[Tech Issue] Pirelli-The Tyre Story..

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I agree, I don't think one tyre is better than the other. IndyCar could get Firestone to make a myriad of compounds, like Pirelli do for F1 but haven't found the need, despite the different types of tracks and track surfaces and it keeps costs down. Would a set of Pirellis necessarily result in chaos at the 500? There is no option tyre in the 500, so only one compound is needed.

Maybe there isn't always the dramatic effect, like in F1 but IndyCar has its moments, like at TMS last, with tyre blistering that led to the race being red flagged.

That issue you describe is exactly what F1 doesn't want, and why it does have several compounds it cycles through. IndyCar does only have two, but it can be argued that despite having to cope with a lot more tracks, it actually does this less well.

IndyCar tyres: One size fits all weapons
F1 tyres: Highly tuned for very specific circumstances.

I suspect the "ideal" tyre really lies somewhere in between these two ideals.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

That issue you describe is exactly what F1 doesn't want, and why it does have several compounds it cycles through. IndyCar does only have two, but it can be argued that despite having to cope with a lot more tracks, it actually does this less well.

IndyCar tyres: One size fits all weapons
F1 tyres: Highly tuned for very specific circumstances.

I suspect the "ideal" tyre really lies somewhere in between these two ideals.

TMS last year was an exception, otherwise I think IndyCar does it very well, considering the variety of tracks and track surfaces, which F1 doesn't have to contend with.

[broadrun96]

Originally Posted by Adam43

What kind of spectator sport is watching a ship sink? What is wrong with everyone?

That's more a comment on working on things that aren't the problem, it's not meant to be literally taken. But hey if you've never heard it used before in that context, welcome to the world, it's used OFTEN.

[S griffin]

It's because the powers that be like answering questions no one asks. That's how we ended up with that knockout qualifying at the beginning of 2016 or the double points finale in 2014

[F1Guy]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

Will this entice Michelin back into F1?

Sadly no. Michelin is not interested in developing a 13" tyre, then an 18" tyre 12 months later. Can't blame them.

Statement from Michelin

It is well known that Michelin is already engaged in a wide range of world-class motor sports such as MotoGP, WEC, WRC, Formula E and more. This unique and very broad portfolio corresponds to the vision of the Michelin Group: indeed Michelin is competing to innovate for the benefit of its customers and sustainable mobility.

As far as Formula 1 is concerned, we have received the technical specifications on which the FIA call for tenders has been issued and we have studied it carefully. Michelin's recommendations for a switch to 18-inch tyres, as in Formula E, have been taken up by the authorities, which we are delighted about.

However, the demand for the supply of 13-inch tyres for the 2020 season alone, as well as the deterioration of performance as a part of the show, goes against our principles of efficient resource management and respect for the technology of a sustainable tyre.

Michelin has therefore decided to refrain from any response to this invitation to tender and will continue to follow, in conjunction with its governing bodies, the developments of Formula 1 in the coming years.

[S griffin]

Shame, because Michelin love competition

[wnut]

However, the demand for the supply of 13-inch tyres for the 2020 season alone, as well as the deterioration of performance as a part of the show, goes against our principles of efficient resource management and respect for the technology of a sustainable tyre.

Good to see that Michelin have finally learned a lesson and found some principles.

Perhaps the FIA will take their "deteriorating performance" and stick it up ....

[F1Guy]

Originally Posted by F1Guy

Maybe Hankook could be interested??

It's Hankook vs Pirelli then. 31 August 2018 was the deadline for tenders.

[wnut]

Interesting response from Mark Hughes to the question of whether or not Pirelli are they capable of providing a better tyre for F1 or are they limited by the technology used for the manufacture of the tyres?
Hughes says it is because of the commercial deal that Pirelli has with FOM requiring that the tyres are manufactured cheaply. The tyres are extruded not handbuilt like traditional racing tyres manufactured by Bidgestone and Michelin, the limiting performance factor is the chemicals required to make the compound runny enough to be extruded.
There is a widespread misunderstanding between a tyre that can be raced hard and will see a reduction in performance as it wears like a traditional racing tyre as opposed to a tyre that has to be kept at certain temperature to stay in its performance window which imposes a slow pace and a softer tyre is faster but imposes a slower pace as you still have to strive to be within the performance window which imposes one stop races. This problem was largely solved until wide bodied cars which work the tyres harder were introduced, the problem seems to be intractable unless there is a new commercial relationship to enable Pirelli to solve the problem, if they can. Pirelli have been confirmed as the tyre supplier until 2023.

