Throughout his career, we’ve seen many ideas for his ultimate F1 machine, among them his famous Red Bull X2010 created for Gran Turismo. It was a 1,400 hp fan car that broke the track record at Suzuka by 20 seconds during simulator racing.
But delivering the perfect F1 car isn’t just about having the ultimate cars, as a grid full of X2010s probably wouldn’t deliver the brilliant racing fans desire. Instead, creating a successful F1 requires overcoming a ton of conflicting demands to achieve goals that come together to create something truly exciting.
So, at a time when F1 is wondering if the current era of rules has produced everything it hoped for, and there is intrigue over what we can expect from 2026, it seemed like the perfect time to sit down with Newey and download his thoughts on what F1 should be.
Speaking exclusively to Autosport, Newey offered a fascinating and pragmatic insight into where he believes F1 should be heading, as there are many aspects to the changing world around us that mean the head must rule the heart .
“That’s where all the puzzles arise,” Newey said. “I think most people would say that, from an eyewear standpoint, you probably want a high-revving, naturally aspirated V10. We all have a bit of envy for V10s and even V8s from the 2000s.
“But of course they are not fuel efficient. We must therefore find a balance between spectacle and social responsibility, even if the fuel consumption of cars in terms of pollution caused by sport is, in reality, tiny.
“The biggest contributor, by far, has to be the people who attend the races. And in this sense, it is no different from football or any other international sport. But it’s the image and the popularization. So, I think that’s your first puzzle: the energy source. Do you go for efficiency, which is usually relatively quiet, because noise is actually inefficiency?
Newey’s Red Bull team is currently the dominant team in F1
Photo by: Sam Bloxham / Motorsport Images
“And then on the chassis side, for me, it’s small and light. Cars have become very big. These are the fundamentals.
“You can then start to debate how fast the car should be, in terms of high-speed lap times, but what you have to remember is that TV invariably looks like it’s slowing down the cars.
“Looking at a car with moderate performance is not very exciting. Cars need to be fast enough to start looking fast on TV.
Newey’s talk about the conundrums of a future F1 series goes to the heart of a conflict that lies at the heart of motor racing. The regulators and promoters of Grand Prix racing want rules that provide thrills, whereas it is the job of the teams to produce cars that, in a perfect world, give their best and run races. 1-2 boring. Producing an entertaining victory no longer earns points.
MORE: The ironic reason Newey thinks Red Bull hasn’t been caught in F1 yet
According to Newey, these two forces that ultimately oppose each other can never be completely resolved.
“Unless you make it artificial, which then starts to look like the WWF, then I’m not sure you can do it,” Newey said.
“The reality is that current regulations are arguably the most restrictive we have ever had. Each new set of regulations tends to be more restrictive than the previous ones, and a cost cap has also been introduced to limit the spending of larger teams compared to smaller teams.
“And yet the competitive order under the cost cap has not changed significantly.”
Having teams and regulators pursuing competing goals does not mean guaranteed failure, as they are in the business of sharing the ingredients that can produce great races.
Six different winners in as many races in 2012 will always be a difficult feat to achieve
Photo by: Andrew Hone / Motorsport Images
Remembering the good times
There is also the important consideration that F1 will always struggle to live up to what we remember from the past: memorable highlights of iconic moments, the boring races having been erased from the memory banks.
“We have a habit of remembering the memorable races, the memorable battles and kind of putting them in the rose-tinted glasses,” Newey added. “Then we forget about the ones that are a bit boring.
“The reality is that there have been a lot of boring races over the years, including every season. And perhaps the most dramatic season, I suppose, was 2012, where there were six different winners in the first six races.
“The beauty of F1 is that it is made up of men and machines. Within the machine you have the chassis and the engine. So, you effectively have three key elements for a fully competitive package.
“You don’t necessarily need all three to be the best on the grid, but probably if two are the best and the third is good, then you’ll be in a reasonable position.
“That’s the danger of over-regulation, that if cars became so over-regulated and effectively became single-make formula racing, then history dictates that whenever a racing series became a single-make, it invariably becomes less popular.
“The best or worst example, whichever way you want to look at it, is IndyCar in the mid-’90s. There were, I think, four or five different chassis builders, three or four chassis builders. different engines, and its popularity was beginning to rival F1 at the time.
“Soon after [following the US open-wheel split and subsequent reunification] it has become a single-brand series, certainly for the chassis, and two-brand on the engine side. And his popularity actually plummeted.
Newey believes current tire balance is effective
Photo by: Mark Sutton / Motorsport Images
The role of tires
Successful F1 isn’t just about having quality cars, because Newey sees something just as important: the impact of tires.
Although many teams and drivers complain that F1 is in an era of tire degradation where they cannot push to the maximum every lap, Newey believes the balance is currently quite good.
“I think tire degradation tends to get a bad reputation,” he said. “But personally, I think it’s actually a good thing. This gives rise to different strategies, including throwing the balls in the air and taking a chance: like we did in Texas. [Austin] race last year.
“If during this race in Texas the tire degradation was not significant, we would have had no chance of helping Max [Verstappen] win this race. And it turned out to be probably one of the most exciting races of the year.
“So I think the tire degradation is actually about right as we have it. This means that, without repeating ourselves, we can have different strategies and different cars perform differently at different times in the race.
“It kind of gives a little bit of variety and, in terms of variety, unpredictability that might otherwise be lacking. Generally, races where tire degradation is less of an issue and the grid ends with a single stop tend to be the slightly more boring races.
Modern F1 cars are significantly larger than the last Newey-designed and title-winning McLaren, the MP4/14 of 1999.
Photo by: Rainer W. Schlegelmilch / Motorsport Images
Car size is key
Amid recent discussion in F1 circles about the problem of dirty air returning, despite best efforts with the 2022 rules, Newey is returning to his original point: that car size is critical.
“Aerodynamically, especially in racing in 2022, the cars were following very closely, and even now they are still following closely,” he said. “But maybe cars have gotten really big. They’re fast and heavy, and I think that’s a bit of a shame. Because one thing that can be said over the years is that no matter what F1 cars represent, they tend to be popularized in showrooms.
“Steering wheel shifting obviously appeared in F1. And it’s become very popular in road cars now.
“When turbocharged cars were first introduced to F1 in the 1980s, there was a tendency to see more turbocharged road cars then.
“Look at the carbon fiber fenders: Most of the sports cars you see on the highways today have some sort of wing that opens and lowers. So, it popularizes things.
“Of course, there is a lot of talk at the moment, rightly so, about ecology and how to reduce the effects of the automobile on the planet. What tends to accompany this is primarily an obsession with reducing emissions, perhaps through batteries or hydrogen, not the use of fossil fuels.
“But the most important thing for me is actually how much energy the car uses. Because that’s the bottom line: if it consumes enormous amounts of energy, it doesn’t matter where the source comes from, that energy has to come from somewhere, even if it comes from a wind turbine, it’s not by no means zero carbon emissions. .
“So the opportunity for F1 to go the opposite route and go for much smaller, lighter, more aerodynamically efficient cars, I think that’s one that I would certainly advocate for.
“Maybe it would then start to turn the tide against these three-tonne monsters destroying our roads and collapsing potholes.”
