Even weirder strategies when the total fuel becomes marginal: the optimum might sometimes be to be a lap down (I'll later rephrase that to "have a shorter race").
If you are counting on being lapped anyways in, say, Spa, you can calculate 102Kg for the race distance proper. You should, as you only plan on doing 97.x% of the race distance anyways. This way when you finish a lap down, as you are expected to, you have only used 99.x Kg of it, but you have enjoyed a 2% extra energy throughout the weekend, quali included (if for example this meant running more rear wing than you would otherwise). A perverse effect is that in that case you need to finish a lap down. Otherwise you get disqualified, not just set a lap down.
No for the outrageous "have a shorter race" scenario. Can anybody with a good lap-sim estimate how much lap time a 5% increase in fuel usage would bring? And a 10%? I'd venture at least two seconds, or way more than a lap's worth, in the latest case?
So say a race (Monza?) would require 110Kg to run flat out. Most teams would have to scale back fuel consumption through a combination of less downforce, leaner engine settings or less revs. In team X you like risks and set up the car for full performance. You gamble! Possibility 1: If there are two lengthy safety car periods, then you finish just fine with 100Kg. If there are 25 laps of rain, ditto. Possibility 2: The race is normal and you end up having to stop in the pits with three laps to go, and finish last. If you are, say, Caterham, in the second case you have traded finishing 16th a lap down for finishing 20th, not much lost. In the first case, you might, wait for it, win the race!
Edit: This thread used to be called "100 Kg fuel rule".
- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up