Roughly taken from the answer to a question on the Motorsport magazine podcast at 52 min 38 secs here:
https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/f1-2018-season-review-podcast
Looks like we are done as far as wheel to wheel racing goes until at least 2013, the tyres are simply not up to the challenge!

[Casper]

Originally Posted by wnut

Interesting response from Mark Hughes to the question of whether or not Pirelli are they capable of providing a better tyre for F1 or are they limited by the technology used for the manufacture of the tyres?
Hughes says it is because of the commercial deal that Pirelli has with FOM requiring that the tyres are manufactured cheaply. The tyres are extruded not handbuilt like traditional racing tyres manufactured by Bidgestone and Michelin, the limiting performance factor is the chemicals required to make the compound runny enough to be extruded.
There is a widespread misunderstanding between a tyre that can be raced hard and will see a reduction in performance as it wears like a traditional racing tyre as opposed to a tyre that has to be kept at certain temperature to stay in its performance window which imposes a slow pace and a softer tyre is faster but imposes a slower pace as you still have to strive to be within the performance window which imposes one stop races. This problem was largely solved until wide bodied cars which work the tyres harder were introduced, the problem seems to be intractable unless there is a new commercial relationship to enable Pirelli to solve the problem, if they can. Pirelli have been confirmed as the tyre supplier until 2023.

Roughly taken from the answer to a question on the Motorsport magazine podcast at 52 min 38 secs here:
https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opinion/f1/f1-2018-season-review-podcast
Looks like we are done as far as wheel to wheel racing goes until at least 2013, the tyres are simply not up to the challenge!

I have always said that it was the contract Pirelli were tied too that defined the tyre and not Pirelli's manufacturing and design. Of course the bandwagon opinion which everyone jumps on is that Pirelli produce rubbish because they want to which is a dopey idea altogether and shows the level of thought that average fan gives to these matters. The wrath of hell will now descend on me from high.

[S griffin]

Pirelli are hardly advertising a great product though are they? That's the problem with a control tyre, you've got nothing to compete against, so you can produce a sub standard product, which is hardly F1

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Pirelli are hardly advertising a great product though are they? That's the problem with a control tyre, you've got nothing to compete against, so you can produce a sub standard product, which is hardly F1

With a control tyre, you can produce a crap tyre and as long as it isn't horrendous, nobody will notice. In a control tyre scenario, nobody even notices the tyres - they're just "there", doing the job quietly. Then Pirelli gets to put out advertisements saying they supply F1 tyres and everyone is happy. The tyre can be sub-standard, but as long as it isn't terrible, nobody knows it's sub-standard.

This is how Continental got by (just) in IMSA. That tyre was an absolute hunk of junk. But it didn't wear (because it was made of solid titanium), and it didn't blow up (for similar reasons), so it was rarely noticed outside the paddock that the tyre was crap.

The two things you don't want are extreme wear rates, and failures.

[S griffin]

But it’s hardly F1, it’s supposed to be the cutting edge of technology, so it doesn’t feel right

[Akrapovic]

Maybe, but that's a simplistic way to look at F1. It has never been the cutting edge of technology in every single way. We're only looking at the tyres in this level of depth because F1 makes a big deal out of them, and they have had a lot of problems. Spec and customer parts have always been part of F1.

[bella]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Pirelli are hardly advertising a great product though are they? That's the problem with a control tyre, you've got nothing to compete against, so you can produce a sub standard product, which is hardly F1

it’s working very well for them commercially, as i’ve said before on this thread. it’s doing their sales of road tyres a lot of good. you don’t get to hear about some of the hilariously bad decisions by the other big names either.

what has always interested me about (non f1) pirellis is that you can get a strange batch that has a lot of inconsistencies (that doesn’t really affect performance). which is the opposite of what you’d expect from what is allegedly a machine vs “handmade” process.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Pirelli are hardly advertising a great product though are they? That's the problem with a control tyre, you've got nothing to compete against, so you can produce a sub standard product, which is hardly F1

The first on the bandwagon of it is all Pirelli's fault, it didn't take long.

[Akrapovic]

Why is it a bandwagon? To have the opinion that Pirelli tyres failing is a Pirelli fault? Is it not bandwagonny to suggest that it's all F1s fault?

