Max Verstappen warned as long ago as July 2023 that the new rules for F1 2026 would take Formula 1 in the wrong direction.
Nothing from pre-season testing in Bahrain has eased fears that F1 has just committed an act of self-sabotage…
Max Verstappen the voice of reason in F1 2026 rules debate
A version of this article originally appeared in PlanetF1.com’s conclusions from Bahrain testing
Want more PlanetF1.com coverage? Add us as a preferred source on Google to your favourites list for news you can trust
Formula 1 has always lived on the fault line between science and entertainment.
For most of its history, it has got the balance right. But on the evidence of 2026 so far?
With cars running out of puff before the end of the straights? With drivers talking of the need to lift and coast ON A QUALIFYING LAP?
It is as though these rules have asked everyone – teams, drivers, outside observers – to forget everything they previously knew about motorsport and how it works.
It is likely to prove a question too far. Was F1 really so broken before that it required this mass overcorrection?
Little wonder that Max Verstappen, always a voice of reason in the debate about where F1 stands and should be heading, has described the new regulations as “anti-racing.”
Early days these might be, yet it is hard to escape the sense that F1 has just taken a very wrong turn.
You do not have to look very far in the paddock to find a reminder of Formula 1’s commitment to achieving Net Zero (whatever that means…) by 2030.
Yet the great – and largely unspoken – problem with F1 going green is that such a target cannot be met without changing the face of the sport beyond all recognition.
Here is where we find Formula 1 in 2026: a sport grappling with its identity, unsure of itself and its place in an increasingly climate-conscious world.
Max Verstappen: F1 2026 rules like ‘Formula E on steroids’
Max Verstappen, Izzy Hammond and the great Formula E delusion
Bahrain telemetry suggests Red Bull engine edge after Wolff claim
It is this thinking that results in the new regulations in place for this season, produced not purely with the spectacle in mind unlike most previous rule changes, but with the aim of tempting major car manufacturers, all facing the same existential concerns, into F1.
These regulations were widely agreed to be a bad idea at least two-and-a-half years before a 2026 car hit the track and it hardly screams of a recipe for success when the chassis rules were devised primarily to make up for the shortcomings of the engine ones.
Has Formula 1 just committed an act of self-sabotage here?
That would be a step too far without yet seeing these cars in racing situations (even if the very concept of ‘active aero’ conjures up nightmarish images of a never-ending DRS train).
Yet there is every possibility that the self-styled pinnacle of motorsport has just gone and neutered itself in a ham-fisted attempt to pander to the eco-centric demands of the age.
On the plus side, it’s been a very good couple of weeks for the ‘Bring Back V10s’ brigade…
The people have spoken: Reader reaction to the F1 2026 rules
Pedro Perez: I am going to watch the first few races, maybe even up to Monza/Spa to see if they are slowing up in the straights even in qualifying, and if the clownery of these regulations is what it seems to be, I will stop watching F1 first time in 40 years. IndyCar it will be.
Pete Bauer: Oliver should get a Pulitzer Prize for exposing the fact that the emperor has no clothes. EV sales are down, the King of the US is killing all eco friendly regulations. Bring back real racing before they kill it. Soon IndyCrash will be making F1 look like the kids on the block and it pains me to say that.
xTubeframe: “Yet there is every possibility that the self-styled pinnacle of motorsport has just gone and neutered itself in a ham-fisted attempt to pander to the eco-centric demands of the age.”
The best sentence of this generation of cars! Congratulations Oliver, you, in just a few words, have summed up the situation the FIA regulators have imposed on the most successful motorsport period in the history of motorsport.
George Bascomb: This is what we end up with when woke is applied to motorsport. F1 is diminished, no doubt.
Piro Vash: Racing as we know it has changed forever. In an effort to accomplish net zero, F1 has killed what makes it special in the first place. Which is to watch the best in the world do what they do best: race.
What is the point in all of this when they burn through tires faster than an alcoholic goes through beer or when they spend countless amount of gas/resources traveling the world. Their eco footprint is something that will never change as they keep adding more races to the calendar year.
Which in essence makes this net zero crusade that much more foolish.
With that said, they’ve killed the foundation of F1 all for the sake of “progress.” Congrats.
boson sombrero: When Oliver Harden writes of “the need to lift and coast ON A QUALIFYING LAP,” I think he echoes a real sentiment (of dismay) among fans.
F1’s been hijacked. Abducted. Kokopelli chapter 3.
