The contradictory 2019 rule change that 'fooled the FIA'

The maximum amount of fuel that a Formula 1 driver can use over a race distance rises from 105 kilograms to 110kg in 2019, in a move that appears to contradict the ethos that efficiency is a cornerstone of the current hybrid regulations.

For the first three years of the hybrid era the fuel limit was 100kg. Then in the build-up to 2017's big regulation changes it was realised that draggier, wide-track cars, with their high downforce levels allowing drivers to stay on the throttle longer, would impact consumption - so it was wisely decided to increase that to 105kg for '17. Despite the engine manufacturers continuing to explore the limits of efficiency that limit goes up by another five 5kg in '19.

The increase was suggested by Liberty back in April. In the aftermath of a dull Australian Grand Prix there was a renewed focus on short-term changes that could improve the show for 2019, while work continued on the big picture of '21 and a completely new package.

Fuel received some attention in those April discussions, mainly as a direct response to regular radio traffic about lifting and coasting. F1's new bosses at Liberty Media felt such chatter sent the wrong message to TV viewers, implying that drivers weren't always able to race as hard as they'd like to. Give them more fuel, and perhaps they will be able to race, was the general conclusion.

The 5kg increase was duly voted through by the Strategy Group and F1 Commission. The official FIA announcement made the reasoning behind the increase clear, stating that it was "in order to be able to use the engine at full power at all times." Voting wasn't unanimous, and some teams were uncomfortable with the change, feeling it gave a helping hand to manufacturers with less efficient technology.

Fuel usage is not just about the engine, but also the aerodynamic choices made by individual teams as they seek to optimise their packages. If you'd done an efficient job with your aero, why make it easier for others?

Force India was one team not overly keen to see rivals handed extra fuel for 2019.

"My view is that actually you don't need it," Bob Fernley, the team's then deputy boss, noted at the time. "In principle we're against it because we want to represent the holistic approach that was taken in the first place from the FIA which was to have fuel-efficient engines. We believe the integrity of that should not be compromised.

"Irrespective of that our reasons behind voting were that there are many other aspects that need to be taken into consideration, and there is actually no need to increase the fuel."

"Some engine manufacturers and teams who didn't do a good job with efficiency lobbied the FIA and got their way. I think they fooled the FIA and Liberty - what they were trying to do was regain a competitive advantage" Otmar Szafnauer

Fernley's Force India colleague Otmar Szafnauer was even more outspoken.

"I think it's wrong," said Szafnauer. "We were given a target, for good reasons, of 100kg, and those reasons were to force cars to become more efficient.

"We were given a fuel-flow restriction as well, and that was such that the powertrain would become more efficient. I think those reasons are still here today, and all those efficiencies that those restrictions drive are relevant in the world, and we shouldn't have changed it.

"I can half understand going from 100kg to 105kg, because the cars changed so significantly, the dimensions changed, the downforce levels, the drag, the wings got bigger. The tyres got wider, which is a big component of drag as well.

"So I get that we didn't anticipate all this when we set the level at 100kg, let's go to 105kg. I can understand all that, that's logical. But to just go from 105kg to 110kg, because...? It's illogical."

Asked about Mercedes' power unit users potentially losing an advantage, Szafnauer added: "So therein lies the question. If you don't do a good job, should you work harder within the rules that everyone agreed to, or should you change the rules? That's what I don't like. 'I didn't do a good job, let me change the rules'.

"We only changed it because some of the engine manufacturers and teams who didn't do such a good job with efficiency lobbied the FIA, and they got their way.

"I think it's just wrong. I think they fooled the FIA and Liberty, and what they were really trying to do was regain that competitive advantage.

"That's what it's really about, and they fooled them."

Williams chief technical officer Paddy Lowe - whose team also uses Mercedes engines - also questioned the thinking behind the change.

"It was a strange decision to be honest that was made rather too quickly to be considered properly," said Lowe. "This formula that we created with these hybrid power units was always about efficiency, not only with the engine, but also of the whole car. So that fuel limit was what drove teams to certain levels of efficiency, and some of that's around choices that you make in the design.

"So when they say certain teams are struggling with fuel consumption in races more than others, well maybe those teams haven't made the right choices in their design for efficiency. The goalposts have been moved, and for the wrong reason."

