F1 backs two-step engine overhaul for 2027 and 2028 after a bruising debut season

Formula 1's rule-makers have agreed in principle to a two-stage revision of this year's power-unit regulations, with adjustments scheduled for the 2027 and 2028 seasons. The move, confirmed by reporting from BBC Sport and Sky Sports on 10 June 2026, is a direct response to criticism that has built up around the new engine package introduced for 2026 — the largest regulatory reset the championship has attempted in a generation.

The package is a quiet admission that the most ambitious technical reset in modern F1 did not land cleanly. Whether the fix is calibrated, or whether it sets up another round of argument, is the more interesting question.

What the agreement actually covers

According to Sky Sports, the changes will see an increase in internal-combustion output within the hybrid power unit — the central element of the cost-cap-era technical rulebook that came into force at the start of the 2026 season. BBC Sport described the plan as a "two-step" process, with modifications introduced across successive seasons rather than bundled into a single regulation drop.

The decision was framed by both outlets as a managed response to sustained criticism from teams, manufacturers, and observers who have argued that the current balance between the internal-combustion element and the electrical component of the power unit has produced a car that sounds and behaves in ways the sport did not promise. The 2026 regulations were sold, in part, on sustaining spectacle: closer racing, more overtaking, and a power unit that remained distinctively Formula 1. Detractors inside the paddock have argued, on and off the record, that the result fell short of that brief.

F1's regulatory process is unusually layered: rule changes require agreement between the FIA, the commercial rights holder (Formula One Management, the entity controlled by Liberty Media), and the ten constructors who currently supply or build power units. That tripartite structure is part of the reason revisions tend to be negotiated over months rather than weeks — and part of the reason a public statement of intent from both BBC Sport and Sky Sports, on the same day, carries weight.

Why the original package is in the firing line

The 2026 power unit was designed around three headline aims: a roughly 50/50 split between combustion and electrical power, the use of fully sustainable fuels, and parity between works manufacturers and customer teams. The engine formula was also meant to attract new entrants — most prominently Audi, which is preparing a works entry in partnership with Sauber for 2026, and Honda, which returns as an Aston Martin partner after a period in which it had signalled an exit.

Criticism has clustered on three fronts. First, on sound: the electrical component's increased share of the total output has, in the telling of several senior paddock figures quoted in motorsport media, dulled the aural signature that has long been central to F1's identity and commercial value. Second, on driveability: drivers have publicly questioned whether the energy-deployment maps produce the kind of wheel-to-wheel racing the rules were designed to encourage. Third, on cost and complexity: manufacturers continue to argue, as they did throughout the original rule negotiation, that the electrical architecture is more expensive to develop than the combustion element it partially displaces.

Reporting on the changes does not specify which of these critiques drove which element of the 2027 and 2028 revisions. The published detail is thin: an increase in combustion output is confirmed, the timing across two seasons is confirmed, and the consultative process that produced the agreement is described in general terms.

The Audi, Honda, and Cadillac wrinkle

Any change to the power-unit formula lands in the middle of a manufacturer transition that is already in motion. Audi's Sauber partnership is preparing for its first full works season. Honda is back on the grid with Aston Martin. General Motors' Cadillac project is moving toward a 2029 entry, with Ferrari initially supplying power units — a bridging arrangement that gives the incoming manufacturer time to develop its own unit.

Revising the formula mid-cycle is, for those programmes, an unfunded complication. The signed-off 2026 regulations were the planning baseline for several years of capital allocation. Adjusting the output split in 2027 and again in 2028 is the kind of policy U-turn that corporate boards in Stuttgart, Tokyo, and Detroit tend to notice. F1's defenders will argue that the cost cap and the longer regulatory cycle give manufacturers time to adapt; its critics will note that the original promise of the 2026 reset was precisely that it would not need this kind of in-cycle surgery.

There is also a competitive angle. Power-unit parity has been a recurring flashpoint in F1 since the turbo-hybrid era began in 2014, and the customer-team/works-team balance is the place where most of those arguments live. A revision that disproportionately benefits one architecture over another would be politically charged in a way a simple sound fix would not be.

What is settled and what is not

The settled part: there is agreement, in principle and on the record, that the engine regulations will change in 2027 and 2028, and that internal-combustion output will rise. The unsettled part is everything else — the magnitude of the increase, the offsetting adjustments to electrical deployment, the implications for the cost cap, and the question of whether the sound profile will actually move in the direction fans and broadcasters are asking for.

The sources do not specify a target decibel level, a kilowatt figure, or a fuel-flow change. They do not name a specific clause in the technical regulations that will be amended. They do, however, agree on the political fact: the 2026 rules, in their current form, did not survive contact with the season they were written for, and the governance system is responding by adjusting them across the next two years rather than waiting for the next full reset.

That is the structural frame worth holding onto. F1's regulatory machine moves slowly, in public, and under the scrutiny of every team principal with a microphone. When it moves at all, the move tends to be the product of months of off-camera negotiation. A two-season staged revision, agreed in the middle of a cycle, is the sport's way of saying the original package was a bridge — and that the bridge needs reinforcing before more weight goes on it.

Desk note: Monexus is treating this as a governance story first and a technology story second. The wire coverage concentrated on what is changing and when; the editorial question is who pays, who benefits, and what the changes say about the durability of the 2026 reset. Reporting from BBC Sport and Sky Sports provided the foundation; manufacturer and team statements were not in the source set at time of writing and have not been inferred.