Why Pirelli's downforce simulations don’t tell the full story of F1’s 2026 pecking order

The 2026 regulations represent one of the most significant overhauls in Formula 1 history, aiming for a more sustainable future with power units moving to a 50% internal combustion engine and 50% electrical power split. This is coupled with revised chassis rules designed to create lighter, smaller cars featuring active aerodynamics, including movable front and rear wings, to manage drag and downforce more efficiently. These fundamental changes present a "clean sheet" design opportunity for all ten teams on the grid, leading to a wide array of initial design philosophies.

Initially, many technical directors across the paddock suggested that the new rules were quite restrictive, potentially limiting the scope for innovative design solutions. However, Adrian Newey, the highly acclaimed Chief Technical Officer at Red Bull Racing, has offered a contrasting perspective. Newey, renowned for his ability to interpret and exploit regulations, suggested upon closer inspection that the rules might not be as constrained as first perceived. This echoes sentiments from the 2022 regulation change, which, while initially thought to be prescriptive, allowed Red Bull to develop a dominant car that has largely dictated the competitive order for two seasons. The Red Bull RB18 and RB19’s success demonstrated that even within seemingly tight regulations, significant performance differentiation can be found through astute engineering and aerodynamic interpretation.

The implications of Newey’s assessment are now being reflected in early data submitted by teams to key suppliers. Brembo, the official brake system supplier, has indicated a considerable variance in the expected dimensions for rear brake discs for the 2026 cars. This difference points to diverse approaches in brake cooling strategies, weight distribution philosophies, and the integration of the complex Energy Recovery System (ERS) with braking, all of which are fundamental to vehicle dynamics and performance.

Concurrently, Pirelli, the sole tyre supplier for Formula 1, has revealed an even more striking disparity: a substantial difference in the predicted downforce levels submitted by the teams. This data is critical for Pirelli’s development cycle, as it provides an essential reference for designing the construction and compounds of the new 2026 tyres. Each team is mandated to provide Pirelli with their projected downforce levels for the end of the subsequent season, offering a glimpse into the anticipated loads the new tyres will need to withstand.

Related News :

During an exclusive interview with Motorsport.com, Mario Isola, Pirelli’s F1 Director, confirmed the mandatory nature of this submission. "That is our request, yes. All teams must give us a prediction of their expected loads for the end of next season," Isola explained. He noted the considerable variation in these initial 2026 predictions. However, Isola was quick to temper any premature conclusions about the competitive order, emphasizing that this wide spread does not necessarily indicate a massively divergent field come race day.

"I don’t believe that those simulations are telling us what the competitive order for next year will be. The numbers are far from that to be honest. They are just simulations showing the expectations of the teams, not the real performance that we see on track," Isola stated. He sought to de-emphasize recent reports that had begun to draw definitive conclusions from these early figures. "I’ve already read articles saying, ‘with this in mind we already know who will be fastest’. No, reality is completely different."

Isola underscored that a higher load at either the front or rear of the car does not automatically translate to superior speed. The overall performance package is influenced by a multitude of factors, including crucial drag levels and the intricate interaction between aerodynamic efficiency and mechanical grip. A car generating immense downforce might also suffer from excessive drag on straights, or possess an inefficient aerodynamic balance through different corner types. The ultimate challenge lies in finding the optimal balance across all performance metrics.

"Even if you have a higher load at the front or at the rear, that still doesn’t mean you will be quicker. That also depends on drag levels and on many other factors, so it’s not that those simulations define the competitive order," Isola clarified. He expressed amusement at the speculative reports, quipping, "So basically, I can already tell you who is going to be the winner next year! But unfortunately, it’s not like that, or maybe I should say: luckily, it’s not like that!" This serves as a stark reminder that the journey from theoretical design to on-track performance is fraught with complexities and unforeseen challenges.

For Pirelli, this unpredictability, while exciting for fans, significantly complicates their critical task of developing tyres that are safe, durable, and performative for the new era. If the initial simulations from various teams present such a broad spectrum of expected loads, deciding which numbers to base their tyre development on becomes a complex decision.

Isola detailed Pirelli’s strategy for navigating this uncertainty. "In the first part of the development, it was not a big issue because we targeted the integrity of the tyre based on the highest simulations," he explained. This "better safe than sorry" approach is paramount for safety. Pirelli must ensure the structural integrity of the tyres can withstand the maximum possible forces any team might generate, particularly towards the end of the season when car development typically reaches its peak. Under-designing for integrity could lead to catastrophic tyre failures or necessitate excessively high minimum tyre pressures, which negatively impact grip and handling. "We cannot start with a tyre that is okay for loads at the beginning of the season, but not for the end of the season. In that case we have to increase the tyre pressure by a huge amount, because we need to support the construction. We prefer to design a tyre that’s in line with the expectations for the end of the season."

The more challenging aspect, according to Isola, arises when defining the actual rubber compounds. "The difficult part of the job is when you’re in the process of defining the compounds, because that also depends on the energy and load." Different loads generate varying amounts of heat in the tyres, which directly impacts compound selection. Higher loads generally require harder compounds to manage heat and wear, while lower loads might allow for softer, grippier compounds. This balance is crucial for race strategy, tyre degradation, and overall driver feel.

Pirelli anticipates that the next round of simulations from teams will show much greater convergence, a pattern observed during previous regulation changes. Isola cited the introduction of the 18-inch tyres in 2022 as a precedent, where initial predictions also varied widely before coalescing as teams gained more clarity on their designs. While the construction of the 2026 tyres will be homologated by the time these more refined figures arrive, the information will still be invaluable for Pirelli in making their final compound selections for individual races throughout the season.

To proactively address the inherent uncertainties of a new regulatory cycle, Pirelli is planning to develop a wider range of compounds for 2026, with larger gaps between each compound. "We started the development with the C3 as our baseline, as that one is in the middle of the range. We started to design a C3 with the same hardness as the current C3, and then moved to the others. We tried to enlarge the gaps with the other compounds," Isola confirmed.

This strategy of creating greater differentiation between the compounds aims to provide Pirelli with enhanced flexibility in their tyre choices for each Grand Prix. By having a broader spectrum of hardness levels at their disposal, they can better accommodate all possible performance scenarios that might emerge from the new regulations. "If for any reason the cars are not as fast at the beginning of the season as predicted, then the range of compounds is probably a bit on the hard side. But in that scenario we can still select softer compounds for specific races," Isola elaborated. This pragmatic approach underscores the complexity of preparing for a future that is, by definition, an educated guess, ensuring that the tyre supplier is equipped to support Formula 1, regardless of the precise performance characteristics of the 2026 cars. The competitive order for 2026 remains firmly on the drawing board, far from being defined by initial simulation data alone.

💬 Tinggalkan Komentar dengan Facebook

Author Profile

Jonas Leo: Jonas Leo is a passionate motorsport journalist and lifelong Formula 1 enthusiast. With a sharp eye for race strategy and driver performance, he brings readers closer to the world of Grand Prix racing through in-depth analysis, breaking news, and exclusive paddock insights. Jonas has covered everything from preseason testing to dramatic title deciders, capturing the emotion and precision that define modern F1. When he’s not tracking lap times or pit stop tactics, he enjoys exploring classic racing archives and writing about the evolution of F1 technology.