Jump to content


Photo
* * - - - 26 votes

New Pirelli tyres and DRS - a disaster for F1 and racing


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
4031 replies to this topic

#1251 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,811 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 March 2013 - 00:45

I just hope that if Pirelli do stay in F1, they make tyres to a different specification like Bridgestones. They should at least make the tyres work well for the whole grid, rather than who just managed to have setup that gets tyres at correct temperature for car. The way they have made the tyres, it is always going to be main point in performance doing a race as they vary depending on weather. They should have a more neutral impact but the way they make it out, the teams should somehow figure a way to make the tyres work optimally when there is really little they can do but make the cars slower and have a wider operating window. Good for smaller teams though. Also you would think soon weather will have to be designed for these Pirelli tyres by Bernie :lol: as it can't be too cold or too hot. Tyres are not good enough level to work on relatively normal temperatures but is blamed on weather by Pirelli not being ideal :lol:.

They have been quite lucky given the regulations have promoted competitive overtaking such as Kers and DRS and less downforce. If Bridgestone stayed for 2011 season season at least, and Pirelli came in afterwards, they would most likely look more embarrassing than it is currently. In my opnion, these tyres are anti-racing as quite a few here have also said. They create a lot of marbles which doesn't help racing, tyres degrade too much to be able to follow cars as well as they might be able to do with better tyres, drivers drive well below their limit, mentally and physically. The kind of overtaking Pirelli promotes is drivers letting each other overtake in a gentleman kind of manner due to worry about tyre wear, or helplessness when tyres get worn too much. The good overtakes in my opinion is only when tyres are still fresh and cars are sometimes on limit of braking with Kers and/or DRS helping cars to get wheel to wheel. Even backmarkers helping also.


The problem with this argument is that we have direct quotes from Whitmarsh from more than one year and most recently a few months ago (IIRC some of those quotes made when he was not only McLaren TP put also FOTA chairman, though I don't think the quotes made clear in which role he was speaking) asking specifically for tyres that give teams a "headache" or "make us scratch our heads", or something to that effect. I am tired of posting these quotes, I did so many times, probably earlier in this thread and in the other redundant Pirelli threads.



Advertisement

#1252 McLarenNo1

McLarenNo1
  • Member

  • 145 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 19 March 2013 - 01:16

The problem with this argument is that we have direct quotes from Whitmarsh from more than one year and most recently a few months ago (IIRC some of those quotes made when he was not only McLaren TP put also FOTA chairman, though I don't think the quotes made clear in which role he was speaking) asking specifically for tyres that give teams a "headache" or "make us scratch our heads", or something to that effect. I am tired of posting these quotes, I did so many times, probably earlier in this thread and in the other redundant Pirelli threads.

That is more regarding degradation, otherwise why would Pirelli make the tyres this year have a wider operating window. First thing you hear from them in testing or this race is not being ideal temperatures :lol:. FIA, Pirelli and some F1 team members have got the wrong idea regarding overtaking in my opinion. Competitive overtakes is what they should be looking at increasing, and they have done that with less downforce and KERS and DRS. It is ruined by the current Pirelli tyres though but it increases the numbers for meaningless overtakes which they probably like regarding stats and think it is successful thing they are doing. Going back to operating window, I think this promotes more random results which is a success if it is their intended design I guess but not good for the teams who have got better performance cars on merit. This year, they say they have increased performance window of tyres so I don't think that is truely their intention, but covering the poor tyres by saying it is what people want or that track temperature is not normal.



#1253 chrisj

chrisj
  • Member

  • 578 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 19 March 2013 - 01:44

... Austin wasn´t. Drivers were sliding everywhere and their grip levels were ridiculously low. Drivers were not pushing at all, they were tip toeing on cars with ridiculous grip levels with tyres miles away from being working and yielding the grip levels they´re supposed to do. At some parts of the weekend it looked as if they were driving on a wet track. Race was excellent because it was the same for everyone and we had tight fights, but that tyre choice was far from a standard setting one.



I actually liked that. I don't care if Pirelli wants to make shitty tires, but bring 2 or 3 compounds and let the teams decide what to run. And make decent rain tires, FFS.

#1254 Massa

Massa
  • Member

  • 4,324 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 March 2013 - 10:52

Lauda is not happy at all.... And i'm fully agree with him

Niki Lauda has slammed the tyre situation in formula one, accusing Pirelli and the FIA of confusing the fans.

"The situation with the tyres is absolutely stupid," the forthright triple world champion, broadcaster and Mercedes team chairman and shareholder said.

"Artificially creating more and more pitstops is wrong," Lauda told German newspaper Bild.

"Pirelli can’t really help it as they are only doing what the FIA ordered them to do, but 90 per cent of the time no one understands what is happening in the races now."

Pole sitter Sebastian Vettel finished the 2013 season opener third on Sunday, while Lotus’ Kimi Raikkonen did one fewer pitstop and surprisingly won for Lotus from seventh on the grid.

Lauda said the current situation, with the tyres more influential than ever before, is confusing for the fans.

"My advantage is that I can ask our (Mercedes) engineers. The fans cannot. But even our people are confused.

