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

#1801 swiniodzik

swiniodzik
  • Member

  • 606 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 05 April 2013 - 01:12

Driving under constraints will always be happening, yes, however it can be happening to different degrees under different regs and that's the disputed point as far as I can see.

I don't remember an F1 era with so several drivers talking so frequently about not having fun or not being challenged enough. In the OP there are included quotes from guys like Vettel and Rosberg where they speak about nursing the tyres and not pushing and it being no fun, so it's not only the struggling drivers whining. If, as somebody earlier said, some fans are underestimating how hard it's to drive fast while still conserving the tyres, I think some others may just as much be underestimating how hard it's to drive a car pushing it to its very limits.

The optic that the drivers always push to the limit all the time, just that the limit is different in every era - once it's mostly fuel, then tyres, then something else - looks somehow false when even those drivers successful on the Pirellis imply that driving on the limit means a very specific thing in a racing driver's book, i.e. going as fast as the car physically allows you to in a given moment, and they seem like they're basically all wishing for it to be possible more often than it's the case today. No doubt re-fuelling and/or undegradable tyres made this driving on the limit of adhesion more present at the cost of very boring and predictable races. There is always a balance to be struck here between sport and entertainment, between this pureness of driving on the limit and how exciting the races are for the spectator.

I still believe that Pirelli has done a better job than Bridgestone with this balance striking and hence words like them being 'a disaster' are over-dramatization. I also see that they're improving matters slowly like the wider working temperature window for the current rubber compared to last year. Yet I think the mentioned balance at the moment is far from something that I as a racing fan can be satisfied with, even though I admit I don't have a clue whether it's even possible to do a much better job from a tyre manufacturer's perspective given the circumstances like only the four compounds rule for the whole season of vastly different track types and ambient temperatures.

Advertisement

#1802 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,459 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 05 April 2013 - 03:06

the 4 compound thing is funny, you look at it and go, yeah fair enough. but in there first year the soft was used at nearly every race. i think the ones that didnt used might of used super soft and medium...



#1803 boldhakka

boldhakka
  • Member

  • 2,340 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 05 April 2013 - 03:12

I completely agree, there's no point in discussing this if it's considered irrelevant to point out that although there are an almost infinite number of things Pirelli could do to try to get 2 and 3 stop races, nearly all of them are impractical for one reason or another, including the ones you yourself brought up as examples, leaving Pirelli with very limited options in practice.

I'm quite happy to grant you that you are right insofar as your point goes, but where it goes is nowhere. Yes, they could make the tyres out of melted down vinyl but there's no point discussing it because such tyres wouldn't last to the end of pit lane. They could make them out of whatever compound Bridgestone used in 2010 but there's no point discussing that either, because they're aiming for pitstops. They could in theory make them the same as 2011 or 2012, but they couldn't do that in practice for the reasons I've explained. So if we're going to criticise and make suggestions, why not keep to the real world and talk about the sort of things that might actualy be feasible?


Again, there clearly are other possible solutions, otherwise they wouldn't be reviewing the tyres. I don't see why I'm being expected to come up with a solution just because I pointed out that there's a problem.

Edited by boldhakka, 05 April 2013 - 03:12.


#1804 skid solo

skid solo
  • Member

  • 2,051 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 05 April 2013 - 09:48

For want of a better place to share this video and as an interlude to all the bickering

Enjoy this great little film

When the flag drops the bullshit stops... Or at least it used to..



#1805 Group B

Group B
  • Member

  • 13,971 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 05 April 2013 - 10:02

Isn't that what people are demanding? Push / more stops vs conserve / less?

Yes, but the problem so many people are raising is that you currently can't push at all because the tyres totally disintegrate in 2 or 3 laps, so unless you do 20 stints you can rarely, if ever, be on the limit.

#1806 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,184 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 05 April 2013 - 10:49

Webber: That's my little rant...


______________

With growing concern I am noticing that whenever Brundle opens his mouth, I feel that I am watching another show, and agree with him just about nothing.

Edited by Sakae, 05 April 2013 - 10:53.


#1807 ZooL

ZooL
  • Member

  • 2,063 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 05 April 2013 - 11:34

Of course Schumacher's going to complain - he hates losing and his car was crap on its tyres. Same goes with Webber - he can't come out and complain that Vettel's always beating him in a top car so he blames the tyres - implying he'd beat Vettel in refuelling (lol).

Take three long term drivers who are currently successful - Alonso, Button, Raikkonen. Are they complaining? Nope.

Vettel as well as Webber are complaining.
Alonso is complaining too - read the 1st post, not his attempts at sarcasm.
Button has complained too, especially last year, and this year he is saying that even HE OF ALL PEOPLE cannot conserve the tyres.
Alx09 needs to add this Button interview to the OP, its in autosport news.
Raikkonen - well he's very pragamatic and says its the same for everyone and that is avoiding the topic.

#1808 ZooL

ZooL
  • Member

  • 2,063 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 05 April 2013 - 11:38

People are arguing that these tyres force drivers to drive under the limit of the car - they don't

Tell me why I should believe you and not the racing drivers quoted in the OP. How can you possibly know more than them?
Are they all liars or just mis-informed?

Edited by ZooL, 05 April 2013 - 11:39.


#1809 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,184 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 05 April 2013 - 11:41

Brundle (quote of the century):

“I can understand if some drivers are not happy — we do want to see the fastest guy win, not the best at managing the tyres.


Read More http://www.yallaf1.c...eveals-brundle/



#1810 ZooL

ZooL
  • Member

  • 2,063 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 05 April 2013 - 11:47

More quotes for OP:

Button:

"At the moment, they just degrade and you don't really have any choice in the matter.

Pastor Maldonado:

"You can change some things to get maybe one or two more laps from them," he said, "but not 20."

#1811 SpaMaster

SpaMaster
  • Member

  • 5,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 05 April 2013 - 15:17

Only if they are constantly doing it.... but if they are pushing they are not going to break traction only twice in an entire grand prix... are they??

So this is proof that the way forward for drivers is to not push and to drive in a sort of limbo where they are going as fast as they can without actually pushing. i.e. doing only 90% as the drivers put it.

... I'm sorry but that's not what I tune in to see.... and you should have heard the glee with which James Allison told us that KR had won by driving in the most boring manner possible ... it was sickning.

Sorry, you are giving a different meaning to what Allison said. He was not sounding like how downbeat the driving was, quite the opposite. He was praising how exceptional his driver was in the race. One could say being at 98-100% rarely going over requires more expertise than fluctuating above and below 100%. Besides the proof against fast-degrading tyres is Raikkonen setting the fastest lap of the race on 21-lap old tyres. By all accounts Lotus and Raikkonen were not driving a boring race. It was a quintessential race victory by them.

Edited by SpaMaster, 05 April 2013 - 15:21.


#1812 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,882 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 05 April 2013 - 15:22

Button:

"At the moment, they just degrade and you don't really have any choice in the matter.


This is the key point, people glorify this tyre saving as if it's so virtuous for the driver, yet it's not so much looking after the tyres while driving at the maximum as is commonly perceived, it's literally about just driving considerably slower than you can, because the faster you drive the more the tyres overheat, the slower you go and the more pitstops you have to do. So it's more of a case of strategy over skill than ever before, but one where the strategic options are extremely limited. Contrary to popular belief, the driver is more of a passenger than ever before. On the one hand, the high degradation means more varied performance through the field and more overtaking, so it looks great from the outside, but on the other it means the driver has less to do with this than before. The age of the tyres, the car's treatment of them and the driver's chosen pace are the dominant factors, not the inherent speed of the car and driver, even if previously it resulted in less 'exciting' racing than what we have now.

I've always preferred quality over quantity though, so i'd take a dearth of overtaking in flat out racing, over an overtaking bonanza in a tyre conservation exercise - of course a balance would be better, but it should be possible to have an exciting sport without bastardising it.

#1813 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,882 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 05 April 2013 - 15:36

Sorry, you are giving a different meaning to what Allison said. He was not sounding like how downbeat the driving was, quite the opposite. He was praising how exceptional his driver was in the race. One could say being at 98-100% rarely going over requires more expertise than fluctuating above and below 100%. Besides the proof against fast-degrading tyres is Raikkonen setting the fastest lap of the race on 21-lap old tyres. By all accounts Lotus and Raikkonen were not driving a boring race. It was a quintessential race victory by them.


No he isn't, he's inferring from the revelation that Raikkonen only broke traction twice in a 58 lap race that they couldn't possibly be pushing near the limits of adhesion for much of the race. I don't see how that is disputable.

Take a look at the lap charts and Raikkonen found a second in lap time in the space of two laps on the way to his fastest lap - a stint of predominant tyre saving ending with a couple of fast laps for fun, knowing the race was won. The Lotus clearly had much better tyre deg than anything else that day as well, it was running at a pace as fast as the 3 stoppers, on a 2 stopper.

Edited by PretentiousBread, 05 April 2013 - 15:37.


#1814 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,882 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 05 April 2013 - 16:01

Of course Schumacher's going to complain - he hates losing and his car was crap on its tyres. Same goes with Webber - he can't come out and complain that Vettel's always beating him in a top car so he blames the tyres - implying he'd beat Vettel in refuelling (lol).

Take three long term drivers who are currently successful - Alonso, Button, Raikkonen. Are they complaining? Nope.


Funny, Vettel and Webber were taking it in turns to complain about the tyres over the weekend I thought.

Edited by PretentiousBread, 05 April 2013 - 16:02.


#1815 yoyogetfunky

yoyogetfunky
  • Member

  • 856 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 05 April 2013 - 16:06

This is the key point, people glorify this tyre saving as if it's so virtuous for the driver, yet it's not so much looking after the tyres while driving at the maximum as is commonly perceived, it's literally about just driving considerably slower than you can, because the faster you drive the more the tyres overheat, the slower you go and the more pitstops you have to do. So it's more of a case of strategy over skill than ever before, but one where the strategic options are extremely limited. Contrary to popular belief, the driver is more of a passenger than ever before. On the one hand, the high degradation means more varied performance through the field and more overtaking, so it looks great from the outside, but on the other it means the driver has less to do with this than before. The age of the tyres, the car's treatment of them and the driver's chosen pace are the dominant factors, not the inherent speed of the car and driver, even if previously it resulted in less 'exciting' racing than what we have now.

I've always preferred quality over quantity though, so i'd take a dearth of overtaking in flat out racing, over an overtaking bonanza in a tyre conservation exercise - of course a balance would be better, but it should be possible to have an exciting sport without bastardising it.


Im amazed the drivers havent complained in outrage over the fact these tyres need to be pre-heated before use.

#1816 WitnessX

WitnessX
  • Member

  • 1,032 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 05 April 2013 - 16:18

This is the key point, people glorify this tyre saving as if it's so virtuous for the driver, yet it's not so much looking after the tyres while driving at the maximum as is commonly perceived, it's literally about just driving considerably slower than you can, because the faster you drive the more the tyres overheat, the slower you go and the more pitstops you have to do. So it's more of a case of strategy over skill than ever before, but one where the strategic options are extremely limited. Contrary to popular belief, the driver is more of a passenger than ever before. On the one hand, the high degradation means more varied performance through the field and more overtaking, so it looks great from the outside, but on the other it means the driver has less to do with this than before. The age of the tyres, the car's treatment of them and the driver's chosen pace are the dominant factors, not the inherent speed of the car and driver, even if previously it resulted in less 'exciting' racing than what we have now.

I've always preferred quality over quantity though, so i'd take a dearth of overtaking in flat out racing, over an overtaking bonanza in a tyre conservation exercise - of course a balance would be better, but it should be possible to have an exciting sport without bastardising it.

Unless it's the MP4-28 which I'm inclined to believe came out of a "Bizarro" universe:

Q: Looking at the tyres, how careful do you need to be to not degrade them too much, and does this have any effect on the speed?
JB: In our case going slow does not help the tyre at all, as going slower is not making any difference towards the degradation. So in fact it is completely the opposite. ..

http://www.formula1....13/3/14402.html

#1817 boldhakka

boldhakka
  • Member

  • 2,340 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 05 April 2013 - 16:30

What we need are anti-fragile tyres. The more you push, the more they let you push.;)

#1818 SpaMaster

SpaMaster
  • Member

  • 5,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 05 April 2013 - 16:32

No he isn't, he's inferring from the revelation that Raikkonen only broke traction twice in a 58 lap race that they couldn't possibly be pushing near the limits of adhesion for much of the race. I don't see how that is disputable.

Take a look at the lap charts and Raikkonen found a second in lap time in the space of two laps on the way to his fastest lap - a stint of predominant tyre saving ending with a couple of fast laps for fun, knowing the race was won. The Lotus clearly had much better tyre deg than anything else that day as well, it was running at a pace as fast as the 3 stoppers, on a 2 stopper.

That is the reason. Not necessarily slow driving. I certainly don't think they had had that much pace gap to other cars to pull the fastest lap out like that, otherwise they would not have qualified 7th on the grid. The car and driver had better race pace and better tyre degradation characteristics (not pushing below limit of the car, the car limit itself was designed to not degrade the tyres as much as other cars do). That is clearly different. There are some teams that have taken up a different philosophy is exploiting the tyres and there is nothing lame about it.

#1819 PPLH

PPLH
  • New Member

  • 1 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 05 April 2013 - 16:39

BTCC have introduced a softer tyre to be faster over a race run with an emphasis on tyre management. Cars had different pace at different times & it encouraged overtaking. F1 should take note.
Perhaps the Pirelli brief has gone too far, F1 races are too controlled ?, drivers do not race at their maximum & the optimum package provides too much downforce & eats it's tyres. Bring back Austen tyres, allow drivers to race at maximum. Until Vettel intervened in Malaysia, we would have had a 'Controlled' 1-2-3-4 finish. Unpredictable controlled racing may be good for TV but is it really what fans want ?

Advertisement

#1820 peroa

peroa
  • Member

  • 8,627 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 05 April 2013 - 16:47

Oh, BTW, if nobody noticed.
http://www.autosport...t.php/id/106428

#1821 Jejking

Jejking
  • Member

  • 2,071 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 05 April 2013 - 18:35

Oh, BTW, if nobody noticed.
http://www.autosport...t.php/id/106428

We did. Pages ago.

#1822 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 13,451 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 05 April 2013 - 20:33

may be good for TV but is it really what fans want ?

:lol:

If its not good for TV, then its not what the fans want.

Man, the more I watch races from the last era(pre-2009), the more I appreciate what we have now. It was ridiculous how hard it was to pass somebody and it meant that track position was EVERYTHING. A lot of these races are decided from the starts and the only reason half of them ever got exciting was when a safety car threw a spanner into the ridiculous refueling-era pitstop nonsense, mixing up the grid and/or closing things up or if it rained.

Thanks be to Pirelli and DRS, I swear. If they ever revert back, its going to be a tough transition for me, I know that.

#1823 R Soul

R Soul
  • Member

  • 525 posts
  • Joined: August 06

Posted 05 April 2013 - 21:35

Yes, it was hard to pass in the previous era, but it wasn't because the tyres were too durable or there wasn't a flappy rear wing. Turbulent air and tyre marbles were the main physical obstruction. On the tactical side there was refueling. That combination meant it was usually quite feasible for a fast driver to wait for the next round of pit stops. Not many of us liked races being decided in the pits, but the Pirelli tyres make pit strategy an important factor. Instead of refueling.

My opinion is that they should have hard tyres that don't produce marbles, and something that limits the effect of turbulent air, or the cars' dependence on clean air.

Edited by R Soul, 05 April 2013 - 21:38.


#1824 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 13,451 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 05 April 2013 - 21:45

Yes, it was hard to pass in the previous era, but it wasn't because the tyres were too durable or there wasn't a flappy rear wing. Turbulent air and tyre marbles were the main physical obstruction. On the tactical side there was refueling. That combination meant it was usually quite feasible for a fast driver to wait for the next round of pit stops.

My opinion is that they should have hard tyres that don't produce marbles, and something that limits the effect of turbulent air, or the cars' dependence on clean air.

Waiting until pitstops often meant having the guys out front running away and becoming uncatchable barring a safety car, though. Thats no way to go about racing. The way things are now, the race can actually unfold properly. Stuck behind a slower car and getting held up? PASS THEM.

The tire durability adds a similar sort of aspect of strategy that refueling did. Except that it takes out the stupid refueling-in-the-pitlane aspect and having each car only needing to be balanced for a relatively small window of performance.

