Four races into Formula 1’s 2026 reset and the paddock is already doing what it does best: talking about the next reset.
The sport has only just switched to the new power units, with a near-even split between internal combustion and electrical deployment, yet the conversation has drifted beyond teething troubles and upgrade plans to something much bigger — whether F1 should pivot again later in the decade towards a simpler, louder formula built around a V8 and far less electrification.
Stefano Domenicali isn’t trying to pour cold water on the idea so much as he is underlining the brutal reality of how long these decisions take. For the F1 CEO, this isn’t a romantic debate about noise and nostalgia; it’s about not letting the calendar dictate the rules.
“I definitely see a sort of sustainable fuel at the centre of the future, with a different balance of what could be the electrification in the future with a strong internal combustion engine,” Domenicali said. “We cannot lose too much time because the time is passing so quickly… if we need to be robust enough to allow us not to be in a corner, we need to decide as soon as possible.”
That “corner” line is doing a lot of work. F1 has spent years selling the 2026 direction — sustainable fuel, a heavier electrical component, and a broader story about relevance — and it’s no secret that the sport’s credibility with manufacturers depends on keeping a coherent narrative. Domenicali’s point is that if a correction is coming, it has to be called early enough to be engineered properly and sold cleanly, rather than arriving as a knee-jerk compromise after positions harden.
Mohammed Ben Sulayem has been the loudest voice pushing the conversation along. The FIA president has spoken repeatedly about F1 reclaiming some of its visceral identity and recently said he is targeting 2030 for a change, with his preference landing on V8 internal combustion engines paired with “very minimal” electrical influence.
“The most popular and easiest to work with is the V8,” Ben Sulayem said. “You get the sound, less complexity, lightweight… It will not be something like now, which is a 46-54 split. There will be very minimal [electric] power.”
He’s also argued the V8 has a familiar place in the broader industry landscape — pointing to manufacturers and road-car applications — while stressing the practical benefits: less complexity, lower weight, and a package that’s easier to operate.
That’s the political tension, really. Domenicali is framing the future around sustainable fuel and a recalibrated hybrid balance, while Ben Sulayem is openly steering the conversation towards a concept where electrification becomes a footnote rather than a pillar. On paper, those positions can be reconciled — sustainable fuel can sit under multiple architectures — but the intent matters. One is trying to preserve F1’s modern identity; the other is trying to drag the pendulum back towards spectacle and simplicity.
And in the middle sit the teams, reading the wind and, naturally, protecting their interests.
Red Bull has spoken in favour of a future change, and Mercedes boss Toto Wolff has said he’s open to new engine regulations while cautioning against stripping electrical elements out entirely. That’s not posturing for the sake of it; it’s the kind of statement you make when you’re keeping your options open and making sure the sport doesn’t sprint towards a dead end — technologically or commercially.
What Domenicali is warning about, in effect, is that F1 can’t afford a long, fuzzy “maybe”. If the championship wants to adjust the balance again — whether to address cost, complexity, show quality, or manufacturer relevance — it has to lock a direction quickly enough for proper development lead time. The sport has already learned what happens when regulations become the product of late-cycle horse-trading: you end up with a rulebook that pleases nobody and a grid that pays for it for years.
The irony is that 2026 was supposed to be the big, clean new chapter. Instead, the paddock is treating it like a prologue — an interesting tell in itself. Either the sport is spooked by the optics of the new hybrid split, or it sees a political opening to re-litigate what “relevant” should mean in the first place.
For now, the only certainty is that the noise around the next engine formula isn’t going away. Domenicali’s message is that the clock is already ticking — and F1 doesn’t get to pretend that 2030 is far off when you’re writing regulations for global manufacturers with multi-year development programmes.
If the sport wants change, it has to choose it. Soon.
