[Tech Issue] Pirelli-The Tyre Story..

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Marbot

I agree. What's the solution?

practical solution or pipe dream solution?

pipe dream solution for me is simply budget caps. variety of results should come from doing more with less and the compromises in design paths that stem from it. if we still get processions then so be it because its now a function of one team doing better with the same level of resources as the other teams.

practical solution. have as many compounds as you want with the goal being the 'softs' on three stops will net you the same time over a race distance as the 'hards' will on two stops verified by use on multiple test tracks using the same test car.

give teams the freedom to use them in any combination and with an unlimited supply so they can find performance advantages based on their own ability to set up cars.

the third party spec supplier should be aiming for balance and not a desire to effect the results (even if that is whats asked of them).

could you imagine the uproar if the Mclaren ECU worked differently for each team on top of working differently at each track? for the purpose of this debate thats what i would call random and artificial. i guess the point i am making is the behaviour of standardized parts should be entirely predictable ahead of time.

[Flat12-Aircool]

What convinced me that Pirelli got it wrong this year is that even when some calamity hits a car less than 10 laps from the end and they need a unscheduled pitstop, most teams are still electing to send their car back out on the harder tyre.

Seen a quote from Bernie today that says Pirelli were tasked to make tyres that would last at least 50% of a race distance. This years tyres clearly do not.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22523596

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Flat12-Aircool

What convinced me that Pirelli got it wrong this year is that even when some calamity hits a car less than 10 laps from the end and they need a unscheduled pitstop, most teams are still electing to send their car back out on the harder tyre.

Seen a quote from Bernie today that says Pirelli were tasked to make tyres that would last at least 50% of a race distance. This years tyres clearly do not.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22523596

Interesting as Pirelli say they were asked to produce a tyre that in turn could produce racing as in Montreal 2010.

[neiltb]

I bet you could make the tyre last half distance, but if the point is half distance for the car that is set up to be the hardest on it's tyres, that's different.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Lotus think it unfair if Pirelli now make tyre changes.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/107403

[Spritle]

Originally Posted by Flat12-Aircool

Seen a quote from Bernie today that says Pirelli were tasked to make tyres that would last at least 50% of a race distance. This years tyres clearly do not.

Bernie is notorious for later saying he said what is presently the preferred opinion on things.

While I am no fan of Pirelli or nor a believer in 3/4 of what Hembrey says, I'm inclined to believe Paul in this instance.

[jsTrecu]

Originally Posted by Spritle

Bernie is notorious for later saying he said what is presently the preferred opinion on things.

While I am no fan of Pirelli or nor a believer in 3/4 of what Hembrey says, I'm inclined to believe Paul in this instance.

Agree, as much as I wanted this change and I've been criticizing Hembery for his comments, I think the part where he says they made tyres that way because the FIA asked them to, is true.

[Flat12-Aircool]

Originally Posted by Spritle

Bernie is notorious for later saying he said what is presently the preferred opinion on things.

While I am no fan of Pirelli or nor a believer in 3/4 of what Hembrey says, I'm inclined to believe Paul in this instance.

Well yes, but I don't think what Bernie has said is all that different to what Hembery is claiming Pirelli were asked for (and now admits getting it wrong).

Because even if the harder compound lasts say 60% of a race, the fact that the top ten usually start on softer used tyres will under most circumstances at least give a 2 stop race.

[Adam43]

The result of the discussion above is that they'll get harder. It is presumably good F1 has a partner that can respond to these problems so quickly.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22523596

Pirelli are reacting to the demands of the fans. They have done this before and look where that got us

[Bononi]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Pirelli are reacting to the demands of the fans. They have done this before and look where that got us

Hear, hear !

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Marbot

What is 'not' manipulating the standardized tyres? What would you do to alleviate the problem?



I agree. What's the solution?

Build a racing tyre, and stop being a pussy Paul...

[wnut]

The above

&

This

Originally Posted by chillibowl

the third party spec supplier should be aiming for balance and not a desire to effect the results (even if that is whats asked of them).

could you imagine the uproar if the Mclaren ECU worked differently for each team on top of working differently at each track? for the purpose of this debate thats what i would call random and artificial. i guess the point i am making is the behaviour of standardized parts should be entirely predictable ahead of time.

A manipulated reliability trial based on a spec part is just not on.

[Scooter185]

i have an absolutely crazy idea: after increasing the durability of all tire compounds, keep the SSofts and softs as slicks, make the mediums and hards treads and no more requirement to use a set of both. The target for the Option Slicks should be 2-3 stops and the Prime Treads should have a target of 1-2 (or maybe even 0!) stops depending on the track.