"When the tyres are so soft, it’s bad for formula one. The fans don’t understand if there are more than two pitstops. (For F1) it’s a fundamentally wrong path."

Pirelli’s Paul Hembery hit back: "Many fans have told us they think the racing is more exciting now."



#1255 MrAerodynamicist

MrAerodynamicist
  • Member

  • 13,690 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 19 March 2013 - 10:59

Think of the children!.

#1256 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,811 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 March 2013 - 11:03

Lauda is not happy at all.... And i'm fully agree with him


Good quotes, thanks. Could we now PLEASE lay to rest the accusations that Pirelli does not know what they are doing, or that they are working against the wishes of FIA? Sakae? Is this now satisfactory for you?

Edit:
Otherwise FWIW I think there is a lot of crap in Lauda's quotes: "The fans don’t understand [when] there are more than two pitstops. " Come again?

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 19 March 2013 - 11:05.


#1257 black magic

black magic
  • Member

  • 3,859 posts
  • Joined: June 00

Posted 19 March 2013 - 11:05

bless him.

and from someone who raced slicks that degenerated - except as they slowly went off they could still be driven

may as well turn f1 into econo runs. who can win on the least fuel

#1258 McLarenNo1

McLarenNo1
  • Member

  • 145 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 19 March 2013 - 11:09

*Sigh*

Whitmarsh in 2013


Whitmarsh in May 2012:

Whitmarsh, Dec 2011:




Apparently because they listen to their customers, several of which as you know suggested this publicly, and since we are -as usual in F1- not privy to internal discussions, I can only assume that this is what was agreed on, until there is more evidence for Pirelli working against teams' and FIA's wishes than the big fat zero we have so far.

I don't know why the sigh is for, considering what you posted backs up what I am saying.

Lauda is not happy at all.... And i'm fully agree with him

I have to say I agree with him. We need more people to stand up and against these kind of tyres so FIA take note and Pirelli get the hint. Pirelli's Paul keeps saying fans like it, but I don't and don't know really anyone who does. Racing also looks so visibly slow, last time I saw two drivers going fast was when Lewis and Sebastian battling it out in the United States Grand Prix. That to me was exciting and it was due to tyres and track surface allowing the drivers to push.

#1259 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,811 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 March 2013 - 11:25

I don't know why the sigh is for, considering what you posted backs up what I am saying.


I don't think the 2013 quote does.


Advertisement

#1260 McLarenNo1

McLarenNo1
  • Member

  • 145 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 19 March 2013 - 11:42

I don't think the 2013 quote does.

It does, Martin says they don't want to be able to one stop. They want more degradation which I understand and is what I said and they have achieved this. They also wanted a tyre with a wider operating window and Pirelli have said they have tried to achieve it this year. However the thing I find funny is temperatures not being ideal not only the first race weekend but also in testing. I wouldn't be surprised if they say this for most of the races this year. Quite embarrassing really but they can get away with it as people are expecting poor tyres in general. Will be interesting coming weekend, if these tyres produce a lot of marbles, something I think teams and drivers as well as FIA probably don't want. If there is enough bad reaction to this kind of racing in public, hopefully FIA take notice and Pirelli do so if they renew their contract, they have to make tyres in a different direction or FIA to get a new supplier to do it.

Edited by McLarenNo1, 19 March 2013 - 11:44.


#1261 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 19 March 2013 - 11:55

Good quotes, thanks. Could we now PLEASE lay to rest the accusations that Pirelli does not know what they are doing, or that they are working against the wishes of FIA? Sakae? Is this now satisfactory for you?

Edit:
Otherwise FWIW I think there is a lot of crap in Lauda's quotes: "The fans don’t understand [when] there are more than two pitstops. " Come again?


Your problem is, that you are trying to defend indefensible. Hembery IMO should get either dismissed from his job for

Pirelli’s Paul Hembery hit back: "Many fans have told us they think the racing is more exciting now."

; or perhaps he should be taken on the carpet by his handlers, because an executive should not argue his case at the level of an adolescent forumer. Who are those fans he is speaking about, and invested much money in the sport? I am a fan since 1974 and no one has asked me. One would think that Hembery is not responsible for listening to fans and making up rubber according to them, but he should work with all people who are investing into F1, and are responsible for sustainability of the sport on long term. What happened to keeping cost down? (I can imagine how much Merc had to reach deep into their pockets to deal with their mess last year).

When I tell you that this kind of racing is not appealing to me, you get overheated and wet in no time. When Lauda (or Schumacher) tells you the same, that doesn’t mean anything for you either. You are always referring to some higher powers who bestowed upon Hembery that extra wisdom how to literally screw teams. Mercedes really got a black eye last year, and I bet that characteristics of Pirelli contributed greatly to that malaise. Whitmarsh, a name you are raised up so often, is not running Mercedes’ investment in F1, and any private talks between him and Hembery should be taken to lawyers first to let those to look at properly how legitimate such instructions are; besides, beyond some loose quotes, I am not so sure how credible those claims are, I haven’t read any pertinent contractual papers reflecting upon this situation. I would doubt that any corporation works just on chit-chatting at the water-cooler. Has Mercedes co-signed on these tire specs? Are other teams on board with those specs, or it all depends on results from last race? All what I see is the result, and forgive me, but I still do not like it.

