American automaker Cadillac will join the Formula 1 grid for the first time in 2026, and it'll have to pay out the nose for the privilege. Parent company General Motors will provide a one-time entry fee of $450,000,000, split equally among the other ten teams on the grid, as an "anti-dilution" payment. Because each F1 team derives some of its annual income from a share of the sport's television revenue and prize money, and in 2026 that pot will be split among 11 teams instead of ten, Cadillac's payment will help diffuse some of that revenue loss in the first couple of years of the new team's participation.

The Concorde Agreement, the commercial contract between Formula 1 and the teams running in the sport, has stipulated an anti-dilution payment from any team joining the grid. The existing agreement which runs the 2025 season specified a $200,000,000 anti-dilution fee. A new agreement was signed by all teams ahead of the 2025 Australian Grand Prix governing the 2026 season, which increased the fee to $450,000,000, though many of the teams started the negotiation with a desire to pump it up to $600,000,000. The most recent team to join F1 was Aston Martin in 2021, though it did not pay an anti-dilution fee because it purchased an existing team and did not expand the grid. Audi, which similarly purchased a stake in the Sauber team, is joining alongside Cadillac, but will not have to shell out the same fee.

In addition to the money teams make from selling sponsorship Formula 1 pays out about 61 percent of its operating budget to teams, totaling around $1.3 billion in 2024. The basic way teams are paid is by points earned through the season. By winning the constructors' championship last year McLaren earned a payout of $132.9 million, while last placed team Sauber earned $57.9 million. There are additional bonuses paid out for "success" to previous championship winning teams Ferrari, McLaren, Mercedes, Red Bull, and Williams, and Ferrari famously receives a $63.3 million bonus for being a "historic" team. For a team like Ferrari, which reportedly took home a quarter of a billion dollars for its middling success in 2024, Cadillac's $45M won't be much of a game changer, but for Williams or Sauber it could mean a huge difference in team investment opportunities and choices.

Ahead of the new Concorde Agreement signing, the series issued a statement saying that "Formula 1 has never been in a stronger position—and all stakeholders have seen positive benefits and significant growth."

Eddie Jordan, the legendary F1 team owner, has passed away at the age of 76.

Born in Dublin, Ireland, Jordan was synonymous with motorsport, having initially climbed the ladder as a budding racer before turning his attention to team ownership.

In a spell at the wheel across the 1970s and early 1980s, Jordan tasted success in the Irish Kart Championship and raced in categories such as Formula Ford, Formula 3 and Formula 2, as well as appearing at the prestigious 24 Hours of Le Mans.

By the end of the ‘70s, Jordan had set up his own, eponymous outfit on the single-seater scene, steadily rising the ranks until he secured an entry on the F1 grid for 1991.

Jordan famously gave Michael Schumacher his F1 debut during that ’91 campaign, with many other big-name drivers – including the likes of Rubens Barrichello, Martin Brundle, Damon Hill and Jean Alesi – racing for the squad over the years.

Hill scored Jordan’s first Grand Prix victory during a dramatic, rain-hit 1998 Belgian Grand Prix, with team mate Ralf Schumacher following him home to make it a 1-2 and complete a landmark result for the team.

Jordan won further races with Heinz-Harald Frentzen in 1999, when the driver and team emerged as surprise title contenders, before a fourth and final triumph – courtesy of Giancarlo Fisichella – in the chaotic 2003 Brazilian Grand Prix.

Jordan sold his team in early 2005 and the now-famous name dropped off the grid the following season, but it would not be the last time F1 fans saw or heard from him.

In 2009, he became a pundit for the BBC’s F1 coverage, spending several years entertaining viewers and breaking stories such as Lewis Hamilton’s shock switch from McLaren to Mercedes at the end of 2012.

He later took on a similar F1 role at Channel 4, while appearing as a host on renowned British TV show Top Gear and running a popular podcast – Formula For Success – with former BBC colleague David Coulthard.

Most recently, he acted as Adrian Newey’s manager, facilitating the design guru’s early release from Red Bull to take up a new position at Aston Martin’s growing F1 team – the pair sharing an interest in sailing.

Jordan was also a music enthusiast, forming his own band and playing the drums and spoons, alongside other interests such as golf, cycling and the arts, and boasted a huge portfolio of business activities.

