you beat me to it. Since I was old enough to know that Re-fueling was banned in F1 up until 1994. when I heard it was like.. Wait .. What.. noo.. had to re-watch it to be sure of the mistake.
He missed one main reason: refueling ruined racing. Drivers and teams were relying solely on pit stop strategies to overtake which meant less overtaking on track. It's still the case today with compulsory tyre changes, but not as much as with refueling
@@ulysse21 But refueling has one advantage, it can create suspense on tracks where overtaking is difficult. I mean, just the last 15 or so laps during the 2004 French GP were simply awesome even if Schumacher and Alonso were 10+ seconds apart on the track. I miss those races during the Schumacher vs. Hakkinen era where Ferrari would often go for 2 stops and McLaren for 1.
There was also a period of time from 1984-1993 where refueling was also banned. Where (during the 80's turbo era) they were made to work with an increasingly restrictive fuel tank size to slow down the cars during the races, force them to conserve fuel. It was reintroduced in 1994 and at the time there was understandable anxiety with the implementation. Jos Verstappen's pit fire at Hockenheim was what the teams had feared (a big fire in the pit lane) so as soon as the fuel splashed, they were reaching for fire extinguishers to douse it even as the fire ignited on the ~800°C brake discs. This is why the fire was contained so quickly and why there were no serious injuries
Over the years FIA killed this sport and you can say it doesn´t have so much of a impact about every element they changed from Hakkinen / Schumacher era.... summarize it and you get current boring sh it show...
That doesn't really happen, though, thanks to limits on fuel flow rate. That limit means it's not really possible to burn excess fuel that would require you to slow down in order to have enough to last a race.
@@epion660 I mean a system that the teams put in to make sure the driver cant accidentally use 1 percent too much fuel and be dry 100 meters from the finish makes sense to implement...
I liked the strategy back then. NASCAR has something called compression cautions which kinda help but are designed moreso to get the cars bunched again for a restart, but still have other pit windows. Fuel strategy had always been apart of all circuit racing, so I'm just used to it and it does hold an element of drama.
Competition Caution. "Competition cautions don’t happen at every race. They only occur when it rains the night before or the day of the race. They usually will occur 20 laps into a race, although when they happen depends on the size of the track. NASCAR does this to allow teams to check how their tires wear halfway into a run. NASCAR introduced stage racing last year. That created a lot of excitement during points in the race when fans wouldn’t necessarily expect it. At the end of each stage, the caution flag comes out. This allows teams to pit in exactly the same manner as a competition caution."
nascar manipulates races for their preferred car/driver. Watch the 1985 Daytona 500, They started screwing the Elliott's before they won their first race that year. A prolonged green flag pitstop over taping up a headlight door opening and have richard childress,earnhardt caution flag on demand dave marcic pull over to the apron to get a caution with nothing wrong because they thought Elliott could not make it 100 miles under green. There in the open for the millions to see.
In Argentina, when Irvine started the race on extremely low fuel, shot off in front of everyone so he could allow Michael through, after his pit stop, and then hold up the pack. It made for an exciting race to see if they could pull it off. I don't think refuelling should return, but there needs to be an element added that creates another kink in the way teams think about strategy, that can be kept secret from all their competitors, and isn't revealed until the race is already under way.
@@4Leka I agree. I'm not a fan of having to use the Q2 tyre to start the race, either. You should be able to just start on whatever you want, and use whatever you want throughout the race.
I feel that thing; "holding others back", is not very sporty. Just like Perez did to help Verstappen to win 2021. I´m more of a Verstappen fan than a Hamilton fan, but I don't feel that was fair. Not sporty at all.
@@TheKentaurion I understand where you're coming from, but teams will exploit any edge they can get. Back in the day Verstappen could have just plowed straight into Hamilton at turn one, taking them both out and he would have been crowned champ right there ala Senna v Prost in Suzuka. They just want the title, sporty or not. They don't care what we think.
I love the blistering speed of the current pit stops. Somehow watching them leisurely change the tires while waiting for the fueling to complete doesn't have the same feel of precision and skill adding to the team effort to win...
but different fuel levels made for better strategy games on the track. recently rewatched some late 90s seasons and there you have schumacher 30 sec ahead, then he pits for fuel, hakkinen coming in hot on his heels, then they both pit around similar laps and the questions is, who has more fuel? i think it made for better battles, but at the same time, it lost massa the title in 2008, almost turned jos verstappen into ash...so i get it.
When I came back to watching F1, it didn't take long for me to notice the absence of refueling. IMO not only safer, it is actually a better way to judge driver's performance overall, reducing the overwhelming maths theorycraft the engineers have to do, whilst giving more of an equal plain field for the drivers to show their capabilities, which are almost overlooked as the championship develops to which team has the best chassis and engineers.
Fuel management does not come under driver skills in my opinion. Driving skills in a RACE are only limited to car control. Because, if the driver has to take into account the fuel consumption as well. then he cannot focus completely on giving his best for a race, and cannot drive on the edge.
How about a bigger fuel tank but no refuelling, and the team can decide for each race if they go for max fuel and max power, or less fuel to do faster laps but risk running out of fuel if they get into persistent duels with opponents having more fuel onboard.
yeah! way back then drivers were allowed to risk something. nowadays you look like wanting to risk something: "Dude get your butt right here to the pit lane and drive through slow like a snail!"
I think the reasons for getting rid of it were all valid and it's probably for the best but I still miss it quite a lot. Because yes, it opened up the strategy to something other than tyres.
Flavio, Symmonds and Alonso lost him the title. Among other stuff. The guy had so many close calls that year, many things just occurring slightly differently could have tipped him the title
@@CallMeMrChainmail remember the good old days when a problem was discovered and the product was altered to fix the issue and it got passed down to passenger cars??? Wasn’t that long ago. Now the EPA is trying to ban turning a car into a race car.
Way more dynamic, some teams at the start would go light fuel just to gain advantage in quali and the first laps before deciding how to proceed the next pit stop. Team strategy being huge over the weekend. Nowadays it's a couple of tyre changes that everyone nearly runs the same, watch out for the weather and play long enough for a SC to be in your favour.... rubbish
Tbh the only reason I'd want refuelling back is to allow Williams the space in their car to use flywheel energy storage that they developed. That shit is so cool
They would be a customer like all f1 teams for that technology if it was allowed. They sold the flywheel tech to gkn in 2014. They have also just recently sold Williams Advanced Engineering to try to fund f1, but it wasn't enough to stop the Williams family having to sell up.
@@JohnDoe-ji5wg Yep, it would only hold very little energy for short boosts of power. And it could only convert kinetic energy, not heat as the MGU-H does. It was a potential alternative to pre-2014 KERS systems but wouldn't work with today's complex hybrid powertrains.
I started watching F1 in recent years and I don't categorize myself as hard-core but something like refueling which adds another dimension to team strats would be fun to watch. We all love chaos.
Since they banned refuelling, I love the emphasis the teams have had to put on changing tyres as quickly as possible when they come in for a pitstop. The mechanics have done so much practice to get it down to the ~2 seconds we see today and it would be sad to see that made obsolete by bringing back refuelling.
I'm not an F1 fan, but would the skill be obsolete if they did a two tire pitstop with a but of fuel? do two tire stops happen in F1 like they do in nascar? that's wild that they've gotten to sub two seconds though.
I don't know what time you are referring to but F1 went through really bad times in terms of overtaking. The pitstops were pretty much the only times overtakes happened unless you had a vastly superior machine.
People forget about this too often, I wanna see a battle on the road, not passing someone who's stopped, I really like the 2-3s pits, it means less action there.
Yes! I just re-watched the 2006 Monaco Grand Prix - multiple pit stop strategies, Michael starting last and finishing 8th! Overtaking galore! Not to mention Kimi retiring from the race and walking directly to the marina and into his leased Yacht. Caveats: 1. Maximum 110KG per car for the entire raceday. 2. Each car has a 25L Fuel Cell, (guaranteeing a minimum 3 stop strategy, up to 5). 3. Car must start with Q2 tyres. 4. In Q3, remaining 10 cars fuel their car once at the beginning of the session and are not allowed to add fuel. The more laps they do to try to get pole position, the less fuel they have to start the race. Lots of strategy possibilities there! What about Maximum 7 - 10 people allowed to service the car during a pitstop?
In fact, with 25L tanks, you could even consider a modular design with the "empty" tank being swapped out for a prefilled one. That would preclude someone driving off with the hose still attached and a variety of other unfortunate scenarios and minimize the risk of open fuel spills. Also would allow interesting mind games of estimating how much fuel is in the tank based on how heavy it seems when they heave it into position vs. the crew pretending it's heavier than it actually is..
A rushed stop which he was forced into by crashgate. I still think that cheated race should have been struck from the standings. Massa deserved that championship and Hamilton has enough of them by now.
lots of times drivers pulled away from the pits too soon. some still had the refueling pipe attached. some didnt have their wheels put back on fully so they came off before they even got out of the pits. Seen a few pitcrew guys get hit by their cars cause the driver got impatient and pulled away before the guy in front lifted the board to say they could go and pit crew were still working on the car. They banned pit stops at 1 point for that reason. Think it was more fun when they just raced from start to finish without stopping to refuel or change tyres unless they got a puncture. then it was all about drivers abilty to overtake cars in front rather than pit stops.