Edited by Sakae, 19 March 2013 - 12:02.


#1262 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,811 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 March 2013 - 12:10

^^ Sakae,

why is it so hard for you to understand that there are 2 issues here, and keep insisting to confuse them?

1. Is Pirelli producing tyres to FIA requirements?
2. Are FIA requirements good?

As for (1), it's really astounding that you still question this after all the links I gave you (not only the Whitmarsh ones above, but lots of other quotes as well), all of which you simply brushed aside. And now we have Lauda saying, "Pirelli can’t really help it as they are only doing what the FIA ordered them to do", and even though by your own admission Mercedes had nothing to gain from these tyres so far, you STILL want to keep this up?

As for (2), it could be a reasonable debate. Unfortunately, arguments in the league of "Pirellis were graining in Melbourne, so they are crap" are not helpful if anyone who paid attention knows that Michelins grained terribly in some seasons, and Bridgestones did too at times. Links were provided for this as well.

Edit: And once more, " I haven’t read any pertinent contractual papers reflecting upon this situation" continues to be a senseless demand by you because you haven't read any pertinent contractual papers on anything else in F1 either.

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 19 March 2013 - 12:15.


#1263 Diablobb81

Diablobb81
  • Member

  • 3,518 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 19 March 2013 - 12:18

So the very narrow operating window last year and temp problems this year were required by FIA?

Edited by Diablobb81, 19 March 2013 - 12:18.


#1264 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,811 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 March 2013 - 12:48

So the very narrow operating window last year and temp problems this year were required by FIA?


I don't think they were directly. But they required at the very least a tyre that degrades quickly, but is still safe in a degraded state when forcing the driver to pit. When Pirelli got the brief, Hembery went on record (links were provided repeatedly in this and/or other Pirelli threads) that it would be very difficult to build such a tyre, but if that was FIA' (and FOTA's when it still important) wish, they would be happy to try and add to the spectacle.

Links to how Pirelli achieved this construction-wise were provided (yadda yadda).

It is possible that some of what we have seen were unintended side effects, but we do not know that it would be possible to fulfill the requirements while avoid such side effects. Michelin and Bridgestone did not want to try, so stating categorically that they would have done a better job while fulfilling the requirements is pretty baseless.

It is also possible, and IMHO the Whitmarsh quote from 2013 strongly hints at this, that there was a wish for complex tyres that provide multidimensional challenges (edit: he is talking about "exciting dilemmas"; a dilemma is "is a problem offering two possibilities, neither of which is practically acceptable" (Wikipedia), and he wants more than one of those (plural), ergo more than just the deg vs. pace dilemma), and that this was part of (edit: at least) the 2013 agreement between FIA and Pirelli. FWIW I seem to remember to have seen other quotes to this effect as well, but frankly I am tired of spending time to hunt for links just to have them ignored. Maybe those who claim that Pirelli failed to fulfill the requirements could for once do some work and provide quotes. (Edit: and some that carry some weight in the face of the new Lauda quote stating that Pirelli did exactly what FIA told them to. You know, "Pirelli can’t really help it as they are only doing what the FIA ordered them to do". It was just a few hours ago, but it's impressive how much effort goes into ignoring it)

It is fact that there was also a wish for a wider operating window, which Pirelli now provided. Maybe FIA & teams figured out that 2012 was a case of "be careful with what you wish for" and wanted to back track a little. Anyhow, IMHO it is weird to use the fact that Pirelli listened to those wishes to lambaste Pirelli.

The temp problems are at least partly caused by FIA's tyre regs (2 race compounds, must start race on quali tyre). There were probably less of those in other tyre eras, but we have to take into account that Pirelli, on request, is building tyres that behave "unnaturally", and this may have legitimate influence (as in "impossible to cover this issue as well, on top of everything else"). And anyhow, there were temp problems in unusual weather (which we did have in testing and in Melbourne) on Bridgestones and Michelins as well (links for that and excessive graining were already provided, yadda yadda).

Edit: And by the way, I don't think I ever received a reply to this quote, Räikkönen May 17th 2012:

"I don't think the nature [of F1] is different because of that," Raikkonen told Finnish newspaper Turun Sanomat about the impact of Pirelli.

"It's because of the amount of the fuel on board. I don't think there would be that much problem with these tyres, if we would race with 50 or 60 kilos, when we start.

"Previously the pitstops were made usually after every 20 laps, while we had less fuel. I think it would have been the same situation with Michelins and Bridgestones if we would have this much fuel as we have now.

"These tyres are good in qualifying: they have a good grip and all in all they are good tyres."


Edited by KnucklesAgain, 19 March 2013 - 13:25.


#1265 FerrariV12

FerrariV12
  • Member

  • 348 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 19 March 2013 - 15:14

Edit: And by the way, I don't think I ever received a reply to this quote, Räikkönen May 17th 2012:


2010 (when Kimi didn't race, which might explain him saying that), refuelling had been banned and they ran the Bridgestones, with pretty much every fan except me complaining that there weren't enough pitstops, if it wasn't for the ridiculous "run both compounds rule", some races would have been non-stop for some drivers.

