Looks like the tyre warmer ban won't be delayed

http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/67967

Formula One's official tyre supplier Bridgestone is to reject a bid by teams to delay the introduction of a ban in tyre warmers until 2010.

...and the most interesting part:

"The real concern is minimum pressure," said Hamashima. "They [the teams] worry about minimum pressure. We suggest a minimum pressure to teams because we would like to keep tyres safe, but some teams will take a risk - and cheat. Other teams are worried about that, so they would like to keep the tyre warmers."

If this is the real reason then... it's just plain stupid.

That's going to piss Williams off no end. They just invested in a state of the art tyre warmer.

wonder how close they will be to the IRL tyres..

Always thought it was a pretty lame excuse for delaying the introduction this year. Plenty of other series manage without them, and if its a tad more difficult for the driver then so much the better.

Originally posted by Clatter
Always thought it was a pretty lame excuse for delaying the introduction this year. Plenty of other series manage without them, and if its a tad more difficult for the driver then so much the better.

Agreed.


That "we might not do it cause teams are afraid teams are gonna cheat" bit is laughable.

Originally posted by wingwalker


Agreed.


That "we might not do it cause teams are afraid teams are gonna cheat" bit is laughable.

I think their point is that if teams run very low pressures then it could become a safety concern. BS recommended pressures are given for this reason.

This sounds really stupid. But so does the reasoning to ban tire warmers...

Originally posted by Josta
That's going to piss Williams off no end. They just invested in a state of the art tyre warmer.

??

There are regulations around tyre warmers, and have been for a few years. I can't see why Williams would invest n anything like this given that they existing rules have been around for at least a couple of years after the Ferrari tyre boxes, and the move to ban tyre warmers has been on the cards for the last year at least.

Anyone know the science/theory behind running lower pressures being an advantage?

I guess what's being suggested is teams running below the recommended safe pressures, which could be dangerous. But what kind of performance advantage would that give? We're used to hearing that tyres aren't good until they're up to pressure after stops, so why would low pressures (and in this case super-low) be any good?

maybe they would heat up a little quicker? i don't know you could find a gas combination that when is at the right temperature it would have the right pressure but when it's cold it has a pressure smaller than the one recommended by bridgestone...thus they could be running half a lap on a pressure the tyre isn't comfortable with

Originally posted by pingu666
wonder how close they will be to the IRL tyres..

Probably totally different. There was a quote from AJ Foyt a couple months ago where he said the IRL Firestone tires were crap compared to Bridgestone's Japanese tires. It sounded like they came from separate groups. It came up when the NASCAR drivers were complaining about the quality of Goodyear tires and AJ jumped in to echo their comments with the situation in the IRL.

lower pressure means that more surface is in contact with the ground= more grip, additionally it also decreases the load sensitivity of the tyre because the rubber in contact is more flexible.

The payoff is more wear of course, but who cares??

Originally posted by JForce


??

There are regulations around tyre warmers, and have been for a few years. I can't see why Williams would invest n anything like this given that they existing rules have been around for at least a couple of years after the Ferrari tyre boxes, and the move to ban tyre warmers has been on the cards for the last year at least.

There was a piece on them a few races ago.
Most (all?) tyre warmers have to be set manually via some fairly rudimentary controls.
Williams' new warmers use preset temperatures for the whole set of tyres, selectable via touch screen. Not a big deal you might think, but as they pointed out - every job you make easier saves time for the more important things, and also avoids mistakes.

but the bridgestones dont run on ovals? tho i must admit i know hardly anything about irl tyres

Not having tyre warmers IS a safety concearn.
Stone cold tyres on an outlap will pose a risk to anyone not giving way to faster cars. And who does that?
Teams spend millions trying to make the car go faster. If tyre warmers do this, go at it!
For Bridgestone to suggest that the teams have an ulterior motive is a defflection of a legitimate concearn.
Let's see how this plays out.
Let's see who has the power in F1. The teams, the GPDA (remember their reason for being) or Bridgestone?
I see no reason whatsoever for eliminating this practice.
I also see them re-introduced after the first serious crash attributed to cold tyres.

Originally posted by metz
Not having tyre warmers IS a safety concearn.
Stone cold tyres on an outlap will pose a risk to anyone not giving way to faster cars. And who does that?
Teams spend millions trying to make the car go faster. If tyre warmers do this, go at it!
For Bridgestone to suggest that the teams have an ulterior motive is a defflection of a legitimate concearn.
Let's see how this plays out.
Let's see who has the power in F1. The teams, the GPDA (remember their reason for being) or Bridgestone?
I see no reason whatsoever for eliminating this practice.
I also see them re-introduced after the first serious crash attributed to cold tyres.

How come the majority of other racing series easily manage without them? Any crash should be attributed to driver error, not the tyres.

