27 replies to this topic

[Jimisgod]

I assume methanol or other alcohol has never been a legal fuel, but I was interested to read this:

http://green.autoblo...c-ethanol-blen/

So what 'blends' have been legal throughout F1 history?

[Tim Murray]

Before 1958 fuel was free, and teams used fuels mainly consisting of ethanol and/or methanol. Between 1958 and 1960 teams were required to run on AvGas – aviation standard gasoline with a maximum octane rating of 130. From 1961 to date the requirement has been to use fuel with a maximum octane rating of 100 – 102, similar to pump petrol. This has not stopped fuel companies developing special blends for racing, particularly in the turbo era of the 1980s when very exotic fuels mainly consisting of heavy aromatic compounds such as toluene came into use. These were nothing like pump petrol, very expensive and extremely hazardous to health, but they still nominally met the 102 octane spec.

From (I think) 1993 all fuels have to meet a spec laid down by the FIA using only approved ingredients. The teams supply a sample of what they intend to use to the FIA which is checked, and then tests are regularly carried out to ensure that the fuel being used matches the supplied sample. This still hasn’t stopped the fuel companies experimenting with blends, but obviously they’re much more tightly restricted these days.

[D-Type]

Incidentally, the original intention was to make cars run on "ordinary pump petrol". After G A Vandervell and others pointed out that pump petrol varied from country to country, the FIA changed to AvGas, since at the time it was the only perol-type fuel blended to an international standard.

[Roger Clark]

It has never been clear to me why the 1961 rules could not have been introduced in 1958. The objective, apparently, was to allow the fuel companies to advertise that races were won on "the fuel you can buy". The AvGas rule failed but the 1961 rule would have succeeded for their major markets. The AvGas rules forced some expensive development for no discernible benefit.

[paulhooft]

Mercedes Benz Silber Pfeile:
With no regulations limiting engine size, other than the 750 kg (1,700 lb) total car weight limit, Mercedes designed a 5.6 litre engine configured with eight inline cylinders and an overhead camshaft for the W125. Named the M125, the engine was also fitted with a Roots type supercharger producing 632 lb·ft (857 N·m) of torque at the start of the season. The engines built varied in power, attaining an output between 560 and 595 horse power (418-444 kW) at 5800 rpm. Fuel used was a custom mix of 40% methyl alcohol, 32% benzene, 24% ethyl alcohol and 4% gasoline light.

[D-Type]

It has never been clear to me why the 1961 rules could not have been introduced in 1958. The objective, apparently, was to allow the fuel companies to advertise that races were won on "the fuel you can buy". The AvGas rule failed but the 1961 rule would have succeeded for their major markets. The AvGas rules forced some expensive development for no discernible benefit.

What were the 1961 rules? All I have found is a reference to "normal, commercially available petrol with a maximum octane rating of 100" without clarification as to what that meant.

I have found what DSJ had to say regarding 1958 in A story of Formula 1 in 1960

When the Formula was given a new lease of life, for the years 1958, 1959 and 1960, it was decreed that straight petrol should be used in the engines with no additives, and that it should be "pump petrol". This caused Mr. Vandervell to storm into the F.I.A. sanctuary and ask, very pointedly, "which pump, a British one or a Moroccan one" for between various countries the petrol sold to the public varied enormously. After a great deal of arguing and inability by a lot of people that a variation in the quality of pump petrol was going to be an impossible problem for engine designers, it was agreed to scrub the rule and substitute the use of Aviation petrol, for this was the only commercial fuel that was blended to an International standard. The result was that International Avgas was the fuel decided upon and this was rated at 130 octane against the best pump-petrol which was 100 octane. It also meant that the fuel companies had to provide supplies of this Aviation spirit at all Grand Prix meetings, so they had just as much work to do as before and also. of course, they had defeated their own object, for nobody in the motoring public can buy Aviation spirit, so there were no advertising benefits. ~

Which is pretty much as I summarised above.

Presumably by 1961 the CSI had found a way of specifying 'normallly available' petrol.

[Lee Nicolle]

Avgas has been commercially advailable in most countrys. Up until the 90s selected retail outlets had it on pump for the high performance people. These days because of the evil lead!! it is harder to get but still advailable for racers and classic cars. I used to buy it by the 200l but they got very expensive. It was about 10c a litre dearer than 98 unleaded. I used to use 50% 98 and 50% avgas to run my classic Ford. But it is well over a dollar dearer these days. mostly tax, though the resellers make plenty too. It is cheaper from airports but very hard to buy now.

Petrol world wide still varies widely. Climate, government regulations make it a varied lot. Here in Oz we have 91 octane unleaded, then 94/95 and 98, and sometimes 100 ethanol blend. As well as a few sites with E85!!!! And the fuel quality varies a lot. a real problem with a 10-1 classic car. Though currently it likes the 100 ethanol blend but uses more and the neoprene needle and seats cause problems.
Our horrid 91 is a real problem for performance imports as most cars are designed for around 95.
Then South America loves E85. Who would want to export cars from the home market!!