Edited by FerrariV12, 19 March 2013 - 15:14.


#1266 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,251 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 19 March 2013 - 15:21

I actually liked that. I don't care if Pirelli wants to make shitty tires, but bring 2 or 3 compounds and let the teams decide what to run. And make decent rain tires, FFS.


Now you´re talking. Open compound choice to let every team use whatever they think is better would improve the current situation, which is not bad.

But if you like that, you can´t like Austin ´12, which is an example of the opposite: teams stuck with totally unsuited tyre compounds.

#1267 FerrariV12

FerrariV12
  • Member

  • 348 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 19 March 2013 - 15:26

Now you´re talking. Open compound choice to let every team use whatever they think is better would improve the current situation, which is not bad.

But if you like that, you can´t like Austin ´12, which is an example of the opposite: teams stuck with totally unsuited tyre compounds.


While I'm unashamedly in the pro tyre-war minority, if we have to have spec tyres designed with certain things in mind like we have, then yeah I'd at least like to see the teams given free reign of what to run from the range and when, no mandatory use of both compounds, no racing on the tyres you qualified on for the top 10.

If expense and logistics are a concern, in that its hard to bring the entire range to a GP to cover every eventuality for all cars, then make the teams pre-declare the tyres they want to be brought for each car, or maybe x+3 or 4 from which they can run x over the weekend if there is that capacity. Then some teams may be stuck with unsuitable tyres, but it will be their choice, their responsibility and their problem.

#1268 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,251 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 19 March 2013 - 15:30

While I'm unashamedly in the pro tyre-war minority, if we have to have spec tyres designed with certain things in mind like we have, then yeah I'd at least like to see the teams given free reign of what to run from the range and when, no mandatory use of both compounds, no racing on the tyres you qualified on for the top 10.

If expense and logistics are a concern, in that its hard to bring the entire range to a GP to cover every eventuality for all cars, then make the teams pre-declare the tyres they want to be brought for each car, or maybe x+3 or 4 from which they can run x over the weekend if there is that capacity. Then some teams may be stuck with unsuitable tyres, but it will be their choice, their responsibility and their problem.


Excellent post. Making own wrong choices cause of poor shape is much better than having poor shape because of other´s decission. Lotus shouldn´t be slow because Pirelli decided to use mediums and hards, Mercedes shouldn´t be slow because Pirelli decided to use supersofts and softs. Let the teams decide two compounds if there´s problems bringing all tyres to a race.

Also top 10 starting on quali tyres is totally outdated and the conditions making this rule appear have dissapeared ages ago.

#1269 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,811 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 March 2013 - 16:49

2010 (when Kimi didn't race, which might explain him saying that), refuelling had been banned and they ran the Bridgestones, with pretty much every fan except me complaining that there weren't enough pitstops, if it wasn't for the ridiculous "run both compounds rule", some races would have been non-stop for some drivers.


That's true, but I would think even a Kimi not running for a year knows better than anyone here when he says it does not make F1 much different and that they are good tyres.
And we also had an Alonso quote that in Melbourne he was fighting every lap, and he enjoyed it a lot, with flies in the face of the people propagating the delta myth. Was also not taken into account here.

#1270 readonly

readonly
  • Member

  • 179 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 19 March 2013 - 16:55

If teams were free to choose tyres, how on earth will BE fix results at will ?

#1271 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,811 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 March 2013 - 16:56

While I'm unashamedly in the pro tyre-war minority, if we have to have spec tyres designed with certain things in mind like we have, then yeah I'd at least like to see the teams given free reign of what to run from the range and when, no mandatory use of both compounds, no racing on the tyres you qualified on for the top 10.

If expense and logistics are a concern, in that its hard to bring the entire range to a GP to cover every eventuality for all cars, then make the teams pre-declare the tyres they want to be brought for each car, or maybe x+3 or 4 from which they can run x over the weekend if there is that capacity. Then some teams may be stuck with unsuitable tyres, but it will be their choice, their responsibility and their problem.


Yeah I'd probably like that. Let them run different compounds at the same time as well.
Though I do feel a bit uneasy about letting the teams choose in advance. If half the field gets it wrong, it's Indy all over again.

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 19 March 2013 - 16:57.


#1272 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,811 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 March 2013 - 16:57

If teams were free to choose tyres, how on earth will BE fix results at will ?


If you believe this, why are you wasting your time with F1?

#1273 readonly

readonly
  • Member

  • 179 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 19 March 2013 - 17:08

If you believe this, why are you wasting your time with F1?

I wish F1 fans opened their eyes and force a change.

Edited by readonly, 19 March 2013 - 17:11.


#1274 MarileneRiddle

MarileneRiddle
  • Member

  • 399 posts
  • Joined: December 12

Posted 19 March 2013 - 17:23

I think the 'fans' should really just get to the heart of the problem - the F1 teams themselves. They are the ones who get to feedback to Pirelli on the tyres' performances. Sure, the comment is 'they degrade very quickly', but (as KnucklesAgain has quoted) that would provide the strategic uncertainty that the teams are calling for.

