F1 tyres - 10-Tenths Motorsport Forum

MarkG · 23 Apr 2012, 09:09

Has it got to the point now that the Pirelli tyres are spoiling F1, or if not, in danger of spoiling it soon??
It seems to me that the races are becoming a bit of a lottery now because of the tyres. I don't know the best solution and maybe there isn't a problem really, and it's just my view alone??
If they stick with having to use two types, I'd like to see them have to use a durable tyre and a really grippy tyre during a race, but the latter must be used for a set minimum of laps.

ECW Dan Selby · 23 Apr 2012, 09:19

No. And here's why:

We moaned when we had Bridgestones. We moaned when we had the tyre war.

The bottom line is, everything has pluses and negatives. This, for me, has much more pluses than negatives.

I can't recall the last time we had racing this good...

Selby

**Adam43** · 23 Apr 2012, 20:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by ECW Dan Selby

No. And here's why:

We moaned when we had Bridgestones. We moaned when we had the tyre war.

The bottom line is, everything has pluses and negatives. This, for me, has much more pluses than negatives.

I can't recall the last time we had racing this good...

Selby

We moaned when we had Bridgestone. We moaned when we had a tyre war. We moan now we have Pirelli. Bottom line is, we moan.

I'd prefer a tyre war, but this is alright.

steve_r · 23 Apr 2012, 09:21

We are stuck with one supplier thanks to the debacle of the 2005 US GP.

The racing is currently very close and there is plenty of overtaking and we have had four different races winners out of fours races this season. Some purists may argue this is ruined due to the "artifical nature" of purposefully fragile tyres, plus DRS and Kers.

From a drivers perspective it may be frustrating, but the F1 raqcing on show is more exciting than the Schumacher dominated years of the mid 1990s and early 2000's, when one driver/team could dominate pretty much the entire season, and overtakes mostly happened in the pits.

Is F1 a lottery as a result of the tyres? Wel no, its just that the nature of F1 has changed in that tyre management is more important than it used to be.

IceMan_PJN · 24 Apr 2012, 08:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve_r

Some purists may argue this is ruined due to the "artifical nature" of purposefully fragile tyres, plus DRS and Kers.

They've chosen not to have the best possible tires, in terms of durability and endurance. It isnt really all that different from choosing not to have other available things like traction control and anti-lock brakes. Driver aids were abandoned so that the driver is responsible for more, and being forced to get the most out of tires is more of the same.

I don't see KERS as artificial since it's there for all drivers to use as they please. It's just part of the modern arsenal of an F1 car. This is in contrast to DRS, which is artificial since only certain drivers get to use it (whatever driver happens to meet the criteria).

ECW Dan Selby · 23 Apr 2012, 09:23

The thing is, people may moan about tyres having too much of a say in the outcome.

But what about the engines? Should they have more of a say? The aero? Should that be king?

The main thing is the drivers are still driving and having to manage the race, as they would with fuel, with tyre deg, and any other variable. There's still skill.

Selby

wnut · 23 Apr 2012, 09:40

It seems that MSC is not a big fan

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/99103

safc_fan89 · 23 Apr 2012, 09:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by wnut

It seems that MSC is not a big fan

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/99103

Yet he was more complimentary about them in winter testing...what's changed?

rantanamo · 23 Apr 2012, 09:41

I think getting speed out of managing tyres is much more of a driver skill and a skill in developing the car than having the fastest engine and most perfect aero that varies little from race to race.

safc_fan89 · 23 Apr 2012, 09:52

With these tyres, the emphasis is on the drivers and teams to manage them. The team that does that best this season will stand a good chance of winning the title.

What's wrong with that? In the past, teams have won titles largely because their tyre manufacturer did a better job than the other. Did that reflect badly on the sport? Probably not, as it added another level of interest.

We had a season with no refuelling in 2010 with ultra-durable tyres and although the title race was close, most of the races, always the dry ones, were tedious. I'd much rather have what we have now than that.

ECW Dan Selby · 23 Apr 2012, 10:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by safc_fan89

With these tyres, the emphasis is on the drivers and teams to manage them. The team that does that best this season will stand a good chance of winning the title.

What's wrong with that? In the past, teams have won titles largely because their tyre manufacturer did a better job than the other. Did that reflect badly on the sport? Probably not, as it added another level of interest.

We had a season with no refuelling in 2010 with ultra-durable tyres and although the title race was close, most of the races, always the dry ones, were tedious. I'd much rather have what we have now than that.

Yeh, this is probably a better way of explaining how I feel.

Selby

MarkG · 23 Apr 2012, 10:24

I agree actually, with all the responses. We don't want to return to boring follow-my-leader races, and degrading tyres plus DRS, plus KERS, have all improved the show, but all have been necessary because of huge amounts of downforce along with very short braking distances. But with tyres degrading too much then maybe cars can't follow a car for very long or attempt passes because the tyres degrade so quickly due to sliding because of "dirty" air???
It was close to predictable with Red Bull last year, even with the tyres etc, and wet races helped more than anything.

Having said that though, I would rather have it as it is than the boring racing we had before.

wnut · 23 Apr 2012, 10:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarkG

I agree actually, with all the responses. We don't want to return to boring follow-my-leader races, and degrading tyres plus DRS, plus KERS, have all improved the show, but all have been necessary because of huge amounts of downforce along with very short braking distances. But with tyres degrading too much then maybe cars can't follow a car for very long or attempt passes because the tyres degrade so quickly due to sliding because of "dirty" air???
It was close to predictable with Red Bull last year, even with the tyres etc, and wet races helped more than anything.

Having said that though, I would rather have it as it is than the boring racing we had before.

Ditto this!

Reckon Schu is getting Alzheimers?

Truenorth · 28 Apr 2012, 05:19

I had decided to be one who said the new tires suck to the max and are ruining the sport. (What's a poor tifosi to do?) After reading the variety of opinions in this thread, I'll step back a bit from my snap judgement and watch for a while.

F1 develops the "best" technology and even the slowest drivers are demons of speed beyond the skill of most. F1 is the game of problem solving. We all harp on about who cheats and who doesn't (I'm glad my favourite never does!) and the efforts to meet the challenges are often lost in the foliage of politics, but the problems do get solved.

I question the value of this this problem in terms of there being any wider application or knowledge. I'm struggling to see what can be learned by making tires that contradict all the developments of the century or so of tire making. I'm not sure that if in proposing an experiment, saying "Let's just do the opposite of what we normally do" is a valid approach.

ECW Dan Selby · 23 Apr 2012, 10:30

And the thing is, this is more racing than the 'pass in the pits' rubbish we had for too long.

Selby

Welcoming AmericanLeMansFans refugees.