[fkjghfg]

I want to see refuelling banned, so that the teams have to build cars with a decent fuel capacity, and drivers have to drive to optimize their tyre wear throughout the race. Currently F1 races operate as a series of loosely connected sprints. I would prefer to see tyre changes banned also except on obvious safety grounds, but I suspect that the TV action level would drop too far if that were to be enforced, unless the new rules to increase overtaking on the track make a significant difference. Right now I only watch about 50% of the races because most of them are highly processional.

[soonahonsefalh]

Is this a cost cutting measure then? Surely the ideas being kicked around to ban refuelling and shorten the races will only have a minor affect on the amount of money spent. Surely most of it is blown on complex aerodynamics etc.

I'm too young to remember F1 without refuelling, but I think that with the current regulations and even with the 2009 specs once the teams have had fair opportunity to counter the affect will just result in no overtaking whatsoever at many races, especially at the increasing number of street circuits.

I'm really dead against shortening the races. This appears to just be so that they don't have to radically redesign the cars, thus increasing costs. But presumably even when absolutely full the current cars can't last for longer than an hour. The only race they should really shorten (and probably will do) is Singapore, which was probably just due to a miscalculation of the average speed on the circuit anyway.

[9Goarveboofe]

Not only was overtaking far more common (although there may be aerodynamic reasons for that), the races themselves were much more complex. Someone like Alain Prost would sometimes hang back in 7th or 8th place conserving fuel and tyres, then come into play towards the end of the race and often win (I think this was more during the turbo/fuel consumption era though).

And also lose on the odd occasion as Mr Bounce kindly points out:

Revival of Nash and Mobil Economy Run

Ah yes, no refuelling. The days of the Shell Mileage Marathon are back. Let us look back kindly and revisit some of those more memorable moments.

1985 San Marino GP
5 cars ran out of fuel and Prost who crossed the line first was disqualified because his car was underweight by 2kg.

1986 San Marino GP
A year later and in almost a repeat of the year before, 4 cars ran out of fuel, and Prost who won weaved feverishly across the track in an effort to slosh fuel around inside the tank.

1986 German GP
Prost had led every lap bar one but his car ran out of fuel. He tried to push the car but it was too far. Keke Rosberg also ran out of fuel and so McLaren scored 3 points for the day with cars that failed to finish.

The man who Nelson Piquet called "an uneducated blockhead", our Nige of the red 5 (praise be), said of non-refuelling that "it wasn't really racing".

[Gintovtosik]

OK I'll concede that point, but still this was during the turbo era and when cars were limited to a certain amount of fuel by the regulations.

By 1993 with normally aspirated engines (as we have currently) and fuel only limited by however big you could make your fuel tank, I don't remember running dry ever being an issue. I would also guess that the engine technology of today compared to 15 years ago would have improved fuel consumption a bit.

[LypeReexy]

Shorter races is a dumb idea. I don't see anything wrong with refuelling, besides the fact that some teams fail to do it properly.

[lipitrRrxX]

You remove another variable and races become more predictable.

Considering F1 teams want more overtaking in 2009, this will be an interesting juxtaposition. IMO it isn't necessary, but worth looking at.

[Reftsheette]

If anyone gets the chance (if you don't remember them first-hand) watch footage of races in the late 80s and early 90s when refuelling was last banned.

Not only was overtaking far more common (although there may be aerodynamic reasons for that), the races themselves were much more complex. Someone like Alain Prost would sometimes hang back in 7th or 8th place conserving fuel and tyres, then come into play towards the end of the race and often win (I think this was more during the turbo/fuel consumption era though).

Have it like le mans where you can't work on the car while it's being refuelled. You won't have these sorts of incidents happening.

I'm in favour of banning refuelling, it would several advantages from my point of view. The issue of some drivers conserving their tyres more than others would be very interesting, and the increased safety has to be a bonus.

From another point of view, it'd fit in quite nicely with the FIA's new clean 'n' green policies that they're pushing for, because all of the teams would surely try to increase the efficiency of their engines so they could run the race with less fuel onboard? Alternatively it may split the field - a big engine and a big fuel tank for some, and a much more efficient and lighter engine from others, although this would mean the minimum weight requirements would need looking at.

Look at all the great possibilities!

I'm in favor of making refueling a slow process and not having engine rules beyond 'no unobtainium' and no minimum weight. You would have teams going for the big engine which would dominate at Spa and Monza, and teams that would go for the small engine which would get around twisty tracks faster. Some would try the no stop approach, some one stop, some two stops. The reason all the cars look the same and nobody can pass is because the cars are over-regulated. Open the rules up a bit and there would be a lot more passing, and the top of the championship chart would change more from race-to-race.