“We are deeply saddened to hear about the sudden loss of Eddie Jordan,” said F1 President and CEO Stefano Domenicali.

“With his inexhaustible energy he always knew how to make people smile, remaining genuine and brilliant at all times.

“Eddie has been a protagonist of an era of F1 and he will be deeply missed.

“In this moment of sorrow, my thoughts and those of the entire Formula 1 family are with his family and loved ones.”

A statement from Jordan's family said: "It is with profound sadness that we announce the passing of Eddie Jordan OBE the ex-Formula 1 team owner, TV pundit and entrepreneur.

"He passed away peacefully with family by his side in Cape Town in the early hours of 20th March 2025 at the age of 76, after battling with an aggressive form of prostate cancer for the past 12 months.

"He was working until the last, having communicated on St Patrick’s Day, about his ambitions for London Irish Rugby Football Club, of which he had recently become Patron."

His family added: “EJ brought an abundance of charisma, energy and Irish charm everywhere he went. We all have a huge hole missing without his presence. He will be missed by so many people, but he leaves us with tonnes of great memories to keep us smiling through our sorrow.”

Red Bull's second Formula 1 driver qualified in the top five at the Australian Grand Prix, within two tenths of a second of Max Verstappen, battled Ferraris for much of the race and only failed to score because their team misjudged its tyre choice in the changing weather.

Given how badly Sergio Perez trailed Verstappen for most of 2024, that was a definite upgrade and a hint Red Bull's lead driver might actually have someone who can give him the support he needs in what looks like being a very challenging championship defence.

The problem was Red Bull's second driver was not in a Red Bull. It was Racing Bulls' Yuki Tsunoda.

Red Bull Racing's actual second driver Liam Lawson appeared to be on a mission to offer Perez fans vindication with his scruffy Q1 exit and a race spent fighting the Haases at the back before crashing out, having been lapped just after half-distance.

Team principal Christian Horner pointed to the "flash of light" of Lawson setting the second fastest race lap in the brief window on dry tyres. But a one-off lap (boosted by DRS from Gabriel Bortoleto's Sauber ahead) in ever-improving track conditions is a flimsy thing to hang hope on when weighed against a race spent mostly in 15th place lapping multiple seconds slower than Verstappen.

There were a few circumstances against Lawson - being the only driver completely new to the Albert Park track, the air intake problem that cost him all of final practice. Red Bull took advantage of his pitlane start to switch him to a higher downforce rear wing so he went into the race on an unfamiliar set-up, but Lawson himself brushed this off as a non-factor.

All weekend Lawson maintained this wasn't about car adaptation or even challenging handling characteristics such as those that sunk Perez.

He just wasn't very fast. And when he was looking faster, he made errors.

Asked how long he needed to acclimatise to the Red Bull, Lawson replied: "To be honest, I felt used to it in the test. It wasn't like I wasn't adapted or anything like that. It's just been a tough weekend."

Horner agreed: "This weekend wasn't representative of what he's capable of."

There's a decent history of drivers being anomalously terrible for new teams in Melbourne before finding their feet with time and more typical circuits (looking at you, David Coulthard's McLaren debut in 1996). It's way, way too early to judge Lawson, and Horner cautioned that he already expects another "tough" weekend coming up immediately for his new driver at Shanghai - "a sprint race at a track that he's not been to before".

But by the time of the following triple-header, there won't really be any excuses.

Tsunoda's superb Melbourne performance - in which he topped the midfield, outpaced Ferraris and was on course for a top five before being left out on slicks in the wet consigned him to 12th - doesn't directly put pressure on Lawson because Red Bull's spent four years snubbing Tsunoda for mostly character-based reasons already and it's highly unlikely what happened at the opener will change that.

Finally signing him for the second Red Bull Racing seat now would be more an ‘Oh all right, we give in' last-resort signing than a proper endorsement (though Red Bull's got form for major U-turns on drivers when in a tight spot - see rejected protege Alex Albon's initial F1 call-up).

But if it's Tsunoda's emotional nature that still spooks the Red Bull hierarchy, it should give his radio from Melbourne a listen.