For a purpose of which we are ignorant. I’m not pointing fingers. I think Nikolas Tombazis — whom I respect — knows his stuff & loves the sport. So the unanswered question (the WHY?) needs an answer.
I don’t believe the green sector has abducted the FIA. They don’t have the power. The question is, who does?
Ron: It’s no coincidence that the climate change extremists are the same people who will tell you a woman can have a penis. Just look at the UK Green party as an example.
Rich31: Sadly the greatest motor sport spectacle bent a knee to climate alarmists for no other reason besides optics.
A sane look at whether or not F1 is melting icebergs or causing Greta’s sailboat to cruise in rising seas is sorely needed.
The same folks pressuring the FIA to green it up are the same who ignore China’s continued use of coal for energy.
By the way F1 has been a quite conscious of its impact on the world, pump gas, tire limits etc.
A couple of comparisons: a daily commute of work a day traffic in London, Los Angeles, Paris not to mention all the cities in countries without pollution restrictions, cause more CO2 then a full season of F1.
A 26-race season still has less emissions than the 24 Hours of Le Mans with their multiple racing classes.
Rick Prophet: Many of the comments make some sense to some extent but at the end of the day we all watch F1 to see skill ability and engineering excellence. The new rules have made it hard for me to watch F1 after 48 years. Max is right, the thrill is gone.
toph1980 (in reply to Rick Prophet): Yup. F1 is the pinnacle of motorsport and should be about flat-out racing, not about managing a battery (on top of tires and everything else). It’s become a joke.
Zabra: I remember when the last reg changes caused a lot of issues during testing as well. It took time to stabilize. But never in my life have I witnessed “energy conservation” instead of flat out… In F1! This is really too much.
Slipstream: Climate conscious world or not there were many options rather than electric solutions like hydrogen..
Manufacturers have imposed their will with electric cars and now F1 is the last casualty..
Jack Willet: Domenicali says ‘net zero’ and ‘a sprint quali every weekend’ in the same breath. Yes, it’ll be net zero—right after adding a gazillion tons of carbon to the equation. F1 was more climate‑friendly 30 years ago when we were running hard combustible engines and V12s.
Rob B: I just don’t see anything as written in stone here. If they have gone too far and throughout this season it becomes apparent that they are unable to do much about the extreme management, and the racing is harmed, and the audience falls off, they’ll re-evaluate.
Perhaps go to 60/40 ice to electric so there is less concern about battery regeneration via downshifting on straights.
I guess my bottom line for now is that I’m going to continue to enjoy following F1’s history, through the highs and the lows, and let’s see where this journey takes them.
After all, the teams agreed to these regs. Let’s see what evolves. The only thing constant in F1 is change and what we are seeing now is not what it is always going to be forever and ever.
Citrus Fruits: You can’t blame F1 for trying to keep car manufacturers involved in the sport. The ICE for private cars has no future and manufacturers want/need to develop better electrical options.
Electric cars at the moment could be compared to the Model T Ford, basic.
The future of F1 is with the ICE PU, which probably means having only two maybe three F1 PU builders at best. At worst one company to build a standard unit for every team, probably Ferrari as they will never give up producing ICE road cars.
The sooner the powers that be accept the reality that the likes of Renault etc will not be involved in F1 because it’s not an electric derived motorsport the better.
John: Unfortunately, the F1 show has been wrecked by the European obsession with the “Green Energy / Zero Emissions” virtue signaling BS.
All of the large auto manufacturers have lost Billions to the EV fantasy and at great expense, have recently turned their ships away from them.
F1 will hopefully do the same with these 50% battery powered white elephants that stray too far from what F1 has always been about.
Max was spot-on with his criticisms, but he obviously got a verbal spanking for them and has since softened his stance. Bring back the V10’s!
DriveRaceWin: This is not the F1 I wish to look at… Mixed feeling so far. Pecking order will probably be the same.
ImsterF1: F1 is not truly F1 without the sound. Why cant they bring back V10’s and make it hybrid with sustainable fuels. The sound is missing from F1.
Since 2014 cars have sounded like vacuum cleaners on steroids. Eventually F1 will have to rethink this through if drivers complain about the new regs as the season unfolds.
OzzyOzzyOzzy: millions of people are waking up to the climate scam that has been taking over our world the past decade. F1 is so late to this game that it should have been stopped before the point of no return.
But it’s better late then never, the only way forward is to draft new regs now for 2027, 2026 is already in the dustbin. The cost of keeping this nonsense going each year will be unfathomable.
