Continue reading with advertising …

… or with a subscription

Visit motorsport.com as usual with advertising and tracking. You can revoke your consent at any time via the data protection page.¹

Use motorsport.com without any advertising banners, personalized tracking and commercials for a small fee.

Accept and continue

More information about advertising and tracking in our Data protection notice, the List of our partners and in Data protection information center.

Already a subscriber?

Log in here

Bob Pockrass

FOX NASCAR Insider

Drivers who have advanced to NASCAR’s Round of 8 have already survived two elimination playoff rounds. They have one more to go in their question to be one of the four drivers eligible for the title at the Nov. 10 season finale at Phoenix Raceway.

We asked all the playoff drivers prior to the start of the playoffs to answer the question: “Why will I make the Championship 4?” 

Here are those answers from the eight drivers who still have a shot at getting there. Are they right with their analysis so far … and will they be right over the next three races? Take a read:

Christopher Bell: I’ve done it the last two years. Why not? (Pockrass: What did you do the last two years that you felt like got you there?) We performed whenever it mattered the most … except at Phoenix. The playoffs, it seems like the 20 group is able to turn it on and go to another level whenever the playoffs start. 

Ryan Blaney: The first two rounds are the biggest question mark rounds with Atlanta, the Glen and even Bristol being in the first round. But the Round of 8, for us, if we can get there, is really strong. We turned it on last year in the Round of 8 and those tracks were great for us. If we can get to the Round of 8 and have the same speed as we had last year, I definitely think we can get back to Phoenix. But we’ll see. Hopefully, it all plays out for us and we can do our job.

William Byron: We’re going to make the Championship 4 because we’re experienced, have speed and have a really talented team.

Chase Elliott: I think our team is just extremely well-rounded and we have a lot of depth, too, I feel also with a lot of experience. I think those are all extremely important things as it pertains to making it through the rounds. 

Denny Hamlin: It will mean I got through the carnage. I think that really, especially this season with the schedule, I think it will be a more unpredictable final four than ever.

Kyle Larson: Our team will make the Championship 4 because we’re fast, we’ve been there a few different times already so we have the experience of knowing what it takes, and I think our team does a good job of overcoming adversity when it’s in front of us.

Joey Logano: For numerous reasons. We’ve been in this position before. I know we’re not having the most playoff points going into the playoffs themselves, but I think we know how to execute each round and get to the next one, get to the next one. And the bottom line, when you get to the Round of 8, for us, I think we’re going to have to win. Pointing in is probably not in the cards, depending on who else wins in that round, but most likely winning in that round is going to be our ticket in.

Tyler Reddick: Speed and consistency.

Radioactive: Charlotte — ‘He ****** pushed me, man!’ | NASCAR on FOX

Bob Pockrass covers NASCAR for FOX Sports. He has spent decades covering motorsports, including over 30 Daytona 500s, with stints at ESPN, Sporting News, NASCAR Scene magazine and The (Daytona Beach) News-Journal. Follow him on Twitter @bobpockrass.

Get more from NASCAR Cup Series Follow your favorites to get information about games, news and more

World Rally Championship teams have expressed their thoughts regarding the possibility of a last-minute change to remove hybrid power from Rally1 cars for next season.

It appears there is a strong chance the FIA could decide to abandon hybrid power from the WRC’s top-flight class in a move that has been triggered by a mid-season change to the hybrid unit user guide from control supplier Compact Dynamics.

This is the latest in a long-running saga over the 2025 WRC regulations.The FIA’s working group, formed to “evaluate and recommend the future direction of rallying, proposed to remove hybrid power as part of raft of changes for 2025 in February this year.

However, WRC teams pushed back against the changes, resulting in the current Rally1 regulations staying put for 2025 and 2026 in what was seen as a U-turn from the FIA.

As previously reported, Compact Dynamics’ new safety guidelines stipulate that if the 130kW hybrid unit suffers three shock errors over 15G or one over 25G, it has to be stripped apart and sent back to the supplier for a full repair that can take months to complete.

