[Tech Issue] Pirelli-The Tyre Story..

[VIVA GT]

But, but, but. I maybe being too presumptuous here, but I'm guessing that "checking the tyre pressures on the grid" would have involved simply sticking a tyre pressure gauge onto the Schrader valve of the tyre and seeing what pressure was registered? If so, then surely there's every chance that this simple action could have cased a small leakage which could easily explain Lewis's loss of 0.3 psi?

[chillibowl]

Must say I'm happy there is at least something to talk about after another pretty straight forward race.

Questions, was this an issue with the set they started the race with or something found with alll of their sets?

What are the parc ferme rules concerning a teams ability to alter tire pressures...was this an issue for quali as well and if so why did it take so long for anyone to say something?

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by wnut

Pirelli set tyre pressures, which Mercedes then violated with both cars and attracted no penalties??!

I think it's a slight exaggeration to suggest that Mercedes violated Pirellli's recommended tyre pressures after all the talks they must have had with Pirrelli after Nico"a tyre failure ..

[Lancsbreaker]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

But, but, but. I maybe being too presumptuous here, but I'm guessing that "checking the tyre pressures on the grid" would have involved simply sticking a tyre pressure gauge onto the Schrader valve of the tyre and seeing what pressure was registered? If so, then surely there's every chance that this simple action could have cased a small leakage which could easily explain Lewis's loss of 0.3 psi?

Absolutely - and when was the gauge used last calibrated, what were the calibration tolerances, at what temperature was the calibration carried out, etc etc. As one of my friends who used to be involved in aircraft tyre fitting and maintenance remarked that they had to leave tyres for 24 hours after fitting to wheels before they could be used, after checking with freshly calibrated gauges, and that no one who had had alcohol within 24 hours was even allowed on board, let alone to operate measuring equipment. I wonder how many of the FIA or Pirelli staff this would apply to?

[wolfhound]

Pirelli want 6 three day tests (18 days total) next year in preparation for the new rules coming in 2017. From the best of my memory there are to be only 12 days testing next year all pre season. I suspect Pirelli will want their tests spread throughout the year as they develop the new tyres.

I can see this causing all sorts of moaning from the teams as it will add a lot of mileage to their engines, with 21 races finding time might be difficult and the teams will have very little data gain from running in the tests.
The other question is who pays?

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/120803

As an aside does this mean that Pirelli has won the contract to supply tyres for the 2017 season and the following years?

[Mike Harte]

BCE has been sending out signals that seem to indicate that Pirelli will have their contract renewed; I think that Michelin were/are making too many demands, one of them being that the wheels be changed to 18", which I don't think that the teams are too keen on, but would accept if absolutely necessary.

I would imagine that the teams might have mixed feelings about extra testing for tyre development. If Pirelli mean that they want all the teams present at each test, then that becomes a problem for the teams because of a) logistics and b) staff rostering. However, if they only propose that each team takes it in turn to participate, then I think that the teams might be quite amenable. And extra PSUs and running gear are allowed for testing, so that should not be a problem either, and in all probability some power-unit providers might well be quite pleased to have the extra running, to assist Pirelli of course, I mean.

As for costs, I believe that Pirelli used to pick up the tag. However, as they now supply the tyres on a purely commercial basis, there may need to be some horse trading required to sort out the funding to everyones satisfaction.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

As for costs, I believe that Pirelli used to pick up the tag. However, as they now supply the tyres on a purely commercial basis, there may need to be some horse trading required to sort out the funding to everyones satisfaction.

How did this happen?

Pirelli are probably generating more mileage out of F1 advertising than anybody else, and they are merely a supplier of a spec part!

This is just ridiculous!

[MatCoch]

Originally Posted by wnut

How did this happen?

Pirelli are probably generating more mileage out of F1 advertising than anybody else, and they are merely a supplier of a spec part!

This is just ridiculous!

Previously, Bridgestone and the like used to supply tyres for free. However, when Pirelli won its initial tender that deal changed and each team now pays $3million for its tyres.

