Zhou Guanyu, Sauber, Miami, 2024

New points system rejected, minimum weight rising to 800kg in 2025

Formula 1

Posted on

| Written by

Plans to extend the points-scoring positions in Formula 1 to cover the top 12 have been rejected by F1 Commission.

However the commission approved other changes for upcoming seasons, including an increase in the minimum weight limit for 2025 and a significant increase in testing when new regulations arrive in 2026.

The FIA confirmed the commission agreed unanimously not to extend the points system to cover two more places beyond the current 10. The proposal would have left points for the top seven finishing positions unchanged, then given five points for eighth down to one for 12th.

F1’s points system was last extended in 2010, prior to which it covered the top eight. Until 2002 only the top six finishers scored points.

The commission approved an increase in the minimum weight limit from 798kg to 800kg next year. This is being done to allow the minimum weight for drivers to rise from 80kg to 82kg. This is the first time the allowance for drivers has been increased since its introduction five years ago.

However the increase in minimum weight goes against the FIA’s aim of making cars lighter. It intends to reduce the minimum weight limit to 768kg in 2026, a target some teams have warned is unrealistic.

The commission also agreed a significant expansion in testing for the 2026 season, when F1 will introduce new power units and major changes to its aerodynamic rules. Teams will have nine days of testing split across three separate tests, compared to just one three-day test this year.

The decisions require the approval of the World Motor Sport Council in order to become official.

The first draft of the 2026 technical regulations was published last month. An extraordinary meeting of the F1 Commission will take place on October 2nd to discuss issues surrounding the rules, after which an update on the sporting and technical regulations for the new season will be presented to the World Motor Sport Council on October 17th.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Formula 1

Browse all Formula 1 articles

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

50 comments on “New points system rejected, minimum weight rising to 800kg in 2025”

  1. Formula Heavy.

    1. Mandate 4.5metres car length and weight will automatically come come down. Oh and back to 1.8 metres width although I’m not keen if that it’ll reduce weight and back to the old 13inch rims to also reduce weight. Pretty each fixes

      1. The width doesn’t do much for weight but for racing a bit more downforce is reduced and there is more room. The tyres we never going to have them back as they would look bad with these cars (think of current car with cart tyres)
        Reducing battery space will drop weight a LOT new batteries are much lighter so performance isn’t reduced.

        1. Energy density of fuel far outweighs the battery usefulness. Drop the batteries all together or work with a small KERS.

          1. just get rid of KERS, and put superchargers (to regulate the air fuel density) on the V8’s with the octane rich ethanol, and you would have very nice sounding and f1 cars, as light as 2007, with twice as much power and much much more down force.

            Then bring back the tire wars and the lap times will drop an anvil.

          2. the only thing keeping battery technology relevant are the penalties and rulesets that prohibit petrol from completely dominating it.

            The grid-locked crowd that want to pay taxes ad-nauseum by having their petrol cars superseded by computer controlled electric ones are really the bitter clingers holding on to a losing position. If Europe doesn’t get it’s head out soon it will be left to the laundry bin of history, by a much more vibrant and realistic East.

        2. It would if they go back to previous tyres widths but I see your point. I wouldnt mind that if they weigh less it’ll be good. I could be wrong but I assume the old tyres size allowed for better mechanical grip therefore allowing for less aero dependency. But of course as you mention the extra benefits of the cars being narrower if sor the racing. It also would improve following since the lead car isn’t as wide and at least by a bit reducing it’s wake I assume. Allowing the chase cars to explore different lines in order to help set up passes. Yeah that would be welcome with the batteries!
          If they did mandate much short cars (4.5m) I think overall this would help a lot. Sure some down force would be lost but the weight loss would be able make up for it.
          I also don’t mind at all if the cars are a few seconds slower if it’s due to down force losss since the racing will be a little better.
          Feels pointless sometimes thinking these things up and even watching as they don’t seem all that keen of doing things they could easily do to improve the racing (drs too and the tyres)
          But understood. Since F1 has no competition they can be pretty relaxed. If they had competition they would be forced to improve.

  2. Neil (@neilosjames)
    23rd July 2024, 21:17

    I’m so happy that strange, odd-looking points system was rejected, I don’t even care about the weight gain.*

    * – which is only two kilos and seems to have been done for driver welfare, so I probably wouldn’t care anyway.

    1. Very good for the drivers health doesn’t do much for the cars.

    2. notagrumpyfan
      24th July 2024, 7:59

      driver welfare: I think many drivers care more about some extra points than extra kilos :P

  3. That’s annoying to see. Expanding the points to 12 positions allows the 5 “Formula B” teams to properly differentiate themselves with significant constructors money on the line, instead of depending on the failures of the top 5 teams. Plus, more points positions means more consequential action on the track, which means a better product.

    I figured there would have been more support for that proposal.

    1. All teams bar one have scored this season. They’ve all differentiated themselves – with one being very poor indeed.

      1. @sham Your point does not necessarily support the view that the additional points would be a negative thing.

        (I know you did not explicitly state that it did, but it did imply a counter position to the OP).

      2. notagrumpyfan
        24th July 2024, 8:02

        All teams bar one have scored this season.

        That’s exactly the criticism @nerrticus has. Those teams can only score points “depending on the failures of the top 5 teams”. OP wants them to “properly differentiate themselves with significant constructors money on the line”, which maybe only extending the points system can give.

  4. I like it. A round 800kg is a more sensible number. And people should stop moaning as if it changes anything for the racing.
    F1 cars carry what – 110kg of fuel? So the cars will be heavier for 1 lap in a race. And then on lap 2 in 2025 they will be as heavy as they were on lap 1 in 2024 and so on.

    1. Isn’t it minimum weight? Wouldn’t they have to be 800kg after the race has concluded to pass scrutineering?

      1. The point still stands though, it’s only an extra laps worth of fuel

        1. What point is still standing? With a post race weight of 800 kg the cars weigh at least 900 kg at the start. The 100 kg difference is an extra lap of fuel? Ah, I see, you are talking about the difference between 798 and 800. How about making the minimum 700 kg and letting the teams work it out?

          1. Great but for the driver must be a minimum of 82kg for there health. Otherwise we have all little persons driving and we miss the (real) talent (looking to me as i was to heavy with 86kg to race in my time….)

          2. “How about making the minimum 700 kg and letting the teams work it out?”

            I agree 1000% !!! I was actually thinking about it yesterday.
            Make the minimum weight 600kg. It’s only the MINIMUM weight, your car can be 2000kg for all anybody cares.
            If you can make a car that’s 600kg – that’s great. If you make a car that’s 680kg, that’s great too. Maybe making a 600kg is such a big compromise that a 700kg car is faster? It should be YOUR engineering choice.

            It would be fantastic to see what solutions every team would come up with.
            One team would make their cars as short as possible to make them 600kg light, thus sacrificing in-corner stability, another team would make their cars longer and heavier to be faster in corners etc., one would make a no-sidepod desing to make the car lighter but with worse aero, another would make proper sidepods for better aero but the car heavier.

            WE NEED EXACTLY THAT in F1.

    2. If the headline had been weight minimum rises 2kg, I doubt anyone would complain. A round number does make more sense.

    3. Asd gDog
      Zero impact as fuel is never considered in the minimum car+driver weight, so the lap 2 in 2025 versus 1 lap this year reference is inaccurate.

      Asd Nick T.
      Round number may make comparatively more sense, but this isn’t a justifiable reason to change the minimum requirement in any case, not that it’s a factor here anyway.
      Otherwise, the target for 2026 should be 770 instead of 768 solely for round number’s sake.

    4. notagrumpyfan
      24th July 2024, 8:07

      And people should stop moaning

      Why is it ‘moaning’ when pointing out that a minimum weight is not needed at all? F1 already has a driver minimum weight, detailed safety requirements, and a budget cap, which cover the important topics.

  5. Some of the cars are already over 800kg (driver included) anyway so this little formality will make little to no difference. Maybe a few extra stickers here and there.

    1. Not anymore & only two teams, Alpine & Williams, have been overweight this year, with only the latter still, if any.
      2022 is when several teams ran over 800 for quite a while, so yes, this change won’t be evident to the naked eye or affect on-track action.

  6. I think points need to be divorced from payments. At the moment, from the WDC point of view, there is not enough of a gap in the points awarded at the sharp end, not enough risk reward for winning once or twice versus slow and steady picking up points. If you add more points positions, you close up those faps even more.

