F1 Fuel Cap in 2013

I agree in that lap records aren't being broken, but if the lap record breaking continued, eventually you would see top speeds hitting somewhere in the region of 240mph+. The FIA have prevented this and as such the speeds are being (almost) maintained.

I haven't analysed the lap times achieved in 2010, Vs lap times achieved in 2004, but I donot believe the difference is significant.

As an example, I chose to look at Spa - a huge track, with the longest lap time, consisting of every type of corner.

in 2004, fastest race lap: 1:45.108 on lap 42
in 2009, fastest race lap: 1:47.263 on lap 38

Indeed there is a drop off in performance by 2 seconds, but I don't believe it is significant enough to be worried. Average speeds are almost identical (consider how long the circuit is) and the viewing public would never ever know that the car is going 1mph slower, on average.
 
Austrlia
Lap Record: 1:24.125 - M Schumacher (2004)
Mark Webber Red Bull-Renault 1:28.358


China
Lap Record: 1:32.238 - M Schumacher (2004)
Lewis Hamilton 2 McLaren-Mercedes 1:42.061

Spain
Lap Record: 1:21.670 - K Raikkonen (2008)
Lewis Hamilton McLaren-Mercedes 1:24.357

Monaco
Lap Record: 1:14.439 - M Schumacher (2004)
Sebastian Vettel Red Bull-Renault 3 1:15.192

Turkey
Lap Record: 1:24.770 - JP Montoya (2005)
Vitaly Petrov Renault 1:29.165

Canada
Lap Record: 1:13.622 - R Barrichello (2004)
Robert Kubica Renault 1:16.972

some of that will be from circuit alterations, but I would say that's significantly slower.
rap records should be being broken every few years, restrict, catch up, surpass, restrict again.
The restrictions should also allow development, which is why I like limited fuel with every 2 years reduction, but engine should not have capacity, cyclinder, valve restrictions. With limited fuel, you do not need tight restrictions.
 
AcidHell2 said:
Austrlia
Lap Record: 1:24.125 - M Schumacher (2004)
Mark Webber Red Bull-Renault 1:28.358


China
Lap Record: 1:32.238 - M Schumacher (2004)
Lewis Hamilton 2 McLaren-Mercedes 1:42.061

Spain
Lap Record: 1:21.670 - K Raikkonen (2008)
Lewis Hamilton McLaren-Mercedes 1:24.357

Monaco
Lap Record: 1:14.439 - M Schumacher (2004)
Sebastian Vettel Red Bull-Renault 3 1:15.192

Turkey
Lap Record: 1:24.770 - JP Montoya (2005)
Vitaly Petrov Renault 1:29.165

Canada
Lap Record: 1:13.622 - R Barrichello (2004)
Robert Kubica Renault 1:16.972
Click to expand...

Are those qualifying times or race fastest race lap times?
 
The problem with comparing race lap times from 2004 and 2010 is that re-fuelling was removed. This means that the setup of the cars have changed to handle the extra fuel loads. The best example is use the 2009 lap times, as the performance of the cars is directly comparable with 2004.

Spa, gives the best indication, simply because it is the circuit which contains all corners.
 
5 mpg doesn't actually sound that bad does it? To say they are the fastest cars in the world being driven to the limit 5 mpg doesn't sound that excessive.

I'll be very surprised (and dissapointed) if they go anywhere near GP2 laptimes, surely the power would have to drop significantly for that to happen.
 
And don't they already offset the CO2 emissions anyway? Thought I read in F1 Racing a year or two ago that they plant loads of trees a year?
 
TaKeN said:
They're ruining the sport, why I ask.. just why.. do these people never think 'Let's see what the public thinks' ?
Click to expand...
Big money sponsors and investors do not and cannot be seen to be promoting and supporting what is a relatively harmful sport to the environment.

People might scoff about green credentials and so on, but to many corporations it is becoming an absolutely essential part of what deals and arrangements they come to.
 
Although many people don't like the idea of it, turbocharged, small engines are the future of the vast, vast majority of passenger cars, and we'll see them become smaller and smaller with bigger hybrid drives getting put there in place of them.

Though turbo'd F1 left 2 decades ago, when it does come back (and it will), it will actually have relevance. Sure, you'll never see half the technology on a road car, but the idea of downsized engines + hybrid/kers is the future, until we run out of fossil fuels and are running the cars on hydrogen!

I don't really mind too much about how the cars are powered, as long as it gives some good racing!

Dave
 
I agree, but the restrictions are so heavy. the kers/engines can not be developed, so there is still no relevant investment for car manufactures, to get involved in f1. This is something, they have to solve, at the moment it is only investing as advertising. Rather than investing for research/product like the old days. It also makes fuel saving pretty pointless. What is being achieved, there's no development for efficiency and you save no co2 and it's totally pointless outside of f1.

If you restrict fuel, you need no other restrictions on engine development.
 
Weren't the Turbo'ed cars given a fuel restriction as well as the 'pop off' valves in 1988? IIRC it was 150L for a race distance.

The McLaren MP4/4 was an awesome machine and only had a 1.5L Turbo engine but won the season at a canter (would've been a white (and red) wash but for a certain J L Schlesser), although several big teams had written off '88 as a 'transition' year before the all-NA cars rule came in for '89. (showing my age here?!)
 
One possible set of rules I'd like to see would be composed of only 3 rules:
- Tires as they are now, but with softer compounds and no requirement to use both types
- A fuel limit
- A common shell (ie exterior). This would heavily reduce costs and go some way towards solving the aero problem.

Everything else if fair game. Personally I think this would promote the sort of development that manufacturers want, give some diversity in (mechanical) car design and improve the racing considerably.

Never gonnna happen though, especially now all the top teams have bought wind-tunnels :)
 
Last edited:
Weebull said:
Wouldn't the best way to reduce CO2 emissions be to stop adding excessive far-flung race locations to the calendar?
Click to expand...

it's not about saving co2.

It's two things

1) appearing to be green
2) embracing green technology to attract companies. Which hopefully will be useful outside the world of f1.


F1 use to be the test bed and development of a lot of innovation, which was then applied to the car and other industries. As such companies invested as they got something tangible out of it. This has been lost and all companies get is advertising.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom