http://en.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/080703164727.shtml

........I have been suggesting this for years in my small circle of friends. Hopefully turbo's and other 'innovations' will now be allowed back in to F1. Also, according to Moseleys letter, the developments used to save fuel should be 'road' focused.

My idea is a simple one, give the teams a fixed fuel allowance and slack off a load of other rules and let the creative F1 talent produce innovation valid to us all!

I won't listen to Moseley......he's a fruit loop.
F1 should be the last bastien of out and out racing. It's not an endurance race to see how far you go on tank of fuel, it is who covers the distance the fastest.
If I wanted economy, I would have traded my car in for a sinclair C5.
I want to see racing.

quote:

---

Originally posted by nitram38
I won't listen to Moseley......he's a fruit loop.
F1 should be the last bastien of out and out racing. It's not an endurance race to see how far you go on tank of fuel, it is who covers the distance the fastest.
If I wanted economy, I would have traded my car in for a sinclair C5.
I want to see racing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by carpmart

quote:

---

Originally posted by nitram38
I won't listen to Moseley......he's a fruit loop.
F1 should be the last bastien of out and out racing. It's not an endurance race to see how far you go on tank of fuel, it is who covers the distance the fastest.
If I wanted economy, I would have traded my car in for a sinclair C5.
I want to see racing.

---

Agree Mosely is a complete prat but I disagree on the rest.

F1 is about technology. Diesels were clattery old things in buses and plant until innovation took hold and now they are relatively efficient, high power producing engines winning Le Mans.

Why not have the F1 paddock focused on producing the same speed from less fuel. This ahs to help us as petrol heads as we all love power and performance but with fuel prices rocketing, it would be good to ge that performance from less fuel.

I hope you get my drift on this????

---

F1 the most boring motorsport on the planet ! BTCC is far better as well as nascar.

Easy, I don't know what all the fuss is about!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jackman
F1 the most boring motorsport on the planet ! BTCC is far better as well as nascar.

---

You guys have got a short memory.
In the days before fuel stops, you raced on the tank of fuel you started with, for the whole race. The tanks had a maximum size, the distance of the race was set so there was your limits.
Cars are still encouraged to use less fuel as more fuel requires more pitstops.
If you don't have a fuel effiecient car, you will lose the race.
Your arguement is flawed

Mmmmmmmm! there are many other motorsport series that run more competetively without the use of turbos ! I think F1 has other issues like the cars being to relient on down force etc

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jackman
F1 the most boring motorsport on the planet ! BTCC is far better as well as nascar.

---

I thought they had just recently decided to halt engine development to stop build costs rising.

All Moseley's letter means is millions is spent on research again and boring racing is the result as the fat wallet teams buy their way to the front again.
How are the smaller teams supposed to compete?

Why not just limit the max size of fuel tanks.... Consider the penalty of pit stops I'm sure the cars would become fuel efficient....

As I said, it's called RACING, not ENDURING.
They already have championships for driving the furthest on 1 ltr of petrol etc.
It's interesting, but dull to watch.
F1 is what it is. Fast.
Does it not occur to you that all F1 racing teams are trying to get the most power from their engines from the least amount of fuel or is it just me being thick?
Engine designers don't build engines without considering fuel consumption do they?


[Edited on 3/7/2008 by nitram38]

quote:

---

Originally posted by BenB
Why not just limit the max size of fuel tanks.... Consider the penalty of pit stops I'm sure the cars would become fuel efficient....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BenB
Why not just limit the max size of fuel tanks.... Consider the penalty of pit stops I'm sure the cars would become fuel efficient....

---

We do all have alot of diffrent veiws! But one thing i think we do all agree on is that F1 dose need somthing to make it more intresting to watch.

If you want a fuel efficent car go here

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jackman
We do all have alot of diffrent veiws! But one thing i think we do all agree on is that F1 dose need somthing to make it more intresting to watch.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by nitram38
If you want a fuel efficent car go here

---

I'm with Martin on this one (and i used to work for Shell Research who did the F1 fuel, and was even asked to apply for the job doing the fuels and lubes testing at the GP's).

F1 is surely about racing to the maximum performance given the limits of engine size and within the thousnads of other limits they have on the cars. If they want to start meddling (yet again!!) in an attempt to push more fuel efficient race cars then why not do it in a more suitable series - surely something like the Le Mans endurance cars would be more suitable and surely the technology used is closer to road cars???

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paul TigerB6
I'm with Martin on this one (and i used to work for Shell Research who did the F1 fuel, and was even asked to apply for the job doing the fuels and lubes testing at the GP's).

