Red Bull’s technical director of engines, Ben Hodgkinson, expresses doubts about the effectiveness of the ADUO system designed to restore balance among teams. Rather than a technological compromise, he advocates for a true battle among engine manufacturers, which is more exciting and authentic.
What is ADUO?
ADUO, or Additional Development and Upgrade Opportunities, is a mechanism that accompanies the new engine regulations set for 2026. Its purpose? To allow less competitive engine manufacturers to catch up by offering them additional developments compared to their competitors. A good intention, but one that could clash with the realities of the circuits.
The principle is simple: after each series of six races (after the 6th, 12th, and 18th), engine performances will be evaluated. If an engine is found to be between 2% and 4% below the reference power, one upgrade will be allowed. If the gap exceeds 4%, two upgrades can be implemented. It sounds like a well-thought-out plan, but Ben Hodgkinson remains skeptical about its effectiveness.
Red Bull’s Reservations
Despite the technical support from Ford and the introduction of its first engine this season, Hodgkinson is not convinced that ADUO is the miracle solution. “Personally, I would love to do away with homologation and have a relentless battle,” he states. For him, such a system could harm competition, as it introduces compensatory elements that dilute the merit of the best.
On the sidelines of the presentation of the teams’ liveries, he added: “We have a budget cap and we have limits on hours in the test bench. I believe there are enough limits without needing that.” An argument that raises questions about the very nature of competition in Formula 1.
The Complexity of Engine Development
The Red Bull F1 showcar during the 2026 livery presentation.
Beyond the compensatory mechanisms, Hodgkinson also highlights another challenge: the time required to develop and integrate new parts into the power units. “Does this sufficiently reward those who make the right choices? I think so,” he asserts, but he emphasizes that the gestation time of an idea in the field of engines is much longer than in that of chassis.
He explains: “So, if I need to make a modification, I don’t just have two cars to evolve, I have an entire fleet of engines in the pool. I can have 12 power units to update, which takes time.” Indeed, each evolution requires special attention, and the development of engine components demands clockmaker precision.
A Long and Delicate Process
Hodgkinson also emphasizes the constraints related to homologation: “We can’t really embark on something that hasn’t proven itself, as we risk exposing ourselves to many difficulties.” Thus, each new part must meet a minimum reliability level before being put into racing. High-precision metallic components, essential for the optimal functioning of engines, often require up to 12 weeks of manufacturing. And a similar amount of time is needed to test and install these parts in the engine pool.
In summary, even though ADUO aims to reduce performance gaps, Hodgkinson does not believe it will fundamentally change race dynamics. “I think if a team has an engine advantage at the first race, it will take some time before others can catch up.” A prediction that could very well be verified on the track.
The Stakes of Competition
As a reminder, Red Bull seems to be among the teams that have explored regulatory gray areas regarding compression ratios. The team asserts that it has no doubts about the legality of its engine block. However, this situation raises the question of equity in Formula 1: is a system like ADUO really necessary to ensure balanced competition? Do the passion of fans and the excitement of races not rely on a true rivalry among teams?
As the 2026 season approaches rapidly, discussions around the ADUO system highlight the complexity of technical and sporting stakes in Formula 1. Between the desire for equality and the quest for pure performance, the dilemma remains and promises lively debates in the paddocks.
