planetf1.com

I certainly do as it totally added another aspect to team strategy, get rid of this mandatory pitstop for both compounds and go bak to refueling. I loved watching quali and trying to figure who had outright pace or down to fuel loads.

I really enjoyed it too. I was in favor of the times when the tire changes were banned and refueling was allowed, for some reason it was very very fun for me. Although now the pirelli compounds are special so they degrade fast so I guess it comes down to the same. Many times during refueling teams would have problems which was also quite fun to watch.

_________________
Best drivers:
1-Vettel
2-Kimi
3-Hamilton

It's fine the way it is. Refueling was becoming dangerous and several people inside and outside of the FIA said it was no longer a question of if but when we will have an ignited fuel spill. Plus the KERS mixture into all this sealed the refueling ban.

The present regulations of no refueling and the abnormal tire characteristics force everyone to follow strategies based on tire degradation. This formula, whether you like it or not, has produced wild and entertaining races.

If you allow refueling, the quantity of fuel in the car would be determined by the life of the option tires, since all the front runners use them at the start. So it would be no surprise if everyone had the same amount of fuel at the start.

And since the cars would not have the massive change in weight that is present because a car has to start on full tanks and finish with empty tanks, the entire setup and strategy picture becomes much simpler.

Personally, I believe that allowing refueling would remove most of the uncertainty with the tires, and strategy would shift from where it is determined by tire degradation to fuel strategy. And it would get very boring too quickly.

I can definitely live without refueling. I would rather see them get rid of the rule that says top 10 qualifiers have to start the race on used tires. The two compound rule can also go. Let the teams choose what they want to run. With the latter change, they probably should create a greater grip and fall-off differential between primes and options meaning that primes are long-lasting and predictable and options blazing fast, but fragile.

Nope. It adds an extra element of danger a sport like F1 really doesn't need.

_________________
1994 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

I'd say yes because the sport is no longer exciting. I'd say no because society is moving away from unnecessary dangers. I think F1 should focus on racing versus a tyre degradation points system showdown. The current setup favors one exciting race (brazil) versus the possibility of having a few exciting races per season.

It was terrible and you all hated it. Has something changed or can't you just remember?

i could go either way. i wouldnt mind seeing it back, but i wouldnt mind seeing it away.

in 2010 with the one stop strategies i wouldve cried for refueling. But since 2011 and the Perelli tyres and the more pitstops i dun care for refuelling anymore

I remember it well, I did not care for it, and it was one of the contributing factors towards boring racing.

I love these threads of late, there's been heaps. Threads saying, we should revert rules changes and ditch technology that turned the yawn-fest back into something more exciting.

Races where the only passes that mattered were made in the pits were dull, even more so to the general populace.

I would have to disagree refueling would allow slower mid field teams to score more points, I think would encourage 2-3 stop strategy there for allow more opportunities for a chaotic gp let alone trow some rain in. As this duznt even work anymore, as the lower teams are to far away, even Minardi scored on days like that anyway my point is, i hate this must stop for tyres crap, you already know everyone has to stop, if refueling was back it would make ya wonder if and when they will pit

Agree

From a strategic point of view, it would add another dimension and so make the race more interesting. But on the flipside, I think refuelling is dangerous with all those hot cars close to each other in the pits. So on balance, I'd say NO.

_________________
Vettel / Raikkonen / Button

No, that would mean all overtakes happen in the pits again, they just need to sort out the stupid tyre rule and let teams race with their favoured compounds.

_________________

Yes, let's bring back refueling because F1 is sooooooo much more exciting when all the overtaking happens in the pit lane.....

_________________
90% of the topics on the PF1 Forum consist of this: "My favourite driver didn't win! The driver I hate the most did win!! Wah! WAH!! WAAAAHHHHH!!!"

A million times this.

If they bring refuelling back I will stop watching. No question.

_________________
Sebastien Vettel, the youngest driver ever to have the fastest car in F1 for four consecutive years

_________________
"You are the universe expressing itself as a Human for a little while..."

What on earth happened that made you lot come to your senses? A few months ago, this place was crying for refuelling.

Refuelling would be the worst thing that can ever happen to this sport. And while I hate using statistics as the sole basis behind an argument, you only need to see the numbers to realise that no refuelling means much more exciting racing.

_________________
I don't follow F1 so I don't know what I'm talking about

I'm not sure how people can think we need refueling on the back of such an exciting season. Even last year from 2nd to the rest of the grid was exciting, and 2010 was exciting! I'm not sure where the call for refuelling comes from, unless pit-lane overtakes are considered top-class racing maneouvres.

_________________
"You are the universe expressing itself as a Human for a little while..."

The grass is always greener...

Are u blind the majority of passing still happens at stops or in pitlane. The only way to fix this is simple, revert back to the wider chassis and mechanical grip say from 95-97 that's all they have to do. Ohh and modernize the safety of course, done and if you all say " nah f that I'll stop watching if they refuel" u ain't a true fan, just think about it, don't be hypercritical as majority of YOUR fav gps (depending on age) would have been senna, Prost and so on era they filled em up and let me guess u watched it hey, pretty crap hey.

Calm down Chriso... you asked for opinions, you got them, don't take offence and start ridiculing people. I don't think anyone said they won't watch if refuelling comes back, people just stated their preference. Calm is good

_________________
"You are the universe expressing itself as a Human for a little while..."

No.

Reliability is too good compared to what it used to be. That alone means that the likes of Caterham and Marussia will have to make major improvements to score points. And even then you have to consider points only used to be given for top 8 or top 6. You will never see a backmarker finish top 6 ever again, refuelling or not.