So if that isn't the type of racing 'fans' want, then the blame should be on the F1 teams - tell the F1 teams that they don't want so many strategic stops or uncertainty. Then, and only then, will Pirelli get a new brief and you'll get less degradation in the tyres. It is terribly unfair to blame Pirelli for something they are hired to do.

#1275 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,811 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 March 2013 - 17:47

I think the 'fans' should really just get to the heart of the problem - the F1 teams themselves. They are the ones who get to feedback to Pirelli on the tyres' performances. Sure, the comment is 'they degrade very quickly', but (as KnucklesAgain has quoted) that would provide the strategic uncertainty that the teams are calling for.

So if that isn't the type of racing 'fans' want, then the blame should be on the F1 teams - tell the F1 teams that they don't want so many strategic stops or uncertainty. Then, and only then, will Pirelli get a new brief and you'll get less degradation in the tyres. It is terribly unfair to blame Pirelli for something they are hired to do.


:up: And don't forget to review these 2010 thread (just examples, I am sure there are more, search sux) before you tell the teams, lest we have a "should have been careful what I wished for" situation again :p

Tyres destroying racing!, Ultra-durable tyres is the completely wrong way to go.
Bridgestone are a big cause of 'processional' races...
Bernie proposes shortcuts and other stuff...
Is there a big enough difference between soft and hard compounds?
Are Tyres Limiting Performance Too Much in 2010?


#1276 Rubens Hakkamacher

Rubens Hakkamacher
  • Member

  • 1,567 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 19 March 2013 - 17:55

the requirement was to have high deg but a safe tyre when degraded. When somebody stays out too long, they use up all of the outer compound layer, then they run on the hard and safe inner compound layer, their times hit the cliff, and they pit.


Wow, you're so smart.

So, when Lewis came in with the cord exposed on the inside of his front right tire, that was the "hard and safe" part? Ok.

The rest of what you wrote is uninformed as well.


I know you're trying to win at the Internets, keep trying.




#1277 Rubens Hakkamacher

Rubens Hakkamacher
  • Member

  • 1,567 posts
  • Joined: March 04

Posted 19 March 2013 - 17:59

. Lotus shouldn´t be slow because Pirelli decided to use mediums and hards, Mercedes shouldn´t be slow because Pirelli decided to use supersofts and softs. Let the teams decide two compounds if there´s problems bringing all tyres to a race.


I agree. This "the tires should favor team X at this track" business is lame. It's like a tire war, but a random make believe one.

They should make the tires hard and harder, not "soft and falling apart". I want the drivers to push all the way, not tippy-toe around, or have to think about not pushing in qualifying because "we may need the softs for the race".

It's a tire test.



#1278 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,811 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 19 March 2013 - 18:27

Wow, you're so smart.


It's really not my problem if you don't know these things.

So, when Lewis came in with the cord exposed on the inside of his front right tire, that was the "hard and safe" part? Ok.


Once more I do not know what you are talking about. Sounds like China 2007, but that can't be. Care to enlighten me?

I know you're trying to win at the Internets, keep trying.


It's obvious you're not interested in serious discussion.


#1279 Menace

Menace
  • Member

  • 12,298 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 19 March 2013 - 18:47

This thread is still going? The crying continues? :rotfl:

KnucklesAgain - Why waste you're time? It's obvious no matter how you back it up, the same people will not have a word of it as it doesn't fit with their view. For what its worth, you backed up you're arguments well and no one has been able to retort them point by point.

Edited by Menace, 19 March 2013 - 18:49.


Advertisement

#1280 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,224 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 19 March 2013 - 18:54

This thread is still going? The crying continues? :rotfl:

KnucklesAgain - Why waste you're time? It's obvious no matter how you back it up, the same people will not have a word of it as it doesn't fit with their view. For what its worth, you backed up you're arguments well and no one has been able to retort them point by point.

:up:

best way to sum this thread ... :o

Posted Image

Edited by eronrules, 19 March 2013 - 18:55.


#1281 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 19 March 2013 - 20:37

^^ Sakae,

why is it so hard for you to understand that there are 2 issues here, and keep insisting to confuse them?

1. Is Pirelli producing tyres to FIA requirements?
2. Are FIA requirements good?

As for (1), it's really astounding that you still question this after all the links I gave you (not only the Whitmarsh ones above, but lots of other quotes as well), all of which you simply brushed aside. And now we have Lauda saying, "Pirelli can’t really help it as they are only doing what the FIA ordered them to do", and even though by your own admission Mercedes had nothing to gain from these tyres so far, you STILL want to keep this up?

As for (2), it could be a reasonable debate. Unfortunately, arguments in the league of "Pirellis were graining in Melbourne, so they are crap" are not helpful if anyone who paid attention knows that Michelins grained terribly in some seasons, and Bridgestones did too at times. Links were provided for this as well.

Edit: And once more, " I haven’t read any pertinent contractual papers reflecting upon this situation" continues to be a senseless demand by you because you haven't read any pertinent contractual papers on anything else in F1 either.

These exchanges are becoming circular and tiring, to be frank. I shall refrain myself from declaration of a kind that Pirelli delivered a product that was ordered. I haven't seen any paperwork, so how would I know, and these vague descriptions you are leaning on do mean very little to me. This is (or should be) a quantitative issue. If you think it's not, we can argue for next several months about rate of degradation what is too much and/or just right; endless argument and no winners in sight.

