Fuel limit rethink?

[SiLo]

So I was wondering about the fuel limit and how difficult it is to accurately measure the fuel rates across all the team fairly. I came to the conclusion that it will never be as fair as the teams want in a sport where 1/1000th of a second matters.

I like the idea of only having 100KG of fuel to use for the race, obviously if we take away that fuel flow rate, I'm guessing the team would simply use all the fuel with higher flow rates for more power from the engine. To combat this I came up with an idea (please shoot me down if you think it's stupid):

Basically, the cars still have the 100kg limit for each race, but there are points awarded for each 1kg of fuel not used across the race not including DSQ's.

It would be great to see teams trying to win and race for points whilst also doing it as efficiently as possible. It's a chance for the lower teams to maybe grab some points, but they still have to remain within certain margins otherwise they may be deemed to slow to race etc.

Obviously there would be problems with teams that were not competing for top ten points, where they run super slow using no fuel to get more fuel points. Maybe this fuel points thing could be a fuel championship with its own team awards I don't know... Anyway, what do you guys think? Can we spitball a bit and see what people can come up with?

Please don't post if you're simply going to say "Duuhh you stoopid". Let's have some proper discussion

[WhiteBlue]

AsJean Todt pointed out there cannot be changes unless there is unanimous agreement which will never be there. Your proposal is unrealistic considering that the leading teams have the say in the strategy group. I don't think anything like it will come.

There could be a special price for fuel conservation by the pool of fuel suppliers but I doubt they would have much interest. At Le Mans they do it for tyres.

[Dragonfly]

I think an average fuel flow limit per minute is much easier achievable and more fair. In addition it gives some new strategy opportunities.
Momentary flow limit IMHO is a self imposed goal without much practical effect other than potential scandals and controversies. With so many other limitations and race distance fuel cap I don't think it is necessary.

[Racechick]

I wondered from the start why there had to be a fuel flow limit. Why not just give them the limited fuel and leave the strategy of managing it up to the teams? Scope then for clever strategies. I was told that the fuel flow limit was to stop discrepancies of speed being too great..ie. someone going mad on the turbo button and another car not turboing at all.is that so, the reason for the flow restriction? ( sorry for the poor technical description....on a site with 'technical' in its title )

Whatever the reason for it, it's the rule, and to change if mid season would be unfair. All teams knew the rules, some just did their homework better.

[MOWOG]

I think an average fuel flow limit per minute is much easier achievable and more fair. In addition it gives some new strategy opportunities.
Momentary flow limit IMHO is a self imposed goal without much practical effect other than potential scandals and controversies. With so many other limitations and race distance fuel cap I don't think it is necessary.

Quite correct, sir! =D>

And while I agree about no rule changes in the middle of the season, we do have the embarrassing example of Pirelli knuckling under to pressure from Red Bull last year and making significant changes to the tires in mid year. In Formula One, the only thing that matters is who has the most horsepower OFF the track.

[mertol]

Why would you want points for fuel economy? This would make mercedes even stronger. I don't want ANY rules for saving in F1! ERS, DRS, limited fuel, limited tires, limited engines, LIMITED RACING. Let them race I don't want to watch this phony F1.

[lebesset]

Why would you want points for fuel economy? This would make mercedes even stronger. I don't want ANY rules for saving in F1! ERS, DRS, limited fuel, limited tires, limited engines, LIMITED RACING. Let them race I don't want to watch this phony F1.

what you really suggest is the end of F1
without these technology changes

renault would have withdrawn
honda would not come back
and rumour says mercedes were considering withdrawing completely

[thedutchguy]

what you really suggest is the end of F1
without these technology changes

renault would have withdrawn
honda would not come back
and rumour says mercedes were considering withdrawing completely

So what? Ferrari would definitely have stayed and Cosworth an Zetec would have been more than happy to build V8 or V10 engines. The whole notion that F1 should be a showcase for car manufacturors is wrong, and so is energy saving.

I know that energy saving is important in the real world, I'm reminded every time I fill up my tank, thank you. When I watch F1, I want to be entertained, not be reminded that the world is going to hell if we don't switch to hybrid cars. The new graphic which shows the % of fuel used - while technically nice - should have nothing to do with F1. It's supposed to be a show people, not a lesson in economical driving.

They should have kept al the energy-efficiency crap in endurance and touring car racing and let F1 be wat it's supposed to be: The fastest cars belting down the track for 90 minutes. Race pace on most circuits is now round 8 to 10 seconds slower than in 2004, when F1 was at it's fastest. Make me wanna cry..

I know it isn't going to happen, but please bring back engines with 900+ hp in cars that weigh less than 600kg's. And while you're at it, a new tire war and refueling during the races would be nice too.

[mertol]

In the golden years of F1 almost everyone used the same engine. I don't give a rat's ass about renault and mercedes. They were absent before and F1 didnt end. But the turbos are not the reason I said they are limited. I'm talking about the development freeze. If this was about developing the technology then this freeze makes no sense.