F1 is surely about racing to the maximum performance given the limits of engine size and within the thousnads of other limits they have on the cars. If they want to start meddling (yet again!!) in an attempt to push more fuel efficient race cars then why not do it in a more suitable series - surely something like the Le Mans endurance cars would be more suitable and surely the technology used is closer to road cars???

---

But it just wont work like that in reality. Even the fuels used are blended to optimise the power output of the engines which run at up to 19,000 rpm - and its bugger all like pump fuel!!

To move the goal posts towards promoting fuel efficiency but expecting the teams to maintain the power will highly likely mean the gap between the big teams and little teams gets wider and wider and forces costs up across the board.

Seems like the whole thing is a ploy by Moseley to divert attention off the fact that he should have been booted out and try to win a few mates in the form of the green lobby - jumping on their band wagon

They are already trying to get maximum fuel efficiency!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No engine designer is going to make the highest power engine at the cost of using more fuel.
They WANT the most power at the least fuel.
The only way to reduce fuel by 50% is to introduce maximum speeds to 50% of what they are now.
That is called Formula Ford, GP2 etc where everyone has the same equipment which limits the top speed.
This is F1 and the cars are all different but within defined limits of the FIA.
This means that the teams are ALWAYS developing the car towards making it faster within these rules.
All Moseley is doing is joining the "green" clean brigade to take people's minds off his own dirty little secret.
He wants people to think that he is not so bad after all.
He is just part of the same propaganda machine that is extracting more money from everyone, while lining his own pockets.
It's about time that the FIA is lead by a proper racing driver and not this interfering idiot.

It's about image: F1 doesn't want to look like it's a dinasaur. It wants to look modern and cutting edge (again); and that involves a bit of "conservation".

There was an article in the French language Reader's Digest recently about a guy from Chicago who, by paying attention to his driving habits, burnt about the same amount of fuel as a hybrid driver. The point is that there are ways to save energy, and if F1 looks like it's making an effort, everyone will make an effort.

quote:

---

Originally posted by RK
It's about image: F1 doesn't want to look like it's a dinasaur. It wants to look modern and cutting edge (again); and that involves a bit of "conservation".

There was an article in the French language Reader's Digest recently about a guy from Chicago who, by paying attention to his driving habits, burnt about the same amount of fuel as a hybrid driver. The point is that there are ways to save energy, and if F1 looks like it's making an effort, everyone will make an effort.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by nitram38
They are already trying to get maximum fuel efficiency!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No engine designer is going to make the highest power engine at the cost of using more fuel.
They WANT the most power at the least fuel.
The only way to reduce fuel by 50% is to introduce maximum speeds to 50% of what they are now.
That is called Formula Ford, GP2 etc where everyone has the same equipment which limits the top speed.
This is F1 and the cars are all different but within defined limits of the FIA.
This means that the teams are ALWAYS developing the car towards making it faster within these rules.
All Moseley is doing is joining the "green" clean brigade to take people's minds off his own dirty little secret.
He wants people to think that he is not so bad after all.
He is just part of the same propaganda machine that is extracting more money from everyone, while lining his own pockets.
It's about time that the FIA is lead by a proper racing driver and not this interfering idiot.

---

You seem to have forgotten a few things.
F1 is there to create winners and make money by driving faster, not increase the range on your Ford Focus.
Honda are using the Green image on their car and where has it got them?
Why do you want to put the responsibility of finding more effceincy to F1 teams when their objectives contradict what you are trying to achieve?
Why not tackle Boeing to make longer range engines as aircraft use more fuel than cars or ask Ford, Honda etc as to what they are doing on road cars?
You are taking two ends of the spectrum and are trying to make them meet and it ain't going to work.
F1 wants 200mph and you want 80 mpg.
Now matter how we try, the two will never work together.
There comes a point where power in equals power out (laws of physics, not laws of Moseley)
All that will happen in F1 if Moesley gets his way (and he normally does) is put more limits that will impede F1 developement.
Where would we be now if tyre widths, turbos, wing size rules were taken away? A 300mph car? (plus a lot more dead drivers)
The 2CV brigade should go and watch 2CV racing and keep their noses out of F1.

[Edited on 3/7/2008 by nitram38]

Mr Carpmart - out with that Pinto Turbo.......... in with a 1.4di for you!!!

You can do your own bit then rather than make F1 slow and boring, rather than just boring!!!

Nitram38 - I genuinely understand all the points you raise but you are looking at this from only one perspective based on what is known today not what could be known. Innovation comes from thinking outside the box not inside. Your views are based 100% inside, I have been trying to suggested there may be a bigger box! Taking you example, 'where would we be now' if mankind or to be more specific certain men, hadn't thought outside the box and split the atom or sent pulses down bits of wires.

I also have to admit that I have been somewhat frustrated with myself this evening at my inability to communicate to you in a way that you could understand the point I was trying to put forward. As they say, 'life is too short' and I haven't got the time or inclination to try to explain the same thing again!

I respect everyones opinion and I have enjoyed the debate but, I'm drawing a line there!

I think its a step in the right direction providing they open up the rules on engine development.

Finishing first will still remain the teams priority, not saving fuel needlessly, as any fuel left at the end of the race (bar a little for contingencies) is dead weight that could either have been used to make more power or to left out to reduce weight.

I do think that a change like this would alter the way the teams have to approach the engineering and design and it might take some teams a season or two to get to grips.

[Edited on 3/7/08 by Mr Clive]

quote:

---

Originally posted by carpmart
Nitram38 - I genuinely understand all the points you raise but you are looking at this from only one perspective based on what is known today not what could be known. Innovation comes from thinking outside the box not inside. Your views are based 100% inside, I have been trying to suggested there may be a bigger box! Taking you example, 'where would we be now' if mankind or to be more specific certain men, hadn't thought outside the box and split the atom or sent pulses down bits of wires.

I also have to admit that I have been somewhat frustrated with myself this evening at my inability to communicate to you in a way that you could understand the point I was trying to put forward. As they say, 'life is too short' and I haven't got the time or inclination to try to explain the same thing again!

I respect everyones opinion and I have enjoyed the debate but, I'm drawing a line there!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by nitram38

quote:

---

Originally posted by carpmart
Nitram38 - I genuinely understand all the points you raise but you are looking at this from only one perspective based on what is known today not what could be known. Innovation comes from thinking outside the box not inside. Your views are based 100% inside, I have been trying to suggested there may be a bigger box! Taking you example, 'where would we be now' if mankind or to be more specific certain men, hadn't thought outside the box and split the atom or sent pulses down bits of wires.

I also have to admit that I have been somewhat frustrated with myself this evening at my inability to communicate to you in a way that you could understand the point I was trying to put forward. As they say, 'life is too short' and I haven't got the time or inclination to try to explain the same thing again!

I respect everyones opinion and I have enjoyed the debate but, I'm drawing a line there!

---

I am thinking outside the box as I work in engineering and I have raced cars so I do have some experience and I have watched engines change over the last 25 years.
While engines have developed a lot, there will always be a limit to the fuel/power ratio.
Getting more out of engines has a limit, just like we cannot travel at the speed of light, even though it is a "nice idea".
F1 is advancing, but like all advances, they build one on top of the other.
F1 engines use a combination of high compression and high revs to produce horsepower.
Your road car could do the same for about 2 minutes while sitting in traffic and then destroy itself.
F1 engines won't even start without being warmed up or hours etc.
You car engine is constantly being developed by car companies, extra valves, high compression, fuel injection, variable cam timing etc.
What you are asking for is a utopia of engines that do 200mph on a thimble of fuel and it just ain't going to happen, even if some PR guru says they can.
There is a finite limit to what energy you can extract from petrol, not an infinite one.
Olympic runners improve on records in thousandths of seconds and so does the evolution of car engines.
As scotty once said" Yer canny change the laws of physics!"
I live in the real world and not in some starwars concept world.
The reality is that , no matter how frustrating, man will always lag behind his dreams and car engines are progressing at the best pace they can.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by carpmart
I predict that 'should' F1 engineers have their priorities re-focused on improving fuel efficiency, they will over a reasonable time frame of say 10 years be able to double the efficiency of F1 engines.

---

F1 may have very talented engineers but they are too narrow minded to do new concepts, instead refining the conventional piston engine. They wouldn't come up with radical new designs as it would be too risky (the wankel engine for example would never have made it off the drawing board).

quote:

---

Originally posted by carpmart
Got to reply again as you are wrong and you have not demonstrated any outside the box thinking in your posts!

I too live in the real world and detest science fiction because of the word fiction, I deal in facts. Fact: F1 engines are very inefficient; just look at the amount of heat and noise they make neither of which is using the fuel as efficiently as it could to make the car go forward. Fact: Where there is this much inefficiently produced power and this amount of waste there is room for improvement.