With respect to FiA - there is a technical working group which works on specs. with teams having about limited voting right, if my recollection is correct. FOM and FiA holds the rest. It is more complicated than a simple claim that teams have what they asked for. Maybe some teams (probably 3 had some input), and since FOTA seems dysfunctional, I doubt very much that every team was consulted on the subject matter. Vettel (in last race) is now marginally faster than end of the grid; bravo! DM must be really impressed over returns on his investment and what his budget has delivered in the first round.

This is however also end for me on this subject; interest in the topic has simply vanished.

Edited by Sakae, 19 March 2013 - 20:39.


#1282 akshay380

akshay380
  • Member

  • 561 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 20 March 2013 - 00:02

I hope drivers start talking against these driving to delta entire race.

#1283 superdelphinus

superdelphinus
  • Member

  • 1,338 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 20 March 2013 - 00:07

FFS someone get him some paperwork

#1284 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,905 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 20 March 2013 - 00:45

I don't think they were directly. But they required at the very least a tyre that degrades quickly, but is still safe in a degraded state when forcing the driver to pit. When Pirelli got the brief, Hembery went on record (links were provided repeatedly in this and/or other Pirelli threads) that it would be very difficult to build such a tyre, but if that was FIA' (and FOTA's when it still important) wish, they would be happy to try and add to the spectacle.

Links to how Pirelli achieved this construction-wise were provided (yadda yadda).

It is possible that some of what we have seen were unintended side effects, but we do not know that it would be possible to fulfill the requirements while avoid such side effects. Michelin and Bridgestone did not want to try, so stating categorically that they would have done a better job while fulfilling the requirements is pretty baseless.

It is also possible, and IMHO the Whitmarsh quote from 2013 strongly hints at this, that there was a wish for complex tyres that provide multidimensional challenges (edit: he is talking about "exciting dilemmas"; a dilemma is "is a problem offering two possibilities, neither of which is practically acceptable" (Wikipedia), and he wants more than one of those (plural), ergo more than just the deg vs. pace dilemma), and that this was part of (edit: at least) the 2013 agreement between FIA and Pirelli. FWIW I seem to remember to have seen other quotes to this effect as well, but frankly I am tired of spending time to hunt for links just to have them ignored. Maybe those who claim that Pirelli failed to fulfill the requirements could for once do some work and provide quotes. (Edit: and some that carry some weight in the face of the new Lauda quote stating that Pirelli did exactly what FIA told them to. You know, "Pirelli can’t really help it as they are only doing what the FIA ordered them to do". It was just a few hours ago, but it's impressive how much effort goes into ignoring it)

It is fact that there was also a wish for a wider operating window, which Pirelli now provided. Maybe FIA & teams figured out that 2012 was a case of "be careful with what you wish for" and wanted to back track a little. Anyhow, IMHO it is weird to use the fact that Pirelli listened to those wishes to lambaste Pirelli.

The temp problems are at least partly caused by FIA's tyre regs (2 race compounds, must start race on quali tyre). There were probably less of those in other tyre eras, but we have to take into account that Pirelli, on request, is building tyres that behave "unnaturally", and this may have legitimate influence (as in "impossible to cover this issue as well, on top of everything else"). And anyhow, there were temp problems in unusual weather (which we did have in testing and in Melbourne) on Bridgestones and Michelins as well (links for that and excessive graining were already provided, yadda yadda).

Edit: And by the way, I don't think I ever received a reply to this quote, Räikkönen May 17th 2012:


Raikkonen never drove the 2010 Bridgestones, it's flatly wrong to think the style of racing Pirelli tyres have induced is some sort of constant from 2010 when refuelling was banned.

Edited by PretentiousBread, 20 March 2013 - 00:45.


#1285 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,224 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 20 March 2013 - 07:31

Lauda is not happy at all.... And i'm fully agree with him



But Paul hembery doesn't :p link

Pirelli motorsport boss Paul Hembery has hit back at Niki Lauda, after the famous Austrian lashed out at Pirelli in the wake of the 2013 season opener.

Lauda, the outspoken former triple world champion and now Mercedes chairman, had told Bild newspaper the tyre situation in Formula 1 is “absolutely stupid”.

“90 per cent of the time no one understands what is happening in the races now,” he claimed.

Hembery hit back: “Has Niki forgotten how boring the races used to be?”It’s always the same: we give the teams a new challenge, and if their driver doesn’t win, they complain

you know what, Niki lauda and JYS reminds me more and more of Grandpa simpson :o

#1286 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,811 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 20 March 2013 - 08:23

I hope drivers start talking against these driving to delta entire race.


Alonso:

"It was a fantastic, fantastic race, fighting all through the race," said Alonso. "The race was action every lap and I personally enjoyed it, obviously.

(Autosport)

#1287 Telemetry Man

Telemetry Man
  • Member

  • 249 posts
  • Joined: May 99

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:11

You can cherry pick quotes all day long, it's easy, you can find as many drivers against as are for. Alonso as he says is 'obviously' happy. He came 2nd.