Teams believe the change brought in at the Acropolis Rally Greece in September will significantly raise hybrid unit repair costs, with one team arguing it would no longer be financially viable.

An FIA e-vote has since been held where teams have expressed their thoughts as to whether hybrid power should continue next year. A decision is yet to be made. 

M-Sport-Ford team principal Richard Millener says the “extreme costs” now involved to run the hybrid units has made it no longer feasible for the Ford squad next year.    

“I think I would still like it [hybrid] in terms of what it is about, and what we are trying to push in terms of a championship with hybrid technology is still important,” Millener told Motorsport.com. 

“But sadly, with the rules that we have regarding the safety of the units and how they have to be repaired after a shock, with extreme costs to repair them, and that’s not feasible for us. 

Kalle Rovanperä, Jonne Halttunen, Toyota Gazoo Racing WRT Toyota GR Yaris Rally1

Photo by: Red Bull Content Pool

“It is not a request to remove it for what it is, it is a request to remove it because we can’t actually repair and run them at an economic price for M-Sport. We are talking a few extra million euro to do it and that is not something we can deal with. 

“It is not good, that image [of constant rule changes] from the outside and I have said before we need to have a strong leadership and a strong image of where we are going and we are struggling with that and we need to improve it.

“People will skew the reason and I’m sure people will blame the teams and some people will blame the FIA, but the supplier is not able to give us the product in the way we need it to work for us.”

Toyota is hopeful a sensible solution can be found but has questioned if hybrid power is still required moving forward.

“It’s not an ideal situation for sure,” Toyota team principal Jari-Matti Latvala told Motorsport.com. “We don’t want expenses to go higher and we want to keep things simple, and if it is getting too complicated the the question is do we really need them [hybrid units]? 

“I think performance-wise the cars are pretty good even without it. But it shouldn’t get too difficult for the teams and if there is a risk that teams cannot be in the World Rally Championship because they are running out of units, then it shouldn’t be that way. 

“It is difficult as running these units and if they have an impact they need to be fixed and that takes time, so we need to find a sensible solution. At the end of the day if it is too difficult then it is easier to go without.”  

Ott Tänak, Martin Järveoja, Hyundai World Rally Team Hyundai i20 N Rally1

Photo by: Red Bull Content Pool

Hyundai has been vocal in its support of hybrid power previously this year but even its team principal Cyril Abitebeoul admitted that if would accept a change if it helped ensure the future of its competitors in the WRC.

“My thoughts are that electrification is the direction that the world is taking. We know that it’s an ongoing trend and therefore we are still supportive of electrifying motorsport electrifying WRC,” Abiteboul told Motorsport.com. 

“We will never actively or proactively request to remove the hybrid from WRC. Having said that, we also need to be pragmatic and recognise the fact that the WRC community is a small community and as any small community, we need to look after one another.

“So if there is any steps that must be taken in order to guarantee participants and competitors at the events we will accept to take those steps. We don’t want to be selfish. I don’t think that anyone can afford to be selfish in the current situation of WRC.

“One thing we must have is a decision very quickly. We are in the process of ordering parts, not the hybrid themselves, because that’s been done already since a while.

“If hybrid was to be removed, I think that’s something we will want to know as quickly as possible to avoid the [un]necessary cost.”

Pedro Acosta has voiced the commonly-held paddock belief that Ducati would prefer factory rider Francesco Bagnaia to win this year’s MotoGP world championship over Aprilia-bound Pramac man Jorge Martin.

Acosta made the remark as he reflected on a stunt engineered by MotoGP promoters, in which KTM’s 20-year-old rookie asked a question at the pre-weekend press conference featuring the two title protagonists.

His question (via video) tackled the possibility of favouritism for either rider on the part of the Italian factory.

Acosta’s invitation to contribute the press conference question; “Will the manufacturer influence this championship battle?” –  his exact wording – was the result of his remark a few weeks earlier that press conferences between Pramac’s Martin and factory rider Bagnaia lacked “spice”.

To his credit, Acosta did earn two significantly different responses from the friendly rivals, who go into the Australia weekend split by just 10 points with Martin in front.