---

F1 has no say in what the rules are. That's what Maxie and the FIA are for. And the drivers have less than zero say. If you think even the average F1 engineer has the remotest chance of having his opinion heard on the big picture of F1 publicity/image/conservation etc, you are dreaming or have been sniffing too many petrol fumes. They are there to win races within the rules. The rules are set for them ahead of time by Uncle Bernie and Maxie. Business is about looking a certain way to sell products and that is what F1 is all about. The race itself is almost unimportant.

You can't say these things will never happen because they do happen regularly in life and they will happen in F1 if the big power people say they will happen. They sell more phones if they do.

Well, it appears that I am in a minority of ME who thinks F1 running on less fuel, but using more innovation to do so is a good idea!

There is no need to get emotional in posts as the 11 year old 'fuel additive chemist' seem to be a little agitated! It's clear that I must not have a view in such 'qualified' company!

My comments/observations are all tongue in cheek fellas!

quote:

---

Originally posted by carpmart
Well, it appears that I am in a minority of ME who thinks F1 running on less fuel, but using more innovation to do so is a good idea!

---

I still like the idea of no refuelling and no tyre changes - you run the race with what you started with. But F1 has never been like that, as even in the earliest races tyres and fuel were part of the event, and the biggest wallet won most times.

Not sure what the answer is...

Maybe a totally radical change is required - how about:

You do whatever you like with your car, as long as it fits in a standard-sized box (of whatever size);

You can do whatever you like with your engine, but your air intake is restricted to a defined cross-section.

Could be interesting!

quote:

---

Originally posted by mr henderson

quote:

---

Originally posted by carpmart
Well, it appears that I am in a minority of ME who thinks F1 running on less fuel, but using more innovation to do so is a good idea!

---

Make that a mnority of two!

The job of F1 engineers is to win the race within the rules. Change the rules and they will start looking for new ways to win within the new rules.

Technology filtering down from top level racing to family cars has been going on virtually as long as cars have been raced.

It really matters little who has spent time doing what, everybody's opinion here is valid, because one thing is for sure, get n number of engineers in a room discussing a problem and you will have n number of answers.

John

---

Nobody thinks it's a bad idea, we're just trying to point out that what you seem to want just isn't possible. Agitation is only appearing because you keep repeating the same point over and over without listening to what people are trying to say, that the F1 engineers are already doing it to the best of their ability with what they have to work with (the laws of physics, essentially). It would take an entirely new form of propulsion other than the internal combustion engine to get the kind of gains you and Mad Max are throwing around, which will take the work of research scientists to come up with the underlying principles before engineers can adopt them to a working vehicle. We're not refusing to 'think outside the box', we're refusing to work in fairy-land.

quote:

---

Originally posted by martyn_16v
Nobody thinks it's a bad idea, we're just trying to point out that what you seem to want just isn't possible. Agitation is only appearing because you keep repeating the same point over and over without listening to what people are trying to say, that the F1 engineers are already doing it to the best of their ability with what they have to work with (the laws of physics, essentially). It would take an entirely new form of propulsion other than the internal combustion engine to get the kind of gains you and Mad Max are throwing around, which will take the work of research scientists to come up with the underlying principles before engineers can adopt them to a working vehicle. We're not refusing to 'think outside the box', we're refusing to work in fairy-land.

---

I am building an Atom like car but with an R1 engine and Air adjustable ride height suspension. How do I not think outside of the box?

quote:

---

Originally posted by martyn_16v
Nobody thinks it's a bad idea, we're just trying to point out that what you seem to want just isn't possible. Agitation is only appearing because you keep repeating the same point over and over without listening to what people are trying to say, that the F1 engineers are already doing it to the best of their ability with what they have to work with (the laws of physics, essentially). It would take an entirely new form of propulsion other than the internal combustion engine to get the kind of gains you and Mad Max are throwing around, which will take the work of research scientists to come up with the underlying principles before engineers can adopt them to a working vehicle. We're not refusing to 'think outside the box', we're refusing to work in fairy-land.

---

If you slow the cars down, why bother with racing?
It will save 100% of the fuel!
The arguement to slow the cars down is pointless.
You are gaining one thing but losing another.
What a pointless waste of time.
I can drive my car down the motorway at 56mph to save fuel, but I don't want to, the same as F1 drivers don't want to drive at 120mph.
That is called Formula Ford, not F1...........
I also think that if one F1 team came up with a faster car (and I mean the leap you are talking about) it will be banned.
Look at turbos, pop off valves, active suspension and ground effect cars to name but a few.
F1 does innovate and that does filter down to road cars, but these inovations soon get banned.


[Edited on 4/7/2008 by nitram38]