Formula 1’s next technical inflection point is already shaping the grid before a single 2027-specification car has turned a wheel. At the center is a proposed shift away from the 50/50 split between internal combustion engine (ICE) and electrical power that underpins the 2026 power unit regulations. In recent F1 Commission and manufacturer meetings, teams agreed in principle to evaluate moving toward a 60/40 split for 2027, increasing ICE output by roughly 67bhp while trimming electrical deployment to give drivers more usable, predictable power.
The proposal is not unanimous. Cadillac, Ferrari, Audi, and Honda have each raised objections, arguing that altering the balance for 2027 would undermine the Additional Development and Upgrade Opportunities (ADUO) catch-up mechanism that was written into the rules to help underperforming engine suppliers close gaps to the benchmark. Mercedes and Red Bull are understood to support accelerating the change, while others prefer to delay major revisions until 2028. Because engine regulation changes require a supermajority of manufacturers, opposition from two of the four objecting suppliers could block or postpone the 2027 package.
Max Verstappen’s future has become inseparable from the discussion. The four-time world champion has publicly questioned his long-term enjoyment of F1 under the new hybrid era, citing concerns that energy management and lift-and-coast driving reduce flat-out racing. His comments, combined with reports linking rule-package outcomes to his willingness to continue beyond 2026, mean the 2027 power-split vote carries implications far beyond engineering.
How F1 Got Here: From 50/50 to 60/40
The 2026 regulations were designed to make F1 more road-relevant and sustainable. They keep the 1.6-liter turbo V6 but remove the MGU-H and raise MGU-K output from 120 kW to 350 kW, targeting roughly a 50/50 split between ICE and electric power while mandating 100% advanced sustainable fuel.
Early simulations from Red Bull in 2023 flagged a fundamental issue: with a 50/50 split, drivers risked running out of deployable energy on long straights, forcing extensive lift-and-coast and making the power unit behave like a “regenerator” for the battery. Christian Horner and Max Verstappen both warned the formula could produce “Frankenstein” cars that compromise racing.
By May 2026, teams, the FIA, and manufacturers agreed to evaluate moving away from 50/50 for 2027. The outline discussed is a 60/40 split favoring combustion, achieved by increasing fuel flow and reducing ERS deployment limits. The stated aim is to eliminate speed drop-off at most circuits and restore a qualifying mode where drivers can push flat-out.
A senior insider summarized the paddock mood: “Everybody is in the mood for a challenge”. Yet the engineering work remains substantial, and the package must still pass through technical groups with the manufacturers.
What ADUO Is and Why It Matters to Cadillac, Ferrari, Audi, and Honda
ADUO stands for Additional Development and Upgrade Opportunities. It is a catch-up mechanism embedded in the 2026 regulations that allows engine suppliers who are behind on performance to access extra development time and upgrade tokens during defined windows. The FIA retains the ability to adjust ADUO periods.
The logic: if Mercedes or another manufacturer emerges with an early advantage under the new rules, ADUO gives rivals a structured path to close the gap without waiting for the next homologation cycle.
Cadillac, Ferrari, Audi, and Honda’s concern is that changing the ICE/electric balance in 2027 alters the assumptions under which ADUO was calibrated. The 2026 split was part of the baseline when those catch-up provisions were drafted. Moving to 60/40 would increase combustion power and reduce electrical deployment, potentially changing which elements of the power unit are performance differentiators. For a new or returning supplier, that shift could devalue development work already aimed at the 50/50 architecture and blunt ADUO’s effectiveness in erasing a Mercedes advantage.
Ferrari and Audi have been described as “strongly opposed” to the 2027 change specifically because of its impact on engine and car requirements under ADUO. Honda and Cadillac share the broader reservation that mid-cycle changes reward incumbents who can adapt faster, while entrants still building capability for 2026-2027 are disadvantaged.
Where Each Manufacturer Stands
Mercedes: Seen as potentially forced to comply if rivals present a united front, but not leading the opposition. Mercedes has extensive hybrid experience and would likely adapt quickly to a 60/40 formula.
Red Bull: Reportedly supports the change toward more combustion power. Horner’s early warnings about 50/50 align with backing a shift that reduces energy management constraints.
Ferrari: Strongly opposed to the 2027 revision due to concerns over engine and car implications tied to ADUO. Ferrari will also supply Cadillac with power units and gearboxes for 2026-2027 while GM develops its own PU for 2028, giving it a vested interest in regulatory stability.
