How to fix F1?

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by Plato

Simple get rid of pirelli

To the contrary, Pirelli have been extended to 2023 as tyre supplier.

https://au.motorsport.com/f1/news/pi...-2023/4303669/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pk8ZrN__nmA

The divide in opinion between (most likely, Gen Y and older) pro-ICE combustion enthusiasts who love the Aston Martin Valkyrie's all-new Cosworth 6.5L NA 1000hp V12, compared to pro-EV (probably younger, Gen Z) enthusiasts in the comments who despise this new Cosworth engine as an absurd dinosaur ("congratulations Brits, it's like making the world's best steam engine at the dawn of the age of the car -- irrelevant") is so HUGE --- you wonder if F1 will ever be able to attract the latter as F1 fans, even with F1's "halfway house" hybrid eco technology to enhance ICE efficiency....

Hmmmmmmmm.

[chillibowl]

Welcome to the steampunk revolution!

[Casper]

Originally Posted by Plato

Simple get rid of pirelli and their shite tires

Can I ask you a question, why do you ignore the fact that Pirelli deliver tyres to the FIA specification in the contract and not what they would like to deliver (maybe). Michelin have had major failures in supplying poor tyres as have most other suppliers when it was not a monopoly.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Casper

Can I ask you a question, why do you ignore the fact that Pirelli deliver tyres to the FIA specification in the contract and not what they would like to deliver (maybe). Michelin have had major failures in supplying poor tyres as have most other suppliers when it was not a monopoly.

To me, Pirelli are the tyre experts, and if they have no problem putting their name to inferior product, they will have no problem in supplying consumers with inferior product, they clearly have no interest in quality otherwise they would have refused the FIA's terms.

[Akrapovic]

The "we build an inferior product because we are asked to" line only goes so far though. When the tyres were blowing up at record rates, was that because the FIA asked them to build them? What about the GT tyres? They supply the tyres exclusively for SRO competition, but it's generally accepted that the tyres are actually quite difficult for the amateur drivers (which is what SRO build their model around) and that the Michelin equivalents are far better for everyone.

There are lots of attributes which go into making tyres good and bad, but I don't buy that all of Pirellis negative attributes are actually because the FIA asked for them to be like that. Some of these attributes are Pirelli tributes in other series as well. You'll not see Pirelli tyres cropping up on GTE/GTLM cars (despite having tyres for them), because Michelin and Dunlops are better.

[Casper]

Michelin built tyres that blew up and the FIA didn't even have to ask them to do so. Pirelli build to a contract, if they didn't what would the legal implications be?
Every tyre company that has ever supplied tyres to F1 back when they were allowed to had huge problems preventing the sort of stuff that has happened to Pirelli, tyres blistering and literally falling apart was quite common then but all that seems to be forgotten. Pirelli gets it in the neck because they are the only tyre supplier on show and the problems don't get hidden in all the noise of racing.

[Akrapovic]

Michelin built tyres that failed on a very specific surface. Should be noted that Goodyears also failed on that same surface when NASCAR race there. The surface was so bad it was all torn up again and relaid in a completely different style. The only company that didn't have problems was Bridgestone, because they had access to all of the IndyCar testing done by Firestone. Michelin (and Goodyear) tyres failed at one track. Pirellis were through a phase of failing at every track.

Also, when Michelin tyres failed, they were hauled over the coals for it. When Pirelli tyres fail, it's all "Well they were told to build them badly!"

Michelin were also in a tyre war, in a battle to build the best product. When you're pushing boundries, you'll have mistakes. Pirelli are in no such position either in F1 or sportscar racing, and both sets of products there are mediocre at best. Michelin and Dunlop (Goodyear) have tyre competition in the majority of sportscar series they race in.

"We're told to build bad tyres" is getting a bit...tired now, if you pardon the pun. No other series seems to go out of its way to tell suppliers to build crap things, but it seems that's an acceptable stance in F1. You'll see tyres from Michelin and Dunlop in tyre wars in other series, but never Pirelli. It's pretty obvious why they aren't in those tyre wars.

[S griffin]

I agree, there's something not right about deliberately building a sub standard product. Not exactly the pinnacle of technology is it? Let's just open up for another tyre war, if anything that will make things less predictable

[chillibowl]

im not a fan of the 'we just did what we were told' mantra but in fairness to Pirelli, many of those blow outs several years back had to do with teams mounting their tires on backwards, running with too much camber, running with too low pressure.

the top teams are the culprits not the supplier imo.

in the face of teams running insane budgets and resistant to any change which might erode their advantage, the FIA/FOM do not have many options to curtail performance in order to give us the closer racing and unpredictability we demand.

while not ideal, settling on 'sub par' tires for the entire field, imo, is preferable to allowing Merc or Ferrari to enter into a deal with another tire manu to build bespoke tires.

doing so would essentially make permanent almost every issue/problem everyone in this thread has brought up.