As far as turbulent air goes - there's no fix to it. As long as F1 remains a sport high on downforce, it will be an ever present problem. DRS seems like a very good solution as it makes up for the disadvantage of the speed you lose following a car through a corner. I actually hope more series adopt it because F1 isn't the only series where its a problem. Lots of series could benefit and be much more exciting as a result. Its not nearly as artificial as some people make it sound. Its about finding a balance.

#1825 rhukkas

rhukkas
  • Member

  • 2,161 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 05 April 2013 - 21:49

:lol:

If its not good for TV, then its not what the fans want.

Man, the more I watch races from the last era(pre-2009), the more I appreciate what we have now. It was ridiculous how hard it was to pass somebody and it meant that track position was EVERYTHING. A lot of these races are decided from the starts and the only reason half of them ever got exciting was when a safety car threw a spanner into the ridiculous refueling-era pitstop nonsense, mixing up the grid and/or closing things up or if it rained.

Thanks be to Pirelli and DRS, I swear. If they ever revert back, its going to be a tough transition for me, I know that.


I am the opposite. I think how fantastic it is to watch drivers on the limit, instead of the rubbish we have now.

#1826 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 3,895 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 05 April 2013 - 23:13

:lol:

If its not good for TV, then its not what the fans want.

Man, the more I watch races from the last era(pre-2009), the more I appreciate what we have now. It was ridiculous how hard it was to pass somebody and it meant that track position was EVERYTHING. A lot of these races are decided from the starts and the only reason half of them ever got exciting was when a safety car threw a spanner into the ridiculous refueling-era pitstop nonsense, mixing up the grid and/or closing things up or if it rained.

Thanks be to Pirelli and DRS, I swear. If they ever revert back, its going to be a tough transition for me, I know that.


Totally. In my case late 90´s and early 2000´s have even some nostalgia factor, it was the era when I was most passionate about the series and its drivers. I was old enough to understand the sport perfectly and young enough to get inmensely fired up by it. The goosebumps during races have not gone at all but the full week afterwards racing mood and dependance has.

The cars, the environment, the tracks, the drivers of that era still hold an aura for me. But even like that, rewatching a random race from that era always leaves me wondering how on Earth I could enjoy it that much.

The claims that drivers refuse to race because this is sort of a TT sport now are totally ridiculous. Quailfy poorly, and you´re on your backfoot, but you can still turn it around. Qualify really well, and you´re up for a good chance of podium, but if you lack speed next day and you´ll get your ass kicked. There´s a lovely balance between track position and raw pace relevance right now.

#1827 mattferg

mattferg
  • Member

  • 847 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 06 April 2013 - 00:18

Tell me why I should believe you and not the racing drivers quoted in the OP. How can you possibly know more than them?
Are they all liars or just mis-informed?


If you read all of my post and not just the first line, you'll see that I explained what this meant. The tyres don't force the driver to drive under the limit - that's ridiculous, qualifying would be impossible if that were true. They don't force them, they just make it impractical for them to drive at the limit at all times, much like every era of F1 racing ever for one component or the other, engine conservation, tyres, fuel etc.

#1828 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,184 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 06 April 2013 - 07:04

If you read all of my post and not just the first line, you'll see that I explained what this meant. The tyres don't force the driver to drive under the limit - that's ridiculous, qualifying would be impossible if that were true. They don't force them, they just make it impractical for them to drive at the limit at all times, much like every era of F1 racing ever for one component or the other, engine conservation, tyres, fuel etc.

I haven't seen or heard about too many "other" components falling off the cliff for so many drivers, and as often as we see with these tires, that they would have to curtail racing at two-thirds into a race. At this rate, and love for this kind of charade, perhaps next year we shall race just to a first stop-over, and then radio-in "Code xx". Teams like Marussia might have a future in this "sport" after all.

Edited by Sakae, 06 April 2013 - 07:06.


#1829 Group B

Group B
  • Member

  • 13,971 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 06 April 2013 - 07:43

If you read all of my post and not just the first line, you'll see that I explained what this meant. The tyres don't force the driver to drive under the limit - that's ridiculous, qualifying would be impossible if that were true. They don't force them, they just make it impractical for them to drive at the limit at all times, much like every era of F1 racing ever for one component or the other, engine conservation, tyres, fuel etc.