Got so much downforce that it destroys options? well you can use primes all race but your pace is going to suffer for it....

[formerf1champ]

Red Bull - Gives you whinge.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Marbot

What is 'not' manipulating the standardized tyres? What would you do to alleviate the problem?

The only fair and maintainable solution is the reversal of the standardization of tyres.

[neiltb]

so on the beeb website pirelli are noting that the cars increased speeds (1 sec a lap) is more than they forecast and part of the tyre issue.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22523596

DC has his column and mentions that the tyres do not allow the full aero performance of the cars to be used.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22512693

more reason to hack aero bits of the cars if you ask me.

What will we change next year after 1/3 of the season to try and let the struggling mouthy teams catch up, or should Lotus hire mouthier team principals? (ferraris make enough noise at the best of times)

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Pirelli are reacting to the demands of the fans. They have done this before and look where that got us

Indeed.

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

Build a racing tyre, and stop being a pussy Paul...

What's a "racing tyre"?

Even if they built a "racing tyre" to last the whole of the race, it's still possible that they are going to favour one team (Red Bull) over any other. If our only answer to that is that the other teams should 'step up', then that's likely to result in calls for other changes to F1.

Originally Posted by wnut

A manipulated reliability trial based on a spec part is just not on.

It's not like the tyres don't fit the wheels, is it? As with the McLaren ECU, it's then up to you to get the best out of them.

Originally Posted by Pingguest

The only fair and maintainable solution is the reversal of the standardization of tyres.

You're still not quite telling us exactly what it is you want.

[Pingguest]

A time ago I started a thread about my thoughts on the tyres, which was debated again quite recently. Any way, I believe Formula 1 should be without standardized, homologated and 'equalized' components as well as without pit stops.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

Any way, I believe Formula 1 should be without standardized, homologated and 'equalized' components..........

The problem with that, and a problem that has been demonstrated to be true, is that it all gets rather too expensive. You could never have a tyre war without it getting to the point of it not being a "maintainable solution". You could never allow lots of technologies before a team says that it is 'unwilling to use the technology that currently makes an F1 car go faster because it doesn't have any road car relevance (see Honda story). Goodbye.' Or a team that has to fold because it spent all of its cash on regulations that were always a moving target in the first place.

You could have a budget cap, but wouldn't that be worse still than 'cheesy' tyres?

Now I'm likely to get posts saying that if you can't afford to be in F1, then you should go and do something cheaper instead. This would, even under the current cost controls, apply to at least 2/3rds of the current teams.

[neiltb]

budget caps would not work in F1, too many (i.e. all) would cheat. If I had one I would get a subsidiary to do all my wind tunnel work done for a nominal fee, suppliers would be asked for stuff gratis and I would put a logo on the car, let them burden the cost of development and manufacture.

Nice idea, unworkable. Do we have a cost breakdown on where the $$ are spent? chassis x%, aero y%, entertainment z% etc. We would need to know where it's spent before you figure out how to make it cheaper.

It's an arms race now, lets not make it worse.

[Marbot]

You don't seem to have much idea about how forensic accountancy works.

And the punishment for any 'cheating' would be more costly to a team than 'spygate' was.

[FordCosworthPanoz]

Formula 1 now a procession in the pits instead of on track. Complete with dropping global and key market television viewership. What a success Pirelli has saved the sport from it's past success and has turned a procession into a less popular procession.


If the great Benson and the BAR guys were dominating F1 2000-2004 instead of the Ferrari and the 'immoral' (aka human) Michael Schumacher it would have been the greatest era of F1 ever and Martin Brundle, with all his bountiful Formula 1 wisdom from his 0 Grand Prix victories would be praying for a return to it.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Indeed.



What's a "racing tyre"?

Even if they built a "racing tyre" to last the whole of the race, it's still possible that they are going to favour one team (Red Bull) over any other. If our only answer to that is that the other teams should 'step up', then that's likely to result in calls for other changes to F1.



It's not like the tyres don't fit the wheels, is it? As with the McLaren ECU, it's then up to you to get the best out of them.



You're still not quite telling us exactly what it is you want.

I want tyres that the drivers can race on without the engineers having to hold on to drive the race for them ... Lets see 100% racing not a tyre saving experiment ..

[bjohnsonsmith]

Here's an interesting article from Autosport outlining the technical implications of Pirelli changing the tyres.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/107432

[Scooter185]

hmm, if the tyres are going to move back closer to the 2012 spec, and that the data from them is usable as the article suggests, I wonder if McLaren will seriously consider bringing back last years car. Jenson may like it better.

Canada will be interesting to say the least.