Adamant there would be no preferential treatment, Bagnaia said: “If Ducati wanted to help me in some way, then I could have had something better than [our current package] at Misano already.

“We tried a new chassis, but it’s not ready for everybody so we’re not using it. It’s more correct like this.

“I think Gigi [Dall’Igna] was always clear on that, ever since I started riding for Ducati and even more in the last two seasons, the factory teams have the same package.

“If I have something new, everybody has something new. I don’t believe we’ll change anything until Valencia.”

Jorge Martin, Pramac Racing, Francesco Bagnaia, Ducati Team

Photo by: Gold and Goose / Motorsport Images

Martin, on the other hand, dodged taking a clear position on the question.

“For sure I hope not!” he said. “But I’ll focus on what I can control: riding at 100% and trying to be fast.

“I understand why people ask this question. If they ask it, it’s because they’re thinking about it! But I cannot control that so I won’t focus on that. I will focus on riding.”

Acosta was underwhelmed with the results of his brief flirtation with journalism.

“I found the answers a bit bland,” he told the working media. “But it’s normal, they have contracts that tie their hands a bit, especially Pecco.”

After a little equivocation, Acosta was happy to give his thoughts on the matter.

“I don’t have an opinion on the subject, I’m [just voicing] popular opinion. [But] I think it would hurt [Ducati] a lot if Martin took the title to another factory.”

Asked in his own press conference whether he thought Martin or Bagnaia was the favourite for the title, Acosta replied that his money would be on Martin.

Max Verstappen says McLaren’s Oscar Piastri is “too good” to be asked to support Lando Norris, and says he would have never agreed to it.

As the 2024 F1 season has progressed, McLaren has become the team to beat over the summer, challenging Red Bull for the constructors’ title.

The Woking outfit has since taken a points lead on Red Bull, while Norris has a chance to topple the Dutchman in the drivers’ standings as well, heading into the final run of six races with a 52-point deficit.

And while McLaren is sticking to its general approach of having two equal drivers, the growing realisation that Norris could yet clinch his maiden world title has made the team decide last month to give the Briton priority whenever the on-track situation calls for it.

When asked for his views on McLaren’s team orders in an interview with Motorsport.com, Verstappen said Piastri was “too good” to play a supporting role and shouldn’t have accepted it, although the world champion admitted he has never been in a similar position.

“For me, he’s definitely not a [number two driver] and if I was him I would never accept it,” Verstappen said.

“For me, it’s easy to talk, of course, because I’ve been in Formula 1 for 10 years and it’s Oscar’s second season, so it is always harder to put your foot down.

“But he’s just a great F1 driver who doesn’t deserve it to give up wins and positions and play second fiddle because he’s asked to.”

Zak Brown, CEO, McLaren Racing, and Max Verstappen, Red Bull Racing, 2nd position, congratulate each other in Parc Ferme

Photo by: Sam Bloxham / Motorsport Images

Under its changed approach, McLaren would likely have reversed the positions in Monza when Piastri and Norris finished second and third respectively, but the team has always clarified it would not ask Piastri to give up race wins for Norris.

Norris has also stated he doesn’t want to be handed the championship on a silver platter.

“If a driver is doing better than me and performing, I need to do a better job, so I wouldn’t want to take that away from someone,” Norris said.

“I also don’t want to be given a championship. Yes, it would be great to have a championship, and on the short term you feel amazing, but I don’t think you’d be proud of that in the long run.

“I want to win it by beating Max, beating my competitors, and proving that I’m the best on track.”

Verstappen praised McLaren for its rapid rate of development over the past 18 months, and for how Norris and Piastri have proven a formidable combination.

Asked if the pair was the best driver line-up among Red Bull’s competitors, he replied: “Yes, because they are closely matched and because they are both quick.

“McLaren has really put the right people in the right place, people that were already working at the team.

“The people there aren’t all new hires, apart from people like [former Red Bull designer] Rob Marshall. But some staff have been given new roles, and you can see how quickly that can have an impact.”

The revelation that the FIA has moved to clamp down on a potential ride height parc ferme trick has added an intriguing twist to the Formula 1 title battle.