@@justcows7772 at least they're looking in the right area at last, instead of idiotic ideas like grooved tyres which everyone with half a brain knew was gonna make things worse!
The monetary and safety arguments against refueling in F1 seem ludicrous when you consider every other major racing series pulls it off using lower budgets and without cars turning into fireballs all the time. As for it making less of a difference because of smaller tanks - less difference is not the same as no difference. With the 0.3 sec per 10 kg rule of thumb a car with half a tank would still run 1.5 seconds faster per lap than one with a full tank and that's pretty significant. Lastly, saying it's confusing to casual fans is funny when you consider all the other craziness F1 implements. So you mean to tell me putting gas in a car is more confusing to a spectator than some weird aerodynamic gimmick to allow overtaking that sometimes is available to a driver and sometimes not? I'd like to see refueling back myself to add to race strategy and make things more unpredictable but one subtle argument against it that wasn't spelled out in this video is the environmental side. F1 made the switch to hybrid cars for environmental concerns despite most everyone knowing that the cars themselves are a drop in the ocean compared to the pollution moving the whole F1 circus around makes. By banning refueling F1 keeps up its image of environmental consciousness by not showing nasty, polluting gasoline being put in the cars during a race. Politics and image ultimately are two of the biggest factors in modern F1 and that environmental aspect will keep refueling out of F1 forever now.
Wow, you said it better than I ever could and spot on! As for fires, there is no way 87 oct gas would burn like the fire they showed unless it was under pressure and aerated. You can put a cigar out in a pool of gas but not when it is air burst. Maybe go back to gravity feed cans like everyone else. As for the money....lol...maybe get one of the 32 people standing around the car at a pit stop to pick up a gas can. Only five can go over the wall in a Nascar race and they do a manual jack, change tires and fuel the car.
@@finscreenname F1 was using regular race fuel in 1994, not something extra flammable. By the way, octane doesn't dictate how easy fuel is to set alight, only how resistant it is to compression.
@@rockarola55 Like I said, "unless it was under pressure and aerated". Due to the conversation what I meant was the hose was under pressure and aeriated the gas which caused it to explode like it did. 😎😎 If they used a gravity feed system it may be slower but you are not going to spray the whole pit area down with napalm.
@@finscreenname any kind of spill will will find an area hot enough for evaporation - on some tracks that'll mean any area, including the driver's helmet - but brakes, exhaust manifold and the engine block will be hot enough to both evaporate and ignite most kinds of fuel.
Well FIA will do something big to stop Mercedes dominance as they did in 2005 against Ferrari. Ferrari dominated 1999-2004 so 6 seasons straight. Mercedes have surpassed that, but I don't think it will stay for long, new regs will make RedBull or some middle team jump out.
@@ingvers1436 to the opposite of the Ferrari period, develoment (engine and electronics) is now forbidden in F1. So unlike this period no one will challenge Mercedes As long as the FIA does not UN-FREEZE engine develoment and energy saving electronic limitations, the grid order will stay basically the same
Exactly, Mercedes will have 10 consecutive years of dominance, if not more. What an awful era for F1 this is. This is even more painful than the Schumacher era because nobody can get near Mercedes performance for 7 seasons now.
@@bacro2 This exactly. I used to be a big F1 fan, got hooked during the Schumi vs Hakkinen era. I stopped watching severa; years ago. What is the point anyway, when everyone knows who is the winner before the season even begins?
@@ingvers1436 which would be something like making a huge change to the engine regulations but the FIA refuse to do anything about that. You look at when Red Bull were on top and their designs were constantly getting banned.
Like any sport, Formula 1 is an evolving story. Strategies change, regulations change, training changes, technology changes, the fans change. I for one find all of these interactions fascinating. I think the sport should pivot away from passive aero and embrace active aero. Not in the form of shape shifting aerodynamic surfaces or suspension set ups, but in the form of a single fan with a regulated max power output. Play with the shape of the underbody, play with the placement and control of the fan and do away with wings. Implemented wisely this would not only lessen the downforce penalty of following closely but it would also keep F1 on the very cutting edge of technology.
Mean while I'm here just finished watching a replay of the V8 supercars goldcoast 600 where the fuel strategy help win the race. Fill up with less fuel to undercut their main rival for position, then race on a leaner setting and race defensively to hold off second place who was racing on max fuel use. Differing pit strategies make the racing more exciting, instead of just changing the tires. It also allows for much longer races including enduro events.
what does the cost of having fueling infrastructure have to do with anything? the whole circus lays waste to millions of gallons of jet fuel hauling itself all over the world, making any claims with regards to cost savings irrelevant. fact is, what was once strategy and chance is now tedious and dull. we watched because life on the edge was dangerous and thrilling and often unpredictable, just like rally1 and motogp today.
With all the tweaks to F1 regulations over the years the 2022 season looks like they might have actually made the right changes to make the sport more competitive. Hopefully what we saw in Bahrain will carry on throughout the season.
I don't remember it quite the same way. I remember refuelling being one of the anchors around F1's necks, dragging strategy to the point where more of the overtaking was done in the pits during fuelstops.
I remember when Button would catch up half a second a lap on competitor . Make a half-hearted attempt to pass and whine that he couldn't. So his team would bring him in. No refueling forces them to be racers.
I was never a fan of refuelling. I didn't like the way strategic decisions were essentially fixed by the time they lined up on the grid; you can't decide to risk running on an empty tank the way you can eke out some extra laps on worn tyres. I also hated the way it made pit stops themselves less intense. The length of a pit stop was essentially determined by the amount of fuel you needed rather than the skill of the crew.
1:01 - More like "There was constant push towards saving as much money as possible on things that provided excitement for the spectators, in order to allow Bernie Ecclestone to extract an ever increasing amount money from the sport each year!"
If it's that dangerous why do they still refuel in indycar? IndyCar has plenty of both on track passing and strategy overtakes, why doesnt f1 take a lead out of there book?
Indycar is a spec series so the racing is much more competitive to begin with. Refuelling definitely would make more of a difference in a spec series like Indycar than a series like F1 where the cars are bound to regulations but other than that they all have obvious differences in power, aerodynamics, brakes, suspension etc.
@@Spermwhales93 While IndyCar is a spec series, it should be noted that the IRL (Indy Racing League) offers different engine manufacturers and aero kits for teams. It's not quite the same as Formula One as you pointed, but it does offer some variety.
It’s all about the pit stall. F1 pits are enclosed structures less than 10 ft from the pit lane where the car stops. Insanely dangerous atmosphere for an out if control fire. Indy pits are open air, non enclosed structures on the other side of a large pit wall separating the fuel from the pits/track. Much safer.
not to mention insane fuel strategies. "clutch and coast" has become a legendary phrase while Alexander Rossi was nursing every last drop pf fuel in that tank to win the Indy 500.
Also, Indy car (and most US series in general) are biased to being a contest of endurance (human and mechanical) as much as "who can drive the perfect lap". Longer races mean refueling becomes part of the strategy, (limited crew over the wall and pit row being an active zone also plays into this). Back in the 50s a handful of cars tried running Indy on one tank (mostly diesels), it didn't pay off
At the isle of man one team (Hector Neill? I think, not sure) checked the rules for replacing the fuel tank during a pit stop. Nothing in the rules regarding it. So on the pit stop, empty fuel tank was removed and replaced by a full fuel tank, and was out of the pits really quick. The main rival to that team I believe was Philip McCallen? Who saw his rival leaving pits, told his crew to hurry up, left the pits with not the right amount of fuel, ran out of fuel and had to retire. The team who replaced the fuel tank won the race. The rules were changed after to prevent this happening again.... However the point I am getting to is, what about a fuel tank that is primed and ready to go to be slotted in like a cartridge after the empty tank has been removed during a pit stop.
It would be nice to see refueling come back to F1, especially since FE is planning on bringing in mid-race recharging... But I understand why it'll probably never happen.
@@nielsdebakker3283 Thing is, fuel weighs something too. If you use a 50 kg tank instead and refuel halfway through the race, you're saving 50 kgs of weight in the first half of the race. According to the numbers in the video (at 3:19), that's 1.5 seconds of time saved/lap, more than enough time to offset the 6-9 seconds it takes to refuel the car.
Indy car seems to get refuelling done reasonably well... same with V8sc... as for the cost element, supply a standard rig to all teams that has updated safety systems in place. Fuel tank sizes (and therefore car sizes and weight) would be reduced, which should help the spectacle a bit. I would like to see it return IMO. As for the safety side - Grosjean crashed with the better part of 150kg of fuel onboard and the fireball was massive, surely the scenario would be improved if he only had 50kg of fuel onboard?
Indycar doesn't have as many crewmembers over the wall. Refueling is part of the adventure, isn't it? If NASCAR could pull it off they probably would do as F1 does. I like the drama that can or may happen on a pit stop or a fuel mileage race.
indycar pit stops are much longer. As far as the explosions...someone correct me if I'm wrong, but in actuality less fuel would result in a bigger explosion, as an emptier gas tank has more vapor, and gasoline only burns in vapor form. So if the tank is full the initial explosion is smaller but it burns much longer (obviously). If you've ever been a dumb teenager starting fires with your friends, you know that even a very small amount of gasoline has (ahem) a very high energy content.
@@Burt1038 That metric is the air volume around the fuel. bigger fuel tank at the end of its run would therefor have a larger explosion potential. This point also comes out in favor of smaller tanks and refuelling.