And as Blinky has pointed out, with the current tyres, everyone would simply try to figure how long the tyres would last and plan strategy around that.

As for wondering if/when drivers will pit - Did you see the Canadian Grand Prix? Or China when we all thought Merc would destroy their tyres, but in fact made them last longer? Or the middle part of Monaco where we waited to see if Vettel could jump everyone or not? There's plenty of strategical unpredictability without refuelling.

Refuelling is anti-racing. The highest figure of overtaking in a single season under refuelling (1994-2009) falls well short of the lowest figure under a refuelling ban, both from 1984-93 and 2010 onwards.

_________________
I don't follow F1 so I don't know what I'm talking about

Somebody doesn't realise that refuelling was banned for the whole of Senna's career, bar his last three races.

No need to throw a strop. Sounds really petty when you accuse others of not being 'true fans' simply because they don't agree with your vision for the sport.

_________________
I don't follow F1 so I don't know what I'm talking about

With the current rules a Schumacher Hungary 98 drive is simply impossible. I want the F1 drivers to be able to drive at 100% from start to finish and not go around the circuit in a full tank and trying to preserve tyres that go off in 7 laps if you push them hard...

I guess somebody forgot to mention that to Lewis Hamilton in China in 2011.

_________________
I don't follow F1 so I don't know what I'm talking about

What I liked about re-fueling was not the strategic aspect but rather the relentless speed of the cars. The cars were always sprinting and there was this "snap" at every change in direction. Can't say that I wouldn't want that back.

As for the strategic aspect, I really didn't like it very much but back then I had never known anything different to complain about it. I like the low fuel quali we have now. Also too many races were decided in the pitstops and drivers were almost reluctant to overtake out on the track.

_________________

I loved re-fuelling, I wish they did bring it back. But sadly I know that they won't...

Well it makes things a bit simpler in terms of strategy to not have it, I always find it strange how a lot of people say it should be about driver skill but then really want back things which took even more out of the drivers hands and make strategy even more decisive.

At the end of the day safety is the issue here and it's safer to not have refuelling so that's that really. After all it was just another innovation by a team, just like something that's part of the car like the double diffuser, which everyone else decided would be beneficial to adopt and now the FIA have banned it, it's not part of the fabric of F1 or anything and most of the time there has been no refuelling.

How about no. Fuel tanks would ultimately be smaller as refuelling would be mandatory, meaning all the cars will end up smaller again. Just seems like wasted development from a teams point of view and the racing was pretty bad with refuelling anyways.

Brings up another point too, people are seemingly annoyed when the FIA change everything and dont let the teams race and develop how they want, and then people suggest a return to refuelling? Just seems like "hey i'm bored with this setup lets throw everything in the air again" rather than just sticking to what we have for next year until the V6 turbo era comes in. I wouldn't want to see refuelling back, and isn't driving through the pitlane going to be KERS powered only from 2014? Refuelling would just be something we don't need or want, from a teams or fans perspective.

_________________
http://www.facebook.com/CarelessRumour

I have a band.

Somebody posted overtaking stats from years previous during and then after Re-fuelling on the old forum. One read was all it needed to show why re-fuelling is a bad idea if you want to watch racing.

If you want a procession might I suggest Belfast on the 12th July.

_________________
Disclaimer: The above post maybe tongue in cheek.

"I thought I'd get your theories, mock them, then embrace my own. The usual."

That's right I'm not a real fan like you, except I know that Senna drove almost all his GPs in a no refuelling era like now.

You really should check your facts before you shoot your mouth off.

I'll tell you this; I've been watching F1 since 1986 and most of the dullest races I've seen were in that period when there was refuelling. I have no enthusiasm for seeing its return, as I KNOW the races will get boring again.

I'm sure refuelling will be back at some point in the future... But at the moment there is no need to change a formula that makes for exciting racing

Why are DRS overtakes any different from pitlane overtakes? One can argue that the majority of overtakes are still artificial due to DRS. Each approach have its pros and cons. My belief is that with DRS, KERS, Pirellis etc we would still have a good spectacle with refuelling, it's just that cars would be faster overall. You still watch good fights towards the end of some races where cars are a lot lighter, you still watch pitlane overtakes and you still watch one-button-press overtakes.

I still haven't decided yet about bringing refuelling back but one thing is for sure, if it came back it wouldn't be a step backwards and it wouldn't be like in 2000 era as many of you point it will be.

No your right for some reason I thought refueling was brought back in 1989, ohh just like I thought hakkinen retired on last lap of us gp. My point is this I've just been watching some highlights of 2009 season, and it was fantastic just a hand full of cars were running kers as it was a new thing back then, no drs and its good quality racing, I just think with full fuel tanks and tyres that simply fall of the cliff isn't essential for f1, prime example my cousin yesterday took me out to a tyre shop as he needed new tyres. The salesman offered him pirelli, and for someone who duznt really watch the sport said he didn't want tyres that would last 5 mins. I've sed before and I'll say again fuk all this artificial crAp fast wearing tires,drs,Kers all this and go back to the wider chassis and inforce refueling, overtaking problem solved. Someone said why would you after the exciting season we had? Fair point but so was 1999 didn't they refuel then, I think it's jus a circle, we will get another season the same in maybe 5-10 yrs from now.

I think the idea of messing about with petrol while hurried in a crowded atmosphere is asking for trouble, no matter how good the safety equipment is.

_________________
Vettel / Raikkonen / Button

^This. It always seemed silly to be refuelling a car that's turned on, right next to a crap load of people, in a small, enclosed area, with no real/decent fire extinguishers.

It was a huge disaster waiting to happen.

In any case, we may not need fuel much longer if the Formula E series takes off

_________________