[coppice]

As I said a million posts ago -


-nobody sane is interested in tyres



- pitstops and their attendant under and over cuts are poor substitutes for overtaking on track



- the worst advert for Pirelli is for it to make tyres that wear out in ten minutes



-compound choice is only interesting to folk who don't get out often enough


- F1 boasts about its environmental awareness by making Hybrids with good mpg and then undermines that by consuming tyres quicker than I can eat Quality Street chocolates



- More people would be impressed more if Pirelli made tyres , a single set of which could endure the rigours of a 900bhp F1 car for the full duration of a Grand Prix

[Plato]

I wouldn't run Pirelli products if you judged alone what they do under an f1 car

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by coppice

As I said a million posts ago -


-nobody sane is interested in tyres



- pitstops and their attendant under and over cuts are poor substitutes for overtaking on track



- the worst advert for Pirelli is for it to make tyres that wear out in ten minutes



-compound choice is only interesting to folk who don't get out often enough


- F1 boasts about its environmental awareness by making Hybrids with good mpg and then undermines that by consuming tyres quicker than I can eat Quality Street chocolates



- More people would be impressed more if Pirelli made tyres , a single set of which could endure the rigours of a 900bhp F1 car for the full duration of a Grand Prix

That’s exactly how I feel too

[wnut]

Coppice has nailed it for me too.

[Adam43]

Which Pirelli failures are we talking about?

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Which Pirelli failures are we talking about?

Pirelli's continuing failure to produce a racing tyre capable of lasting a full GP distance, for whatever reason, nobody cares about the excuses.

[Oldtony]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Which Pirelli failures are we talking about?

Actually I think a lot of the contributors to this thread are talking not about failiures but about about Pirrelli's success.
Success in injecting some variability into the racing outside the controll of team engineers.
Success in requiring a skill beyond that demonstrable in a simulator by drivers.
Success in allowing the racing to have a strategic and tactical awareness by the race teams.

Can you please nominate exactly what you want fron racing that doesn't include those skill sets?

[Casper]

Originally Posted by coppice

- More people would be impressed more if Pirelli made tyres , a single set of which could endure the rigours of a 900bhp F1 car for the full duration of a Grand Prix

So tell us why they don't, the truth is THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO, geddit it now?

[Casper]

Originally Posted by wnut

Pirelli's continuing failure to produce a racing tyre capable of lasting a full GP distance, for whatever reason, nobody cares about the excuses.

Some people do not want to admit that the FIA specifies the tyres and to break a legally binding contract would not be a good thing. Seriously are you saying that the tyre supplier should sign on the dotted line then tell the FIA to get stuffed and supply what the tyre company company thinks should be supplied. What are you smoking to suggest that, to do that would be dishonest and deceitful and bring the supplier into a legal conflict with the FIA.

[Casper]

Bernie has got the fix

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/20...c-cars-ferrari

First he says they need to go electric then agrees that Ferrari won't have a bar of it and leave but F1 have to have Ferrari to be successful none of which is at all contradictory!!

[coppice]

Originally Posted by Casper

So tell us why they don't, the truth is THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO, geddit it now?

No need to shout my dear chap- I sort of , y'know, knew that already , hence voicing my thoughts on an idiocy which results in tyres with a lifespan of minutes .

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by wnut

Pirelli's continuing failure to produce a racing tyre capable of lasting a full GP distance, for whatever reason, nobody cares about the excuses.

But as has been pointed out so often, these are not Pirelli's excuses; they are the reasons why the tyres are like they are. It is also why there is so little interest from other manufacturers to bid for the contract to supply the teams.

The FIA and FOM mandate the construction of the various compounds that they require Pirelli to manufacture, and then expect Pirelli to provide them to the teams with virtually no meaningful testing.

And what testing is permitted is either done in the heat of Abu Dhabi after the final race of the season, or in the cold of Barcelona prior to the commencement of the season. And people then wonder why the tyres are like they are!

The tyres behave as they do because the FIA and FOM, from BE's time to currently, believe that that it "spices" up the races. And that's why we are where we are.

And why on earth do we have to have so many compounds? Because the FIA and FOM think that it improves the racing!

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by wnut

Coppice has nailed it for me too.

Yep, I'm with him too.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by coppice

No need to shout my dear chap- I sort of , y'know, knew that already , hence voicing my thoughts on an idiocy which results in tyres with a lifespan of minutes .

Why criticise Pirelli if you already know it isn't their fault? I just don't get all the criticism that they cop when the people writing the criticism should know the situation as they have been told often enough. And no, I don't use their tyres and never have.

[bjohnsonsmith]

I don't know why they need so many compounds. Just have three, slick compounds: hard, medium and soft, plus inters and rain tyre.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I don't know why they need so many compounds. Just have three, slick compounds: hard, medium and soft, plus inters and rain tyre.

Because the soft set might be fine for Monaco, but barely survive a lap at Barcelona. Meanwhile, Barcelona hard set might be ok, but you won't get heat into them, at say, Hungary.

To be fair to Pirelli, whilst the current set of tyres are crap and the reasons why aren't much better, the compounds have always been like this, just named better. Even in the Bridgestone and Michelin days, they'd bring 2 compounds, but it wasn't the same compounds every week, it just looked it.

Pirellis mistake with the compounds isn't having too many, but how they name them. Who cares if we use Ultra Soft and Hyper Soft at Monaco. What we need to know is which is which. So call them Hard and Soft. Same at Silverstone. Medium and Hard? Call them Hard and Soft. It doesn't matter what is what when compared to circuit to circuit - it matters what is what on any given weekend. So if you're taking multiple compounds then name them relevant to the weekend.

The teams already do this. Option and Prime. It's purely marketing reasons that has all these names and colours, and that has backfired now the range has more options.