Honda Confirms 2026 Engine Performance Step But Driveability Gap Exposed: Aston Martin Faces the Chassis-PU Balance Equation

Zandvoort, Netherlands – In a technical press conference typically dominated by evasive answers, Koji Orihara, Honda's F1 project leader, pulling a piece of paper from his jacket pocket was a notable anomaly. He held it up, looked around the room, and declared: "I brought the answer for the horsepower questions. But I will not read it." The room laughed. And that, in a way, was the clearest signal of what Honda had just done with its internal combustion engine (ICE).

This is not a revolutionary announcement. No horsepower figures, no specific lap time improvements. But it is the first confirmation from Honda of a performance step from their first power unit upgrade package of the 2026 season, introduced at Zandvoort – just weeks after Adrian Newey's first major upgrade package for Aston Martin in Hungary. And more importantly, it exposed a problem that the team and engine supplier are now jointly addressing: driveability.

"We have confirmed what we saw on the dyno," Orihara told reporters. "It is a step forward." But immediately after, he admitted: "On the driveability side, there are still some issues that the drivers feel are not yet satisfying."

This combination of "step forward" and "not yet satisfying" paints a nuanced picture of one of the most important technical relationships reshaping the F1 landscape ahead of the 2026 regulation revolution.

The Deliberate Scope of the Upgrade: All About the ICE

The first thing to clarify: this upgrade package does not touch the ERS, MGU-H, MGU-K, or battery systems. The entire focus is on the internal combustion engine. This is fully consistent with the power unit development freeze regulations that came into effect in 2026, which only permit reliability and driveability improvements during the season.

Based on my experience following engine development cycles over the years, I see this choice as deliberate. Honda is not seeking a revolutionary leap in performance. They are making a controlled refinement. Focusing solely on the ICE allows the engineering team at HRC Sakura to isolate variables, measure impact more precisely, and most importantly, collect real-world operational data from the track to correlate with dyno data.

And here, we arrive at the crux of the story.

The Dyno Doesn't Lie, But the Dyno Doesn't Know How to Drive

Orihara confirmed that the absolute performance measured on the dyno has been validated on track. This means Honda's development tools are reliable for pure performance parameters. But the driveability issues the drivers feel – that is not a hardware problem.

Let me explain why this matters. A dyno is a perfectly controlled environment. It measures power, torque, and efficiency under stable operating conditions. But an F1 lap is never stable. It is a continuous sequence of transient states: heavy braking into corners, deceleration, coasting, acceleration out of corners. It is in these transitional moments – these "silences" between intentions – that the difference between a good engine and a great engine is made.

The driveability issues Honda acknowledged encompass multiple aspects: gearshift behavior, combustion stability during braking phases, engine braking, and the smoothness of torque pickup when the driver opens the throttle. This is not a single fault. It is a set of points requiring refinement in the data maps and control tools.

What does this mean? It means Honda is facing a software optimization problem, not a mechanical design failure. And with no further hardware changes planned, the path to improvement lies in calibration – a process that can be iterated rapidly across race weekends.

Evidence of this is Honda's response speed. Within the 10 days between Zandvoort and Monza, the engineering team at HRC Sakura developed countermeasures, brought driver feedback to the dyno, tested, and prepared for validation at the Italian high-speed circuit.

But here, I want to offer a caveat based on what I have observed from similar development cycles: Monza may not be the ideal test.

Zandvoort, with its banked corners and constant elevation changes, is one of the most demanding circuits for transient engine operation. Monza, with its high-speed configuration and low downforce, poses completely different demands. If Honda's countermeasures work well at Monza, that is a positive signal. But the real validation may have to wait for a circuit with similar characteristics to Zandvoort – where the problem was originally exposed.

The Contrarian View: Driveability is a Chassis Problem, Not Just an Engine Problem

This is the part I believe many analyses miss. Mike Krack, Aston Martin team principal, has cautiously but clearly emphasized that driveability is "also a chassis topic."

Think about this. When a driver brakes and turns into a corner, the interaction between regenerative braking strategy, chassis balance, and how the engine delivers torque creates a complex system. If Newey's upgrade package at Hungary has changed the aerodynamic and mechanical balance of the AMR24 – which is almost certainly the case – then it may have also changed how the car reacts during braking and corner entry phases.

In other words, the driveability issues drivers feel may not come entirely from the engine. It could be the result of an interaction between a new engine (with different combustion characteristics) and a new chassis (with different balance characteristics). This is a multi-dimensional optimization problem, requiring close collaboration between Honda and Aston Martin.

Krack's public framing of the issue this way is not just a technical remark. It is a signal of the partnership's maturity. Instead of pointing fingers at the engine supplier, Aston Martin is accepting a share of the responsibility. This builds trust – a crucial factor as both parties head toward a formal works partnership from 2026.

The Long Game: 2026 Lessons for the 2026 Revolution

Every tactical diagram starts with a shaky hand-drawn line on PowerPoint. Similarly, every driveability improvement starts with acknowledging the problem on track.

This story is not just about fixing an immediate issue. It is part of a much larger strategy. The 2026 engine regulation revolution, with increased electrification and sustainable fuels, is the real goal of the Honda-Aston Martin partnership.

The lessons about combustion stability, about calibrating control tools under transient conditions, and about engine-chassis integration – all of these will be transferred directly into the 2026 engine architecture. The current driveability work, while important for the 2026 season, is strategically a learning exercise.

And that is why Honda's transparency here is notable. Publicly acknowledging driveability issues, rather than hiding or downplaying them, is a credibility-building move. It shows Aston Martin that Honda has a systematic problem-solving process. It demonstrates a willingness to collaborate, not to assign blame.

Transition is not a stretch of running. It is the silence between two intentions that few can read. In this context, driveability is that silence – where the engineer's intention and the driver's feeling meet, or fail to meet.

The Open Question

When Honda talks about a "step forward" without providing specific numbers, they are deliberately managing expectations. The piece of paper Orihara brought to Zandvoort but did not read is a perfect symbol of this: the answer exists, but it is not for the public.

The real question is not how much horsepower Honda has found. The question is whether they can convert that horsepower into consistent lap times in the hands of the drivers. And that depends on solving the driveability puzzle – a puzzle that lies not only in Sakura, but also in the integration between engine and chassis at Aston Martin's headquarters.

A misplaced pass is not a mistake. It is data the system is trying to send you. The driveability issue at Zandvoort is a data signal. The question is whether Honda and Aston Martin can read it correctly and respond correctly before the season enters its decisive phase.

Monza will be the first checkpoint. But the real track for evaluation – where everything will be exposed – may still lie ahead.