His brilliant race imploded when first he was told to pit for intermediates when already coming onto the pit straight and well past the pit entry, then was left out as long as possible on slicks in the worsening rain while being reassured it was as bad as it was going to get. Only when he could barely control the car on the straight was Tsunoda brought in for intermediates.

There was a point when he told engineer Ernesto Desiderio that he was speaking too quietly and a slightly urgent "I can't see it, it's your guys' job!" remark about the weather forecast. But for a supposedly volatile driver dealing with one of the best races of his F1 career being wrecked by poor forecasting and strategy calls, Tsunoda was extremely measured.

And on the slowing-down lap after his point-less 12th place:

Ernesto Desiderio: "Hey Yuki, this result is very hard for the whole team, for you. I know it, you know I share it. One thing I wanted to say was your drive was very, very strong, you didn't put a foot wrong. Well done there, we'll regroup and understand how to do better."

Tsunoda: "Yeah, hard luck guys. We came back strong, we had pace. We just have to outperform every single race from now on. Weather didn't come towards us."

Desiderio: "Yep, thanks mate."

When he met the media afterwards, Tsunoda admitted it was "very frustrating" that Racing Bulls' likely main rival Williams had scored the top five he'd been denied, but was generally gentle in his assessment of the weather forecasting miscue.

If anything his biggest plea was for Racing Bulls to properly understand how it had managed to be so fast in qualifying to make sure it was repeatable (a tow from Lando Norris's McLaren was handy, but certainly wasn't the entire reason Tsunoda qualified so close to Verstappen and ahead of both Ferraris). Team boss Laurent Mekies reckoned/hoped Racing Bulls just hadn't shown its hand as much as others in testing and was more competitive when it counted than it had looked when it didn't.

Tsunoda suspected that single-lap pace might stand Racing Bulls in good stead for Shanghai and its sprint format this weekend - the same Shanghai weekend when Horner reckons Lawson will probably struggle again.

How many Melbourne style performance juxtapositions might it take for Red Bull to decide maybe it could live with Tsunoda's emotions after all?

The FIA’s move to impose tougher rear wing flexibility tests to stamp out mini-DRS tricks from this weekend’s Chinese Grand Prix was triggered by suspicions surrounding four Formula 1 teams, The Race has learned.

Following evidence obtained by the FIA from HD video camera footage of rear wings at the season-opening Australian GP, allied to static tests conducted in the pitlane, the governing body felt there were “sufficient grounds” to take immediate action for this weekend's Shanghai sprint weekend.

While no team has been singled out by the FIA as being the catalyst for its action, sources have indicated it was the behaviour of four cars in particular from Bahrain testing and the Australian GP that caught the attention of both rival teams and the governing body.

These squads are understood to be McLaren, Ferrari, Alpine and Haas.

There is no suggestion that any of the squads have broken the rules, and indeed Lando Norris’s car was examined by the FIA after the Australian GP and fully complied with the rear wing flexibility checks there.

The FIA also confirmed in its statement earlier this week that “all cars raced in Melbourne were deemed to be legal".

However, the FIA’s immediate response to enforce more stringent tests for the Shanghai weekend – allowing just a 0.75mm slot gap variance from a 75kg load test applied to the mainplane – clearly indicates that the governing body has seen enough to feel that whatever behaviour it spotted must not be allowed to carry on.

The teams involved in the saga have all played down talk that the revised tests are going to force them to abandon current designs or make modifications to their rear wings.

McLaren has insisted that the same configuration of rear wing that it used in the Bahrain test and Australia will continue to be raced in China without modification – and that it will pass the new test.

Norris even suggested that McLaren’s wing was probably not flexing enough compared to others.

"We don't have to change anything," he said. "Ours is fine. In fact, ours is probably too good and we probably are not pushing the limits enough honestly."

Ferrari’s Charles Leclerc said that his team was in the "same" situation as McLaren of not needing to make modifications.

Asked who he felt the suspicions were aimed at, Leclerc said: "I don't know…I really don't know."

Asked about his team’s involvement, Alpine’s Pierre Gasly said: "Hopefully it is good for us. We'll see this weekend what it does, over the next few weeks, who's impacted from it, who isn't.”

Haas team principal Ayao Komatsu said that while his squad would not need to make modifications to the wing, “we may have to change a little bit how we set up the wing, but not the design or anything".