Edited by Lee Nicolle, 15 April 2013 - 23:50.

[Roger Clark]

What were the 1961 rules? All I have found is a reference to "normal, commercially available petrol with a maximum octane rating of 100" without clarification as to what that meant.

I have found what DSJ had to say regarding 1958 in A story of Formula 1 in 1960

Which is pretty much as I summarised above.

Presumably by 1961 the CSI had found a way of specifying 'normallly available' petrol.

I've always found the Vandervell "which pump" story to be slightly unconvincing.

The 1961 regulations were announced in October 1958 and included the requirement for commercially available fuel. It is possible that a clarification was issued in the following two years but I haven't heard of it. I suspect that 102 octane, commercially available was precise enough for those days.

I don't know when the decisions for 1958 were announced but the original decision must have been early enough for Ferrari to commit to petrol for the F1 Dino engine. We know that Vanwall and BRM had huge difficulty modifying their engines to run on AvGas and presumably commercially available petrol would have been even more difficult. I suspect that AvGas was a compromise between the needs of Vanwall/BRM and Ferrari.

[Roger Clark]

Avgas has been commercially advailable in most countrys. Up until the 90s selected retail outlets had it on pump for the high performance people. These days because of the evil lead!! it is harder to get but still advailable for racers and classic cars. I used to buy it by the 200l but they got very expensive. It was about 10c a litre dearer than 98 unleaded. I used to use 50% 98 and 50% avgas to run my classic Ford. But it is well over a dollar dearer these days. mostly tax, though the resellers make plenty too. It is cheaper from airports but very hard to buy now.

I don't recall AvGas being available for road use in the UK. You could buy 5-star which, I think, was rated at about 105 octane but nothing like AvGas.

[Lee Nicolle]

I've always found the Vandervell "which pump" story to be slightly unconvincing.

The 1961 regulations were announced in October 1958 and included the requirement for commercially available fuel. It is possible that a clarification was issued in the following two years but I haven't heard of it. I suspect that 102 octane, commercially available was precise enough for those days.

I don't know when the decisions for 1958 were announced but the original decision must have been early enough for Ferrari to commit to petrol for the F1 Dino engine. We know that Vanwall and BRM had huge difficulty modifying their engines to run on AvGas and presumably commercially available petrol would have been even more difficult. I suspect that AvGas was a compromise between the needs of Vanwall/BRM and Ferrari.

Most countrys then and now do have different fuels. In the 60s here in Oz it was about 92 octane for 'super' And most road cars had about 7.5-1. imports suffered and we did not get the 'good' engines from Europe or the US. rapidly octanes raised by 64 nearer 9-1 was being used. In 86 before we went to ULP super was 99 octane which performance 10-1 engines ran on. Though advance was a bit restricted. Some even had more. 12-1 engines did run on the stuff. Then came 91 unleaded and engines got very 'doey' and gutless and thirsty. With about 8.5-1 with all the knocksensors and electronic engine management.

The London to Sydney Rally cars generally used low comp engines because of the available fuel in some countrys.

SO saying that F1 could run on 'pump' fuel was stupid. As Vandervell said which countrys? Wheras Avgas was a consistent blends world wide.

Modern F1 should be on a consistent blend that is a true commercial fuel. Which again is AVGAS.

[king_crud]

My understanding is that F1 now, or at least recently, would use fuel available from the public pump. Part of the checking process by the powers that be was they would get samples from randomly selected service stations of the teams fuel supplier and match these agaist samples taken from the cars. Can anyone confirm this?

[Alfie]

Although not in F1, in touring cars we were limited to pump fuel. This was OK until Britain effectively stopped selling 98 octane fuel in or around 87.
98 Octane was still available in Germany so it was no surprise that certain enterprising teams would travel to Germany and fill up their 200 litre drums. Often this was not declared on the cross channel ferries as the load.

Avgas was available on some airfields - we would buy ours from Cranfield. Cannot remember how much it cost.

To overcome the 95 Vs 98 argument, IIRC BP produced a "spec" pump fuel that we purchased from the BP garage on Mulliner's Corner in Northampton.

Then it was opened to competition, but therein lay some "issues" with composition detail.

Today for WEC Shell produce a standard pump fuel, although I know of more than one engine manufacturer who would argue that this in itself is anti-competitive since the Shell mix sets some engines at a disadvantage due to the specific chemicals employed to achieve various performance criteria.

[D-Type]

My understanding is that F1 now, or at least recently, would use fuel available from the public pump. Part of the checking process by the powers that be was they would get samples from randomly selected service stations of the teams fuel supplier and match these agaist samples taken from the cars. Can anyone confirm this?