I sometimes like to compare and contrast differences in sports. So now I'm pondering how it'd look for Formula One if they had a Nascar-style gas can for refuelling. Those hold a little more than forty litres of fuel, and apparently weigh in full at about thirty-two kilos. To fully fuel a Cup car, it takes two of these (and the second one usually has some fuel left in it of course). Would this be considered safe?
It would be more exiting if they actually got out to put it in themselves. The skills involved would entail: , getting the girl on the till's attention to activate the pump, making sure they didn't put in diesel and paying for it in the kiosk (could always pick up a kitkat too). I'd enjoy watching that anyway.
It definitely removed a MASSIVE strategy element. Hell, how many times has a driver won the Indy 500 on fuel strategy, barely making it across the finish line? Incredibly memorable situations. Something F1 has lacked.
If refueling was back I am sure they could setup a safety feature where the refuel hose had to be a safe distance away before the car’s computer would allow the driver to depart. Since they stopped the refueling I only watch the highlights after the race, I used to watch all the races live.
Current heavy high DF cars are very demanding on tyres. Refueling would reduce weight, and make it possible to push harder for longer, so the best drivers will make more of a difference. So indeed, refueling is a bad idea :)
I am a casual F1 and would def like to refueling added to races. The first lap of a race is breathtakingly exciting. Then it's just the two black and silver cars out front followed in order by the teams with the most money. I would think any variable would be good and more passing (whether in the pits or not) would be better, imo.
Ohhhkay. I guess that shows how long i've been away from F1 (watching MotoGP and SBK instead). I had no idea they'd stopped refueling. I'm only a few years out of date!
i'm in favor of no rules in f1 apart from budget cap and safety related stuff on the technical side. ofc racing rules still apply but it would be mental to see what the engineers could come up with if we would let them. thats what made f1 really good in the past, it was always a playground for the weirdest ideas, many of them didnt work, but some revolutionized the way racecars were built forever.
I long for the old days when cars were actually different. Watching identical cars with different paint jobs is a turn-off for me. I used to wonder every year at Indy what Smoky Yunick or Andy Granatelli would bring. Those exciting days are gone forever.
I watched Verstappen's incident live (wow I'm old) and it's certainly memorable. Verstappen's incident wasn't as scary as the "invisible" fire that occurred during refueling in Indycars which used methanol as fuel back in the days. You don't even see the flames, you just see the heat and the driver panicking. It's remarkable that someone even approved the concept of using methanol when the apparent danger was so clear. Here's a video of it: ruclips.net/video/Ku7TdLeEGsQ/видео.html
It really wasn’t that dangerous and part of the reason they used the fuel is because it could be doused with water fairly quickly. Whereas gasoline fires require chem extinguisher agents to stop the fire from spreading. If you remember Indy teams used to shoot water at the car just as the fuel hose was removed. Oh and it smelled so good as a race fuel with a little castor oil mix.
The reason they switched from gasoline to methanol was because of the Sachs, MacDonald crash in 1964 as gasoline produces black smoke and is very hard to put out. ruclips.net/video/nljbCb2vuL4/видео.html
What about the fact that they had to introduce rubbish tires in 2011 to help prevent utterly dull races that happened in 2010 due to the lack of refueling. They went from authentic variety to artificial variety that also ended with drivers not being able to push at all, meaning fewer mistakes are made, making races more predictable. Not to mention lighter cars having more nimbleness meaning a lower need to rely on aero for performance, meaning able to follow more closely. Refueling has only really made f1 worse for me. Not saying f1 was amazing beforehand, but even a dull race was more interesting with refueling due to the additional element that Brought and the fact the tires actually used to work for more than a few laps
Based upon the logic behind refueling, not allowing tyre changes would make it even easier to follow for the casuals and save even more money. Having gears adds unneeded cost and complexity as well. All of those curves and turns probably confuses casuals and drives up costs as well. For that matter, a single course would cut back on travel expenses, and the casuals would arguably not notice anyway.
And following your logic, teams should be allowed to do everything they want, without restrictions, with no budget limit. Because why should they try to create a sport that the majority of people are interested in ?
The difference is tires can’t function after a certain point where as cars can last a race without refueling it’s just not necessary so not a great comparison
Same here lol, F1 used to be exciting to me in the 70 and 80s but the more regulated it became the more boring it got to watch, 99% of the race was just driving around in convoy with zero overtaking, the race was one by the pit crew, might as well not bother with the driving bit and just time the pit crew lol. I dont like to see people hurt but unfortunately the danger was always a big part of the lure of F1. I find downhill mountain biking more entertaining now.
Same goes for me, I was a avid fan from 1995-2008, but after that it lost it’s appeal. If I hadn’t watched this video today, I’d thought someone is crazy for telling me F1 isn’t refueling anymore..
Refueling means entertainment when something happens because someone didn't get enough fuel for what they was trying to do... No fuel stops means you can predict the race results from the start
"because someone didn't get enough fuel" how often did that happen versus how often it became predictable when cars would pit and how much they carried in order to overtake in the most boring way possible? I seem to recall during your so called "golden era of refuelling" that Ferrari won for 7 years. Refuelling is not the issue. Any fan who isn't completely blinded by nostalgia knows this.
Would loved to agree if it was safer, but motorsports has always been chaotic and I don’t think there’s any chance to see refueling being allowed again anytime soon.
@@GloomGaiGar What? When there was refueling. There was no way to know when they were going to stop as we had no idea how much fuel they put into the cars. Now we know exactly when they will pit because fuel is not the problem but tire degradation is artificially made to last a specific amount of laps before they need to pit
Refuelling is not just dangerous to the driver and pit crew, it’s also dangerous to others. This got proven when, as pictured but not mentioned in the video, Kovalainen took off with the hose still attached and sprayed Räikkönen (driving behind) with fuel that then ignited, giving Kimi a nasty surprise.
@@JohnDoe-vy5hh I hate it so much when people use "Racing is dangerous" as an excuse to discredit valid safety features. Like, dude, your entertainment is NOT worth a humans life.
@@JohnDoe-vy5hhmaking it more dangerous is shit Refueling is shit It invalidates the 2 second pit stop Its dangerous as shit I hope it stays banned forever
LOL, "Hey let's fuel under pressure from mobile rigs, what could go wrong. NASCAR: Yeah we got gravity feeds, not cost, transportation or safety issues at all.
Yup, and you can make gravity fed faster by just increase the nozzle size and use vent. It'll make fire hazard less likely to happen and the car will be less bulky
And significantly longer bloody pitstops that are entirely fine with lower flow rates. Could it be that people that chose to use pressure feeds for their high flow rates knew what they were doing because they were professional engineers, and wanted as quick a pitstop as possible? Could it be that with 2-5, depending on the year, *seconds* it takes to pit everything else, it's the fuel flow rate that would be restricting the stop time? Nah, just fit a bigger nozzle. Not like their nozzles weren't massive already and could pump 12.1 liters per second, or 726 liters per minute, more than a fire hose (which tops at about 120 gallons per minute, or 454 LPM) and still were the defining factor in the length of a pit stop.
@@EgorKaskader I think what you fail to realize is fueling using gravity makes the piut stops longer for EVERYONE and also brings the teams into the mix in terms of determining the outcome of the race. The human / team factor. THAT''S way harder to get right all day and makes races more interesting.
@@surferdjnj I think what you fail to realise is that mandated fuel rigs did exactly the same. No one had the advantage. And I don't want to see races decided solely by pitstops and how long those take, because the flow rate of any reasonable gravity-fed system is pretty low for a quick pitstop.
I'm not that up to date with all the tech but the suspense and strategies the refueling added to the event was great in my memory. But I can understand the safety aspect..
@@GloomGaiGar Figured the pit-stops i 'did' see every so often when i caught part of a race was just them doing a tire-only stop. :) I just honestly havnt watched many anymore. It got to the point that once the first 5 laps were over, the field was pretty much set in stone for the rest of the 50 or so they run. unless someone made a mistake. It got dull :T
@@ZEROmg13 the Halos? I actually think its an engenious thing to design. Keeps "large" debree from being such a risk to the drivers, but still allows them the ability to escape a flipped car.
It could be simple. Keep the rule that f1 use two different compounds during the race and refueling must be completed before tires can be changed. Same as road racing series. It would make races much more interesting
I enjoy pit-stop stuff, more than the race sometimes, so I would like to see refuelling back. Motorsport is inherently dangerous and I am certain safeguards can be put in place.
@@biblemaniswatchingyoumastu1920 its funny . im not a hardcore f1 fan but after 10 minutes of wikipedia reading about the 94 german grand prix fire i also came across the benetton cheating thing lol. all of course after i watched this video.
@@EricHurwitz yeah, they certainly had there fair share of controversy that year. And for controversy, read blatant cheating and disregard for the rules. Still love them though
To remove a major tactical factor, make big teams even bigger, the race more boring and of course remove the risk of having too many fights because saving fuel is the safer option to get some points.