Tyre warmers were not introduced as a safety measure, they are (as you say) to allow the cars to go at top (or near to) speed straight after a pit-stop. If the teams see stopping as a disadvantage then we will hopefully see less stops, and more on track action.

Originally posted by Clatter
How come the majority of other racing series easily manage without them? Any crash should be attributed to driver error, not the tyres.

Tyre warmers were not introduced as a safety measure, they are (as you say) to allow the cars to go at top (or near to) speed straight after a pit-stop. If the teams see stopping as a disadvantage then we will hopefully see less stops, and more on track action.

Spot on

I think Bridgestones theory of cheating worries is rather absurd given the fact that the biggest advocate of tyre warmers, and the people shouting safety concerns the most is the GPDA, not the teams. They are the people whose lives are at risk and as such should be listened to.

I hate this stupid ban!

The later the better.

Originally posted by metz
Not having tyre warmers IS a safety concearn.
Stone cold tyres on an outlap will pose a risk to anyone not giving way to faster cars.

How is havin cold tires any different from any other reason that a backmarker is in front of a faster car???????

Because a backmarker gives way to the faster car.

If two cars fight for the win and that one of them exit the pits with 5-8sec/lap speed difference, he won't give way since he fights..that's where it starts to be dangerous.

The Indycar guys seem to handle it okay, and they're nowhere near as good as the F1 drivers...

Originally posted by JacnGille


How is havin cold tires any different from any other reason that a backmarker is in front of a faster car???????

Backmarkers get blue flaged.
Front runners with cold tyres do no.

Yes we'll see anyway, however when the F1 drivers voiced against the ban, the tyre had about 8seconds/lap difference.

It is not that big in other series. The gripper the tyre, the narrower the temperature of operation window.

But bridgestone seem to be sure they'll provide with wide Temp of Operation tyres. I hope they don't cut the grip with it..

Originally posted by Ogami musashi
Because a backmarker gives way to the faster car.

If two cars fight for the win and that one of them exit the pits with 5-8sec/lap speed difference, he won't give way since he fights..that's where it starts to be dangerous.

So if its so dangerous and difficult to overtake someone who is 5-8 sec a lap slower, what makes it easier/safer when they are running at the same speed? The rules on defending don't change.

Originally posted by Josta
I think Bridgestones theory of cheating worries is rather absurd given the fact that the biggest advocate of tyre warmers, and the people shouting safety concerns the most is the GPDA, not the teams. They are the people whose lives are at risk and as such should be listened to.

The GPDA also argued that the removal of TC was dangerous.

Originally posted by Clatter


So if its so dangerous and difficult to overtake someone who is 5-8 sec a lap slower, what makes it easier/safer when they are running at the same speed? The rules on defending don't change.

Because the same speed (overall) means that you can follow him closely.

A cold tyred car can go fast on straight lines, but can't do it both in braking and cornering, so when you come behind them you never know if they will just brake early or not, at which speed they gonna corner etc..

Backmarkers just go away, blue flags are moved and a backmarker is often easily identifiable.

This is not that i think it's impossible to handle it..but imho it does really represent threats that have to be taken into consideration before jumping on conclusions that some others series do that with no problem so that is not a problem for F1; The problem is that in F1 it is (when it was issued by drivers) different in magnitude.

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
The Indycar guys seem to handle it okay, and they're nowhere near as good as the F1 drivers...

well yeah, but they dont turn Ross, alonso said it so it must be true

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
The Indycar guys seem to handle it okay, and they're nowhere near as good as the F1 drivers...

They have the entire oval track to pass, and do so multiple times during a race.
On road courses, they also have a problem.

Originally posted by Clatter


The GPDA also argued that the removal of TC was dangerous.

Not exacly true.
They argued that without TC, a wet race could be more dangerous.
And it is.

Originally posted by Clatter


So if its so dangerous and difficult to overtake someone who is 5-8 sec a lap slower, what makes it easier/safer when they are running at the same speed? The rules on defending don't change.

The rules are the same but the (car's) ability to defend is far different.

Originally posted by Ogami musashi


Because the same speed (overall) means that you can follow him closely.

A cold tyred car can go fast on straight lines, but can't do it both in braking and cornering, so when you come behind them you never know if they will just brake early or not, at which speed they gonna corner etc..

Backmarkers just go away, blue flags are moved and a backmarker is often easily identifiable.

This is not that i think it's impossible to handle it..but imho it does really represent threats that have to be taken into consideration before jumping on conclusions that some others series do that with no problem so that is not a problem for F1; The problem is that in F1 it is (when it was issued by drivers) different in magnitude.

They will know if a car in front has cold tires and will therefore be able to adjust for it, brake later and possibly overtake.

Again if it's so dangerous to follow a slower car, then the FIA need to review the rules on grid penalties etc, which serve to put the faster cars behind cars that can be 5-8secs a lap slower.