    But if we have less points-paying positions then a lot of teams race for very little reward, and that is also not very good. But why do we have to have the same scoring system for both championships? Maybe for the bottom positions we could award one WCC point for each car that finishes on the lead lap, or maybe only the lead car in the team scores. There are many possibilities, but F1 seems to be stuck in only having one way of doing it, and that is a way that suits the wallets of the top end teams.

    1. If you tie on points, all those post-10 places are rewarded. I see your argument, but I could also see the argument of do we want to reward teams for consistently finishing 11th or 12th? It’d seem to reward teams for being consistently average and eliminate a lot of the excitement of a struggling team getting in the points or a driver far outperforming the car. I don’t feel especially strongly one way or the other. I think I lean toward keeping the current system though.

  7. I may be missing something, but in principle I would have though points for all finishers (except perhaps whomever is last) would only be a good thing.

    It doesnt detract from the sharp end, and indeed still gives top running top teams reson to fight for every position. It would encourage less borderline retirements (not that I am saying there are many of these), and would give everyone something to fight for.

    The only major downsides would be the potential need to increase points at the front, and the increasing disparity from past seasons when comparing points stats. And of course, the glaring issue that I am probably missing.

    1. From a statistical comparison point of view, the historical argument is meaningless as it’s already impossible to draw meaningful conclusions from points tallies since the massive inflation of points awarded from 2010.

      But there is an argument that further extending the points down the field goes against the historical principle of F1 that points are to be fought for, not handed out. There are lots of series that hand out points as a kind of participation trophy to everyone who takes part, and for good reasons, but F1 has never been one of these.

      1. @red-andy I get your point. Though I would still consider 19th to have been fought for – in principle – vs 20th.

  8. An Sionnach
    23rd July 2024, 23:10

    So, before 2019 there was no minimum weight for drivers? Was anything introduced around driver weights in 1994? I saw this mentioned by someone here as a reason why Prost had retired, but considered it spurious. 82kg seems a lot. I’ve seen it written that this includes all safety equipment such as the helmet, head restraint, overalls, gloves and shoes. Is the weight limit being increased to accommodate taller drivers, burger eaters, or to allow for heavier safety equipment? I’m 6’1″ and 70kg. Will drive for any team.

    1. I think they need to increase the cockpit height and inlet height so your head doesn’t get sucked into the air inlet.
      Tall people should revolt against the anti tall person stance F1 has adopted, they should introduce a T series!

    2. correct 82kg is not much as as I was 1.86m (6’1″) and 85kg and no I trained every day twice i had no fat on my body and I was told I was too large and too heavy they we looking for person <1.70 and <65kg to make it in motor sports…..

      I find the current rules healthy…..

      And if i may say your the same height as me but 15kg difference is probaly muscles as i looked like a god (six pack ) My nephew had the same lenght but was 65-70kg and looked like a nail…..

  9. Maybe if a new team were allowed in the clubhouse *ahem*Andretti*ahem* the new point system would have made sense.

    My gut reaction to the weight change is negative, but I’d like to see a really in depth breakdown of where exactly this weight is. Letting up on driver requirements is a good thing. And I can’t say anything about the weight requirements of safety features given the miraculous results we see every season.

  10. Need to go back to naturally aspirated and 600kg with driver. Increase it to 630kg with driver if you like.

    1. Sorry, F1 forgot that fans care about being entertained. Not phony green posturing or manufacturers. So, yeah…

      PS: I’m big on sustainability. Just actual sustainability. Not token gestures and CSR campaigns meant to deter scrutiny.

  11. Sounds like BoP for drivers! Those guys worked hard to lose a few kilos, and now this! So unfair.

    On a more serious note, the point system is a bit goofy. On the one hand, we have F1 saying new teams should be competitive for podiums and wins, and on the other, a point system that says 8th is cool and worthy of points but 12th is bad and should not get any points. Despite both not even being close to the norm for a worthwhile F1 entry. So what’s the idea with the arbitrary 10 places getting points and 16 not getting any points? Is 11th really as good as 23rd? Of course not.

    I would say ‘do it like Indycar’, but they just randomly give the same number of points to everyone past a certain position. Which is also weird. So, don’t do that.

    1. Well, the current points system makes sense in a way: if you are in the top half of the grid, you get points, and if you aren’t, you don’t.

