[Tech Issue] 2011 Pirelli tyres

[flor]

Seeing the amount of tyre sets they will probably run out of fresh tyres after q3

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by flor

Seeing the amount of tyre sets they will probably run out of fresh tyres after q3

Probably not. Alonso hasn't even moaned about that part...yet.

[Pingguest]

Unpredictability isn't synonymous for a lottery. I'd like to see unpredictability because competitors are having the same pace over an entire race distance, instead of races being decided by pit stops.

[flor]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Probably not. Alonso hasn't even moaned about that part...yet.

Yeah it probably won't be the case for the top teams, however teams who struggle to get into Q3 but get in eventually will use 2 sets in each quali part.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

Unpredictability isn't synonymous for a lottery. I'd like to see unpredictability because competitors are having the same pace over an entire race distance, instead of races being decided by pit stops.

As we saw in 2005 - If you happen to have had a poor set of tyres on at the start of the race, you had no option but to carry on and use that set of tyres until the end of the race, unless you were willing to take a hefty penalty.

There were many complaints from drivers back in 2005 about having a poor set of tyres on the car and not being able to do anything about it without having to take a penalty that negated any advantage that they might have gained by pitting for a new set.

Normally, if you found yourself on a poor set of tyres, you had the option to do a short stint in order to limit the disadvantage you had on those tyres. It was a driver based decision.

By all means allow drivers to use one set of tyres that can complete a race distance, but don't make it mandatory to have to do that.

[Spritle]

More artificial nonsense, bring on the tacks I say!!:

http://en.espnf1.com/f1/motorsport/story/42110.html

Here's the REAL problem:

http://en.espnf1.com/f1/motorsport/story/42093.html

In regards to Quali, there will be a LOT of last minute running when the weather isn't a factor and the top teams who are sure they will make the top slots, will sit out 3/4 of the session to save tyres..

...great fun for those of us watching and the sponsors.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Spritle

In regards to Quali, there will be a LOT of last minute running when the weather isn't a factor and the top teams who are sure they will make the top slots, will sit out 3/4 of the session to save tyres..

...great fun for those of us watching and the sponsors.

So a bit like Vettel does then?

Lots of top teams all coming out during the last few minutes.......I think that I'd want to get a banker lap or two in there first.

Bernie also wants to bring back 'medals'..........

Meanwhile, the 'Elephant in the room' is getting bigger.

[cmotd]

Originally Posted by Marbot

As we saw in 2005 - If you happen to have had a poor set of tyres on at the start of the race, you had no option but to carry on and use that set of tyres until the end of the race, unless you were willing to take a hefty penalty.

There were many complaints from drivers back in 2005 about having a poor set of tyres on the car and not being able to do anything about it without having to take a penalty that negated any advantage that they might have gained by pitting for a new set.

Normally, if you found yourself on a poor set of tyres, you had the option to do a short stint in order to limit the disadvantage you had on those tyres. It was a driver based decision.

By all means allow drivers to use one set of tyres that can complete a race distance, but don't make it mandatory to have to do that.

you're forgetting about the flappy rear wing perhaps? if it works the way it should cars won't get stuck behind slower traffic any more and the penalty for pitting won't be nearly so bad

[wnut]

Originally Posted by flor

Seeing the amount of tyre sets they will probably run out of fresh tyres after q3

I have this mental picture of about six cars skating round on canvas or carbon fibre or whatever trying to collect points at the end of a Grand Prix. Great advert that.

Wonder what the advertising value of explaining a massive accident caused by tyre failure will be to Pirelli.
"Our brief was to spice up the racing, so we did!"

Nice one, nice one indeed chaps.

[JeremySmith]

These tyres are complete rubbish lets face it..

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by wnut

I have this mental picture of about six cars skating round on canvas or carbon fibre or whatever trying to collect points at the end of a Grand Prix. Great advert that.

Wonder what the advertising value of explaining a massive accident caused by tyre failure will be to Pirelli.
"Our brief was to spice up the racing, so we did!"

Nice one, nice one indeed chaps.

The tyres don't wear any more than the Bridgestones did. They degrade more.

Repeat after me: Tyre wear is the 'physical' deterioration of the tyre. Tyre degradation is the 'performance' deterioration of the tyre.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Marbot

The tyres don't wear any more than the Bridgestones did. They degrade more.

