don't care about that, but we do. It was important for us to get exactly the same number, and especially with the season getting longer and more flyaway races, and more back-to-backs."
But Abiteboul added that Renault would also have preferred teams to have agreed to an additional increase in the energy store and control electronics allocation.
"We would have liked it, but I have to accept that it's a separate component, so the logistics and operational reasoning do not apply to that one," he explained.
"So it was less important to us."
Share Or Save This Story
Krack: Aston Martin F1 team no longer in “no-man’s land”
Gasly rues costly floor damage from Ocon contact in F1 Japanese GP
How an F1 underachiever became a Japanese political player
What Verstappen did – and didn't – say about his F1 future and McLaren at Spa
“A shock to the system” – Why teams fear the worst with F1’s 2026 cars at Spa
Red Bull parks 'Macarena' rear wing for Belgian GP after Verstappen crashes
Norris given Belgium GP grid penalty as McLaren takes new Mercedes power unit parts
Subscribe and access Autosport.com with your ad-blocker.
From Formula 1 to MotoGP we report straight from the paddock because we love our sport, just like you. In order to keep delivering our expert journalism, our website uses advertising. Still, we want to give you the opportunity to enjoy an ad-free and tracker-free website and to continue using your adblocker.
Top Comments