A bandwagon is when you don't form your own opinion on a topic and simply follow others. You are jumping on the already moving wagon. There's no evidence of that here.

Also, he didn't blame Pirelli. He said the product is sub-standard. He didn't say whose fault that was at all. He could well believe that it is F1s fault. Or Bernies fault. Or Trumps fault. But he does believe the product is sub-standard (which many believe it is).

And finally, I don't agree with your previous statement -

Of course the bandwagon opinion which everyone jumps on is that Pirelli produce rubbish because they want to which is a dopey idea altogether and shows the level of thought that average fan gives to these matters. The wrath of hell will now descend on me from high.

I have never seen anyone claim that Pirelli develops rubbish tyres because they want to. What I have seen is claims that Pirelli are not capable of producing better tyres than they currently do. And that is not dopey at all. Pirelli tyres in Blancpain are also inconsistently and poor performers. They don't have as many catastrophic failures as they do in F1, but they are certainly not good tyres.

A good example is how many teams choose to not run Pirellis in VLN/N24. These teams are all seasoned vets with those Pirelli tyres because they're mandatory in Blancpain and many other series. Come the 24, you see teams experimenting with Michelin, Dunlop, Falken, Yokohama and others. If they have so much data on the Pirelli tyres, why do they all drop them as soon as they're given the option?

Pirelli don't make bad tyres because they want to. They make bad tyres for the reason anyone generally makes a bad product - that was the best they could do. F1 tyres are hard (or soft, ultra soft, hyper soft and super duper mega soft!), and Pirelli don't actually have that good a track record in other series either.

[Richard C]

I agree with many of the posts above. The tires are spec. They are defined by what F1 wants, not what Pirelli is capably of providing. I suspect none of this really hurts the Pirelli marketing effectiveness.

Richard

[Casper]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

A bandwagon is when you don't form your own opinion on a topic and simply follow others. You are jumping on the already moving wagon.

Yes.

[chillibowl]

I hate to be the heavy (and to everyone's happiness I think I'm on my way out of tis forum) but how can anyone say with a straight face that f1 or any sort or racing for that matter is the pinnacle of anything if it relies on rubber to transfer power to the ground?

And not just that but to transfer power at a fraction of power geranerated? That's the best we can hope for right?p

This is truly an antiquated notion no?

Much like a human using their legs to run right?

But hey maybe another pre colonial Corp can do it better...maybe they can restore our faith in technology? Maybe people will start buying tires then right?

How anyone thinks f1 is the pinnacle is beyond my understanding...

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I agree with many of the posts above. The tires are spec. They are defined by what F1 wants, not what Pirelli is capably of providing. I suspect none of this really hurts the Pirelli marketing effectiveness.

Richard

It won't hurt their marketing effectiveness, as I doubt the average motorist is particularly interested tyre specs. Pirelli don't have to do much to market themselves, just being the tyre supplier for F1 is enough. It is a marketing dream.

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

It won't hurt their marketing effectiveness, as I doubt the average motorist is particularly interested tyre specs. Pirelli don't have to do much to market themselves, just being the tyre supplier for F1 is enough. It is a marketing dream.

And to add to that, they can put "F1 Champions" sticker on marketing stuff. The average motorist doesn't know they're the only supplier.

[Casper]

Tyres are one of the fundamental problems of F1 and became so when BE decided to limit the supplier to the best bidder and then dictate what he thought was the answer to good racing and that was insist the sole supplier make unpredictable and less dependable tyres. Good one BE, you are no ones hero for doing this. I can't see what is so hard about reversing the decision and going back to the way it used to be.

[Akrapovic]

Blaming BE for everything is very bandwagon.

F1 tyre bidding was not restricted to 1 bidder. Currently nobody else wants to make tyres. Michelin only wants to if the new tyres fit their idea of what an F1 tyre would be. You can open it up to 10 different suppliers if you want, but nobody is interested.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Blaming BE for everything is very bandwagon.

F1 tyre bidding was not restricted to 1 bidder. Currently nobody else wants to make tyres. Michelin only wants to if the new tyres fit their idea of what an F1 tyre would be. You can open it up to 10 different suppliers if you want, but nobody is interested.

Michelin would make tyres for F1, if they were for 18" wheels, like LMP1 and 2 and that must have a lot to do with cost.