Clearly the most significant change is the introduction of 2.4 litre V8 engines, the biggest rule change on engines since the introduction of 3.5 litre normally aspirated engines in 1989, and arguably the most major change of any kind since the move to grooved tyres and narrow-track chassis in 1998. The intention is obvious: to cut horsepower, reduce speeds, increase lap times (although recent times at Barcelona have been faster than last year's pole), and provide a formula that will facilitate a low-cost F1 in the future.

But for the moment, costs have increased as engine-makers all retreat to the drawing board. That is good news though. Everyone is starting from a clean slate, but unlike in aerodynamics, where the advantages incremental, there is more scope for diversity in engine design. Some will get their solution right, some might not, or many will be evenly-matched in terms of power-to-weight ratio, reliability, and the engine's interplay with the chassis. Drivers will also need to adapt to more refined driving styles.

As a package, Renault and Honda seem to have a slight edge at this stage, Mercedes have the horsepower but not the reliability, while potentially the best engine of the lot is the Cosworth in the underfunded, unfancied Williams. No one will know until 12 March. And there is of course one V10 left in the back of the Toro Rosso, which will continue to provide controversy. Will the equivalence formula set by the FIA be fair? Or will it possibly propel a minnow of the field, the former Minardi, into the reckoning?

Then throw in the return of tyre changes, after one year of the one-tyre-per-race rule. The rule last year did not produce quite as much drama as hoped for, but that was not a reason to drop it. One suspects that it was a matter of politics, since the rule hurt in particular Ferrari and Bridgestone, the cornerstones of the post-2007 new Concorde F1. Be that as it may, the fact is that Bridgestone and Michelin were closely matched prior to 2005, and based on that there is no reason why that stalemate should not resume.

That's what logic said, at any rate. But with only a week of testing left, Michelin seems to have maintained its advantage over Bridgestone, whose rubber appears to be not quite responsive enough on corner turn-in. With V8 engines causing straight-line speeds to have decreased but cornering speeds to have risen, that could potentially be bad news for the guys on Bridgies. But you can be sure that the Japanese brand will not accept being on the end of a shellacking from their French rivals for a second year in a row.

On the up side, Bridgestone lose Toro Rosso but gain Toyota, Williams and newcomers Super Aguri to help develop their tyres in conjunction with Midland and Ferrari, Maranello having finally come to their senses and realised that a combined effort with information sharing was better than a near-exclusive relationship with the Japanese brand. Michelin also will be contemplating their prickly relationship with the FIA and their withdrawal at the end of 2006, which may well have an effect on their focus.

Strategy will now be all-important in what could turn out to be a madcap hour. Seven sets of tyres for qualifying and the race, the potential to start the race on fresh rubber, the first two mini-sessions on low fuel but the third one starting on race fuel - it all adds up to questions like, how many sets of tyres will midfield, lower-grid teams use in the first two mini-sessions to bump themselves up? How much running will top teams in the last session do to run down their tanks but risk engine wear?

And if all that isn't enough to upset the applecart and even out the field, consider the five new team names in the paddock: Honda, BMW, MF1, Toro Rosso, and now Super Aguri with Honda support. They represent the big bucks of leading manufacturers or multinational entrepreneurs, and with that some big ambitions as well. Gone are the days when you knew Minardi would be at the back because they simply didn't have the money. The correlation between budget and results has never been less clear.

Then there are the psychological factors: Renault coping with Fernando Alonso's defection to McLaren in 2007; McLaren with two drivers who know that three into two won't go; Ferrari on the rebound with their first driver change in six years, question marks over Michael Schumacher's future, and the Rossi experiment lurking; Toyota talking up their expectations and hoping they won't come back to bite hard; Williams contemplating the return to 'privateer' status with a raw rookie on board.

There's Honda desperate to make up for their underwhelming 2005 campaign; Red Bull anticipating big things with Ferrari engines and Adrian Newey on board; BMW trying to lay foundations for future success; Midland (sorry, MF1) finally on full throttle after their half-hearted toe-in-the-water exercise with Jordan last year; Toro Rosso likely to be more competitive than Minardi have been; and Super Aguri simply aiming for respectability at the back of the grid.

Dare we also predict a quieter year on the political front? That would be a pleasant change. The battlelines are nothing like what they were a year ago. Six teams are with the FIA; Honda and Toyota have a foot in the FIA camp through Super Aguri and Midland. Flavio Briatore is saying that the GPMA teams have no real choice. Michelin will slink away at the end of the year. The ardent shop steward, Paul Stoddart, is no longer on the scene. Peace in our time may be not that far away, and no one would begrudge that.

For all that F1 is a business, it is still a technological battle and a human drama - a sport. Mix together the uncertainty surrounding the V8s, the return of tyre changes, the revised qualifying format, the new team owners, and all the potential sub-plots, and we have 18 intriguing races and one fascinating season in store, with a final outcome that no-one could call with any confidence right now. Let the sandbagging end and the lights go out. Roll on Bahrain!