This comment may offer a clue that the tricks being employed by teams are more about how the wings are configured rather than any designs themselves being outside the new restrictions.

Teams have been experimenting with different rear wing configurations in this early phase of the season. McLaren has been spotted with two alternative designs, and these could produce varying amounts of opportunity to flex.

The main problem the FIA has is that it's unable to check the flexibility of wings while they are out on track - and the true forces are exerted on them.

So even if a wing is spotted flexing on the circuit, if it passes the static load tests then it will be deemed to be within the regulations.

This means teams can deliberately target designs that withstand loads exerted on them in the FIA checks, but still deform out on circuit as required.

The first suspicions of mini-DRS tricks emerged during pre-season testing when Red Bull said it was concerned by some strange behaviour from rivals.

The team’s technical director Piere Wache told The Race about attempts to get rid of mini-DRS over the winter: “It is still going on. I think Ferrari and McLaren are doing the mini-DRS stuff still."

The Race has learned that this year’s mini-DRS controversy involves a different area of the wing compared to last year – when McLaren managed to flex the main DRS flap to help open the slot gap and reduce drag.

This time around the key area of focus is the flap area outside of the DRS element. It is suspected the slot gap is being manipulated to open up slightly – and not even as much as last year’s McLaren trick that helped Oscar Piastri win the Azerbaijan Grand Prix.

The theory is that by rotating the flap to open up the slot gap in this area, it not only helps to reduce the frontal area of the wing but also helps stall the wing – delivering an immediate reduction in drag.

This benefit has been described by sources as “potentially significant”.

While the focus for the Chinese GP is on the slot gap variance, it is not impossible that the FIA takes further action to address flexible rear wing behaviour if it continues to have suspicions that teams are pushing things too far.

Article 3.15.1 of the Technical Regulations allows the FIA to introduce either new or more challenging load-deflection tests if it suspects there are any potential breaches of the rules.

“In order to ensure that the requirements of Article 3.2.2 (that aerodynamic parts are rigidly secured and immobile) are respected, the FIA reserves the right to introduce further load/deflection tests on any part of the bodywork which appears to be (or is suspected of), moving whilst the car is in motion,” it states.

The idea of bringing back V10 engines to Formula 1 is beginning to win over supporters in the paddock, with sources suggesting that Ferrari is ready to back the idea.

However, even with key figures throwing their weight behind a reintroduction there are still major hurdles to overcome, and opponents who need convincing it is right for F1's future, before it can become a reality.

The situation has emerged at a time when F1 chiefs are already contemplating future engine regulations for the rules cycle that will follow the next generation of turbo hybrids that are currently set to run from 2026-30.

One proposal being considered, if the switch to fully sustainable fuels from next year is deemed a success, is to ditch hybrid engines and revert to either normally aspirated or turbo V10 powerunits after that.

This is something that FIA president Mohammed Ben Sulayem mentioned recently in a social media post talking about the future direction of F1.

"We should consider a range of directions including the roaring sound of the V10 running on sustainable fuel," he said.

"Whichever direction is chosen; we must support the teams and manufacturers in ensuring cost control on R&D expenditure."

The FIA has set up a working group to speak to relevant parties - which are believed to include F1 engine manufacturers, teams and fuel suppliers - about future engine ideas including the V10.

Discussions are ongoing and the feedback from some parties is understood to show support for the V10 proposal.

But talks with and between relevant stakeholders have also thrown up some more interesting responses, with one radical proposal first revealed by Auto Motor und Sport of not only going to V10s but doing it earlier than 2031.

An idea has been floated of ditching the new 2026 engines completely, sticking with the current powerunits until 2028, and then going down the V10 route from 2029.

However, such a bold U-turn on next year's new rules would almost certainly not gather the backing needed, as it would require unanimous support from teams.

And that unanimity does not appear to be forthcoming, especially because of the impossibility of what Audi would do for an engine, and where some teams like Red Bull would be left.

But another idea has also surfaced. It is to go ahead with the new turbo hybrids for 2026 but begin preparations for a switch to V10s perhaps as early as 2029.

Nothing has been formally proposed to teams yet, and ideas are simply being floated right now for a bit of blue-sky thinking.