Originally posted by Clatter


They will know if a car in front has cold tires and will therefore be able to adjust for it, brake later and possibly overtake.

Again if it's so dangerous to follow a slower car, then the FIA need to review the rules on grid penalties etc, which serve to put the faster cars behind cars that can be 5-8secs a lap slower.

There's no car in 8s/lap difference. The slowest cars on the grid (the aguris) used to be 3 o 5 seconds slower.

And then there's a difference, first behind an aguri you know already it can't have the pace, but most of that if you start with a grid penalty, in the event you don't overtake at the start you simply do have the same pace than the aguri.

This is totally different when a car exits the pitlane and the faster car is already at his max pace.

Then you don't know what is the state of the car, what he can do, more over he have more risk of skiding and wheelspining so you can have big surprises.

Again, i'm not saying this a 100% crash situation, but that it definitely represents a problem.

i've kind of lost the thread on this one.

the ban on tyre warmers was supposed to be about what? cost saving or something.

... despite being probably one of the cheapest items in the trucks, and that all teams already own (it's hardly a bleeding edge technology, it's an electric blanket, the current ones will last for years).
if a team loses a single front wing on cold tyres, it costs a lot more than the electricty for some warmers.
teams will now have to put more lifecycle and expense on parts by doing warm-up laps, especially in testing, than they will save on the air-freight tyre warmer bill.

so now we hear, to mitigate loss of grip, we perhaps have teams thinking about running lower pressures, to generate more heat, tyre movement and grip .... and what? risking tyre failures and putting a car into a wall ... yeah that'll be cheap. that'll be safe.

bridgestone, obviously concerned that the only time it is now mentioned is when it's product fails, wants a standardized tyre pressure ... irrespective of individual car design and dynamics (the more suspicious could speculate what team will be in the sweet-spot of that particular tyre pressure number)


look ... here's an idea, let's save on land-fill, why not just keep the blankets and worry about something else more important instead?

Originally posted by Clatter
So if its so dangerous and difficult to overtake someone who is 5-8 sec a lap slower, what makes it easier/safer when they are running at the same speed? The rules on defending don't change.

For perspective, at Le Mans the difference between the fastest and slowest cars is roughly 60s on a track that takes the leaders 3m30s to lap. Call that 20s difference per 1m10s, which approximates more closely a typical F1 laptime. Oh, and those guys have to cope with it in the dark as well.

Originally posted by archstanton
i've kind of lost the thread on this one.

the ban on tyre warmers was supposed to be about what? cost saving or something.

If the ban is purely to make racing more challenging for the drivers and therefore make the driver a bigger part of the equation, then I'm all for it. I think cost saving would be a weak argument, but as they say, 'every little helps'.

it was brought in under the excuse to reduce costs, but its really to spice up the racing

Originally posted by pingu666
it was brought in under the excuse to reduce costs, but its really to spice up the racing

It will have quite the opposite effect and drive costs up ;thus, proving a disadvantage to the lower tier teams. The teams with more money will spend the tire warmer budget (and more) on finding creative ways of getting the tires up to temperature. Will there be a regulation for the temperature inside the garage? How about the lights they use- does it say you can't have 2000 watt halogen "work" lights? Do you have to fill the tires with gas a certain amount of time before the car stops? If not, can I fill them very hot gas? How much money would it take find the best combination? There are myriad ways the tire temps can be optimized without warmers, and you can bet the teams will leave no stone unturned trying to find them. Of course, this will result in a frenzy of rule making trying to close the loopholes. Soon there will be an FIA delegate in every garage ready to enforce the "within some many degrees of ambient" rule.

Which leads me to the question: what's the problem with tire warmers? In F1 terms they are cheap and no team has an unfair advantage. Whoever thought of the ban isn't thinking very well.

Originally posted by metz
]Not having tyre warmers IS a safety concearn.

There is no safety concern. If drivers can't manage on cold tires, they should get a different job.

The IndyCars have the same spec-tire manufacturer and it is not a safety concern for them. The IndyCar venues like Texas and Indianapolis are hugely more dangerous than any of the current F1 tracks. If the IndyCar teams can manage to run safely without tire warmers, there is absolutely no reason for Formula One to allow them.

The F1 teams are scared of the unknown, and if they're stupid enough to try to run with extremely low tire pressures, yes there could be a danger. This risk could be almost entirely mitigated by defining minimum allowable tire pressures. This would be easily enforced with real-time pressure sensors. Sensors of this type are already in use by F1 teams.