But while the governing body’s response to suspicions that one competitor may have been altering front bib clearance between qualifying and the race should stamp out the practice from now, the issue is unlikely to go away immediately.

The big question being asked by some squads in private is whether or not the damage has already been done, and someone has got away with doing something that they believe was clearly outside the regulations.

It is important to state firstly that, at the moment, there is no proof that any team has broken the rules. 
And, somewhat unsurprisingly, no squad has put its hand up and admitted that it has been up to something that it should not have.

The FIA has also been explicit that it has not “received any indication of any team employing such a system”, and one unidentified squad that has been at the focus of the allegations has ruled out it having such a device.

But feelings on the matter could become heightened if, from this weekend’s United States Grand Prix, there is a noticeable step change in the pecking order and one or more teams suddenly fall away.

In a rules era where ride height is absolutely critical to car performance, and teams have long had to battle the compromises between setting a car up for qualifying and the race, the ability to alter the front bib between Saturday and Sunday would be quite a powerful tool to help that.

The potential gains

If someone has been lifting the bib for qualifying and then dropping it for the race, losing that advantage with immediate effect should expose a step-change in performance.

Potentially altering the front bib clearance would help account for the shift in car weight between qualifying and the race, as there is a significant difference in ride height and ride quality between an empty fuel tank for qualifying and it being full for the race.

Having the front bib clearance at the perfect height for both scenarios would give an immediate advantage in terms of being able to take more kerb in qualifying, as there would be no fear of damaging the floor and plank.

It would also ensure that the aero platform was as optimised as possible, which would then have tangible benefits of helping ensure the tyres are in the right operating window.

Cars under covers in Parc Ferme

Photo by: Mark Sutton / Motorsport Images

Advertisement

There could be help too in all of this allowing a team to run much closer to the optimum minimum tyre pressures, without having to sacrifice ride quality through suspension settings.

If you cannot change the bib height, as the regulations state, then teams have to find the best compromise between their ride heights and angles for qualifying and the race – going as low as they dare for both low and high fuel without risking going too far and damaging the plank.

The prospect of a review

Should this weekend deliver a scenario where a team appears to have taken a step back, then that will likely ramp up feelings from its rivals that perhaps the FIA should dig a bit deeper into what has happened up until this moment.

However, while there would likely be calls for some retrospective action to be taken if it can be confirmed that someone had been breaking the rules like this, the difficulty may be in ever having enough proof to take the matter further.

It is understood that all teams have ways to adjust the front bib clearance height on their cars, as it is a standard set-up tool. So the existence of a device in a car’s cockpit to change those settings is not relevant to pushing the matter over the line.

The key however is in understanding whether or not a team has altered the settings under parc ferme conditions between qualifying and the race, which is outside the rules.

That is why the FIA is introducing some procedural changes, which could include the use of seals on the devices used by teams to change the bib clearance, to ensure that these settings remain fixed from now on.

A modern-day Option 13 scenario?

Johnny Herbert, Benetton B194 Ford

Photo by: Motorsport Images

Advertisement

The issue of the matter being about whether a team secretly changed settings means it will be virtually impossible for the FIA to go back and find out whether or not anyone played some tricks at previous races.

One F1 source has suggested that this is a similar scenario to what happened with Benetton in 1994 over suspicions it was running a form of illegal launch control.

Analysis of its source code by the FIA revealed that its car software had a hidden menu where, if Option 13 was selected, launch control would be activated.

However, despite the governing body looking deep into the matter, no evidence could be found that it had ever been used in a race, so action over it was not possible.

Amid the current tech controversy, a team having a device in its cockpit that would allow it to change bib clearance is not a smoking gun that it broke the rules.

For a breach to happen, there would have to be unquestionable evidence that the settings were altered between qualifying and the race, something that would be nigh on impossible to go back and prove.

As of now, the FIA says it ‘remains vigilant’ on the matter in ensuring teams comply with the regulations, but there could be some increased pressure to review things a bit more if this weekend’s race in Austin throws up some surprises at the front.