That was not the case in the turbo era. At tat time the FIA produced a specification for fuel. I don't understand the technicalities of fuel chamistry, but the experts in the fuel companies developed special fuels that met the letter of the regulations but had a totally different mixture of components (i thinkthe objective was to incorporate a small quantity of toluene).

Although fuel chemistry is less critical for normally aspirated engines I am sure that there is still a fuel specification in the FIA Technical regulations. As you suggest, it is possibly based on samples from a selection of retail outlets to establish the 'spread' for the specification. One would expect that fuel from a public pump would fall within the range of the FIA Specification. The latest change is to allow a percentage of oxygeneted sompounds (methanol and ethanol) in the mixture.

Remember that back in 1976 the Italians declared that fuel used by McLaren (101.6) and Penske (105.7) was above the 101 octane allowed and made them start from the back of the grid (It may or may not be coincidental that Hunt's McLaren was in contention with Niki Lauda's Ferrari for the World Championship that year). This suggests that the only regulation of fuel at that time related to octane rating and not to component elements.

Edited by D-Type, 16 April 2013 - 13:50.

[Henri Greuter]

That was not the case in the turbo era. At tat time the FIA produced a specification for fuel. I don't understand the technicalities of fuel chamistry, but the experts in the fuel companies developed special fuels that met the letter of the regulations but had a totally different mixture of components (i thinkthe objective was to incorporate a small quantity of toluene).

Although fuel chemistry is less critical for normally aspirated engines I am sure that there is still a fuel specification in the FIA Technical regulations. As you suggest, it is possibly based on samples from a selection of retail outlets to establish the 'spread' for the specification. One would expect that fuel from a public pump would fall within the range of the FIA Specification.

Remember that back in 1976 the Italians declared that fuel used by McLaren (101.6) and Penske (105.7) was above the 101 octane allowed and made them start from the back of the grid. It may or may not be coincidental that Hunt's McLaren was in contention with Niki Lauda's Ferrari for the World Championship that year.

In fact, instead of incooperating a bit toluene, in the final years of the turbocharged engines the fuel was primarily toluene. Honda used a bled od 84% toluene and 16% heptane to obtain a blend that complied to the anti knok rating of 102 Octane fuel. This with a blend that did no longer contain octane.....

Sometimes I wonder if another manner of keeping the engine power under control would be to mandate the organizers to supply the fuel to the team, serve what they can get at the pump around the corner.....
And of course hand over the bill for the amount they used to the teams.....
I don't think that with so much involvements of the oil companies that whet goes intop an F1 car comes close to what you buy nowadays.

Henri

[D-Type]

~
Sometimes I wonder if another manner of keeping the engine power under control would be to mandate the organizers to supply the fuel to the team, serve what they can get at the pump around the corner.....~
Henri

That was the case at Le Mans for many years - I don't know if it is any longer. At least one team has been known to attribute engine failures to the poor quality fuel supplied by the ACO.

[Tim Murray]

My understanding is that F1 now, or at least recently, would use fuel available from the public pump. Part of the checking process by the powers that be was they would get samples from randomly selected service stations of the teams fuel supplier and match these agaist samples taken from the cars. Can anyone confirm this?

That was not the case in the turbo era. At tat time the FIA produced a specification for fuel. I don't understand the technicalities of fuel chamistry, but the experts in the fuel companies developed special fuels that met the letter of the regulations but had a totally different mixture of components (i thinkthe objective was to incorporate a small quantity of toluene).

Although fuel chemistry is less critical for normally aspirated engines I am sure that there is still a fuel specification in the FIA Technical regulations. As you suggest, it is possibly based on samples from a selection of retail outlets to establish the 'spread' for the specification. One would expect that fuel from a public pump would fall within the range of the FIA Specification.

The FIA Technical Regulations on fuel make no mention of complying with anything available at retail outlets:

http://www.formula1....s/8700/fia.html

As I stated above, before each race teams submit for approval samples of the fuel they intend to use. If it complies with the FIA spec it is approved, and checks are made during the event to ensure the fuel being used matches that approved spec.

Here's an interesting earlier thread about the development of the fuel BMW used in the turbo era:

BMW's exotic fuel in the Brabham in 1983 - is this story true?

Edited by Tim Murray, 16 April 2013 - 13:58.

[Alfie]

The comment regarding the regs is correct, the FIA do not dictate chemicals, but they do dictate the detail specification. Complying to this specification can be achieved in many ways, and this is where the chemist comes into his own and can influence the performance outcome.

Whilst some engines are not so sensitive, turbo engines in particular are susceptible to the method of knock inhibition and it was this, in the Shell fuel, that led one engine manufacturer to draw conclusions about engine failures, hotly denied by the fuel manufacturer.