Since the decision was made, teams have had to decide whether or not to take advantage of the new limit with their 2019 cars. The choice of fuel tank capacity impacts the chassis, as you have to find room for that extra 5kg or a part thereof.

That was one reason why Force India was opposed, as the team had planned to carry its 2018 chassis into '19 - and opting for a bigger tank would have meant a change to that design. In the end the team has kept the same capacity.

"Our tank size is exactly the same next year," says Force India technical director Andy Green. "Maybe other teams have a much bigger issue, and it makes a big difference to them."

Red Bull's Christian Horner adds: "You don't have to take it. You build your car around what you think is the quickest and most efficient car."

The irony in all this is that typically until now teams have often been fuelling their cars with less than the permitted 105kg anyway, because their simulations indicated that a lower starting weight was more advantageous at many venues.

As has been the case for many years, drivers started races knowing that they didn't have enough fuel to run flat out, unless a safety-car period got them back into the black. With tyres also a limiting factor, it made sense to factor in some fuel saving.

"The fastest way to run a race is often not with a full fuel tank," says Green. "Our fuel management comes alongside all the brake management and tyre management we do. You combine all that together."

Given that drivers have often not been taking advantage of the full 105kg, will the extra 5kg on top really improve the show in 2019, or will we continue to hear those awkward radio messages about fuel saving? The consensus is that it won't really make much difference, except perhaps at the handful of tracks where consumption is traditionally very tight. Teams will continue to put only as much fuel in their cars as they think they can get away with.

"Even at 110kg teams will still under-fill the car at some tracks because it's the quickest way to run a race - with a lighter car and a small lift" Christian Horner

"It's still going to happen, we will still save fuel if the quickest way around to the end is to not put as much race fuel in," says Szafnauer.

"It's not at every race that we can't go to the end with 105kg, so this is only an issue at a few races. And we always lift and coast, we always save fuel, even at those races where your capacity isn't the limiting factor."

Lowe adds: "I don't think it's going to make any difference to anything. That's my opinion! You only put in the fuel that makes sense for your race, and that's always been done. And it always involves a bit of fuel saving.

"Cars are often doing lift and coast, and you do it for tyres more than fuel as well. There might be the odd race where it makes a bit of difference."

"We'd have had no major issue if it had stayed the same," says Horner. "Even at 110kg teams will still under-fill the car at some circuits, because it's the quickest way to run a race with a lighter car, and a small lift. We didn't see it as a major issue, or something that will have a major impact.

"I think it will probably be about the same. They want to get rid of that [radio] messaging. I think the reality is it might help a little, but it won't eradicate it. It'll help somewhere like Melbourne, Singapore, Russia, they're fairly fuel critical."

"We're all fuel saving at the moment in most of the races," adds Renault executive director Marcin Budkowski. "It doesn't mean that there won't be any fuel saving in the future, because in reality in F1 it's all about finding the optimum trade-off.

"Now there are some races where we don't go with the maximum amount of fuel, and we do some fuel saving, because the weight advantage is better than going flat out all the time.

"There are some races where we're filling full, and on top of that we need to do some fuel saving, and there are number of races like that in the season, it's not an exception, so the change will make it less likely to happen in the following years."

Some rivals believe Renault may gain more than others from having extra fuel allowance in 2019, although Budkowski insists there's a bigger picture.

"The more efficient your engine is, the less fuel you can embark for the same amount of performance. On the other hand for the sport in general, it's a beneficial thing. At the end of the day, everybody finds their own optimum, but it's nice to be able to decide where the optimum is, and if you decide to under-fill the car, it's your own decision, it's not imposed by the regulations."

Radio chatter aside, the fuel limit hadn't been much of a topic of conversation over the last few years. But it became so after the United States GP, when Kevin Magnussen was excluded by the FIA for just tipping over the 105kg maximum on his final lap.

It was a rare indication of how close to the edge teams sometimes run, and proof that they can get it wrong.

"If anybody listens in to radio at the moment, to the drivers, 80% is about lift and coast," Haas boss Gunther Steiner rued at the next race in Mexico.

"A racecar, in my opinion, is built to race a full race, and not to save fuel."