The suggestion that Formula 1 could return to naturally aspirated engines affords an entry point into a far deeper reassessment of what Formula 1 has become.
FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem has reaffirmed his belief that F1 should return to V8 or V10 power in the near future, and claims he now has support from within the paddock.
Could F1 go a step further than simply returning to normally aspirated engines?
Modern Formula 1 cars boast turbocharged hybrid power units. First introduced in 2014, they’re complex marvels of engineering; the most efficient engines we’ve ever seen.
They’re incredibly complex, expensive, and heavy. In addition to the standard internal combustion engine and fuel tank needed to power it, there are the electrical elements and batteries, which add size and mass.
A current F1 car, at the start of a race, weighs in at around 900kg with a wheelbase of 3600mm.
By contrast, an IndyCar is just over 770kg (750kg for Superspeedways) without the driver or fuel, while, even in its longest configuration, it’s half a metre shorter.
That difference will reduce next year, when new chassis and power unit regulations are introduced, but it’s hardly a sweeping transformation. Cars will be only 200mm shorter, and the minimum weight will drop by a touch over 30kg.
Even still, F1 cars will remain large and, by open-wheel standards, heavy.
And that’s without addressing the elephant in the room: the noise. Where once attending an F1 event was a visceral experience, the muted sound of the modern power unit is far from inspiring.
The decision to originally head down the hybrid route was a pragmatic one. The auto industry, upon which many current teams heavily rely, was moving in that direction. It suited their R&D and marketing to head down a path that included an element of electrification.
Back then, the F1 landscape was entirely different. The cost cap was a pipedream while several teams existed on the brink of financial collapse. Appeasing the automakers was essential as, without them, the sport was dangerously exposed. That led to a largely prescribed power unit, though with sufficient differences and opportunities for manufacturers to extract meaningful value.
The upshot was that all manufacturers had more or less the same power unit, ensuring the on-track product was largely similar regardless of what was bolted into the back of the car – even if Mercedes dominated the era initially.
But more than a decade on, the world has changed. Formula 1 and the teams are in a better financial position than they’ve ever been ,while the automotive landscape is also different.
New technologies are also emerging, such that there is a reduced need for hybridisation with sustainable fuels offering a second lease of life to the internal combustion engine.
That is a key development as, the global carpark of internal combustion engines remains 1.4 billion. While hybrid and EV markets are important, continuing to service that market creates a significant opportunity – not just for those of us with a motorsport slant, but for energy companies.
The offshoot is it affords us the opportunity to question the need for hybrid technology in Formula 1, just as the FIA president has done, given there is an environmentally responsible way of preserving the internal combustion engine.
More on F1 returning to normally aspirated engines
👉 V8 engines to return? FIA president reveals possible timeline in ‘right way forward’ update
👉 FIA issue exciting V10 engine return update after Mohammed Ben Sulayem statement
But where Ben Sulayem has proposed a return to a normally aspirated engine, perhaps there’s a greater opportunity available – one that, in a perverse way, moves the sport closer to its roots while retaining hybridisation.
The resistance to change recently has been the simple fact that the power unit manufacturers have invested heavily in their current projects and want a return on that investment.
It’s a reasonable position to hold but it does mean that the current power unit regulations are not a product of identifying the best solution for the sport from a technical perspective, or even for the fans from an entertainment standpoint, but one dictated by the financial interests of the manufacturers.
But there was once a time when there was little constraint over engine design; during the 1980s, there were separate championships for turbo and normally-aspirated engines. Even decades earlier, the grid was filled with a myriad of solutions: V12s from Ferrari, Matra, Honda, Maserati, and Westlake, BRM’s H16, an Oldsmobile-desived V8 from Repco, and the glorious Cosworth DFV. Those variations all existed not merely in the same era, but on a single grid.
Prescriptive engine regulations are a comparatively recent development, one done with an eye on the bottom line at a time when there was no way to cap spending.
But such a regulation now exists and therefore affords the opportunity to open the power unit regulations once more; allow a manufacturer or boutique supplier the opportunity to develop an engine to whatever architecture they see fit.
It would instantaneously create a point of difference, with each company involved able to stamp their own personality on the sport with a known investment.
Some might prove inspired, like the DFV was through the late 1960s and into the early 1980s, while others may be dismal failures – such as the 3.5-litre 12-cylinder unit developed by Subaru in the early 1990s.
Such a relaxation in the regulations would allow the incumbents the opportunity to continue with their current designs if they so desired, while opening the sport to others who may be interested in a different configuration.
Imagine, a screaming V12 Ferrari alongside the guttural growl of an eight-cylinder Red Bull or Audi, competing against a hybrid Mercedes… It’s that engineering freedom on which F1 was founded but which has sadly been regulated out.
The push for a return to normally aspirated engines is a laudable one, but one that stops short of where the sport could go. Instead, with the regulatory framework now in place, let’s allow engine manufacturers the ability to choose their own adventure.
Read next: F1 2025 v F1 2026: Nine key questions ahead of huge regulation changes