Audi: Joined F1 on the premise of high-powered electric drive development and resisted earlier suggestions to move away from 50/50. Audi remains “unclear” in some reporting but is grouped with Ferrari as opposing the 2027 change.
Honda: Initially partnered with Red Bull and has registered for 2026 PU supply. Honda is reported among those with reservations about altering the split so soon after committing to the 50/50 architecture.
Cadillac: Entering F1 in 2026 with Ferrari power and aiming for a GM-built PU by 2028. As a newcomer, Cadillac is sensitive to rule changes that affect ADUO and development timelines. The brand has also considered expanding its Ferrari supply deal to include suspension to reduce complexity.
The voting math is tight. Implementing a 60/40 split requires a supermajority: at least four of five engine manufacturers. With Ferrari, Audi, Honda, and Cadillac expressing opposition or concern, the threshold for passage is in doubt. One team principal said a two-week decision window existed in early May 2026, after which technical changes become impractical.
Technical Implications of a 60/40 Split
Moving from 50/50 to 60/40 is not a simple software tweak. It requires:
Increased fuel flow: To raise ICE output by ∼67bhp, permitted fuel flow must rise.
Larger fuel tanks: More combustion power demands more fuel. Estimates suggest the package would need bigger tanks, and one worst-case scenario cited is three fewer racing laps to accommodate constraints.
Chassis implications: Some teams want to carry over 2026 chassis into 2027 to control costs, but fuel tank and cooling changes could force redesigns.
ERS recalibration: Reducing electrical deployment changes harvesting and deployment maps, affecting how drivers manage energy across a lap.
The FIA and technical groups are now studying how to make harvesting less critical while preserving the efficiency message of the 2026 rules.
Max Verstappen’s Position and Why It Matters
Max Verstappen has been the most vocal driver about the 2026/2027 technical direction. He questioned whether the 50/50 split would lead to excessive lift-and-coast rather than flat-out racing. In 2026, he said he is “embracing GT3” and noted “if there is just a chance to race, I am happy to do so,” a comment widely read as him keeping options open.
Reporting throughout 2026 has linked his F1 future to his enjoyment of the cars and rules. The Race noted Verstappen made a “surprise admission he must ‘figure out’ F1 future”. Damon Hill suggested Verstappen may need a break amid quit threats tied to 2026.
The connection to the 2027 split is indirect but real: if the package remains 50/50 and energy management dominates, Verstappen’s dissatisfaction could deepen. If the sport moves to 60/40 and drivers regain a more conventional power delivery, it may address one of his criticisms. However, should Cadillac, Ferrari, Audi, and Honda block the change, the rules would stay closer to the formula Verstappen has already criticized, increasing paddock speculation about an early exit.
It is important to note that Verstappen confirmed in 2026 he is staying with Red Bull for that season. The question is post-2026, and whether the 2027 package influences any exit clauses or personal decisions.
Governance Timeline and What Comes Next
Online meetings: F1 bosses, team principals, and engine suppliers met to discuss revisions after concerns grew about electrical energy management.
Agreement in principle: Teams agreed on a direction to scrap 50/50 for 2027.
Technical groups: Details now sit with power unit advisory bodies to define fuel flow, ERS limits, and harvesting rules.
World Motor Sport Council vote: The WMSC is scheduled to vote on the 60/40 proposal.
Manufacturer supermajority: Four of five PU manufacturers must back the change. With Ferrari and Audi strongly opposed and Honda/Cadillac concerned, the vote is not guaranteed.
Deadline pressure: Mid-May 2026 was identified as the point when technical changes become impractical to implement for 2027.
If the vote fails, F1 would likely remain on the 2026 architecture through 2027, preserving ADUO as originally written but leaving the energy-management concerns unresolved.
Competitive and Commercial Context
Cadillac’s entry: Cadillac joins in 2026 with Ferrari PU and gearbox, targeting a GM-built PU by 2028. The team faces the usual newcomer challenge of building infrastructure while regulations evolve.
Sourcing Ferrari suspension is under consideration to reduce variables. Stability in the PU rules helps a new entrant; a 2027 change adds complexity.
Audi’s position: Audi entered to develop high-powered electric systems. A shift toward combustion reduces the strategic payoff of that investment in the short term, explaining its opposition.
Honda’s path: Honda registered for 2026 after officially withdrawing in 2021, and is a logical PU partner for Cadillac given existing automotive ties. Honda’s concern mirrors Audi’s: the 50/50 formula was the basis for its return.