Repeat after me: Tyre wear is the 'physical' deterioration of the tyre. Tyre degradation is the 'performance' deterioration of the tyre.

Any tyre that is shedding marbles like these things do is certainly wearing, and anyway once it has degraded the wear rate increases dramatically as it lacks traction and spins itself into oblivion. Wear and degradation amount to the same thing in the end, lack of grip! I do take your point that there are not necessary holes in the things, but I think it is moot.

[neiltb]

lack of grip is not a problem, it's just physics.

If a car has to slow for any corner on a track it has a lack of grip, if you have a lack of grip, you are going too fast.

If the tyres go off a couple of seconds a lap, they probably do for all drivers, unless they manage them better or the team set up is better.

your aero is still the real problem.

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Marbot

As we saw in 2005 - If you happen to have had a poor set of tyres on at the start of the race, you had no option but to carry on and use that set of tyres until the end of the race, unless you were willing to take a hefty penalty.

There were many complaints from drivers back in 2005 about having a poor set of tyres on the car and not being able to do anything about it without having to take a penalty that negated any advantage that they might have gained by pitting for a new set.

I can't remember driver having that particular complain. They only complained it was an early-created flat spot to spoil the entire race. But of course, occasionally you could have a poor set of tyres. As you could equally get a poor engine, gearbox or even a poor monocoque.

Normally, if you found yourself on a poor set of tyres, you had the option to do a short stint in order to limit the disadvantage you had on those tyres. It was a driver based decision.

By all means allow drivers to use one set of tyres that can complete a race distance, but don't make it mandatory to have to do that.

This could only count in case of a complete abolition of the Safety Car, something I support regardless whatever pit stop regulations are enforced.

[Spritle]

Originally Posted by Marbot

The tyres don't wear any more than the Bridgestones did. They degrade more.

Repeat after me: Tyre wear is the 'physical' deterioration of the tyre. Tyre degradation is the 'performance' deterioration of the tyre.

Repeat after me, the definitions may be different but what pray tell is the difference in result?

A tyre that wears, degrades, deteriorates, goes-off, loses grip, grains, a marble maker is essentially the same thing when it comes to performance...

...rubbish!

How about if we coin a new term, Pirelli which will be synonymous with rubbish by seasons end.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Spritle

Repeat after me, the definitions may be different but what pray tell is the difference in result?

A tyre that wears, degrades, deteriorates, goes-off, loses grip, grains, a marble maker is essentially the same thing when it comes to performance...

...rubbish!

How about if we coin a new term, Pirelli which will be synonymous with rubbish by seasons end.

What you have to remember here is that it was the FIA, FOM and the teams that asked Pirelli to make those tyres.

Pirelli statement.

"The increased degradation is a feature specifically requested by the teams and the organisers to improve the show,' read a statement from the under-fire Italian marque. 'This is an opportunity for the sport, not a problem. What must be said is that we have not run with optimum conditions in the official winter testing, both in terms of temperatures too low and the track conditions.

We hope that in Barcelona for next week's test, there are the conditions to allow everyone to verify the real performance of our tyres. We will continue to work closely with the teams and pay great attention to their feedback."

Don't worry, all will be well.

Pirelli would have no problem making a tyre last for maybe 2 or even 3 race weekends. Is that really what you want?

[Spritle]

Originally Posted by Marbot

What you have to remember here is that it was the FIA, FOM and the teams that asked Pirelli to make those tyres.

Don't worry, all will be well.

Pirelli would have no problem making a tyre last for maybe 2 or even 3 race weekends. Is that really what you want?

If an engine that lasts for several races is a desired cost cutting and "green" objective, why does burning through 2 times the tyres make any sense? While I doubt Pirelli or anyone else could make a tyre that lasts for two race distances without SERIOUSLY compromising performance, I'd be all for it if it eliminated this wear-a-thon artificially introduced attrition.

I'm also betting that 50% of the degradation, (or what ever we choose to call it ), is less about the FIA & FOM requests and more about the Pirelli brand in general. This "Pirelli" thing is hardly a surprise to me. I've owned two sets of their Z rated road tyres and they were good for less than 50% of the mileage of their Michelin or Bridgestone counterparts which I've purchased since. While that is not exactly an indication of what to expect in F1, I guess it may be some of that road relevance some fans seem to be clamouring for.