If it ever gets re-added they will need to make 2 changes for the safety side of things first: have the fuel hose have an auto open/close mechanism so it can’t open or close manually and can only open when inserted into a car the second is have a mechanism in the car that automatically engages the clutch if connected to a fuel hose so it can’t leave without the hose being detached
1994 was the last dangerous moment with refueling. It was 100 % safe. I would love for it to come back. The uncertainty was magic. Seeing a driver push like crazy in the stint-end was great. Overcut was great to see. With how strong undercut is now, it would be even better
I liked how fuel impacts strategy before. And how qualifying is tied to fuel and the race. Lighter on fuel means faster in qualifying but that means stopping earlier in the race... This added an extra dimension besides the tires on pit strategy...
I think from a safety perspective, it's best not to anymore. The refuelling systems were incredibly safe, but when they go wrong the risk for disaster is so high, with fuel spilling everywhere.
NASCAR has no choice. Stock cars are incredibly heavy and races are much longer, so they have to find a way to have refueling measures. F1 cars are so efficient and races are so short that one tank of fuel is enough to go the distance.
I always wondered if it would be possible to develop a detachable fuel tank like on a fighter jet. You would not run the risk of ripped of hoses or spilled gas and you could have multiple ready with different levels of fuel in it or one prefueled to a certain level before the car is in for the swap. I'am no car enthusiast tough so there are likely things I am not considering.
I can see where you're coming from here. Tho having an external fuel tank on a race car has its own issues. I don't know what's considered a close formation for a fighter jet, but they don't often have to consider the case where separation distance is exactly zero metres.
They could had a minimum of 5 seconds or so rule everytime a car goes to refuelling on a race for safety reasons. But what do i know? It's like almost 15 years since i watched a full race
(It’s so quick because they let much less air into the vents, George Russell showed us that it’s all in the car, his pit crew also showed us how quickly a pit stop error can change a race)
F1 has been boring cos they failed to implement the obvious answer to the problem, and instead kept coming up with stupid ideas like grooved tyres, and now sprint races. hopefully that'll change for '22 when they're doing what they should've done all along - clamp down heavily on aero!
I'm a NASCAR and Indy Car fan and have always thought that watching a Formula 1 race was like watching single car qualifying in NASCAR and Indy car. I enjoy watching a race where there are 15+ cars in the tv frame for most of the race. Formula 1 seldom has more than 3 cars close enough to be in the same frame even on a long straightaway, the start being the exception. The viewer has to rely on the announcers keeping the audience informed as to the distance between 1st through 10th because there may be 2 miles between 1st and 10th. It's racing, but certainly not a very exciting spectator sport to me.
Used be a big fun of f1 but I haven't watched f1 for 15 years now it used play on national tv after they went with the more paying channels I lost all interest
First time I see a video from this channel and ... wow! Very good video. Informative, entertaining and brilliant editing. I subscribed for those reasons.
I loved refuelling , it made strategies so exciting, im sure half of the current fan base don’t even remember refuelling, or no tyre changes, or grooved tyres only…etc…
I used to love the q3 that started with the amount of fuel they’d have to start the race with. You’d see some “gambles” on qually with low fuel and soft tyres F1 is painfully boring without refueling. If the way they did it was dangerous, change the procedure en lieu of elimination. Most racing series refuel without incident
Yeah started watching f1 again this year, the last time was Schumacher, Massa, Sutil etc, and surprised seeing pit stop so fast like 2 seconds, turned out no more refueling huh...
![Coheed and Cambria - Searching for Tomorrow [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hDsYGLbmadg/mqdefault.jpg)
“Love of my life, Schumacher”. Charles Leclerc will remember that
@@lakshmivallabh6936 what?
Was gonna like but ur on 420 bro, have a good day
@@lakshmivallabh6936 but leclerc and Schumacher aren’t related.....
He's not a fanboy, just passionate.
A clown ass spotted
Correction - refueling was actually banned in 1984. They allowed it back in 1994, to again ban it in 2010.
Shhhhhhhh
Refuelling was always in f1 in the 50s depending if drivers wanted to, 60s when mid engine arrived they opted full tank to the end
That’s actually quite a big factual error on the side of wtf1 if you ask me
you beat me to it. Since I was old enough to know that Re-fueling was banned in F1 up until 1994. when I heard it was like.. Wait .. What.. noo.. had to re-watch it to be sure of the mistake.
Too be fair I believe he is meaning it banned all together, ban and then unbanned isn’t really banned all together
Totally agree with the safety considerations you documented...
Totally understand why refueling was eliminated...
Totally want to see it back.
He missed one main reason: refueling ruined racing. Drivers and teams were relying solely on pit stop strategies to overtake which meant less overtaking on track. It's still the case today with compulsory tyre changes, but not as much as with refueling
@@ulysse21 But refueling has one advantage, it can create suspense on tracks where overtaking is difficult. I mean, just the last 15 or so laps during the 2004 French GP were simply awesome even if Schumacher and Alonso were 10+ seconds apart on the track. I miss those races during the Schumacher vs. Hakkinen era where Ferrari would often go for 2 stops and McLaren for 1.
why?
"The scream"
Nice move.
Kinda like VETTEL
Move to Aston Martin?
@@evann5451 kiik
It's been so long since I've watched F1, that I never knew they were NOT refuelling anymore. :o
Noone really cares
@@vordenkar6615 about your comment
You and me bud! Was surprised when I saw the title.
You ain't missed anything pal...I dropped it this year...after 30 yrs a fan won't miss it
Same here
There was also a period of time from 1984-1993 where refueling was also banned. Where (during the 80's turbo era) they were made to work with an increasingly restrictive fuel tank size to slow down the cars during the races, force them to conserve fuel. It was reintroduced in 1994 and at the time there was understandable anxiety with the implementation. Jos Verstappen's pit fire at Hockenheim was what the teams had feared (a big fire in the pit lane) so as soon as the fuel splashed, they were reaching for fire extinguishers to douse it even as the fire ignited on the ~800°C brake discs. This is why the fire was contained so quickly and why there were no serious injuries
1994 was an absolutely cursed year in F1
Watching a driver allow himself to be overtaken in order to save fuel has to be one of the most depressing scenes in modern F1.
Happens now with tyres though.
Over the years FIA killed this sport and you can say it doesn´t have so much of a impact about every element they changed from Hakkinen / Schumacher era.... summarize it and you get current boring sh it show...
That doesn't really happen, though, thanks to limits on fuel flow rate. That limit means it's not really possible to burn excess fuel that would require you to slow down in order to have enough to last a race.
@@Christopher_TG The fuck is the point of the race then? If you have systems in place to make sure you can't screw up, there's literally no stakes.
@@epion660 I mean a system that the teams put in to make sure the driver cant accidentally use 1 percent too much fuel and be dry 100 meters from the finish makes sense to implement...
Fun fact:
During the F1 opening titles, when Max Verstappen comes on screen, the fuel incident of his father Jos is shown in the background.
Made me go and have a look. Attention to details on point!
Yeah, I noticed this too!
*max vestappen knows the location of the creator of that intro but wants to know anyway*
Was there any need to write fun fact? This comment would still have worked without it. Why write fun fact I don’t get it
@@jafro8 because it’s a funny fact?
I liked the strategy back then. NASCAR has something called compression cautions which kinda help but are designed moreso to get the cars bunched again for a restart, but still have other pit windows. Fuel strategy had always been apart of all circuit racing, so I'm just used to it and it does hold an element of drama.
Competition Caution.
"Competition cautions don’t happen at every race. They only occur when it rains the night before or the day of the race. They usually will occur 20 laps into a race, although when they happen depends on the size of the track.
NASCAR does this to allow teams to check how their tires wear halfway into a run.
NASCAR introduced stage racing last year. That created a lot of excitement during points in the race when fans wouldn’t necessarily expect it. At the end of each stage, the caution flag comes out. This allows teams to pit in exactly the same manner as a competition caution."
@@GeoffryWKNASCAR didn't introduced the stages in 2022, it added way back in 2017.
nascar manipulates races for their preferred car/driver. Watch the 1985 Daytona 500, They started screwing the Elliott's before they won their first race that year. A prolonged green flag pitstop over taping up a headlight door opening and have richard childress,earnhardt caution flag on demand dave marcic pull over to the apron to get a caution with nothing wrong because they thought Elliott could not make it 100 miles under green. There in the open for the millions to see.
I thought they were called, "Debris on the Track" so the favorite could close on the leader?
Competition Caution= commercial time$$$
In Argentina, when Irvine started the race on extremely low fuel, shot off in front of everyone so he could allow Michael through, after his pit stop, and then hold up the pack. It made for an exciting race to see if they could pull it off. I don't think refuelling should return, but there needs to be an element added that creates another kink in the way teams think about strategy, that can be kept secret from all their competitors, and isn't revealed until the race is already under way.
That kink could be allowing the teams to use whatever tyre compounds they want without mandatory compounds.
@@4Leka I agree. I'm not a fan of having to use the Q2 tyre to start the race, either. You should be able to just start on whatever you want, and use whatever you want throughout the race.
@@4Leka The Mandatory tyres are usually the best tyres for that track. Still, would be good to see that for a season to see how that goes.
I feel that thing; "holding others back", is not very sporty. Just like Perez did to help Verstappen to win 2021. I´m more of a Verstappen fan than a Hamilton fan, but I don't feel that was fair. Not sporty at all.
@@TheKentaurion I understand where you're coming from, but teams will exploit any edge they can get. Back in the day Verstappen could have just plowed straight into Hamilton at turn one, taking them both out and he would have been crowned champ right there ala Senna v Prost in Suzuka. They just want the title, sporty or not. They don't care what we think.
