A single fuel provider in the future of F1?

[Tommy Cookers]

limiting maximum fuel specific energy means that everyone would be operating on and possibly over the limit
and races could be decided by lab tests (and legal disputes) after the event
although logically the fuel rules could otherwise be greatly simplified

Methanol is a very poor fuel in specific energy terms (Ethanol is nearly as bad)
use of such a fuel would encourage engine efficiency (with refuelling remaining banned)
because the worse the fuel specific energy the greater the benefit from engine efficiency in reducing fuel load
(eg current cars would need 350-400 litres of Methanol)
so using (cellulosic) Methanol or Ethanol would there would be no need to meter and record (and dispute) fuel use
and it counts as green/future, so would give an image value to the fuel companies that can access/source it

[Holm86]

When I first heard the idea I liked it. Single supplier would mean no chemical warfare in a arms race to produce most MJ/Kg. Though if it means that any team would loose sponsor money it is pure stupidity.

But what's the problem with technological warfare in the arena of F1? That is a major part of the allure of motorsports to big companies - a development and testing ground for their technologies. That aspect has already been heavily regulated to the point where car manufacturers and tire companies have been chased out of Formula 1 and has left us fans the poorer. With no scope for engine, transmission or electronics development, we currently have a joke of a formula where millions are invested into putting tiny fins on the car, which make very little difference at the end of the day, because of the funny joke tyres they currently race on.

Instead of tightening regulations still further, they should be LOOSENED for the good of F1. Proof of that is the fact that the loosened regulations for engine development from next season onwards has enticed Honda back into the sport.

I say that we need the old days back, where we have real racecars,with real tyres and at the real limit of technical prowess, screaming around the track, being manhandled by the best racers in the world. Not this pseudo spec series farce.

I like technological warfare. Thats why i like F1. But i would much rather see who could come up with the most efficient engine within the new regulations. I dont want to see the worst engine win because of some super fuel. A fuel which is composed of so many additives that it will never be used for other purposes than F1. Thats what i dont want to see.

[Holm86]

limiting maximum fuel specific energy means that everyone would be operating on and possibly over the limit
and races could be decided by lab tests (and legal disputes) after the event
although logically the fuel rules could otherwise be greatly simplified

Methanol is a very poor fuel in specific energy terms (Ethanol is nearly as bad)
use of such a fuel would encourage engine efficiency (with refuelling remaining banned)
because the worse the fuel specific energy the greater the benefit from engine efficiency in reducing fuel load
(eg current cars would need 350-400 litres of Methanol)
so using (cellulosic) Methanol or Ethanol would there would be no need to meter and record (and dispute) fuel use
and it counts as green/future, so would give an image value to the fuel companies that can access/source it

Are you sure that you would need that much more Methanol??? I know that Methanol has a lower energy density than regular fuel. But is has other advantages. It is much less prone to selfigniting and burns cooler which means you can run higher CR and ignite later. Both increases efficiency.

[Tommy Cookers]

the specific energy of Methanol is about 45% that of petrol/gasoline
Ethanols is about 60%
based on the lower calorific values (engine people use these, so ignore the heat tied up in the water vapour from combustion)
alcohols have proportionately more of this
also I have not adjusted for the fuel quantities relative to combustion air mass
but these are minor factors

2014 should have very high CR from late injection and super-high Octane fuel, so Methanol wouldn't be much better ?
they could use a smaller intercooler though

[xpensive]

When Gasoline holds 46, Ethanol 30 and Methanol 20 MJ/kg, a Methanol-powered F1-car would need 230 kg to equal the 100 kg of Gasoline for 2014 energy-wise. This should per definition mean the return of refueling, which I would salute, but better still would be to ditch the fuel-metering device and the recovery-gizmos, then allow for a 900 Hp boost, 1000+ for qualifying!

I think the oil companies should focus on advertising their lubricants and what not.

[timbo]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/110276

[bhall]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/110276

With a number of teams unhappy at the prospect of losing fuel partners, sources have revealed that the FIA has now clarified that the statement made after the WMSC hearing was a mistake.

Instead of setting out on a path for there to be a fuel supplier tender, sources have revealed the FIA's secretary general Pierre de Connick has written to teams emphasising that the governing body is not pursuing that route.

Instead, the FIA statement was intended to make it explicit that any future tenders in F1 will always be handled by the governing body first - rather than it reacting after commercial deals have been put in place.

Does anyone else see the irony in that statement, or is it just me?

[timbo]

Does anyone else see the irony in that statement, or is it just me?

I think the wording is strange and could mean anything.

[GitanesBlondes]

It strikes me that the FIA must have gotten a ton of blowback from not only the teams, but the oil companies as well. Most likely it came in the form of veiled threats and so on, so much so that the FIA decided to back off as it would put them in a tenuous position that has no good outcome. I wonder if there were threats of pulling support from Todt in the upcoming election and switching it over to Mosley's hatchet man Ward.

[xpensive]

Oh my, next season will be a tsunami of innuendos, rumors and accusations around magic fuels from Shell and Total.

Petronas doesn't count in this context, but Mobil perhaps?

[MOWOG]

I hope next year every race winds up being the subject of litigation. It would be especially great if some of the legal action is in Italy, some in France and some in England, with contradictory and conflicting rulings by the various courts.

Man, racing doesn't get any better than when the lawyers get involved!