Pirelli also buys a heap of trackside advertising, far more than the $30million its earning off the teams. It gets added benefits because of the two compound rule that ensure we're constantly talking about it, which is why its keen to keep that part of the regulations.

As for testing, typically Pirelli would hire the circuit and provide the tyres. Travel costs and so on for teams I'm not sure on however I'd suggest they'd be happy enough to cover that themselves (especially the larger teams) as they get benefit out of the test too.

[Akrapovic]

So before the tyres were free? And now they pay $3m? But they aren't allowed to complain when they feel the product isn't up to scratch? In what universe is that ok?

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

So before the tyres were free? And now they pay $3m? But they aren't allowed to complain when they feel the product isn't up to scratch? In what universe is that ok?

Nobody has said that the drivers (and teams) cannot complain about their tyres, but not to do it in public. Especially when their complaints may not have any foundation. And this would seem to have been the case in Spa.

Only two tyres suffered from catastrophic failure during the whole weekend, meaning that the other 4 or 5 hundred tyres uesed did exactly what they were supposed to do. And it would now seem that some of the teams and drivers were not using the tyres as they were meant to be used. It would seem that at least one team had been under-inflating the tyres, whilst some of the drivers were exploring parts of the circuit that did not form part of the track within the lines. Some were also abusing the kerbs, which may have also contributed to the tyre failures.

Pirelli were aware that there was a danger that the tyres could be damaged by debris around the track, so they advised the FIA's delegate that the track and run-off areas be thoroughly cleansed. It would seem as though this was either not carried out or not thoroughly enough because over the course of the weekend 63 tyres suffered cuts caused either by debris or abuse of the kerbs.

So that is the universe that Formula 1 finds itself in. The FIA just told the teams and drivers to speak directly to Pirelli about any concerns that they might have, and not use the media to cover up for what may well have been caused by themselves.

[Akrapovic]

Only two tyres suffered from catastrophic failure during the whole weekend

That's quite a phenomenal sentence really. Only 2 catastrophic failures in a weekend. Could reword that to two in a year for other suppliers and any other type of part. But don't worry, everything's fine now because they've been told to be quiet.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

That's quite a phenomenal sentence really. Only 2 catastrophic failures in a weekend. Could reword that to two in a year for other suppliers and any other type of part. But don't worry, everything's fine now because they've been told to be quiet.

Having followed motorsport for over 50 years, this is not something that hasn't happened time after time. No matter what branch of wheeled sport that you look at, tyres get punctured.

My personal view is that Pirelli have made some blooming good tyres because over that weekend at least 61 tyres were cut by things that were totally out of the control of Pirelli, yet not one of them failed. It is unfortunate that 2 tyres did fail, but yes, one can praise Pirelli for the thousands of tyres that have been used this year that have done what they were supposed to do.

[Akrapovic]

Nobody has ever claimed that tyres do not get punctured. But is anyone seriously suggesting that other tyre manufactures in F1, and other series, have the same failure rate? Because I don't see it in series that has a lot more cars, debris and track time. I'd love to see some stats on failures of Pirelli tyres versus others in F1.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Nobody has ever claimed that tyres do not get punctured. But is anyone seriously suggesting that other tyre manufactures in F1, and other series, have the same failure rate? Because I don't see it in series that has a lot more cars, debris and track time. I'd love to see some stats on failures of Pirelli tyres versus others in F1.

You are talking about 2 tyres that have punctured over the course of 3 days, whilst the other 400 or so tyres were fine! I was watching the Aussi V8s from Sundays race, and one of the Triple 8 cars suffered a puncture on a brand new tyre before the car had even got out of the area in front of their garage.

Anyway, there are no other tyre providers in F1, so there are no comparisons, and I would strongly suggest that you watch a lot more racing because you will then realise that punctures in all forms of racing is a fact of life. It just doesn't make motor-racing headlines, except under exceptional circumstances such as the blow out on Mansell's car in Australia many years ago. And we wouldn't be having this debate if Vettel hadn't accused Pirelli over the issue. If he had just said that it was cruel luck that robbed him of 3rd then there would have been no lurid headlines, I wouldn't need to be defending Pirelli and highly unlikely that you would be saying that they make rubbish tyres.