[TyncTyncSah]

get over it - you would have to carry a massive amount of fuel or make the race a joke - or maybe have two or three races on race day. If you double the mileage I wonder what that would do to power. The system is fine as it is and adds excitement to what could be very boring. I used to be against refueling but unless they ban tire changes to then it is a bad idea.

[NEWyear]

Am I the only one who would prefer to have 50 mechanics during the pitstops?

Where the hack would you put that much people, around an F1 car there isn't enough place!

Still Ferrari would benefit from having 30 guys taking the decision when to release the car!

[NEWyear]

And also lose on the odd occasion as Mr Bounce kindly points out:


Ah yes, no refuelling. The days of the Shell Mileage Marathon are back. Let us look back kindly and revisit some of those more memorable moments.

1985 San Marino GP
5 cars ran out of fuel and Prost who crossed the line first was disqualified because his car was underweight by 2kg.

1986 San Marino GP
A year later and in almost a repeat of the year before, 4 cars ran out of fuel, and Prost who won weaved feverishly across the track in an effort to slosh fuel around inside the tank.

1986 German GP
Prost had led every lap bar one but his car ran out of fuel. He tried to push the car but it was too far. Keke Rosberg also ran out of fuel and so McLaren scored 3 points for the day with cars that failed to finish.

The man who Nelson Piquet called "an uneducated blockhead", our Nige of the red 5 (praise be), said of non-refuelling that "it wasn't really racing".

Easy solution they should have made those fuel bladders a tad bigger. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to come to this conclusion.
I bet that with today's knowledge they would do way better.
And reducing the fuel consumption would be an improvement in the so called "environment friendly" image over the "green" tires!

[posimoka]

Easy solution they should have made those fuel bladders a tad bigger. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to come to this conclusion.

Bet they wished they'd thought of that

Teams were only allowed to carry a limited amount of fuel. Having a bigger tank to put that same amount of fuel in would have made no difference.

[Retapleapse]

I sometimes think that when I hear the ITV jokers talking about one car having a bigger fuel tank that the others.

[WertyNtont]

You could have a rule which says that all cars must start the race with x litres of fuel on board, enough to get to the end of the race if they drive slowly, but they could refuel if they wanted.

Personally I don't see anything wrong with refuelling, but I'd like to get rid of the 'race fuel' element of qualifying, it really adds nothing. Let teams choose how much fuel they want to carry at the start of the race.

[NEWyear]

Bet they wished they'd thought of that

Teams were only allowed to carry a limited amount of fuel. Having a bigger tank to put that same amount of fuel in would have made no difference.

Than they should have reduced the consumption. No big deal either at this level of engine conception.

[posimoka]

Than they should have reduced the consumption. No big deal either at this level of engine conception.

Well I'm sure the engine manufacturers were doing what they could, and the drivers were driving always aware of their fuel consumption, but that's not really racing, it's a fuel economy run and that's what many mid-80's races were.

[NEWyear]

Well I'm sure the engine manufacturers were doing what they could, and the drivers were driving always aware of their fuel consumption, but that's not really racing, it's a fuel economy run and that's what many mid-80's races were.

So it needed more brains from the driver. And some driving knowledge too, trying to carry more speed through the corner in order to need less acceleration on the straights and thus reduce consumption levels. Excellent, I want that back in F1. Also 1 race tires should come back now that we have only one supplier.

[MwhwF6bp]

So it needed more brains from the driver. And some driving knowledge too, trying to carry more speed through the corner in order to need less acceleration on the straights and thus reduce consumption levels. Excellent, I want that back in F1. Also 1 race tires should come back now that we have only one supplier.

It depends on frequency. I've been a bit turned off from ICS road course races because it's mainly come down to fuel strategy. You can argue its the same in NASCAR but I mostly admire that its down to the drivers' foot doing the job and not relying on engine maps etc.

[Kolokireo]

Where the hack would you put that much people, around an F1 car there isn't enough place!...

Sorry, I didn't mean that literally; I meant that, within reasonable limits of safety, I see no reason to restrict the number of mechanics. I do not support regulations intended to slow down pit stops.

[Gintovtosik]

The fuel-economy era of F1 was ONLY during the final days of the turbos when a maximum fuel limit was specified (or rather the maximum size of fuel tank was specified, which led to things like teams freezing fuel to pack more of it in).

I don't remember ANY early 90's F1 race being an "economy run". And that's the sort of thing we'd be returning to if refuelling was banned.

It would also bring the added benefit of drivers actually having to adapt to changing handling characteristics as the fuel load decreased over the course of a race.

[MwhwF6bp]

Senna ran out of fuel on the last lap of the 1991 British GP whereby the infamous scene of Mansell picking up Senna for the ride back to the pits.