The only justification for keeping tire warmers is to help the UK's boutique racing industry. A company or two could go under if this rule is put in place. That regrettable fact is the only reason I can see to keep them, and it's not reason enough.

they already have rules for the temp in garage, FIA just needs to mandate a gas for the tyres. bridgestone tech guys can keep a eye on the teams

so to manage this unnecessary new risk we've artificially created, we now need to get into FIA valve inspections and monitoring, and accusations of cheating and all that malarkey again.

we need new standardized FIA calibrated sensor systems, and more data-logging, what are the tolerances, what about changes in ambient temperature affecting pressures. sounds like a brazilian fuel rig pantomime in the making.
when do we expect the first race result to be decided in the dark, team lawyers squabbling in the stewards office after everyone goes home ... and all off this improves the show how?


as is surely obvious, the top teams will spend whatever is required to reclaim any kind of tyre advantage. they will get those tyre temperatures back up somehow or another and open out the gap again, a gap we have enjoyed watch narrowing due to relatively stable rules.

as it is, we can't keep all the teams we've got on the grid, so lets throw out a piece of old-fashioned affordable hardware that everyone has universal access to, and start an exotic tyre-temperature test-and-development arms-race that gets the eventual winner 8 seconds on an outlap.

all this unnecessary hassle and aggravation, and for what purpose, for what benefit?
risky, expensive, unmanagable, bureaucratic and pointless.

all of it sounds more like administrators meddling for the sake of it, they should leave things alone and let the teams race their cars.

I don't see why Indy cars should set the bar for safety. That would be a relatively low bar.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The real concern is minimum pressure," said Hamashima. "They [the teams] worry about minimum pressure. We suggest a minimum pressure to teams because we would like to keep tyres safe, but some teams will take a risk - and cheat. Other teams are worried about that, so they would like to keep the tyre warmers."


What is this BS from BS??? are they saying that if the teams run the tyres at under bridgestones recommended pressure that they are cheating???

I cant remember ever having seen anything in the sporting regs re tyre pressure.. does anyone know if this is in fact the case.

I would have thought it would be up to the individual teams to choose their tyre pressures, which would be dependent on suspension design among other things

CHEAT is a big word

Did F1 always use tyre blankets? Werent they introduced in late 90s?

Wasnt the switch from slicks to grooved tyres theoretically dangerous? Less mechanical grip?

Originally posted by vivian
Did F1 always use tyre blankets? Werent they introduced in late 90s?

not 100% sure but i thought they had tyre blankets from the 80s.

Originally posted by Philip Lee KK
not 100% sure but i thought they had tyre blankets from the 80s.

I recall seeing them in person in the '80s. At that time, there were very few things of that sort that weren't allowed.

Today, there is absolutely no reason for tire warmers. Back when tire warmers were introduced, tire pressures were not monitored in real time. Today, real-time electronic pressure sensors are even commonplace on road cars. The only safety justification for the blankets was when such pressures could not be monitored in real time, that is simply no longer the case.

Many have asked why they should be banned. My reason is simple, I think it will make for far better racing. The best drivers are able to do amazing things on cold tires. A 800 HP car with cold tires rewards supreme car control. The technical superiority of a car has hugely overshadowed driver talent for too long. This change will start to even the scale.

Bottom line, banning tire warmers will definitely result in more passing and better racing. Of that I've no doubt. That reason alone justifies the removal of this anachronistic driver aid.

The downside I see to no tire warmers is it will only further favour the guy who can stay out a lap longer on the fuel cycle.

How will this be managed? Whats to stop the team employing someone with 2 industrial "Bonnie Tyler" strength hairdryers and aim them at the tyres, or to keep the tyres next tot the 200 degree portable autoclave exhaust?!

The cheating thing is bollocks, if teams want to run lower pressures they are free to do so.
The advantage of lower pressures is not increased contact patch, it's the fact that there is an optimum pressure for when the tyres are fresh on the car and an optimum for when they are fully heated, and they are not the same.
If a team runs reduced pressure that generally means the pressure will be nearer optimum when the tyre heats up, the disadvantage being that in the earlier laps the pressures will be below optimum.
Some cars (for example this year McLaren) heat their tyres faster than others, so could afford to run a lower pressure, negating some of the effect of the early low pressure situation.

Just to try explain the tyre pressures a bit better:

All numbers are made up
Lets say optimum pressure is 17 PSI
The teams will put around 15PSI in the tyres, due to the warming effect creating expansion and therefore more pressure. This however would lead to an eventual pressure of 18PSI
They would prefer to put in 14 PSI because that would result in the optimum pressure being achieved however the early laps performance would be affected and in this case what BS are saying is the safety margins would be compromised, should the teams choose to run these lower temperatures.

Not the greatest way of explaining, I'm no teacher.

just wait till you see the size of the gloves the tyre boys are wearing next year.

If running on cold tyres isn't your fancy as a driver or team, a solution is very simple. Don't stop for fresh tyres. Stuff your car fith fuel before the race, and make it last until the end. Seemed to work just fine until 1994...