Ferrari’s dual role: Ferrari must develop its own 2026 PU and supply Cadillac, and later Sauber/Audi until Audi’s PU is ready. Any 2027 change impacts both its works team and customer obligations. Ferrari’s opposition is consistent with protecting the development path it committed to.
Sporting Integrity and Fan Perspective
The 2026 rules were sold on sustainability and closer racing. Removing DRS and introducing active aero with Z-mode and X-mode shifts overtaking from a button press to energy-driven strategy. The PU debate sits on top of that: if drivers spend laps managing deployment, the sporting product changes regardless of aero rules.
Fans and drivers have voiced that the new hybrid era risks prioritizing energy saving over wheel-to-wheel combat. The proposed 60/40 split is a direct response, aiming to give “more usable and predictable power”. Yet changing it after manufacturers committed to 50/50 raises questions of regulatory certainty.
Scenarios for 2027 and Beyond
Scenario A: 60/40 Passes
Fuel flow rises, ERS deployment drops, tanks get bigger, and ADUO is recalibrated. Mercedes and Red Bull adapt quickly. Ferrari, Audi, Honda, and Cadillac face compressed redevelopment. Verstappen sees a package closer to his preference, potentially reducing exit talk.
Scenario B: Vote Fails, 50/50 Remains
ADUO stays as drafted. Energy management remains a key performance differentiator. Ferrari, Audi, Honda, Cadillac retain development paths, but driver criticism of lift-and-coast may persist. Verstappen’s future becomes a recurring topic through 2026.
Scenario C: Compromise
Technical groups find middle ground, such as 55/45 or adjusted harvesting rules that keep 50/50 headline but reduce drop-off. This would require new consensus and still needs supermajority if it changes PU homologation.
Key Dates and Markers to Watch
World Motor Sport Council vote: Outcome determines if 60/40 proceeds.
Manufacturer public statements: Ferrari and Audi positions are on record as opposed. Watch for Honda and Cadillac to formalize stance.
ADUO adjustments: FIA may adjust ADUO periods regardless of split. Any change signals how the governing body balances newcomer support with incumbent advantage.
Verstappen contract signals: While he confirmed 2026 with Red Bull, any comment on 2027 regulations will be parsed for intent.
Cadillac PU timeline: GM’s 2028 PU plan depends on stable rules. A 2027 shift could affect that program.
Assessment
The 2027 power-split debate is a textbook example of F1’s competing imperatives: sustainability, entertainment, cost control, and competitive balance. Cadillac, Ferrari, Audi, and Honda are not opposing change for its own sake. Their position reflects that ADUO was designed around 50/50, and moving the target in 2027 risks entrenching any early 2026 advantage.
Mercedes and Red Bull’s support for 60/40 aligns with their confidence in adapting and with driver feedback about racing quality.
Max Verstappen’s future is not formally tied to the vote, yet his repeated concerns about energy management mean the outcome will shape the narrative around his motivation. If two or more manufacturers block the change, the sport keeps the package he has criticized, and speculation about his tenure will intensify.
Ultimately, the FIA faces a choice between regulatory stability for new entrants and responsiveness to sporting criticism. The supermajority rule gives Ferrari, Audi, Honda, and Cadillac real leverage. The next WMSC session will reveal whether F1 prioritizes the original roadmap or pivots to address driver and fan sentiment before 2027.
Appendix: Verified Source Summary
F1 agreed in principle to scrap 50/50 for 2027 and move toward 60/40, with ICE output rising ∼67bhp.
Ferrari and Audi strongly opposed the 2027 rule change due to engine/car implications and ADUO.
Implementing 60/40 needs a supermajority of four of five engine manufacturers; Mercedes and Red Bull support, Ferrari and Audi unclear/opposed, Honda position inferred from resistance to moving from 50/50. dd97f420
ADUO periods may be adjusted by the FIA and are designed as catch-up mechanisms.
Verstappen questioned 50/50 and lift-and-coast, and has been linked to future uncertainty.
Cadillac enters 2026 with Ferrari PU, plans GM PU for 2028, and may take Ferrari suspension.
WMSC to vote on 60/40 split; larger fuel tanks and three fewer laps cited as worst-case.
This report is based on reporting and documentation available as of May 26, 2026. Regulatory votes and manufacturer positions can evolve, and any final 2027 rules will be published by the FIA following World Motor Sport Council ratification.