[chillibowl]

in fairness its not just about 2 failures over one weekend. its several years of drivers having multiple issues with the Pirelli rubber. the drivers really dont like racing on them. this debate has been ongoing for years and not specific to SV's comments.

a couple of months back Motorsports magazine ran two interviews, one with Webber and the other with the Hulk both after their recent Le Mans efforts. in which both drivers were very clear on their opinion of tires in f1.

if we are going to talk about other forms of motorsports then it has to be acknowledged that drivers in other categories like their tires more then the drivers in F1 like their tires and the drivers who have multiple categories are very adamant about how bad the tires are in F1. surely we should want to be allowed to hear their opinions.

anyways thats the impression i get when i watch other forms of motor racing.

[VIVA GT]

I accept that 'the drivers' have criticised the Pirelli tyres used in Formula One, and that a lot of 'drivers' don't like them. Mind you, I think that a lot of this 'criticism' and 'dislike' is not Pirelli's fault, it is how the tyres behave and this is what Pirelli have been asked for by Formula One's governing body, so it is not their fault!

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

You are talking about 2 tyres that have punctured over the course of 3 days, whilst the other 400 or so tyres were fine! I was watching the Aussi V8s from Sundays race, and one of the Triple 8 cars suffered a puncture on a brand new tyre before the car had even got out of the area in front of their garage.

Anyway, there are no other tyre providers in F1, so there are no comparisons, and I would strongly suggest that you watch a lot more racing because you will then realise that punctures in all forms of racing is a fact of life. It just doesn't make motor-racing headlines, except under exceptional circumstances such as the blow out on Mansell's car in Australia many years ago. And we wouldn't be having this debate if Vettel hadn't accused Pirelli over the issue. If he had just said that it was cruel luck that robbed him of 3rd then there would have been no lurid headlines, I wouldn't need to be defending Pirelli and highly unlikely that you would be saying that they make rubbish tyres.

I don't feel it's fair to suggest that you've watched motorsport for 50 years and tyre failures happen, and then say "there are no other comparisons" because there are no other current suppliers. This is somewhat insulting to companies like Bridgestone who managed to provide tyres for a long time with significantly less problems.

Please don't tell me I need to watch more racing. I watch BTCC, Pirelli World Challenge, TUSCC, WEC, ELMS, Blancpain Endurance Series, CTSC, Super GT, and F1 on a regular basis. My weekend with my wife is filled with motorsport. Many of these series have far more cars on the grid than F1, have a lot less experience and skilled drivers than F1 (and in most of the mentioned series, amateur drivers), have a lot more debris than an F1 race, have a significantly longer race distance and have a lot more accidents than an F1 race. Yet despite this, they will have less punctures and tyre problems than an F1 race.

Of course, anybody claiming that Pirelli are doing a fantastic job has to ignore the only people who actually have to use the product, which is the drivers. There has been very little support for Pirellis tyres this year, and although there was once support for it, there has been a steady decline. So if the only people who actually use the product are saying it's not good enough, why is this not enough? Now they can't say the tyres are rubbish because they're no longer allowed to give feedback on a public forum, but they've made their stance clear.

[Mike Harte]

In answer to Chillibowl:

But that's not the fault of Pirelli, with the exception of perhaps Silverstone a couple of years ago. Their tyres are safe to race on, even if the drivers don't like them, and again, that's not Pirelli's fault. At least they haven't turned up at a race like Michelin did in Indianapolis in 2005 with tyres that couldn't be safely raced on!

Your ire needs to be directed towards the FIA and FOM who are the responsible for the type of tyres that Pirelli have produced. It is totally unfair to compare the way that the tyres behave in, let's say, the WEC because they are specifically made for a certain purpose. And as BCE has said on more than one occasion, Pirelli could easily make a tyre that the teams could put on in January and only need to take it off in December, except that he doesn't want them to do that.