[Allan Lupton]

This with a blend that did no longer contain octane.....

Sorry to pick you up on this, but no fuel contains/contained octane.
The Octane number represents the percentage of Iso-octane in a control fuel composed of iso-octane and n-heptane that has the same knock characteristics as the fuel in question when tested in a control variable-compression engine.
Values over 100 are extrapolated and should really be referred to as Performance Numbers as >100% is a logical impossibility.

[arttidesco]

That was the case at Le Mans for many years - I don't know if it is any longer. At least one team has been known to attribute engine failures to the poor quality fuel supplied by the ACO.

There have certainly been cases of sand in the fuel supplied by the ACO at Le Mans in 1954 that I have read about and in 1986 the organisers supplied brew nearly wiped out several Porsche 962's using the latest wizardry from Bosch thanks to poor fuel quality, IIRC the winning car made it back to the pits in the opening lap for some adjustments if not replacement of newer electronic wizardry for an older specification black box.

[Henri Greuter]

Sorry to pick you up on this, but no fuel contains/contained octane.
The Octane number represents the percentage of Iso-octane in a control fuel composed of iso-octane and n-heptane that has the same knock characteristics as the fuel in question when tested in a control variable-compression engine.
Values over 100 are extrapolated and should really be referred to as Performance Numbers as >100% is a logical impossibility.

Thanks for clearing this.

Henri

[Henri Greuter]

There have certainly been cases of sand in the fuel supplied by the ACO at Le Mans in 1954 that I have read about and in 1986 the organisers supplied brew nearly wiped out several Porsche 962's using the latest wizardry from Bosch thanks to poor fuel quality, IIRC the winning car made it back to the pits in the opening lap for some adjustments if not replacement of newer electronic wizardry for an older specification black box.

That Le Mans you describe in which so many porsches were eliminated within the first hour was 1987.
I was there that year, late arrival at 20:00 Saturday evening or so and when we arrived we wondered what had happened with all the Porsches we were missing.......
What a story about the eventual winning Porsche that became....

Henri

[arttidesco]

That Le Mans you describe in which so many porsches were eliminated within the first hour was 1987.
I was there that year, late arrival at 20:00 Saturday evening or so and when we arrived we wondered what had happened with all the Porsches we were missing.......
What a story about the eventual winning Porsche that became....

Henri

And here I have been wandering all day why events in 1914 and 1915 don't tally

Your quite right Henri should have looked it up to check first, I think something like five of the Porches were affected and maybe some of the other entrants too, a good result for Primagaz Compétition IIRC 2nd and 3rd

[Henri Greuter]

And here I have been wandering all day why events in 1914 and 1915 don't tally

Your quite right Henri should have looked it up to check first, I think something like five of the Porches were affected and maybe some of the other entrants too, a good result for Primagaz Compétition IIRC 2nd and 3rd

A memorable year within Le Mans History it most certainly was. Not because of Porsche winning yet again but the manner how it happened.
Even within Porsche history one of their most memorable victories of them all.

Henri

[Slurp1955]

I was in the food hygiene industry for many years, and with our factory in Northern Ireland we sourced raw materials from all over Europe. One supplier, mostly of powders, was a company based in Hertfordshire. Not an oil company, and not a massive concern. One day in the mid-nineties their Sales Director arrived and he came up to my office, noticed the model of a Ferrari 643 on my desk and began a discussion on F1 and motor racing. At one point I asked him if he had any interest in the sport - "only professionally" he said " we make the fuel for Tyrrell....... and it's £110 a litre!". JohnP

[kayemod]

... I asked him if he had any interest in the sport - "only professionally" he said " we make the fuel for Tyrrell....... and it's £110 a litre!". JohnP

Was it "lead-free" ?

[Slurp1955]

I guess Yamaha were picking up the bill, for all the good it did. The company concerned worked to our specs on our products so I assume it was the same for Tyrrell. JohnP

Edited by Slurp1955, 18 April 2013 - 09:56.

[Henri Greuter]

The Le Mans '87 fuel disaster has been mentioned, I can think of one other case in which fuel supplied by the organisation played havoc.

Carrera Panamerican 1954....

The Bill Stroppe prepared factory Lincoln Capri team, 7 factory cars and Ray Crawford who bought a ride within the team. Though engine improvements were limited by the rules, Stroppe had managed to get 300 HP out of an engine that in stock shape produced about 150 hp.
Use of Pemex fuel, supplied by the organisation was mandatory. Within the first of 8 stages 5 onf the factory entries retired with engine failure, said to be related with too poor fuel for the state of preparation of the engines. Only two factory cars and Crawford's car survived.

In stage 2 a 6th factory car crashed out....
the two surviving cars took the double, with Crawford winning, but it had been a close call....

Henri

[JacnGille]

The '76 Daytona 24 Hour was affected by water in the track fuel supply.