FIA confirms 2027 rules shift toward combustion engine power
The FIA has confirmed significant changes to its 2026 power unit framework, tilting the ICE/electric balance from 53–47 to 60–40 by 2028. Honda says it is 'not a failure.'
Formula 1's governing body has announced significant changes to the controversial new engine regulations, following months of debate about the sport's power unit direction.
The compromise follows sustained criticism of the original framework, which many had feared placed too much emphasis on electrical power and energy management.
Under the revised rules, fuel flow will increase by 5 percent in 2027 and by 13 percent in 2028. At the same time, the balance between combustion and electrical power will shift further towards the internal combustion engine.
The already-tweaked 53-47 split will now become 58-42 in 2027 and 60-40 in 2028. The FIA said the decision came "following concerns identified in relation to energy management under the new Power Unit framework".
"These latest amendments reflect the continuation of this collaboration with all stakeholders working collectively to refine the framework and address identified operational challenges," the governing body added.
"The FIA will now expedite the formal approval process to provide all parties with early clarity and sufficient time to adapt to the revised requirements."
What the changes mean
The move represents a significant victory for drivers and fans who argued Formula 1 needed to move away from excessive battery dependence.
It is believed the changes will require some shortened race distances because of the upgraded fuel flow.
The agreement also indicates that resistance from manufacturers including Ferrari and Audi has now been overcome.
Honda Racing Corporation president Koji Watanabe welcomed the outcome.
"We don't consider the new regulations to have been a failure," he told Soy Motor. "Any major new challenge comes with difficulties.
"We are pleased with our willingness to make adjustments when necessary and we maintain close communication with the FIA, FOM, and all other power unit manufacturers."
F1 engine rule changes at a glance
| Current ICE/electric split (2026) | 53–47 |
|---|---|
| 2027 split | 58–42 (+5% fuel flow) |
| 2028 split | 60–40 (+13% fuel flow) |
| Trigger for change | Energy management concerns under new PU framework |
See also: 2026 Formula 1 season on F1-Fansite.
Related: Honda open to F1's 2027 engine tweaks and V8 talks
4 F1 Fan comments on “FIA confirms 2027 rules shift toward combustion engine power”
💬 Join the conversation — see the latest comments from F1 fans →
They should just keep the same ratio for consecutive seasons, but more importantly, one thing that isn’t mentioned here is that the total downforce amount is set to be reduced (as pushed by the FIA) by 40-50 points, which, combined with the fuel flow rate increase being limited to 5%, means that energy harvesting will be a lot easier next season, & consequently that lift-&-coast driving won’t be a thing for this or fuel availability purposes.
These combined should also mean that every single race distance can remain unchanged, especially since a 5% increase in fuel flow is so marginal that it barely even increases average consumption.
As a result of these tweaks, active aero should be removed altogether, as it won’t have a purpose.
However, if it still remains, FIA should at least be considerably more reasonable about where they place activation zones, i.e., stop placing them on short blasts where it’s totally useless anyway & excessively increases workload for drivers, as well as not place on any full-throttle section that features or ends in a full-throttle/otherwise high-speed corner or kink on safety grounds.
If anything, Audi's & Ferrari's stance is why this compromise ultimately became the resorted outcome.
a quarter of the season gone and everythings changed from the long drawn out , this is how its gonna work, nothing to see here , to a full climb down down but face saving exercise from who? Basically everyone involved, What a mess that could so have been avoided, no other explanation is possible,So well done everyone
Is that a V12 in the photo? Yes, please!