The jury's out to whether Pirelli have fulfilled their brief until several races in.

#1288 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,905 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:18

Alonso:
(Autosport)


Please show me where he mentions the tyres, or why Pirelli was the reason for his enjoyment of the race?

#1289 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,905 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:21

But Paul hembery doesn't :p link


you know what, Niki lauda and JYS reminds me more and more of Grandpa simpson :o


Wow that is something, a business man defending his product.

#1290 Torsion

Torsion
  • Member

  • 627 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:35

Teams/drivers who do well will enjoy the challenge, and teams/drivers struggling will always think that the tyres are ridiculous.

As a fan, I enjoy the unpredictability. As far as conditions are equal to everyone, I don't see the problem.



#1291 Massa

Massa
  • Member

  • 4,324 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:40

Hembery is too arrogant, as always. I speak as if it is Pirelli championship.

They just cruise around now. Before Melbourne race, i was watching Melbourne 1999. It was the end of the race, everybody was pushing. Even Schumacher who was 8th, at 45 seconds behind De La Rosa, he was pushing and was putting fast lap after fast lap.

Remember Suzuka 2000, one of the best race of the past 20 years. There was no overtakes between Schumacher and Hakkinen, Schumacher took the 1st place during the pitstop but this race was great because they were pushing like hell, they were on the edge, they finish ONE MINUTE in front of their teammates ( !!! ), their fastest lap was 7 tenths faster than everybody, their were on their own league and were pushing, echanging fastest lap after fastest lap.

Imagine these kind of races now, with Alonso, Hamilton, Button, Vettel, Raikkonen. It would be epic. But now, they are just crusing around, conserving tyres because if they drove too fast the tyres would be dead.

It's true that today, the races have more event, it's better than 2010 for sure, but after the race i have always the impression the show is fake and they can be much faster if they want, like Raikkonen show with his fastest lap.

#1292 SunnyENTP

SunnyENTP
  • Member

  • 717 posts
  • Joined: August 12

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:47

It's true that today, the races have more event, it's better than 2010 for sure, but after the race i have always the impression the show is fake and they can be much faster if they want, like Raikkonen show with his fastest lap.



Please people should stop saying its better than 2010. Take for instance 2010 Australia, it was far more exciting with hard racing and overtakes with drivers pushing hard. I have not seen much overtakes WITHOUT DRS. These cheese tyres only mean more pitstops we might as well bring back refueling if people think having more pits stops and undercutting is exciting.

If we had DRS in 2010 it would have been 10X more exciting than this fake racing.

Edited by SunnyENTP, 20 March 2013 - 09:49.


#1293 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 267 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:51

These topics almost make me sick of sadness.

I thoroughly hope F1 rule makers don't follow up on the advices people give here. The post above me states that races pre-pirelli were better because people were on the edge constantly. You state a few examples that were good races, yes. But, remember all those processions. You know, those races where people were driving 2,3 seconds behind someone else and never could get closer?

So cool to be on the edge and then be behind a slower car. Really, I'd love to see that.

I checked some facts for you:

Australian GP 2005 (The golden era, right?): a whopping 5 overtakes in the entire race:

Overtaking Driver Overtaken Driver
Lap Position Overtaker Since Pit Until Pit Overtaken Since Pit Until Pit Pit Diff.
17 9 Fernando Alonso 16 8 Jacques Villeneuve 16 5 0
30 6 Fernando Alonso 4 15 Jarno Trulli 11 6 -7
40 11 Jenson Button 18 1 Jarno Trulli 3 17 15
48 13 Ralf Schumacher 7 8 Jacques Villeneuve 8 8 -1
54 12 Ralf Schumacher 13 2 Takuma Sato 13 Unknown 0

Austrailian GP 2013
59 overtakes! And most important of all, overtakes for the lead. Not some backmarker cars that good overtaken...

Sure, not all overtakes where equally good or interesting, but at least there was action.

There is a reason Formula 1 is more popular than ever you know. So please, stop whining and enjoy the action. Or go watch another racing series...

Edited by Requiem84, 20 March 2013 - 09:52.


#1294 boldhakka

boldhakka
  • Member

  • 2,802 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:51

There are two separate issues here.

One is the rate of degradation, targeting 2 to 3 stops per race, the cliff, "cheese tyres" etc.

The second is Pirelli's decision to keep changing the tyres every season, and changing them during the season, and their seeming desire to make the tyres hard to understand and build a car around.

Why don't they just build tyres that degrade at a certain rate for 2-3 stops and stick with them for several years? Why keep pulling the rug out from under the teams every new season.

"Understanding tyre behavior" is a bizarre goal to have for engineers and drivers during every testing and free practice session.

All the quotes from drivers being in favor of the Pirelli's apply only to the rate of degradation and grip, not to the second point - that of Pirelli's desire to make mysterious tyres every season, that are difficult to understand and take enormous time and resources to decipher.


#1295 Alx09

Alx09
  • Member

  • 1,278 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:52

There is a reason Formula 1 is more popular than ever you know. So please, stop whining and enjoy the action. Or go watch another racing series...

Refer to the link in my signature if you believe Pirelli is responsible for making the racing exciting. That's one driver, from 3 races. Bridgestones.