Drivers can, of course, make comparisons of the way that the tyres behave. However, they need to remember that the tyres are manufactured with different criteria, and as far as F1 is concerned, those parameters are set by the FIA and FOM and not by Pirelli or the teams.

[chillibowl]

so Pirelli should be complemented for making an inferior product simply because they were told to do so? have never bought that line sorry.

i very much dislike the reasoning behind 'they were just doing what they were told' for so many reasons.

also i dont like the drivers opinions being censured.

also i dont like it when people say 'go watch other forms of motor sports'.

if the tires are unique to a specific category then how can you raise a point of tire blow outs from other category? clearly it is different category so those examples have no bearing on what happens in F1.

anyways, lots of my ire is already directed toward the FIA and FOM and i do agree that there are better ways to handle things which is equally a lesson Pirelli needs to learn imo.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by MatCoch

Previously, Bridgestone and the like used to supply tyres for free. However, when Pirelli won its initial tender that deal changed and each team now pays $3million for its tyres.

Are you sure they used to supply tyres for free?

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

Anyway, there are no other tyre providers in F1...

maybe we need to get LEGO involved.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lego#Manufacturing

According to an article in BusinessWeek in 2006, Lego could be considered the world's No. 1 tire manufacturer; the factory produces about 306 million small rubber tires a year. The claim was reiterated in 2012.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

I watch BTCC, Pirelli World Challenge, TUSCC, WEC, ELMS, Blancpain Endurance Series, CTSC, Super GT, and F1 on a regular basis. Yet despite this, they will have less punctures and tyre problems than an F1 race.

On a lot less mileage, there were more failures at Rockingham. And every year, despite a 'special' compound, there can be multiple failures at Thruxton.

The difference in BTCC is that the drivers and teams all accept that they have pushed the limits, both in track and setup.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

On a lot less mileage, there were more failures at Rockingham. And every year, despite a 'special' compound, there can be multiple failures at Thruxton.

The difference in BTCC is that the drivers and teams all accept that they have pushed the limits, both in track and setup.

Indeed. And what makes this important is that these are exceptions to the norm for BTCC. F1s norm is the tyres are rubbish and we give credit when they only have 2 failures, apparently.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

I accept that 'the drivers' have criticised the Pirelli tyres used in Formula One, and that a lot of 'drivers' don't like them. Mind you, I think that a lot of this 'criticism' and 'dislike' is not Pirelli's fault, it is how the tyres behave and this is what Pirelli have been asked for by Formula One's governing body, so it is not their fault!

We keep going over this, where did it specify that catastrophic failure was OK? The tyre grip is supposed to degrade gradually to an unacceptable level, not suddenly explode at 70% of the predicted wear life!

Vettel is committed, its his life on the line, the FIA, FOM and Pirelli are involved from the sidelines and have failed to address an continuing problem satisfactorily, Vettel's anger is totally justified.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by wnut

We keep going over this, where did it specify that catastrophic failure was OK? The tyre grip is supposed to degrade gradually to an unacceptable level, not suddenly explode at 70% of the predicted wear life!

Vettel is committed, its his life on the line, the FIA, FOM and Pirelli are involved from the sidelines and have failed to address an continuing problem satisfactorily, Vettel's anger is totally justified.

I can understand why Vettel had a moan about the tyres after that huge failure, it must have been a frightening experience. (It must have also been frightening for the driver earlier in the season when a Force India had a suspension component collapse, but he didn't start publicly slagging the team off). Mind you, if Vettel had kept within the track limits as has been suggested, his tyre maybe wouldn't have become damaged enough to fracture in the first place?
The point I was trying to make is that although there has been a lot of moaning about the tyres (from a number of sources), this moaning has generally not been about punctures & failures, but mostly about the tyres performance/behaviour which is down to how Pirelli have been asked to make the tyres perform.