I love the blistering speed of the current pit stops. Somehow watching them leisurely change the tires while waiting for the fueling to complete doesn't have the same feel of precision and skill adding to the team effort to win...
Yes, for sure 3 second F1 pit stops are insane! Human beehive with, what, 12 members over the wall?
but different fuel levels made for better strategy games on the track. recently rewatched some late 90s seasons and there you have schumacher 30 sec ahead, then he pits for fuel, hakkinen coming in hot on his heels, then they both pit around similar laps and the questions is, who has more fuel? i think it made for better battles, but at the same time, it lost massa the title in 2008, almost turned jos verstappen into ash...so i get it.
@@broncobalboa I definitely agree with you. I also miss the refuels.
@@broncobalboa agree
Check out NASCAR or IndyCar pit stops. The time it takes to refuel does not allow anything to be leasurly.
When I came back to watching F1, it didn't take long for me to notice the absence of refueling. IMO not only safer, it is actually a better way to judge driver's performance overall, reducing the overwhelming maths theorycraft the engineers have to do, whilst giving more of an equal plain field for the drivers to show their capabilities, which are almost overlooked as the championship develops to which team has the best chassis and engineers.
Hell GuiPandini Why not add anti-lock breaks as well :-|
Fuel management does not come under driver skills in my opinion. Driving skills in a RACE are only limited to car control. Because, if the driver has to take into account the fuel consumption as well. then he cannot focus completely on giving his best for a race, and cannot drive on the edge.
But that throws strategy out of the window. It's a TEAM sport.
@@ravirajyaguru5905 almost like cars use fuel
How about a bigger fuel tank but no refuelling, and the team can decide for each race if they go for max fuel and max power, or less fuel to do faster laps but risk running out of fuel if they get into persistent duels with opponents having more fuel onboard.
last time i watched Formula 1 was when i was a kid and Schumacher was driving for Ferrari battling with Hakkinen, good old times
yeah! way back then drivers were allowed to risk something. nowadays you look like wanting to risk something: "Dude get your butt right here to the pit lane and drive through slow like a snail!"
yeah same as me.i only knew red car and the black car they were schumi and hakkinen .we must at same age hahaha
Says the 13 y/o who meet F1 because DtS lmao
Now is the time to return, the Hamilton vs Verstapen battle for the championship is amazing
Yup back when overtaking was allowed everywhere on the track.
Everytime I think refuels I just see Jos Verstappen
I think of Massa 2008 Singapore
Toasty
@@js1116 oh dear god.....
Same
😪
I think the reasons for getting rid of it were all valid and it's probably for the best but I still miss it quite a lot. Because yes, it opened up the strategy to something other than tyres.
I always think about Massa from Singapore 2008 when I think about refuelling
Ferrari were using a set of lights to time the pitstops thats why they f**ked up. The lollipop signal is still better IMHO
@Thomas Hill no. he spun 5 times at silverstone
Flavio, Symmonds and Alonso lost him the title. Among other stuff. The guy had so many close calls that year, many things just occurring slightly differently could have tipped him the title
@@User-nu6km because of setup and Hungary engine failure
I remember that vividly...I was so upset because Massa was my favorite driver that year
Just add a switch that disengages the clutch when the hose is in the car. Bam, no early runaways
Yep and a better nozzle to stop fuel spills
That's another point of failure, though. They want to minimize that.
@@DiminishingAugmentation
Remember the good old days when they used to run the cars so hard that needed to be replaced after every race?
@@CallMeMrChainmail remember the good old days when a problem was discovered and the product was altered to fix the issue and it got passed down to passenger cars??? Wasn’t that long ago. Now the EPA is trying to ban turning a car into a race car.
@@GloomGaiGar
F1 was about racing fighter jets not hatchbacks.
F1 races are short enough to not need refueling. I would like to see some long races as well.
Loved the pit stops when they could refuel. It made the races a little more dynamic.
Way more dynamic, some teams at the start would go light fuel just to gain advantage in quali and the first laps before deciding how to proceed the next pit stop. Team strategy being huge over the weekend. Nowadays it's a couple of tyre changes that everyone nearly runs the same, watch out for the weather and play long enough for a SC to be in your favour.... rubbish
Tbh the only reason I'd want refuelling back is to allow Williams the space in their car to use flywheel energy storage that they developed. That shit is so cool
But isn't that just ordinary KERS except on the flywheel? Sorry I'm new to F1.
They would be a customer like all f1 teams for that technology if it was allowed. They sold the flywheel tech to gkn in 2014. They have also just recently sold Williams Advanced Engineering to try to fund f1, but it wasn't enough to stop the Williams family having to sell up.
@@JohnDoe-ji5wg Yep, it would only hold very little energy for short boosts of power. And it could only convert kinetic energy, not heat as the MGU-H does. It was a potential alternative to pre-2014 KERS systems but wouldn't work with today's complex hybrid powertrains.
It is cool, yes. but ultimately kinda obsolete for today's F1 Cars IMO.
@@simonbrunner3062 the energy conversion is separate to the storage I think. Any electric energy source can "charge" the flywheel.
I started watching F1 in recent years and I don't categorize myself as hard-core but something like refueling which adds another dimension to team strats would be fun to watch. We all love chaos.
Absolutely. And Danger is my middle name..
Since they banned refuelling, I love the emphasis the teams have had to put on changing tyres as quickly as possible when they come in for a pitstop. The mechanics have done so much practice to get it down to the ~2 seconds we see today and it would be sad to see that made obsolete by bringing back refuelling.
But how can they do long races? Without refueling?
I'm not an F1 fan, but would the skill be obsolete if they did a two tire pitstop with a but of fuel? do two tire stops happen in F1 like they do in nascar? that's wild that they've gotten to sub two seconds though.
@@KumoGoesFast two tire stops would not really work
haha but they still screw that up too
@@dnh3005 f1 races aren’t actually that long in duration.
one of the problems with refuelling was that, although there was a lot of overtaking, pretty much all of it was done off track
I don't know what time you are referring to but F1 went through really bad times in terms of overtaking. The pitstops were pretty much the only times overtakes happened unless you had a vastly superior machine.
@@seppovie I think that is what he meant
People forget about this too often, I wanna see a battle on the road, not passing someone who's stopped, I really like the 2-3s pits, it means less action there.
no refuelling + all teams exchange tyres at the same time would be better
@@hendranhw60 that would completely eliminate tire strategies, are you sure you want that?
Yes! I just re-watched the 2006 Monaco Grand Prix - multiple pit stop strategies, Michael starting last and finishing 8th! Overtaking galore! Not to mention Kimi retiring from the race and walking directly to the marina and into his leased Yacht.
Caveats:
1. Maximum 110KG per car for the entire raceday.
2. Each car has a 25L Fuel Cell, (guaranteeing a minimum 3 stop strategy, up to 5).
3. Car must start with Q2 tyres.
4. In Q3, remaining 10 cars fuel their car once at the beginning of the session and are not allowed to add fuel. The more laps they do to try to get pole position, the less fuel they have to start the race. Lots of strategy possibilities there!
What about Maximum 7 - 10 people allowed to service the car during a pitstop?
In fact, with 25L tanks, you could even consider a modular design with the "empty" tank being swapped out for a prefilled one. That would preclude someone driving off with the hose still attached and a variety of other unfortunate scenarios and minimize the risk of open fuel spills. Also would allow interesting mind games of estimating how much fuel is in the tank based on how heavy it seems when they heave it into position vs. the crew pretending it's heavier than it actually is..
The moment when Massa likely won his one-and-only title
End up in leaving the box with fuel pipe unplugged
and due to a malfunction of ferraris equipment. He had a great season
P A I N.
Ferrari stole that one from him
A rushed stop which he was forced into by crashgate. I still think that cheated race should have been struck from the standings. Massa deserved that championship and Hamilton has enough of them by now.
lots of times drivers pulled away from the pits too soon. some still had the refueling pipe attached. some didnt have their wheels put back on fully so they came off before they even got out of the pits.
Seen a few pitcrew guys get hit by their cars cause the driver got impatient and pulled away before the guy in front lifted the board to say they could go and pit crew were still working on the car.
They banned pit stops at 1 point for that reason.
Think it was more fun when they just raced from start to finish without stopping to refuel or change tyres unless they got a puncture. then it was all about drivers abilty to overtake cars in front rather than pit stops.
Every year they say the changes will make it easier to overtake!
2022 it is finally the truth imo with proper aero improvements reducing the loss of downforce following closely.
New regulation with less complex aero is for sure reduce wake, but still no good for backmarkers
Ggot to love the pass in the pits
@@justcows7772 at least they're looking in the right area at last, instead of idiotic ideas like grooved tyres which everyone with half a brain knew was gonna make things worse!
The monetary and safety arguments against refueling in F1 seem ludicrous when you consider every other major racing series pulls it off using lower budgets and without cars turning into fireballs all the time. As for it making less of a difference because of smaller tanks - less difference is not the same as no difference. With the 0.3 sec per 10 kg rule of thumb a car with half a tank would still run 1.5 seconds faster per lap than one with a full tank and that's pretty significant.
Lastly, saying it's confusing to casual fans is funny when you consider all the other craziness F1 implements. So you mean to tell me putting gas in a car is more confusing to a spectator than some weird aerodynamic gimmick to allow overtaking that sometimes is available to a driver and sometimes not?
