[JNancy46]

I must admit I don't really know what F1 is like without refuelling, as it was before my time.

Presumably we'll still see super-quick pit stops for tyres, but will the racing be more or less exciting? After all it was brought in, in the first place to mix things up a little bit. I fear we'll see more processional races as everyone in the race will have the same fuel load at the same time.

[HaroldMY]

The pit stops will probably be 2 seconds faster and less people will catch fire would be my guess..

[colmedindustry]

The biggest thing is how the drivers manage the brakes on the initial heavy fuel load. Can't remember if Williams are still vetoeing thicker disks, but this is a major factor.

Also, do you still have the stoopid 'must use both compounds in the race' rule? If yes, it'll be manage the harder tyre for a longish 1st stint then go for broke on a lighter load and the softer tyre.

The strategy boys need a sympathetic driver, so I reckon Button will flourish due to smooth style, and Rubens will do well as he can sort out the car.

Other variables are how different the cars performance is from heavy to light.

Should be interesting. Of course, the designers need to get the fuel tank sited in the best place, so that a full tank COG is not too wayward. Ferrari and McLaren could do well, as they have the space left by KERS removal to re-jig packaging.

[Bonioners]

One of the main arguments for refuelling is that it promotes overtaking. Never mind that the overtaking doesn't take place on track because at least it means a change in the order.

Never quite understood that one myself, particularly as it was promoted by a governing body which has safety near the top of its agenda and, as we saw on Sunday, fuel stops are a real danger.

Assuming that we have enjoyed pit lane passing there is a concern that without fuel stops the races may become more processional. The cars will start on the same fuel load so isn't it logical to assume the grid order will determine the race result?

I guess time will tell, but I'm looking forward to seeing how each driver/car combination manage their tyres and fuel load as it lightens. I think there will be more emphasis on the driver and IMHO that's a good thing.

[avarberickibe]

Would qualifying be on a full tank or an empty tank?
I guess it would be less exciting. It would take the variable out, like this year Lewis and Alonso got poles by running light.

Here's a question. Say a Ferrari could run the race on 100l, and a mercedes would need 120 and a cosworth 150. How would minimum weight work with that?
Would Ferrari and Mercedes based car have to be crippled so they all weighed the same? In that case, wouldn't it work out badly? (punished for better engineering)
Otherwise whoever would have the better fuel consumption would also have a lighter car, and would dominate?

How much (realistic assumption please) does the fuel load effect lap times?
And how much fuel is being used per race atm?

Heavier car would be harder on the tires too.

[drislerfottor]

Minimum weight will be with an empty tank as it is now. So it does look like fuel economy will be a significant factor. Perhaps that's an area where Cosworth can gain an advantage, even if they can't match the power of the best engines. They can still modify their engine with the knowledge that economy is going to be important, while everyone else has designs that were frozen when refuelling was the norm.

[avarberickibe]

Minimum weight will be with an empty tank as it is now. So it does look like fuel economy will be a significant factor. Perhaps that's an area where Cosworth can gain an advantage, even if they can't match the power of the best engines. They can still modify their engine with the knowledge that economy is going to be important, while everyone else has designs that were frozen when refuelling was the norm.

How high are cosworths allowed to rev? 19,000 and the rest at 18?
If so, wouldn't a higher engine rev limit mean more fuel being used (all else being equal)?

[drislerfottor]

How high are cosworths allowed to rev? 19,000 and the rest at 18?
If so, wouldn't a higher engine rev limit mean more fuel being used (all else being equal)?

I think it might well be true that more revs would mean a thirstier engine, but AFAIK Cosworth are not getting a rev limit advantage any more - can anyone else confirm?

[XqrkN4a0]

We may well end up with vastly different strategies. For example some smoother drivers will be able to go longer without neededing to stop whereas people like Hamilton will need to stop more often. Could be the case that you get Button one stopping and LH 3 stopping, obviously that's a bit extreme but 2 more stops (with no fuel penalty or advantage) can ruin a race so the smooth drivers will, in theory, suit the system better.

[JNancy46]

I think a lot depends on what sort of tyres they give them. i.e. Sticky tyres that'll allow you to do three quick stints or harder ones which allow you to one stop.

