No refuelling from 2010

Autosport had this to say about the subject ->>

"It was confirmed that from 2010, refuelling during a race will be forbidden in order to save the costs of transporting refuelling equipment and increase the incentive for engine builders to improve fuel economy (to save weight)," said the FIA in a statement following a meeting of the World Motor Sport Council.

The governing body also confirmed that tyre blankets will be banned from 2010 and that the ban on other tyre-heating devices will be maintained.

* * * *

BMW and those using Mercedes power could definitely improve their fuel economy with diesel engines. Look with Audi has done with their new diesel engine in the R15.

Carol

 

Lets hope that atleast petrol will be the choice of fuel. Diesel engines sound rubbish (audi LM car anyone?).

For the rest I'm quite in favor of the new rule. not so much the tyre blankets though.

 

Heard and seen the Pugs and the R10, R15's run - they don't sound rubbish.....noise doesn't equal speed. (to each their own)

F1 is rapidly becoming a spec series. With no refuelling, they will have to come up with come creative innovations to keep the car running for 50 lap races and not having a 25 lap F1 race charging 500€ for that Sunday seat at Barcelona.

Carol

 

wow..i think F1 is coming more and more of a standard sport. I found the 2005 no tyre change was extremely boring. Wonder what this will conclude to.

 

+1. When the spec engine is approved(its only a matter of time) F1 is gone. Now more than ever the FOTA need to end this and break away and form a new F1 series that allows people to race, refuel, use tires and engines and provide a quality experience for that wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy over priced 500euro slab of plastic - i mean seat.

Racing was speed first, winning and F1 uses so little fuel in the larger scheme of things its irrelevant. The world has enough room for an all out series or something along those lines that F1 should be. I burn enough sitting in traffic to not worry about what F1 might or might not save. Its pathetic.

 

Boring. No refueling means effectively no pit strategy. Watch the qualifying and go golfing on Sunday, because unless the (rev-limited and technically frozen) engines blow up or it rains, the race is already over.

 

This has to be one of the worst decisions, I want to see faster cars not slower. I want to see cars racing on Petrol, not Diesel or Ethanol.

If they change to sub 1 litre engines...I mean how much fuel usage can they cut they are already running 2.4l V8's NA. 1.2l straight 4's give me a break.

I think redbull air racing is going be the new F1.
Bernie you little leprechaun you are destroying one of the greatest sports in the world!

I foresee MotoGP being quicker than F1.

 

Welcome to the F1 Skip Barber series! God help us. I might as well go down the interstate and bet on the color of the next truck to drive by, at least that would be more exciting.

 

Well at least it will help Ferrari, pit stop strategy, not exactly there greatest accomplishments of late...

 

Gee, F1 seemed pretty exciting before there was refueling.

Not having refueling doesn't preclude good racing, though the current formula does..at least before this year.

And if you find golf more exciting than racing....aw, I can't figure you out...on one hand you want the excitement of the video game generation, on the other you say you might prefer golf instead. Now, golf........that's exciting is it?

 

to each their own indeed. for me part of the spectacle is the noise of the cars. I was already saddened that the V10s had to be scrapped as they sounded beautiful.

 

Pit stop strategy during the race, and also how it ties into qualifying is a great part of what makes F1 so interesting to watch. Big mistake imo. They should also go back to not publishing race weights.

 

How long are races going to last without refueling...10 minutes?

They're going to need some BIIIIIG fuel tanks...

BTW, I hope I'll NEVER see a diesel engine on an F1 car. That would be so sad. I really like diesel engines...but not on sports/racecars. It would just be wrong

 

This is just the first step......the second shoe to drop will be a significant increase in KERS time per lap. By doing that you place a premium on making a very effective and reliable KERS and get to reuse the energy / fuel lost to braking.

 

True, first F1 experience for me I had goosebumps hearing them scream, loved it!

Although I'm not one to disagree with Carol, I can't knock it till ave tried it.

 

I remember reading somewhere that the state of California uses more fuel in one day than all motor sports activities do for one year.

 

Hmmm......

Firstly, F1 has done pretty well for over 50 years - I haven't checked, but guess about 50% of that was with no refueling (?)

It also doesn't appear to rule out pit stops for tires - Although the need for tires will be in Bridgestones hands - If they continue to bring 2 (widely different) compounds we may still have "in race strategy". I've said this before - I think this spread in tires, while contrived, is actually a pretty good thing - Sure, they moan and whine about the tires going off, but come the race they all seem to manage somehow. And some cars go better on one than the other - At least for a while.

OTOH, I can see B/stone only bringing a single, wooden, compound and then pitstops will go away completely.

I do agree on the "no diesels" in F1 sentiment - I like diesels, but a "whoosh" as a basically silent race car goes by simply doesn't do it for me - I'm old (fortunate?) enough to remember the Matra (*that* sounded ungodly!), the Ferrari boxer, and other engines that have come and gone over the years - I remember Renaults first race with the turbo - *That* was going to kill F1 'cos it "didn't sound right" - Times change.......

My 02c,
Cheers,
Ian

 

If they were consequent, they'd set a standard fuel tank size, too, so you effectively had to cover the distance with a given amount of energy. THAT would be great.

 

Why not just go back to the Rules from the 70's and early 80's before refuelling, was pretty exciting if you ask me. The thing that is scary is the Spec Engine, Transmission, Etc. By the way I don't blame Bernie, I blame the FIA for the stupid rules and the Manufacturers for the spending spree to take off minimal seconds a lap at a high price which no one notices anyway.

 

On the other hand it also means in order to gain positions you must actually pass cars on the track.

 

F1 is becoming more of a joke every year. Its meant to be the panicle of motor sport gees at this rate the V8s in oz will have better cars in 5 year and man they are cr@p.
I think the Teams need to go back to the break away plan

 

F1 will always be the pinnacle of racing just as long as (like most have mentioned) they do not go to a spec engine, transimission, aero package etc. Those changes will very likely "kill" the sport. But (and please explain if im wrong) doesnt changing the rules every frigging year end up costing more money to the teams? It seems as if every year the engineers have to scrap last years car and then go back to the drawing board to design the current years car. To me that would cost more rather than freezing the rules for 2 or 3 years and only allowing very suttle changes to the already existing car.

 

I was trying to figure out how the FIA crafted the new rules to suit Ferrari
BTW don't forget those pesky loose wheel nuts that the Scuderia seems to favor.
Greetings from the Grassy Knoll.