2009 and 2010 can be used as reference points, no other since cars were changed from the ground up after 2008 to allow better airflow behind.

Remember Suzuka 2000, one of the best race of the past 20 years. There was no overtakes between Schumacher and Hakkinen, Schumacher took the 1st place during the pitstop but this race was great because they were pushing like hell, they were on the edge, they finish ONE MINUTE in front of their teammates ( !!! ), their fastest lap was 7 tenths faster than everybody, their were on their own league and were pushing, echanging fastest lap after fastest lap.

Imagine these kind of races now, with Alonso, Hamilton, Button, Vettel, Raikkonen. It would be epic.

It happened in Austin 2012 and it was epic, since tyres held up. I believe Hamilton and Vettel finished 30 seconds ahead of anyone else, pulling qualifying laps the whole race.

Edited by Alx09, 20 March 2013 - 10:06.


#1296 Torsion

Torsion
  • Member

  • 627 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:57

Please people should stop saying its better than 2010. Take for instance 2010 Australia, it was far more exciting with hard racing and overtakes with drivers pushing hard. I have not seen much overtakes WITHOUT DRS. These cheese tyres only mean more pitstops we might as well bring back refueling if people think having more pits stops and undercutting is exciting.

If we had DRS in 2010 it would have been 10X more exciting than this fake racing.


I think if tyres are not a limiting factor, then refueling is necessary - if you have durable tyres and no refueling, there is very limited room for strategy in F1, which in my view would be a big shame.

It is also useful remember that refueling was banned in the first place for safety reasons, and to save costs. I don't see what has changed which will make them go back on this.



#1297 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,811 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:58

Please show me where he mentions the tyres, or why Pirelli was the reason for his enjoyment of the race?


He didn't say the Pirellis prevented him from fighting either. (EDIT: and most of the anti-Pirelli faction argue various degrees from "tyre should play a smaller role" to "tyre should be 100% neutral [whatever this is] and I do not want to hear one word about it". And now you demand that Pirelli should be *the reason* for his fighting the whole race and his enjoyment, instead of simply not being in the way. Curiouser and curiouser)

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 20 March 2013 - 11:10.


#1298 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,811 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 20 March 2013 - 10:05

There are two separate issues here.

One is the rate of degradation, targeting 2 to 3 stops per race, the cliff, "cheese tyres" etc.

The second is Pirelli's decision to keep changing the tyres every season, and changing them during the season, and their seeming desire to make the tyres hard to understand and build a car around.

Why don't they just build tyres that degrade at a certain rate for 2-3 stops and stick with them for several years? Why keep pulling the rug out from under the teams every new season.

"Understanding tyre behavior" is a bizarre goal to have for engineers and drivers during every testing and free practice session.

All the quotes from drivers being in favor of the Pirelli's apply only to the rate of degradation and grip, not to the second point - that of Pirelli's desire to make mysterious tyres every season, that are difficult to understand and take enormous time and resources to decipher.


I know it is not enough for some, but IMHO the fact that Whitmarsh asked them to make the tyres more complicated for 2013 because the 2012 tyres had become too simple to figure out must count for *something*. As for the supposition that Pirelli change the tyres during the season (and that it's all their own decision, and their own desire): sources please.

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 20 March 2013 - 10:20.


#1299 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 267 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 20 March 2013 - 10:06

Refer to the link in my signature if you believe Pirelli is responsible for making the racing exciting. That's one driver, from 3 races. Bridgestones.

2009 and 2010 can be used as reference points, no other since cars were changed from the ground up after 2008 to allow better airflow behind.


First: you don't back up your example with numbers. Sure, we had great races in 2005 and 2006 too, despite overall, the seasons were rather boring.

Second, why do you think the Mclaren was such an overtaking beat at the time? They created the F-duct in 2010 my friend. They had their own 'DRS' system as the only car on the grid and they had a huge top speed advantage. When all teams developped their own F-duct, overtaking levels decreased significantly.

Advertisement

#1300 Alx09

Alx09
  • Member

  • 1,278 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 20 March 2013 - 10:08

First: you don't back up your example with numbers. Sure, we had great races in 2005 and 2006 too, despite overall, the seasons were rather boring.

Second, why do you think the Mclaren was such an overtaking beat at the time? They created the F-duct in 2010 my friend. They had their own 'DRS' system as the only car on the grid and they had a huge top speed advantage. When all teams developped their own F-duct, overtaking levels decreased significantly.

DRS = F-Duct. What is the difference? It gives a somewhat equal comparison what bridgestone-like tyres would be like with DRS, to all people who hail Pirellis. The Pirelli tyres only limits racing and helps with nothing other than slowing down fast cars so that a Force India can be as fast as the rest. In reality the cars could take out 4-6 seconds more per lap, if it wasn't for the damn tyres.

In Australia it felt like tour the france for a while when the top 4 were driving in a queue, 4-6 seconds off pace, just conserving tyres, no one even attempting to pass the one infront. Another interesting aspect which this brings in is: what's the point of extremely high skilled drivers just sitting there, cruising around not even close to the limit? I want to see what they can do, not what the tyres can do.

Edited by Alx09, 20 March 2013 - 10:16.