I'd like to see refueling back myself to add to race strategy and make things more unpredictable but one subtle argument against it that wasn't spelled out in this video is the environmental side. F1 made the switch to hybrid cars for environmental concerns despite most everyone knowing that the cars themselves are a drop in the ocean compared to the pollution moving the whole F1 circus around makes. By banning refueling F1 keeps up its image of environmental consciousness by not showing nasty, polluting gasoline being put in the cars during a race. Politics and image ultimately are two of the biggest factors in modern F1 and that environmental aspect will keep refueling out of F1 forever now.
Wow, you said it better than I ever could and spot on! As for fires, there is no way 87 oct gas would burn like the fire they showed unless it was under pressure and aerated. You can put a cigar out in a pool of gas but not when it is air burst. Maybe go back to gravity feed cans like everyone else. As for the money....lol...maybe get one of the 32 people standing around the car at a pit stop to pick up a gas can. Only five can go over the wall in a Nascar race and they do a manual jack, change tires and fuel the car.
@@finscreenname F1 was using regular race fuel in 1994, not something extra flammable.
By the way, octane doesn't dictate how easy fuel is to set alight, only how resistant it is to compression.
@@rockarola55 Like I said, "unless it was under pressure and aerated". Due to the conversation what I meant was the hose was under pressure and aeriated the gas which caused it to explode like it did. 😎😎 If they used a gravity feed system it may be slower but you are not going to spray the whole pit area down with napalm.
@@finscreenname any kind of spill will will find an area hot enough for evaporation - on some tracks that'll mean any area, including the driver's helmet - but brakes, exhaust manifold and the engine block will be hot enough to both evaporate and ignite most kinds of fuel.
You're a true fan
Everyone keeps bringing up the new regs as if Mercedes aren't going to be 3 seconds faster than everyone else in Australia in 2022.
Well FIA will do something big to stop Mercedes dominance as they did in 2005 against Ferrari. Ferrari dominated 1999-2004 so 6 seasons straight. Mercedes have surpassed that, but I don't think it will stay for long, new regs will make RedBull or some middle team jump out.
@@ingvers1436 to the opposite of the Ferrari period, develoment (engine and electronics) is now forbidden in F1. So unlike this period no one will challenge Mercedes
As long as the FIA does not UN-FREEZE engine develoment and energy saving electronic limitations, the grid order will stay basically the same
Exactly, Mercedes will have 10 consecutive years of dominance, if not more. What an awful era for F1 this is. This is even more painful than the Schumacher era because nobody can get near Mercedes performance for 7 seasons now.
@@bacro2 This exactly. I used to be a big F1 fan, got hooked during the Schumi vs Hakkinen era. I stopped watching severa; years ago. What is the point anyway, when everyone knows who is the winner before the season even begins?
@@ingvers1436 which would be something like making a huge change to the engine regulations but the FIA refuse to do anything about that. You look at when Red Bull were on top and their designs were constantly getting banned.
Narrator: "Why don't F1 cars refuel"
Me: *having flashbacks of Jos Verstappen in Vietnam War*
Like any sport, Formula 1 is an evolving story. Strategies change, regulations change, training changes, technology changes, the fans change. I for one find all of these interactions fascinating. I think the sport should pivot away from passive aero and embrace active aero. Not in the form of shape shifting aerodynamic surfaces or suspension set ups, but in the form of a single fan with a regulated max power output. Play with the shape of the underbody, play with the placement and control of the fan and do away with wings. Implemented wisely this would not only lessen the downforce penalty of following closely but it would also keep F1 on the very cutting edge of technology.
Me: doesn’t remember Jos Verstappens pit stop
Cool guys don’t look at explosions
That's very funny 😂😂😂😂😂😂
This is only in films. In reality cool guys MAKE the explosions. I do, not allways you see it. Hearing is more important.
Mean while I'm here just finished watching a replay of the V8 supercars goldcoast 600 where the fuel strategy help win the race. Fill up with less fuel to undercut their main rival for position, then race on a leaner setting and race defensively to hold off second place who was racing on max fuel use. Differing pit strategies make the racing more exciting, instead of just changing the tires. It also allows for much longer races including enduro events.
Gold coast is a crazy track. Love the street tracks
what does the cost of having fueling infrastructure have to do with anything? the whole circus lays waste to millions of gallons of jet fuel hauling itself all over the world, making any claims with regards to cost savings irrelevant. fact is, what was once strategy and chance is now tedious and dull. we watched because life on the edge was dangerous and thrilling and often unpredictable, just like rally1 and motogp today.
I didnt even knew there was no refueling anymore lol
Lol, have you been watching any pit stops
@@umey3445 Redbulls's 1.8 second pitstop, 4 tires and a tank of gas 😂😂😂
WTF1 see to be reading my mind lately, I question or think about F1 then the next day they upload a video about it
That's exactly what I've been thinking
Like what happened to tobacco sponsorship and than wtf1 gives me a realistic demo of why it isn't allowed.
With all the tweaks to F1 regulations over the years the 2022 season looks like they might have actually made the right changes to make the sport more competitive. Hopefully what we saw in Bahrain will carry on throughout the season.
I don't remember it quite the same way. I remember refuelling being one of the anchors around F1's necks, dragging strategy to the point where more of the overtaking was done in the pits during fuelstops.
DRS could change that, or shorter width cars (2022). The issue was not so much with refueling than with the difficulty to overtake
Yeah refueling worsened overall strategy.
I remember when Button would catch up half a second a lap on competitor . Make a half-hearted attempt to pass and whine that he couldn't. So his team would bring him in. No refueling forces them to be racers.
I was never a fan of refuelling. I didn't like the way strategic decisions were essentially fixed by the time they lined up on the grid; you can't decide to risk running on an empty tank the way you can eke out some extra laps on worn tyres. I also hated the way it made pit stops themselves less intense. The length of a pit stop was essentially determined by the amount of fuel you needed rather than the skill of the crew.
I would prefer a strategic overtake through fuel-stops than the artificial overtaking we have today through DRS and ERS batteries.
1:01 - More like "There was constant push towards saving as much money as possible on things that provided excitement for the spectators, in order to allow Bernie Ecclestone to extract an ever increasing amount money from the sport each year!"
I grow up with refuel was allowed and it was amazing to watch it and gave so much thinking of what strategy will a certain team use
If it's that dangerous why do they still refuel in indycar? IndyCar has plenty of both on track passing and strategy overtakes, why doesnt f1 take a lead out of there book?
Indycar is a spec series so the racing is much more competitive to begin with. Refuelling definitely would make more of a difference in a spec series like Indycar than a series like F1 where the cars are bound to regulations but other than that they all have obvious differences in power, aerodynamics, brakes, suspension etc.
@@Spermwhales93 While IndyCar is a spec series, it should be noted that the IRL (Indy Racing League) offers different engine manufacturers and aero kits for teams. It's not quite the same as Formula One as you pointed, but it does offer some variety.
It’s all about the pit stall. F1 pits are enclosed structures less than 10 ft from the pit lane where the car stops. Insanely dangerous atmosphere for an out if control fire. Indy pits are open air, non enclosed structures on the other side of a large pit wall separating the fuel from the pits/track. Much safer.
not to mention insane fuel strategies.
"clutch and coast" has become a legendary phrase while Alexander Rossi was nursing every last drop pf fuel in that tank to win the Indy 500.
Also, Indy car (and most US series in general) are biased to being a contest of endurance (human and mechanical) as much as "who can drive the perfect lap". Longer races mean refueling becomes part of the strategy, (limited crew over the wall and pit row being an active zone also plays into this). Back in the 50s a handful of cars tried running Indy on one tank (mostly diesels), it didn't pay off
From what I remember, it was mostly centred around reducing costs
At the isle of man one team (Hector Neill? I think, not sure) checked the rules for replacing the fuel tank during a pit stop. Nothing in the rules regarding it. So on the pit stop, empty fuel tank was removed and replaced by a full fuel tank, and was out of the pits really quick. The main rival to that team I believe was Philip McCallen? Who saw his rival leaving pits, told his crew to hurry up, left the pits with not the right amount of fuel, ran out of fuel and had to retire. The team who replaced the fuel tank won the race. The rules were changed after to prevent this happening again....
However the point I am getting to is, what about a fuel tank that is primed and ready to go to be slotted in like a cartridge after the empty tank has been removed during a pit stop.
It would be nice to see refueling come back to F1, especially since FE is planning on bringing in mid-race recharging... But I understand why it'll probably never happen.
F1 cars are restricted on the max amount of fuel they may use during a race, hence the 100kg tank. That's why refueling is pointless.
@@nielsdebakker3283 Thing is, fuel weighs something too. If you use a 50 kg tank instead and refuel halfway through the race, you're saving 50 kgs of weight in the first half of the race. According to the numbers in the video (at 3:19), that's 1.5 seconds of time saved/lap, more than enough time to offset the 6-9 seconds it takes to refuel the car.
Indy car seems to get refuelling done reasonably well... same with V8sc... as for the cost element, supply a standard rig to all teams that has updated safety systems in place. Fuel tank sizes (and therefore car sizes and weight) would be reduced, which should help the spectacle a bit. I would like to see it return IMO. As for the safety side - Grosjean crashed with the better part of 150kg of fuel onboard and the fireball was massive, surely the scenario would be improved if he only had 50kg of fuel onboard?
