I was curious about the weight loss from the burning fuel so I spend 3 hours testing different things!
These results are from acceleration in straight line only-with stock cars.... and with racecars Im getting to the same conclusion.
Burned fuel VS weight reduction
Honda S2000 Fuel capacity (Gallons) = 13.2
----------------------weight(Lb/Gal)
Petrol Premium unleaded -- 7.4 = 97.68
Premium leaded ---------- 7.3 = 96.36
Racing leaded ----------- 7.3 = 96.36
Racing unleaded --------- 7.5 = 99=45Kg
Full tank = 45 Kg
Weight reduction from stage 1 to 2 = 1165 to 1128 =37Kg
0-400m
There is no difference in speed from a full tank and an empty tank
With weight reduction of 37kg you get only 1 MPH
Impreza STI Fuel capacity (Gallons) = 16.9
Full tank = 57.6kg
Weight reduction from stage 1 to 2 = 1310 to 1267 =43kg
Same as the S2000 There is no difference in speed from a full tank and an empty tank
With weight reduction of 43kg you get only 1 MPH
Same happen with 0-1000m
Conclusion .I think there is no weight loss from a full tank to an empty tank(in the game). Although I might be wrong .
Thanks.
I'm in agreement with Austin343 and Parnelli Bone that most of this is due to the reduced fuel load.
Tire wear is also reduced with less fuel.
...something to try would be to have B-spec Bob drive a car from the start until the fuel gauge was reduced by 40 units (from 80 down to 40). And then have Bob pit for tires only. Then have Bob drive off the rest of the fuel (from 40 down to zero) and see how far he goes (overiding the pit-in signal).
I'd be tempted to have Bob run three seperate tests, each one consisting of multiple sessions of just three laps; outlap, hotlap, inlap. Record the hotlap time, then send him back out. Repeat many times.
Test 1; Refuel, but keep old tyres at each pitstop.
Test 2; Refuel and change tyres at each pitstop.
Test 3; No fuel, but change tyres at each pitstop.
....