The Power Struggle Red Bull Won't Talk About

There is a version of Red Bull Racing’s 2026 story that makes perfect sense on paper: new power unit regulations, a new in-house engine, and a team built to dominate the hybrid era finally controlling its own destiny.

Then there is the version nobody is saying out loud.

The real tension

The chassis group in Milton Keynes and the powertrain division in the new campus are operating with fundamentally different design philosophies. This is not a disagreement about downforce levels or cooling package sizing. It is a structural tension about who owns the car concept.

Red Bull has spent a decade building cars around available power units. First Renault, then the Honda-derived units. The engineering culture is chassis-led. The aerodynamicists set the packaging targets, and the engine fits inside whatever space they allocate.

The powertrain division does not see it that way.

Why this matters now

The 2026 regulations increase the electrical component of the power unit significantly. The battery and motor generator units are physically larger. Cooling demands are different. The integration challenge is not incremental. It is a fundamental rethink of how the car is packaged.

A chassis-led philosophy says: we define the bodywork shape, you make the engine fit. A powertrain-led philosophy says: our thermal and electrical architecture sets the constraints, you design around us.

Neither is wrong. But you cannot run both simultaneously.

The signal to watch

Pay attention to the sidepod packaging when the RB22 breaks cover. If the sidepods are tight and aggressive, the chassis group won. If they are notably larger than the competition, the powertrain group set the packaging targets. The shape of the car will tell you who has the political power inside that building, before a single lap is turned.