Agreed. Refueling is much safer. Especially at the beginning of a race when the cars are close and the potential for a huge crash and fireball.
Indycar doesn't have as many crewmembers over the wall. Refueling is part of the adventure, isn't it? If NASCAR could pull it off they probably would do as F1 does. I like the drama that can or may happen on a pit stop or a fuel mileage race.
indycar pit stops are much longer. As far as the explosions...someone correct me if I'm wrong, but in actuality less fuel would result in a bigger explosion, as an emptier gas tank has more vapor, and gasoline only burns in vapor form. So if the tank is full the initial explosion is smaller but it burns much longer (obviously). If you've ever been a dumb teenager starting fires with your friends, you know that even a very small amount of gasoline has (ahem) a very high energy content.
@@Burt1038 That metric is the air volume around the fuel. bigger fuel tank at the end of its run would therefor have a larger explosion potential. This point also comes out in favor of smaller tanks and refuelling.
He got out, that was the single best thing could havr happened there. Horrifying.
I sometimes like to compare and contrast differences in sports. So now I'm pondering how it'd look for Formula One if they had a Nascar-style gas can for refuelling. Those hold a little more than forty litres of fuel, and apparently weigh in full at about thirty-two kilos. To fully fuel a Cup car, it takes two of these (and the second one usually has some fuel left in it of course). Would this be considered safe?
It would be more exiting if they actually got out to put it in themselves.
The skills involved would entail: , getting the girl on the till's attention to activate the pump, making sure they didn't put in diesel
and paying for it in the kiosk (could always pick up a kitkat too). I'd enjoy watching that anyway.
Added bonus coupons handed out.
They should also have to drink a Fosters Oil can after the last pit stop while they drive.
....and the swipe your rewards card challenge, with gloves ON, accumulating points as the season progresses.
@@kirillmitchell888 4 Loko tall boy. Warm.
@@carlsaganlives6086 Out of their shoe.
I miss refuelling. James Allen in the pits with his stop watch trying to work out how many laps Hakkinen could go after a 7 second stop...
It definitely removed a MASSIVE strategy element. Hell, how many times has a driver won the Indy 500 on fuel strategy, barely making it across the finish line? Incredibly memorable situations. Something F1 has lacked.
@@Real28 it happens with IndyCar on the road courses too, makes for some really interesting strategy calls.
If refueling was back I am sure they could setup a safety feature where the refuel hose had to be a safe distance away before the car’s computer would allow the driver to depart. Since they stopped the refueling I only watch the highlights after the race, I used to watch all the races live.
Just no.
Current heavy high DF cars are very demanding on tyres. Refueling would reduce weight, and make it possible to push harder for longer, so the best drivers will make more of a difference.
So indeed, refueling is a bad idea :)
A modern version could be to fast charge the batteries, for a big YEET to get fastest lap, or make up for a bad stop
That is a great idea.
I believe rapid charging for batteries is something Formula E are looking at for the Gen 3 cars
I am a casual F1 and would def like to refueling added to races. The first lap of a race is breathtakingly exciting. Then it's just the two black and silver cars out front followed in order by the teams with the most money. I would think any variable would be good and more passing (whether in the pits or not) would be better, imo.
Ohhhkay. I guess that shows how long i've been away from F1 (watching MotoGP and SBK instead). I had no idea they'd stopped refueling. I'm only a few years out of date!
i'm in favor of no rules in f1 apart from budget cap and safety related stuff on the technical side. ofc racing rules still apply but it would be mental to see what the engineers could come up with if we would let them. thats what made f1 really good in the past, it was always a playground for the weirdest ideas, many of them didnt work, but some revolutionized the way racecars were built forever.
in my opinion modern F1 should be about constant and controlled inovation
cars are better than ever and basically no martirs
Exactly.
I long for the old days when cars were actually different. Watching identical cars with different paint jobs is a turn-off for me. I used to wonder every year at Indy what Smoky Yunick or Andy Granatelli would bring. Those exciting days are gone forever.
I watched Verstappen's incident live (wow I'm old) and it's certainly memorable. Verstappen's incident wasn't as scary as the "invisible" fire that occurred during refueling in Indycars which used methanol as fuel back in the days. You don't even see the flames, you just see the heat and the driver panicking. It's remarkable that someone even approved the concept of using methanol when the apparent danger was so clear. Here's a video of it: ruclips.net/video/Ku7TdLeEGsQ/видео.html
Was that pun?
It really wasn’t that dangerous and part of the reason they used the fuel is because it could be doused with water fairly quickly. Whereas gasoline fires require chem extinguisher agents to stop the fire from spreading.
If you remember Indy teams used to shoot water at the car just as the fuel hose was removed.
Oh and it smelled so good as a race fuel with a little castor oil mix.
The reason they switched from gasoline to methanol was because of the Sachs, MacDonald crash in 1964 as gasoline produces black smoke and is very hard to put out. ruclips.net/video/nljbCb2vuL4/видео.html
@@Heavywall70 Yeah, a fire you can't see is not that big of a problem..
Scary stuff man.
2:52 "With a 4 stop strategy" Damn, how times have changed
I'm old enough to know about the refueling, but not old enough to know about the ban before 1994, and not care enough to know about the ban in 2010
What about the fact that they had to introduce rubbish tires in 2011 to help prevent utterly dull races that happened in 2010 due to the lack of refueling. They went from authentic variety to artificial variety that also ended with drivers not being able to push at all, meaning fewer mistakes are made, making races more predictable. Not to mention lighter cars having more nimbleness meaning a lower need to rely on aero for performance, meaning able to follow more closely. Refueling has only really made f1 worse for me. Not saying f1 was amazing beforehand, but even a dull race was more interesting with refueling due to the additional element that Brought and the fact the tires actually used to work for more than a few laps
You fail to mention that fuel is always part of f1 strategy even if there is no more refueling.
Based upon the logic behind refueling, not allowing tyre changes would make it even easier to follow for the casuals and save even more money. Having gears adds unneeded cost and complexity as well. All of those curves and turns probably confuses casuals and drives up costs as well. For that matter, a single course would cut back on travel expenses, and the casuals would arguably not notice anyway.
yea F1 is not for casuals, that's what drag racing is for.
And following your logic, teams should be allowed to do everything they want, without restrictions, with no budget limit. Because why should they try to create a sport that the majority of people are interested in ?
@@arakwar No, that would be a strawman.
Turn F1 into NASCAR... To reduce costs 👍
The difference is tires can’t function after a certain point where as cars can last a race without refueling it’s just not necessary so not a great comparison
as a younger fan who doesnt remember back in 2010 when they did refuel i do wanna see it back
Yes me too its make the game more tactical and put weight on the whole team .
I wasn't even aware refueling was banned. That's how much F1 has lost it's appealing for me. (a Brazilian btw)
It was banned over 10 years ago, how did you not notice that😂
Same here lol, F1 used to be exciting to me in the 70 and 80s but the more regulated it became the more boring it got to watch, 99% of the race was just driving around in convoy with zero overtaking, the race was one by the pit crew, might as well not bother with the driving bit and just time the pit crew lol.
I dont like to see people hurt but unfortunately the danger was always a big part of the lure of F1.
I find downhill mountain biking more entertaining now.
Try Indycar, it a more pure form of racing
Same goes for me, I was a avid fan from 1995-2008, but after that it lost it’s appeal.
If I hadn’t watched this video today, I’d thought someone is crazy for telling me F1 isn’t refueling anymore..
rubbish why are you at wtf1 then? a channel that covers current F1 stuff
Make the fuel tanks smaller, so they have to come back in often, and make pit stops part of strategy.
Nah, it's better as it is.
Refueling means entertainment when something happens because someone didn't get enough fuel for what they was trying to do... No fuel stops means you can predict the race results from the start
"because someone didn't get enough fuel" how often did that happen versus how often it became predictable when cars would pit and how much they carried in order to overtake in the most boring way possible?
I seem to recall during your so called "golden era of refuelling" that Ferrari won for 7 years. Refuelling is not the issue. Any fan who isn't completely blinded by nostalgia knows this.
rather have my drivers and teams alive than burnt or hurt...
So human powered sports are boring?
Would loved to agree if it was safer, but motorsports has always been chaotic and I don’t think there’s any chance to see refueling being allowed again anytime soon.
@@GloomGaiGar What? When there was refueling. There was no way to know when they were going to stop as we had no idea how much fuel they put into the cars. Now we know exactly when they will pit because fuel is not the problem but tire degradation is artificially made to last a specific amount of laps before they need to pit
That pulp fiction wallet made me laugh out loud
"....Vincent.....over here on the wall...."
Refuelling is not just dangerous to the driver and pit crew, it’s also dangerous to others. This got proven when, as pictured but not mentioned in the video, Kovalainen took off with the hose still attached and sprayed Räikkönen (driving behind) with fuel that then ignited, giving Kimi a nasty surprise.
Auto racing is dangerous...
I'm pretty sure refueling is not the most dangerous thing about the sport haha. Ita auto racing. There is danger.
@@JohnDoe-vy5hh I hate it so much when people use "Racing is dangerous" as an excuse to discredit valid safety features. Like, dude, your entertainment is NOT worth a humans life.
