Racing
© Jonathan Borba
After Oliver Bearman’s crash at Suzuka exposed about a 50 km/h closing-speed gap linked by drivers to new energy management rules, Lewis Hamilton and GPDA director Carlos Sainz are pressing the FIA and Formula 1 for quick fixes. They say the 2026 power unit framework and deployment rules have created unsafe speed swings and have damaged qualifying. Talks between the FIA, F1 and teams are due in the coming days. Some teams are expected to resist broad changes, with Mercedes highlighted as a likely blocker.
The Bearman incident has become a flashpoint. Bearman reported surprise at the difference in approach speed to Franco Colapinto. Leading drivers have tied that gap to energy-management strategies they say the current direction encourages. They argue it is a clear safety warning and should trigger urgent changes.
The core complaint is how the power unit rules shape on-track behavior. Teams are managing tight energy budgets and must harvest and conserve battery charge through the lap. That often means coasting through high-speed corners to bank energy for the straights. Drivers say this distorts the natural rhythm of a qualifying lap and muddies the picture of who has the fastest car over a single lap.
At Suzuka, the qualifying energy allowance was cut from 9 MJ to 8 MJ. That move helped reduce extremes but did not solve the problem. Cars still backed off in fast sections to time deployment later, which created uneven closing speeds when different strategies overlapped. The outcome, in the eyes of drivers, is a qualifying session that rewards energy tricks more than outright pace.
There is also concern about how software manages deployment. Some teams are using machine-learning models to decide when to use or save battery. Drivers say those systems can punish anyone with less mileage or those who make a small mistake, because the algorithm may learn from limited data and make conservative calls in the wrong places. That can widen gaps between cars on track at awkward moments and add more variability to laptimes that should be comparable.
Hamilton and Sainz want immediate relief and a plan for longer-term reform. They have urged the FIA to listen to driver feedback and introduce short-term tweaks as soon as Miami. They also want a clear path to evolve the 2026 package so that energy rules do not force coasting in fast corners and do not generate large speed differentials in traffic. Both drivers have stressed that the current setup risks both safety and the sporting value of qualifying.
Their push comes with a warning about process. Drivers say they do not sit on the voting committees that set or amend the rules. They can raise concerns, but they have little formal power to secure change. That fuels skepticism that the sport will move fast unless there is strong backing from the FIA, F1 and a broad group of teams.
The politics are complex ahead of the planned April meetings. Any move that changes how energy is allocated or deployed could shift the competitive order. Some teams may oppose sweeping fixes. Mercedes has been highlighted as a likely blocker, even as views across the grid remain mixed. The FIA’s ability to enact major mid-season reversals is also limited by governance rules, which makes quick, large-scale changes hard to deliver.
Drivers still expect some action. The most likely outcome in the short term is a set of small adjustments that ease the worst effects at tracks with long, fast sections. A broader rewrite would need more time and wider consensus. For now, the safety review sits alongside a debate over how much influence drivers should have in shaping rules that affect the way they compete.
The meetings in the coming days will decide what is possible before Miami and what must wait. Without broad agreement, drivers anticipate only incremental steps while a longer-term evolution is mapped out.