Unfortunately I have the feeling if the tyres turn out to be a real problem, we will be stuck with them and the contrived results for most if not all of the boring season. That will necessitate YET another rules change which are becoming tiresome and expensive.

We shall see...

Remind me to gloat if I end up being right and to be conspiciously absent if you are indeed correct!

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Spritle

If an engine that lasts for several races is a desired cost cutting and "green" objective, why does burning through 2 times the tyres make any sense?

The 2011 season will see no more tyres used than the 2010 season.

Most road car drivers would expect their engine to last for at least 150,000 miles. How long does the average set of tyres last in comparison?

Also, maybe it was the 2010 Bridgestones that were artificial or even their 2005 tyre? Remember them? Both very different tyres, but neither was "artificial"?

Originally Posted by Spritle

I'm also betting that 50% of the degradation, (or what ever we choose to call it ), is less about the FIA & FOM requests and more about the Pirelli brand in general.

You only have to look at what they do in other series to know that statement is 'Rubbish'.

Originally Posted by Spritle

This "Pirelli" thing is hardly a surprise to me. I've owned two sets of their Z rated road tyres and they were good for less than 50% of the mileage of their Michelin or Bridgestone counterparts which I've purchased since. While that is not exactly an indication of what to expect in F1, I guess it may be some of that road relevance some fans seem to be clamouring for.

You seem to have a personal grievance against Pirelli?

I've found their tyres to be some of the best. Both on four and two wheels. But it's all about personal choice. One man's meat being another man's poison and all that.

Originally Posted by Spritle

Unfortunately I have the feeling if the tyres turn out to be a real problem, we will be stuck with them and the contrived results for most if not all of the boring season. That will necessitate YET another rules change which are becoming tiresome and expensive.

We shall see...

Indeed we shall. But I suspect that it will be, like it was at the beginning of last seasons opener in Bahrain, all of a much ado about nothing.

Originally Posted by Spritle

Remind me to gloat if I end up being right and to be conspiciously absent if you are indeed correct!

[phoenix]

Originally Posted by Spritle

A tyre that wears, degrades, deteriorates, goes-off, loses grip, grains, a marble maker is essentially the same thing when it comes to performance...

A tyre that would last the full Grand Prix distance would, by necessity, have to have a lower wear rate. To achieve that it would have to have a lower level of grip from lap 1.

If the F1 appointed tyre manufacturer (it doesn't matter which company) made such a tyre - would it be better for them? Or for the racing?

I am old enough to have used Michelin ZX tyres on a road car. They would last 30,000 miles or more - never left a marble anywhere - but grip levels? Well, of course not that great!

Wear is a price which has to be paid for grip - and I don't think Pirelli or any other manufacturer should be ridiculed for producing a racing tyre that only lasts a few laps. Bridgestone 'option' tyres in 2010, which was generally used in Q3 by all runners, often lasted less than 16 laps in a race - and in qualifying could degrade so much as to affect grid postions inside a single lap, if the outlap was not carefuly managed.

Rest assured I don't have shares in Pirelli - but I have used their competition tyres, amongst others, over the years and found them sometimes great and sometimes not so.

Over the years, Pirelli have won many world championships in many types of motorsport, but normally against other tyre manufacturers. Two more championships are assured - they will win the F1 drivers and constructors championships in 2011.

Anyone want to bet against that?

[bjohnsonsmith]

I remember when I first followed F1 in the '70s, tyres were expected to last the race distance and usually did. Of course drivers did suffer punctures during the race but that was just as much part of racing as blowing an engine.

[Marbot]

It looks like Pirelli want F1 'fans' to hate them even more.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/89706

[Adam43]

It looks like we have another good case of be careful what you wish for.

[Spritle]

Oh brother, another daft Bernard suggestion has sprouted! It's getting more like Top Gear every day. Maybe the lads should pull caravans behind them for the first few laps, followed by a wet track and then some snow!

Canceling Bahrain was an opportunity missed, surely having an F1 race during a revolution whilst people are protesting and shooting at you would be the ultimate in gimmickry.

[bjohnsonsmith]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/89706

Didn't Davy Boy come up with this idea some time ago?

[phoenix]

Well, why not?

Some artificial snow, a man-made hurricane - all will all add to the show, surely? How about the start/finish straight flooded with burning fuel? That should hot things up!