@@JohnDoe-vy5hhmaking it more dangerous is shit
Refueling is shit
It invalidates the 2 second pit stop
Its dangerous as shit
I hope it stays banned forever
@@JohnDoe-vy5hh and water is wet. Gun free zones are dangerous too but I don't see you complaining about that!
Hell ya, refueling was amazing, gave so much complexity to the race.
LOL, "Hey let's fuel under pressure from mobile rigs, what could go wrong. NASCAR: Yeah we got gravity feeds, not cost, transportation or safety issues at all.
Yup, and you can make gravity fed faster by just increase the nozzle size and use vent. It'll make fire hazard less likely to happen and the car will be less bulky
And significantly longer bloody pitstops that are entirely fine with lower flow rates. Could it be that people that chose to use pressure feeds for their high flow rates knew what they were doing because they were professional engineers, and wanted as quick a pitstop as possible? Could it be that with 2-5, depending on the year, *seconds* it takes to pit everything else, it's the fuel flow rate that would be restricting the stop time? Nah, just fit a bigger nozzle. Not like their nozzles weren't massive already and could pump 12.1 liters per second, or 726 liters per minute, more than a fire hose (which tops at about 120 gallons per minute, or 454 LPM) and still were the defining factor in the length of a pit stop.
@@EgorKaskader I think what you fail to realize is fueling using gravity makes the piut stops longer for EVERYONE and also brings the teams into the mix in terms of determining the outcome of the race. The human / team factor. THAT''S way harder to get right all day and makes races more interesting.
@@surferdjnj I think what you fail to realise is that mandated fuel rigs did exactly the same. No one had the advantage. And I don't want to see races decided solely by pitstops and how long those take, because the flow rate of any reasonable gravity-fed system is pretty low for a quick pitstop.
I'm not that up to date with all the tech but the suspense and strategies the refueling added to the event was great in my memory. But I can understand the safety aspect..
Wait, i thought they still did refuel ... has it really been 10 years since i last watched a full F1 race? wow.
why do you think pitstops average time is below 3 seconds now?
@@GloomGaiGar Figured the pit-stops i 'did' see every so often when i caught part of a race was just them doing a tire-only stop. :)
I just honestly havnt watched many anymore. It got to the point that once the first 5 laps were over, the field was pretty much set in stone for the rest of the 50 or so they run. unless someone made a mistake. It got dull :T
have you seen the roll cages............its a folkN joke.
@@ZEROmg13 the Halos? I actually think its an engenious thing to design. Keeps "large" debree from being such a risk to the drivers, but still allows them the ability to escape a flipped car.
Motor racing gets more boring as you move up through the formulas. Go-karts most entertaining, Formula One least entertaining!
The general audience wants to see drama, aggressive overtakings and crashes... without any injuries of course.
Ha ha. 👍
It could be simple. Keep the rule that f1 use two different compounds during the race and refueling must be completed before tires can be changed. Same as road racing series. It would make races much more interesting
I enjoy pit-stop stuff, more than the race sometimes, so I would like to see refuelling back. Motorsport is inherently dangerous and I am certain safeguards can be put in place.
I feel like it really added excitement to the race
Pitstop was always about refueling in my head. Then you change the tires if needed.
I remember doing it in an old F1 videogame eons ago.
They could just design a standard fuel rig to save development costs.
And prevent cheating (wink Benetton wink)
@@biblemaniswatchingyoumastu1920 its funny . im not a hardcore f1 fan but after 10 minutes of wikipedia reading about the 94 german grand prix fire i also came across the benetton cheating thing lol. all of course after i watched this video.
@@EricHurwitz yeah, they certainly had there fair share of controversy that year. And for controversy, read blatant cheating and disregard for the rules. Still love them though
To remove a major tactical factor, make big teams even bigger, the race more boring and of course remove the risk of having too many fights because saving fuel is the safer option to get some points.
If it ever gets re-added they will need to make 2 changes for the safety side of things first: have the fuel hose have an auto open/close mechanism so it can’t open or close manually and can only open when inserted into a car the second is have a mechanism in the car that automatically engages the clutch if connected to a fuel hose so it can’t leave without the hose being detached
f1: we cater to the causals
casuals: we want overtakes, drama, and chaos!
f1: aight so the most hyped races is gonna be monaco
1994 was the last dangerous moment with refueling. It was 100 % safe.
I would love for it to come back. The uncertainty was magic. Seeing a driver push like crazy in the stint-end was great.
Overcut was great to see. With how strong undercut is now, it would be even better
If you don't count that whole think with Kimi Raikkonen setting a car on fire in 2009 thing. Which you obviously don't.
@@jayrobb9 Yeah, but come on- it was only Kimi 😉🤣
@@jayrobb9 or felipe massa's fuel hose in 2008
Wasn’t 100% if there was an incident was it
I liked how fuel impacts strategy before. And how qualifying is tied to fuel and the race. Lighter on fuel means faster in qualifying but that means stopping earlier in the race... This added an extra dimension besides the tires on pit strategy...
I think from a safety perspective, it's best not to anymore. The refuelling systems were incredibly safe, but when they go wrong the risk for disaster is so high, with fuel spilling everywhere.
By that argument F1 should be banned entirely. Much safer that way…
Ah where’s your sense of adventure Luke?
Meanwhile NASCAR figured out how to refuel safely, to keep it in the mix.
NASCAR has no choice. Stock cars are incredibly heavy and races are much longer, so they have to find a way to have refueling measures. F1 cars are so efficient and races are so short that one tank of fuel is enough to go the distance.
@@Christopher_TG but they still figured out how to do it safely and gas mileage finished are so damn entertaining
@@spiderman4207 yeah but NASCAR hasn’t been that much entertaining even though they still have refueling
Nascar, indy, wec all refuel without killing people every year..
So i'm new to f1 and i think the best way i learn things and catch up all about is f1 is your channel thank you!
I always wondered if it would be possible to develop a detachable fuel tank like on a fighter jet. You would not run the risk of ripped of hoses or spilled gas and you could have multiple ready with different levels of fuel in it or one prefueled to a certain level before the car is in for the swap. I'am no car enthusiast tough so there are likely things I am not considering.
I can see where you're coming from here. Tho having an external fuel tank on a race car has its own issues. I don't know what's considered a close formation for a fighter jet, but they don't often have to consider the case where separation distance is exactly zero metres.
Probably flammability concern. If the container somehow breaks, there is now fuel all over the hot car and hot track
Matt’s voice makes me want to eat soup with a fork
No even better eat cereal with a knife
Are you Ysgramor?
I dont agree with u. But i liked the comment cus it was funny
Omgoodness, Ty for the giggle.😋👍 (so true)
Something better,eat potato chips with a chainsaw
They could had a minimum of 5 seconds or so rule everytime a car goes to refuelling on a race for safety reasons. But what do i know? It's like almost 15 years since i watched a full race
Lol, i didn't even know that they stopped refuelling. :D
I miss refueling.
Made for a more interesting race at times.
Let's be honest, F1 for the last 6yrs has been boring.
It’s only interesting when Hamilton gets stuck in traffic and his car overheats because it’s built to be in open air only.
(It’s so quick because they let much less air into the vents, George Russell showed us that it’s all in the car, his pit crew also showed us how quickly a pit stop error can change a race)
Boring indeed
F1 has been boring cos they failed to implement the obvious answer to the problem, and instead kept coming up with stupid ideas like grooved tyres, and now sprint races. hopefully that'll change for '22 when they're doing what they should've done all along - clamp down heavily on aero!
I'm a NASCAR and Indy Car fan and have always thought that watching a Formula 1 race was like watching single car qualifying in NASCAR and Indy car. I enjoy watching a race where there are 15+ cars in the tv frame for most of the race. Formula 1 seldom has more than 3 cars close enough to be in the same frame even on a long straightaway, the start being the exception. The viewer has to rely on the announcers keeping the audience informed as to the distance between 1st through 10th because there may be 2 miles between 1st and 10th. It's racing, but certainly not a very exciting spectator sport to me.
Last year of refuel: 2009
First Hybrid engine: 2014
Yeah the refuel its being forgettable
I miss refuelling so much
The use of strategy in terms of the amount of fuel in the cars is soo cool tho wow, as a new F1 fan i’ve never thought of that before
Used be a big fun of f1 but I haven't watched f1 for 15 years now it used play on national tv after they went with the more paying channels I lost all interest
Stops being fun when the car and driver catches fire
Refuelling was pretty fun to see but I can see where removing it came from
That one hurt. „They dont care about the 2% Hardcore fans.“
Soccer reference.
First time I see a video from this channel and ... wow! Very good video. Informative, entertaining and brilliant editing. I subscribed for those reasons.
I loved refuelling , it made strategies so exciting, im sure half of the current fan base don’t even remember refuelling, or no tyre changes, or grooved tyres only…etc…
I used to love the q3 that started with the amount of fuel they’d have to start the race with.
You’d see some “gambles” on qually with low fuel and soft tyres
F1 is painfully boring without refueling.
If the way they did it was dangerous, change the procedure en lieu of elimination.
Most racing series refuel without incident
Why everyone loved the old days? It was interesting! When remove the risk, you remove the stakes! And then everything becomes dull...
The vast majority of F1 don't even care. Your "everyone" is just yourself really.
so people dying risk
Yeah started watching f1 again this year, the last time was Schumacher, Massa, Sutil etc, and surprised seeing pit stop so fast like 2 seconds, turned out no more refueling huh...