      We only have 20 drivers atm, so only 10 get points, and if eventually a new team is added, it makes sense to give points to 11 drivers.

  12. The Dolphins
    24th July 2024, 1:41

    I’m of the opinion that any car to cross the finish line ought to score points simply to disincentivize drivers & teams “saving the engine” like we saw in Austria. It would not impact the WDC or WCC standings since those go beyond points scored to determine standings.

    1. notagrumpyfan
      24th July 2024, 8:54

      When building a F1 points spreadsheet I always give the 11th+ finishing drivers pseudo points equal to 1-4% of the previous position (e.g. 11th = .04pt, 12th is 0.0016pt, 13th 0.000064, etc.), this way the points also reflect the 11+ finishing positions when equal on official points.

      But personally I’d rather see real points (1+) rather than these Mickey Mouse workaround points.

  13. F1’s eternal mantra of “If it’s broke, distract people from it – and if it ain’t broke, break it” still holds as true as ever.
    Don’t fix the points system that has been wrong forever, and keep piling on the weight and making the cars even harder on the tyres.

    I still can’t fathom why anyone would want a points system that doesn’t actually reflect the results – other than due to simply being against change.

    And as for the increase in testing – apparently F1 has become too unpredictable and competitive this year. That ‘needs’ to go back to the way it has always been too.

    1. Points should be a reward that is earned and not simply handed out for turning up.

      It’s not about been against change (a lazy excuse used to try and end debate), it’s about not wanting F1 to turn into Nascar/Indycar where points are irrelevant, don’t feel that special and are never talked about because everyone gets them.

      1. Points should be a reward that is earned and not simply handed out for turning up.

        Good results are a reward. Podiums and trophies are rewards. Prize money is a reward. These are all earned.
        Points are not a reward.

        F1 will not turn into NASCAR or Indycar simply with a points system change. Winning races in both of those series is just as rewarding as it is in F1 – and scoring points in minor placings is equally important.

        The important thing with the current system is that finishing 11th is exactly the same as recording a DNS or DNF in almost every situation. That is not right.

    2. An Sionnach
      24th July 2024, 20:23

      They should ban tyres altogether. Cars with tyres have an unfair advantage and illegally boost performance.

  14. I don’t care either way about the points system, whether points get distributed down to P10 or 12.
    However, I don’t understand the minimum car+driver weight increase.
    Just because the minimum weight allocation for drivers increases by 2 kg doesn’t mean the minimum overall weight should also increase in conjunction.
    How wouldn’t 798 kg work with 82 as the driver minimum as it does with 80?
    Yes, 2026 will see a reduction in minimum car+driver weight, but nevertheless disappointing that one more increase will happen before that instead of keeping 798 also for the last season of this cycle, especially after the cooling device addition for this season as a reaction to last season’s Qatar GP didn’t lead to any increase, not that the difference will be evident to the naked eye, given several teams ran even quite a bit above 800 in 2022.
    Hopefully, 768 will still remain the chosen minimum for 2026 despite this previously unplanned 2 kg increase within the current technical regulation cycle.
    I wonder whether all three 3-day tests will be conducted in Bahrain or the first two in Montmelo.

    1. notagrumpyfan
      24th July 2024, 11:40

      Yes, 2026 will see a reduction in minimum car+driver weight

      The best way to reduce, is to inflate the starting point.

  15. Can they at least make a Participation trophy?

  16. I am not concerned about the points not being changed. I don’t think it will make a great deal of difference. I also think the differential in points is too large at the front or certainly doesn’t need to be increased. It just accentuates the differences when one team is dominant. So 20, 15, 12, 10, 8, 6, 4, 3, 2,1 perhaps. I appreciate this was not up for discussion this time.

    I really hope that that FIA resist the pressure from some teams and are able to enforce the lower weight limit ie 768 Kg from 2026.

    1. I couldn’t agree more with you about the weight reference.
      FIA should indeed make matters clear to teams that the initially chosen figure will be the minimum permitted & getting down to that is solely their responsibility.

  17. shittyusername
    24th July 2024, 19:17

    Now I’m not an engineer (yet, I’m studying), but they should just say minimum weight is 700, make do. Teams will then have a choice of overweight or aerodynamically inefficient (smaller and shorter) car. Plus less weight makes for less force in impacts which is obviously safer

Comments are closed.