The paradox of change as F1 2027 decision nears

“Change is the only constant in life" the Greek philosopher Heraclitus is quoted as saying. He would have probably fit in well in Formula 1's circus if he hadn't - an assumption - taken a dim view of its many excesses. He and his peers may have come up with the word 'crypto' [kryptós], but would have probably scratched their heads at how it's being used today.

F1's 11 teams are, of course, the masters of change. No two cars are ever the same, no set-up remains untouched. The cars that you saw running on track at the 'Crypto.com Miami Grand Prix', flashy upgrades and all, were all already obsolete the moment they rolled off the proverbial trailer. The state of the art is a CFD file, a wind tunnel model, a twinkle in Adrian Newey's eye.

That's why it comes as no great surprise that despite many sighs of despair echoing around the Hard Rock Stadium's paddock, the concept of wide-ranging regulations changes for 2027 is still on the cards. Yes, they're difficult, but difficult doesn't mean impossible. Heck, because we're talking about F1 engineering, even impossible often doesn't mean impossible. That baked-in agility of the many talented men and women in F1 really is a marvel and isn't talked about enough, whether it be adapting to the COVID-19 pandemic, adjusting to a silly 24-race schedule or wrapping their heads around extremely complex power unit regulations.

Make no mistake about it, the FIA's announcement last week that there's an "agreement in principle" to move towards a 60/40 split between combustion power and electric juice as early as next year is huge. As suggested in the statement, the most realistic way to achieve it in the short term without making cars much slower is to increase output from the V6 engines.

Now, there is likely some margin on the current hardware, but it hasn't specifically been designed for increased fuel flow from a reliability point of view. Then there's the question of ADUO, the catch-up mechanic for engine manufacturers lagging behind, like Honda. If hardware changes are needed, does the extra dyno time and cost cap money give anyone who qualifies a leg up for these 2027 tweaks? Because looking at the sliding scale that helps manufacturers for every two percent they are behind on V6 power, it won't just be Honda that will be able to use the scheme. 

The biggest issue for teams is the effect increased fuel flow will have upstream, if you will. More fuel means bigger fuel tanks, and that means a new chassis. Having done some digging, over half the grid was planning to re-use its 2026 chassis design next year - albeit a lightened version in some cases - saving precious design, manufacturing and cost cap resource to deploy elsewhere, like aero. With teams working many, many months ahead, the 2027 development race is already happening in the factories. It will be a huge headache to change course.

How the cost cap and ADUO is factored into the 2027 regulation changes is topic to be solved

Photo by: Guido De Bortoli / LAT Images via Getty Images

That's why any such change will likely have to come with a cost cap exemption for next year only, and why a decision needs to be rubber-stamped before this month's Canadian Grand Prix to give teams enough time to react. McLaren team boss Andrea Stella, a strong advocate for regulation changes to improve qualifying and safety, already felt 2028 was a more realistic proposition, and that was two weeks ago. Alpine boss Steve Nielsen's answer was "now", when asked when his team needed to know where the series is heading. Are those changes even realistic, we asked him: "Well, I'm not sure I know what realistic is anymore after the changes we've had this year..."

That's why the "principle" in the FIA statement, while a positive development, still appears to do a lot of the heavy lifting. Further talks between the various advisory committees and then between F1's stakeholders are planned to vote the most palatable solution through. With cost caps and ADUO mechanics all interlinked, it will become a question of political will as much as engineering prowess.

Power unit manufacturers, and the bigger fish aligned with them, may sense an opportunity if there's a bigger runway for engine changes than foreseen by the original homologation schedules. But some feel smaller outfits who barely touch the cap or have less manufacturing flexibility are being taken for a ride to fix rule flaws that a lot of experts saw coming from a mile away.

The current state of affairs feels like one big paradox. The spectacle is deemed "incredible" but needs to change

That's why the current state of affairs feels like one big paradox. The spectacle is deemed "incredible" but needs to change. Teams are trying to allocate money efficiently but will probably have to spend more, inefficiently. A 50/50 power split was deemed the holy grail but is now hastily abandoned, which, in fairness, was an industry-driven shift to begin with.

Will a move to 60/40 be enough to fix all ails? Maybe not, but it's probably the best F1 can do at this point, and to the championship's credit you can't say there hasn't been a willingness to wake up and smell the coffee.

But as pliable as F1 teams have proven to be, there's only so much change they can absorb. Now it's time to get the 2027 rules over the line as soon as possible.

F1 is set to rubber-stamp its 2027 rules by the end of the month

Photo by: James Sutton / LAT Images via Getty Images