Fred Flinstone: I would dispute the assertion that it is “an increasingly climate-conscious world.”
It might have been looking that way when these regulations were conceived but I don’t see it that way now.
Time will tell whether these regulations are fundamentally flawed or just need some tweaks and whether the issues are essentially just the typical bath tub curve effects on complex systems or something more systemic.
I do think a handful of test days for such a radical change is a mistake though and the cost cap is going to be a major issue for teams that are behind like AM.
The worst case scenario is that these regulations destroy what F1 is actually supposed to be about.
F1 Roborbob: Money. More money. Lots of money. How can the owners and F1 make lots of money? That’s the key to these regulations.
Who brings money? Manufacturers bring money.
What do manufacturers want? Bio fuels? Nah, no money in it. Batteries? Oh yes we want batteries! So batteries bring manufacturers and what to manufacturers bring ? Money. More money. Lots and lots of money.
But what about the fans? What do they want? Who cares, we already got their money.
Blazethe1st: F1 has never been about being relatable to road cars.
It is fantasy motoring, a demonstration of the brave – those mad men and their flying machines.
It has never been about being green and it can not possibly be so flying hundreds of people around the world and all the equipment for the circus, many in private jets. It is the ultimate hypocrisy.
There is absolutely no reason for any of this other than the greedy teams wanting to get the engine manufacturers on board to line their own pockets, while Liberty sell the dream of worldwide exposure and ‘fan engagement’.
This is not proper racing, you know – charging into each turn on the limit challenging man and machine which is what created the legends we revere and their mystique.
The very notion of conserving fuel, energy, tyres, batteries, lifting off, clipping and coasting on a qualifying lap aided by auto aero and the pit wall boffins is the complete opposite of what made F1’s legacy and reputation and hence fan interest was built on.
Real fans need to switch off in protest.
As all Liberty understand is commercial, the minute they see less eye balls, less clicks, less revenue they will be forced to react.
Maybe just maybe a whiff of a v8 may materialize, because no one, I mean no one asked for this.
Bobby Laverack: F1 has really taken a wrong turn with these regs, not a single fan asked for them and I’ve never heard anybody say they want them
The whole net zero thing… it’s redundant when the sport keeps adding race after race to the calendar in some far flung country requiring yet more air travel
We don’t need hybrids, just put biofuel in it if it’s really that important (it’s not, cut one flight and you’ll have thousands of times more benefit)
The sport has been stripped of everything that made it great, noise, flat out qualifying laps, overtaking that required skill and patience, defensive driving skills…. All went. For what?
John Poppy: F1 needs competition to know things for sure.
If there was a stripped back series with V10s running on sustainable fuels, only visiting purpose built circuits that hold some motor racing heritage, smaller cars, and simpler aero… I’d probably spend my time watching that.
I suspect it wouldn’t take long for the best drivers to end up there, even if the cars were 1s a lap off of the turbo-hybrid-active-aero-celebrity-dancing-on-ice F1 series. No doubt then the media circus and DTS fans would migrate and ruin that sport too.
To be fair though, I would probably be happy if there was an option on the TV to just have stripped back graphics, no Ted Kravitz and co pitlane nonsense, and old school commentary where I get to hear a grumpy ex-F1 driver tell me how rubbish half the grid is.
In the end, half the changes probably wouldn’t matter that much if I didn’t need to hear Slater, Croft, and co ramble on about them every few seconds.
I am not looking forward to hearing the words ‘energy’ and ‘compression ratio’ several million more times in 2026…
Alexandra Peller: I will get on board with the bring back V10 people when they can tell me who other than ferrari is prepared to build these engines? I have asked it so many times and got no answers from anyone.
Also F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of technology so how does an ancient V10 engine fit into that? There will also be barely any performance difference between the engines cause the technology is so matured now you may as well just have a spec engine which really goes against F1.
Robert Kulik: “Bring back V10s,” comment like this are laughable. If F1 wants to grow and attract car manufacturers it’s engines must be connected to the cars we are seeing on road.
V10 that have nothing to do with era of super hybrids we are entering are the complete opposition of that. No manufacturer care to develop those in any way.
Want to be the first to know exclusive information from the F1 paddock? Join our broadcast channel on WhatsApp to get the scoop on the latest developments from our team of accredited journalists.
You can also subscribe to the PlanetF1 YouTube channel for exclusive features, hear from our paddock journalists with stories from the heart of Formula 1 and much more!
Read next: F1 2026 vs 2025: Bahrain lap-time data delivers rule change verdict