I don't think it's fair to talk about past aerodynamic reg. changes. In those cases, the theoretical benefit for overtaking was a sidenote, a kind of 'by the way' sweetener. For the first time, it's the actual focus of the exercise, which has identified the problem and is now specifically working to eradicate, instead of just trying to cut downforce. In this case, it's the downforce reduction that's the side-effect.



This could only be a good thing. Indycar has shown refuelling doesn't necessarily preclude entertaining racing -- if a driver can make a clean pass on track, the benefits in terms of speed are far greater than waiting for the stops. There's no need for the FIA to put all its overtaking eggs in one rule basket. But if the new wings work, then by all means scrap pitstop fuelling.

Fantastic! 100% yes to the refuelling ban. This will give the drivers more scope to show their flair or controlled conservatism- kind of like a Mansell vs. a Prost. Definitely a no to a shortening of the races, if people want that they can watch touring cars or lower single seater formulae. F1 has always been about pushing things to the limit like a marathon.

No to the ban on refueling.
Will the ban on refueling cause drivers to pass instead of waiting to pass during a pit stop?
Sorry but I can't see this happening in Hungary, Monaco, Singapore, Valencia, or Barcelona. Same fuel, same tires, same for all intents and purposes engines, and same aero.

2008 has been pretty good when you look at the number of winners, the closeness of qualifying and the action on the track. Make a switch to mechanical grip vs aero grip and F1 just might get a winning combination. Leave it alone.

Anybody else concerned that this year, with some parity in the field, is going to be followed by one team getting the KERS and new aero right and marching off into the distance like 04? Wish they would have held off on the KERS for a year or two.

Which major technical changes were there in 2004? I just assumed that it was due to two of the top teams getting things disastrously wrong, and Bridgestone coming up with a tyre that allowed Ferrari to extend their existing superiority.

I think it's much more likely that one team will get it disastrously wrong, than just one team getting it crushingly right. To be honest I'd settle for the drivers of one team fighting it out amongst themselves, so long as the battles a little further down the order were entertaining.

Main one I can remember was the 1 weekend engine.

edit
Just found this list
http://www.motorsm.com/motorsport/auto/F1/2004_rules.asp

Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear. This year we have a grid from top to bottom is the closest I can remember and the result has been some very good racing. My fear is that changes to aero and the addition of the KERS system will separate teams again. Toro Rosa wins a race? I can't see it getting much better than that.

I would like no refueling and longer races. I would also like to see more races, like 25-27. More races in Europe that are weekend to weekend.

Boy, you not only want your cake and eat it, too, but also for somebody to take a trip to the store while you sit there fat and happy to get you a 2nd one!

Well, at least he's honest.

I'd go with the ban on refueling, but the jury is still out on whether or not the aerodynamics will be able to fix as well the problem regarding overtaking.

However, I'm completely against shorter races, they are already short as it is, only 300km. I'd extend them to 360km to have them run to the 2 hr mark at least.

20 races is fine for me.

Bring back more variable race conditions into F1. Let a driver decide with his engineer when the car will hit its sweet spot in the race. It would really make teams think about qualifying.

You know, Formula One existed before 1994.

Doug