Hopefully they'll get rid of the use both rule.

[EzekelEnzino]

The biggest thing is how the drivers manage the brakes on the initial heavy fuel load. Can't remember if Williams are still vetoeing thicker disks, but this is a major factor.

Their are vetoing anything, it's in their blood.

[EzekelEnzino]

I think it might well be true that more revs would mean a thirstier engine, but AFAIK Cosworth are not getting a rev limit advantage any more - can anyone else confirm?

Confirmed.

[EzekelEnzino]

Would qualifying be on a full tank or an empty tank?

Almost empty tank.

[EzekelEnzino]

We may well end up with vastly different strategies. For example some smoother drivers will be able to go longer without neededing to stop whereas people like Hamilton will need to stop more often. Could be the case that you get Button one stopping and LH 3 stopping, obviously that's a bit extreme but 2 more stops (with no fuel penalty or advantage) can ruin a race so the smooth drivers will, in theory, suit the system better.

Depends how much faster the aggressive drivers will be able to go, especially considering that they will have new tires available every 20 laps or so, so they will be able to push almost continuously.
With pit stop times being reduced to less than 20 seconds, a driver doing 2 stops will need to make 1/3 seconds per lap to beat the one stopper, not that hard.

[XqrkN4a0]

Depends how much faster the aggressive drivers will be able to go, especially considering that they will have new tires available every 20 laps or so, so they will be able to push almost continuously.
With pit stop times being reduced to less than 20 seconds, a driver doing 2 stops will need to make 1/3 seconds per lap to beat the one stopper, not that hard.

But if having to do 3 stops due to s**gged tyres then it would be 2/3 second (I assume) which is pretty tricky. Also when fuel isn't a factor I'm not convinced that 3 tenths will be that easy to find.

[EzekelEnzino]

But if having to do 3 stops due to s**gged tyres then it would be 2/3 second (I assume) which is pretty tricky. Also when fuel isn't a factor I'm not convinced that 3 tenths will be that easy to find.

Let's not push it. I don't think that Button is such a smooth driver that he will only need 1 stop when others need 3.
If however he somehow manages to make only one stop when others needed 3 than he sure will be more than 0.666 seconds / lap slower in order to do that.

[JNancy46]

Of course the last time we had non-refuelling pit stops, we also did not have a pit lane speed limit.

[JNancy46]

Let's not push it. I don't think that Button is such a smooth driver that he will only need 1 stop when others need 3.
If however he somehow manages to make only one stop when others needed 3 than he sure will be more than 0.666 seconds / lap slower in order to do that.

I think it might be more like Button will need to stop the same amount of times as the other drivers. But in the latter part of his stint he should have more grip than the other more ragged drivers and be able to make up some time..

[XqrkN4a0]

I said it was an extreme case, we all know that LH throws the car around and will generally need to stop more than anyone else. Plus in certain temperatures different car and tyre combinations throw up weird situations.

[NerbuitW]

Assuming that we have enjoyed pit lane passing there is a concern that without fuel stops the races may become more processional. The cars will start on the same fuel load so isn't it logical to assume the grid order will determine the race result?

I guess time will tell, but I'm looking forward to seeing how each driver/car combination manage their tyres and fuel load as it lightens. I think there will be more emphasis on the driver and IMHO that's a good thing.

I a very valid point. Several things concern me about next year and I hope that if (like IRL) the races become dull the FIA will realise that some of the following things may need to change;

1) Parc Ferme. If we line up in order, and assuming everyone has similar fuel consumtion etc how can we expect the guy P3 to outpace P1? We can't. Thinking back over the years the have been numerous examples of a bad Saturday turning into a good Sunday with some clever adjustments overnight. Shumi and Benetton were a master of it in '94 & '95. McLaren also in Detroit (?) Qualified nearly last and went on to win.

2) Two compounds. Dumb, dumb, dumb. This removes the option of a no stopper, or a mid race one stop for that matter too. We need variation in stratagy to give performance differences = racing.

I hope I'm wrong and the fastest car on low fuel is not automatically fast on brimmed tanks but I do hope that if the show is poor the FIA waste no time in acting.