It's been a few years, and I'm still happy that RE-FUELING is gone.
 

Re-fueling is inherently dangerous. I always cringed when a driver gunned it prior to the fuel hose being disengaged. The teams obviously kept searching for ways to make a pit stop faster, so eventually - at least I thought - there would be a fiery incident and a driver and/or crew members would be severely burned.

Also, I hated when the only time we saw a car pass another car was in the pits. That always made me roll my eyes during the 2008 season. I think the racing is better now that the drivers have to contend with a very heavy car at the beginning of the race, nurse a car if running low on fuel, and be able to keep a fast pace on low fuel towards the end of the race.

I feel as if F1 is more safe and more fun since re-fueling was axed. What say ye?

I agree completely.

Added to that, I'm very happy that qualifying is run on low fuel nowadays. It is proper qualifying again.

The FIA are wise and benevolent. http://www.motorsportforums.com/imag...ies/tongue.gif

I guess it's better with no refueling. They only need to allow that drs be used at any time or not at all and I'd be pretty satisfied.

Yes, I have to agree, that I don't miss it at all. There's enough strategy going on with tyre stops to keep the interest up. I guess we are lucky all those years with refuelling that nobody was killed.

I liked the magic with Ross and Michael did in the years with refueling, but with tons of overtaking thanks to the DRS and Pirelli, now F1 is more fun, I have to admit.

Yes I don't miss refuelling. In addition to the benefits already mentioned, I like that the teams have the challenge of setting the car up to run with the full range of weight conditions from 150kg of fuel to empty.

Gone are the days of pit/fuel strategy of hanging back, save fuel, bang out some banzai laps, pray for a quick and efficient, bang out a few more laps and find that you've passed the car in front.

Stringing together quali style laps and being on the limit was an amazing and appreciative piece of skill but more akin to TTs. Its not what F1 racing is about.

It's down to the drivers now to pass on the track.

While I don't like refuelling, I'm against regulations so think the teams should be allowed to use it if they want.

I think you should give teams a box that the car must fit inside, tyres for the weekend and an amount of fuel for the race and let them get on with it.

I liked refuelling at the time, but I can't argue with the arguments above about the races being better now. Besides, it's not as if it's a 24-hour race, or even a four-hour enduro, where refuelling would be a requirement.

But at the same time, Knockie's spot on about the regulations. Bring back the option of differing numbers of cylinders at the very least...

At the time it was first banned, I thought I would miss watching all the different pit strategies play out. But since it's actually started, I like the issues it creates with car setups more. Not to mention that now the tire stops are just fast to the point of insane at times!

Indeed - being issued with a set amount of fuel per race, will even things out anyway. The emphasis will be on driveability and economy coupled with longevity. I'd quite like to see how the Williams CVT would have aided fuel efficiency, as that allowed the engine to run at its peak rev band and the transmission did the rest.

Most likely it would end up like Indycar and NASCAR where there is a lot of emphasis on saving fuel and economising fuel because of the mandated size of the fuel tank. That style of racing isn't racing if you had to put up with it week in week out.

I've been banging on about this for years to anybody who will listen. Often to people who didn't really want to listen but nodded along politely anyway. The only thing I'd add is that the amount of fuel should decrease season by season, and it should be up to the teams to supplement this with whatever recovery systems or alternative power they see fit.

Not if you freed up the regulations to allow energy recovery systems, solar power, or whatever else some of the world's best engineers can produce.

I'd support that concept http://www.motorsportforums.com/images/styles/World/icons/icon14.gif

Well, in many series fuel economy is important, IndyCar, Stock Car, Endurance... now F1. It's normal. Maybe only the BTCC is about flat out racing... even there you must nurture your tyres.

I think refueling era had its own charm. It was a different spectacle and definetely for people, who like to enjoy flat-out driving - sprints between pitstops.

Whether refueling would be a good addition or not, depends on the regulations. IMO in 2010 refueling was a bit missed, because due to those hard Bridgestones little was going on in the races and refueling strategies could have added an extra depth to races. But since the introduction of Pirellis I don't think we are missing anything - races are exciting and are also strategically interesting. Like we saw in China - 2 stops vs 3 stops.

Of course but with regulation on the amount fuel the more likely fuel economy becomes important when an average race is 1.5 hours - 2hrs.

I always thought F1 should have been left in a similar way to Dave and Knock.

Give the teams a set box as mentioned and allow some free enterprise. Design the car how you want, give the teams a set amount of all compound tyres and use hardest or softest which ever you reckon will give you best race strategy. Allow 0 stops, 1 stop or 4 stop. Teams can choose. Allow fuel race fuel tanks and re fueling if they want, so they can use as much fuel or as little as they want.

Imagine the strategy differences you could come up with in races.

The problem with all this I said above is costs.

Not very compatible with F1's cost savings