But the fact that discussions are being framed in this way indicates that the notion of a V10 return is no longer pure fantasy.

Right now, three manufacturers are wholly against anything other than pushing on with the plans for 2026-30 that they have spent hundreds of millions of dollars developing.

Audi does not have a current turbo hybrid to use, so it would be unable to join the grid as planned next year if the engine regulations F1 has right now were carried forward.

Mercedes and Honda are understood to not want a change after all the effort they have made.

From Mercedes' perspective, while it is not against an earlier reintroduction of V10s in principle, there is no way it can change plans for next year. So a V10 move could only come in 2029 or 2030 at the earliest.

Development of Mercedes' 2026 powerunit is in full swing and there is no ability to deliver current-spec engines for next season as manufacturing has been switched off for beyond this year - which means no supply is possible for itself nor its customers.

It is also understood that, while Mercedes is not against an earlier reintroduction of V10s, it believes it would not be able to supply customer teams were the current engine ruleset to be extended.

But others, while in no doubt that the 2026 rules have to go ahead, are not totally against the prospect of taking a different path over the following few years.

Red Bull team principal Christian Horner said in China that, amid questions over whether the new rules will work, the prospect of a V10 had its attractions.

However, he reckoned that despite "limitations" of the 2026 regulations, it was probably too late to consider anything other than committing to the new turbo hybrids for now.

"We've ended up in a situation where the chassis is having to compensate a huge amount for perhaps some of the shortcomings of the split in electrification and combustion," he said, when asked by The Race about the possibility of a return to V10 engines.

"But it's sort of 10 past midnight and Cinderella's left the building. The romantic in you [says] a V10, a screaming V10, so long as it's done responsibly with fully sustainable fuels, is hugely attractive.

"But I think the big question is: when would that be for? And what will be the game plan between where we sit today and then?"

Red Bull may not be the only manufacturer in favour of the V10 move, with sources claiming that Ferrari's senior road car management sees potential in it.

Ferrari has not officially confirmed its stance and has so far steered clear of any public confirmation of its position regarding a change of tact over the future engine regulations.

Asked during pre-season testing about the idea, team principal Fred Vasseur dodged a firm answer by simply stating it was too early to start thinking about the shape of long-term rules.

"It looks to be very early for me to discuss about the engine of 2031, or whatever," he said.

"We haven't even started with the next homologation. We still have some huge topics on the table, and we didn't even start this journey. So, let's be focused on this before moving on to discuss about 2030 or 2031."

However, it was interesting to hear Lewis Hamilton, who is close to Ferrari chairman John Elkann, be so openly in favour of the V10 route when asked about it at the Chinese Grand Prix.

"It's no secret the V6 has never sounded great," he said.

"I remember the first time I came to a Formula 1 race in 1996 in Spa, I remember arriving and Michael [Schumacher] coming through Turn 1 and my rib cage just vibrating. I was so hooked, like it was the most amazing thing that I felt and heard before.

"Over the years, we've lost that. So if we're able to move back to those amazing sounding engines, and we're still able to meet the sustainable goals, why not?"

Should Ferrari support the V10 plan then it would certainly add some political momentum to the idea, and probably even trigger a more serious evaluation of a switch earlier than 2031.

However, McLaren team boss Zak Brown - whose team will remain a Mercedes customer from 2026 - said it was probably too late to undo what is already planned for the next generation of turbo hybrids.

"I think a V10 definitely, as Christian said, would be pretty cool with sustainable fuels," he said.

"But I don't really see how you can unwind what's in place, really because of all the different powerunit changes that are happening right now: Audi's coming in, Alpine's going to Merc, Ford's joining. Logistically, I'm not sure how you put the genie back in the bottle."

Alpine boss Oliver Oakes, whose team has just committed to shutting down its own Renault engine programme in favour of taking customer Mercedes engines from 2026, agreed that it was now too late to consider the 2028 plan for V10s.

"I think it's quite a romantic idea but obviously the train has left the station now for 2026," he said.

"I think it is something probably beyond that that'll be looked at, because it does sound quite good for Formula 1 to go back that way a little bit."

There is no consensus nor clear road map just yet but, based on the shifting of messaging in the paddock, a return to V10s seems no longer to be a question of 'if' any more. It is now more about when.