Endurance races in Forza Motorsport present unique challenges, and fuel consumption is a critical factor that can significantly impact race outcomes. Many players have voiced concerns about fuel usage, especially when AI opponents seem to have an advantage in fuel economy. This article dives deep into the mechanics of fuel consumption in Forza, offering data-driven insights and strategies to optimize your fuel efficiency and conquer those demanding endurance events.
Contrary to some assumptions, the way fuel consumption is calculated in Forza Motorsport titles, dating back to Forza Motorsport 2, is primarily dictated by throttle input. This means factors like RPM, car speed, and even drafting have minimal to no direct impact on fuel usage. Essentially, whether you’re crawling at 5 mph or speeding at 200 mph, full throttle application will burn fuel at the same rate. To put it simply, the key to saving fuel in Forza is throttle management. Reducing throttle input or coasting through corners without any throttle are the most effective methods to extend your fuel range. Shifting at lower RPMs, for instance, does not inherently reduce fuel consumption compared to racing at higher RPMs, as long as the throttle input remains constant.
To illustrate this, consider an experiment conducted during the Spa 100 endurance race in Forza Motorsport. Playing on Pro difficulty with long races enabled, the goal was to finish the 46-lap race with minimal pit stops while maintaining a competitive pace. Initially, driving with a standard racing style, fuel consumption was observed to be around 4.4%-4.5% per lap at Spa. This aggressive driving style would necessitate multiple pit stops. However, by consciously employing fuel-saving techniques in the latter half of the race, the fuel consumption was reduced to an average of 3.9% per lap.
Here’s a breakdown of the data collected:
- Normal Racing Lap Fuel Consumption (Spa): 4.4%-4.5% per lap
- Fuel Efficient Lap Fuel Consumption (Spa): 3.9% per lap
- Lap Time Difference (Fuel Saving vs. Best Lap): Approximately 3.5 seconds slower
- Pit Stop Time (Entrance to Exit at Race Speed): 18 seconds
- Pit Stop Service Time (Entrance to Exit including service): 40 seconds
- Time Lost per Pit Stop (Pitting vs. Not Pitting): 22 seconds
Analyzing these figures reveals crucial insights into race strategy. At a normal consumption rate of 4.4% per lap, a car can run approximately 22.7 laps at Spa before fuel depletion. For a 46-lap race, this would theoretically require two pit stops (around lap 22 and lap 44), costing a total of 44 seconds in pit stop time. Conversely, adopting a fuel-efficient driving style, albeit 3.5 seconds slower per lap, reduces fuel consumption to 3.9% per lap. This lower consumption rate allows for a single pit stop strategy, theoretically around lap 25 for a 46-lap race. While driving fuel-efficient laps throughout the entire race adds 161 seconds (46 laps x 3.5 seconds) to the total race time, the single 22-second pit stop results in a net time loss of 139 seconds compared to a flat-out, two-stop strategy. Therefore, solely focusing on fuel-efficient laps for the entire race is not the optimal approach for minimizing race time.
A more refined strategy involves combining fast laps with strategically implemented fuel-saving laps to minimize pit stops. For a 46-lap race aiming for a single pit stop, a viable approach is to drive the first 20 laps at a normal pace, followed by 3 fuel-efficient laps, pitting around lap 23 with minimal fuel remaining (approximately 0.3%). Repeating this pattern for the second half of the race – 20 normal laps and 3 fuel-efficient laps – allows for race completion with a single pit stop and minimal fuel left. This hybrid strategy results in a time penalty of 21 seconds (6 fuel-efficient laps x 3.5 seconds) from slower laps, plus 22 seconds for the pit stop, totaling 43 seconds. Remarkably, this is a mere 1 second quicker than a flat-out, two-pit-stop strategy, highlighting the marginal gains in longer races when only optimizing for one less pit stop.
Extending the analysis to a 69-lap extra-long race further illustrates this point. A flat-out approach would necessitate three pit stops, incurring a total pit stop time of 66 seconds. To reduce pit stops to two, targeting the final stop around lap 47 and the first around lap 23 becomes strategic. Implementing the same hybrid strategy – 20 fast laps followed by 3 fuel-efficient laps before the first pit stop, and 19 fast laps and 4 fuel-efficient laps before the second – allows for two pit stops with minimal fuel remaining each time. The time cost for fuel-efficient laps increases to 24.5 seconds (7 laps x 3.5 seconds), and the two pit stops add 44 seconds, totaling 68.5 seconds. This strategy, while aiming for fewer pit stops, ends up being only 2.5 seconds slower than a three-stop, flat-out approach over the entire race.
Conversely, in a shorter 23-lap race, the dynamics shift. A flat-out strategy might still necessitate one pit stop around lap 22, costing 22 seconds. However, strategically incorporating fuel-efficient laps to avoid pitting altogether becomes a compelling option. Driving the initial 20 laps at full speed and then switching to fuel-efficient driving for the final 3 laps allows for race completion without a pit stop, incurring a time penalty of 10.5 seconds (3 laps x 3.5 seconds). In this scenario, avoiding the pit stop saves a significant 11.5 seconds compared to pitting, demonstrating the increased importance of fuel conservation in shorter races.
In conclusion, based on the fuel consumption mechanics observed at Spa and the driving style employed, pit strategy appears to have a diminishing impact on overall race time as race length increases. For extra-long races, reducing pit stops from three to two results in a negligible time difference per lap. For long races, the advantage of one less pit stop is also minimal. It’s only in shorter races that strategically avoiding a pit stop through fuel-efficient driving becomes significantly advantageous, potentially saving a considerable amount of time per lap. Individual driving styles and track characteristics will undoubtedly influence these results. Experimentation with different fuel-saving techniques, such as coasting into corners, and further analysis across various tracks are encouraged to refine these strategies and discover the optimal balance between speed and fuel efficiency for individual racers seeking the Best Fuel Average Car performance in Forza Motorsport endurance events.
