FIA Formula E Generation 4 Car

Being the fastest at Macau track is the ultimate challenge for a street racing race car and it will push the boundaries of electric technologies to a new level.

New suppliers revealed before Christmas brought the next generation of cars another step closer, but our columnist thinks there’s a performance standard it should aim for. By Lucas di Grassi

The picture of what we can expect from Formula E’s Gen4 cars, which will arrive from 2026-27, is becoming more complete. Last month, it was announced that Bridgestone will be the new tyre supplier, replacing Hankook. Marelli will be the front powertrain supplier for the car's four-year lifespan, taking over from Lucid Motors, while Podium Advanced Technologies replaces WAE as the battery partner. Spark Racing Technology remains the chassis constructor. We know that the cars will be four-wheel drive, an overdue step that will massively improve performance levels and set new standards for all open-wheel racing.

Cars will be shorter, wider, and heavier, although we can’t say for sure if this will be better until we see the final specs. Spark will produce high- and low-downforce bodykits. And for the first time, there will be two different tyre compounds, with a typhoon tyre introduced for heavy rain alongside a grooved all-weather option. In my view, it’s time for us to have either slicks or semi-slicks that could optimize dry running. I drove on Bridgestones in Formula 1, and it’s a company with an amazing history in motorsport that knows what it’s doing. It will be an incredible asset for FE and I’m confident it will deliver what’s required, but it is the FIA that should target the right specs. We need around 10-20% more mechanical grip than we currently have to cope with the incredible torque from the four-wheel electric drive, as the cars will be able to deploy up to 600kW, which is approximately 800bhp.

Gen3 was already a massive upgrade in terms of speed, but Gen4 will be even bigger. Still, there’s lots of room for future improvements, for example, movable aerodynamics, a lighter qualifying-only battery, and independent motors for torque vectoring and four-wheel steering. These features will not be in the Gen4 car, but it's something to consider for the future. In respect to aerodynamics, I believe the two bodykits from Spark will be better, but not enough. Having fully adaptable, software-controlled aero parts would be incredible. For example, you could run high-downforce in corners and low drag in straights (and everything in between), but it is imperative that all teams have the same access to the same parts for the sake of competitiveness. Another simple change I would support is bringing back wheel covers similar to what we had in Gen2. These have only upsides: reducing drag and increasing protection against contact, while reducing spray during wet races for enhanced safety. I don’t understand why they were removed for Gen3 as we don’t change tyres in pitstops, so it is no problem at all. They must return for Gen4.

The manufacturer's ability to put their visual identity on the car is primordial. I think FE should allow the manufacturers to make the cars look different using non-performance parts like headlights and taillights without allowing aero advantages.

In a nutshell, for performance, I would have put on the requirements for Gen4 that it can race on the full Macau Guia Circuit and for at least one lap in qualifying be faster than Formula 3 and GT3 cars.

That, for me, would be a great indicator that we’ve gone in the right direction. The core of Formula E is street racing, and the best street track in the world is Macau, so what better place to target having the fastest car? The performance could then be adapted or tuned down to other tracks afterward using software control for specific races and even further, for specific segments of different tracks. In Mexico City, we could deploy its full potential, then if we go back to Paris and the cars are too fast for that track, we could simulate the maximum allowance of power per straight and control it. This would allow for much more flexibility without compromise and reducing the cost at the same time.