Very few us want them to drive at the limit at all times. All we ask is tyres that allow them to push some of the time with at a reasonable price. Being penalised by an instant 3 or 4 second drop off for 2 or 3 laps on the limit does not fit the bill.

#1830 ZooL

ZooL
  • Member

  • 2,063 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 06 April 2013 - 19:07

Tell me why I should believe you and not the racing drivers quoted in the OP. How can you possibly know more than them?
Are they all liars or just mis-informed?



If you read all of my post and not just the first line, you'll see that I explained what this meant. The tyres don't force the driver to drive under the limit - that's ridiculous


The racing drivers disagree with you.

I guess what your saying is all the racing drivers in the OP are mis-informed and you, in actual fact, know better, then them, and, they are, ridiculous, in fact.

#1831 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,184 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 06 April 2013 - 21:05

If you read all of my post and not just the first line, you'll see that I explained what this meant. The tyres don't force the driver to drive under the limit - that's ridiculous, qualifying would be impossible if that were true. They don't force them, they just make it impractical for them to drive at the limit at all times, much like every era of F1 racing ever for one component or the other, engine conservation, tyres, fuel etc.


Button | 2013-02-17

I tried taking it easy on the tyres. They grain. I've tried pushing the tyres. They grain. The overall stint time is almost identical. "When the climate is a bit warmer, I think hopefully driving style will make a difference in terms of looking after the tyres and changing the degradation. "At the moment, they just degrade and you don't really have any choice in the matter.


Wheels24 | Webber

Webber’s gripe is that F1 drivers are becoming experts at tyre management rather than flat-out master race...

Here...

Edited by Sakae, 06 April 2013 - 21:27.


#1832 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 3,895 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 April 2013 - 23:07

Button | 2013-02-17

I tried taking it easy on the tyres. They grain. I've tried pushing the tyres. They grain. The overall stint time is almost identical. "When the climate is a bit warmer, I think hopefully driving style will make a difference in terms of looking after the tyres and changing the degradation. "At the moment, they just degrade and you don't really have any choice in the matter.


Aha. So pushing was the fastest way then. Same tyre wear, more speed. Happy now? Nah, why asking, the apocalypse brigade members never are.

#1833 mattferg

mattferg
  • Member

  • 847 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 07 April 2013 - 00:58

The racing drivers disagree with you.

I guess what your saying is all the racing drivers in the OP are mis-informed and you, in actual fact, know better, then them, and, they are, ridiculous, in fact.


Again you're completely irrational and don't bother to read my post. The tyres don't FORCE anything, that'd be ridiculous. It just makes strategy and the long game more important than pure 1 lap speed.

I feel shocked when people like you post stuff like this, but then I remember these are the people who want F1 more like the Schumacher era, and I understand.

Edited by mattferg, 07 April 2013 - 00:58.


#1834 PretentiousBread

PretentiousBread
  • Member

  • 2,882 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 07 April 2013 - 02:03

Again you're completely irrational and don't bother to read my post. The tyres don't FORCE anything, that'd be ridiculous. It just makes strategy and the long game more important than pure 1 lap speed.

I feel shocked when people like you post stuff like this, but then I remember these are the people who want F1 more like the Schumacher era, and I understand.


I read it and I had to stop reading when you equated driving flat out to a target lap time with being as easy/difficult as driving slowly to a target time.

#1835 SpaMaster

SpaMaster
  • Member

  • 5,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 07 April 2013 - 06:00

I was reading through the Mercedes team orders thread and it looks like the reason why Hamilton was so low on fuel was because he used up fuel when he was fighting Red Bull strongly for a small part of the race. What does this mean? The teams to go at maximum speed use much higher fuel and if they have to balance to optimal fuel they had calculated for race strategy the speed of the car would be as slow as Hamilton was driving. This is much worse than what people claim to be driving under the limit with Pirelli tyres. Was Hamilton pushing? Of course not. The difference was apparent with the optimized fuel ratio Rosberg was using. The question is what would be the difference with a fuel ratio that was design to push to the limit? Like many have pointed out earlier, the fuel strategy does the same and in many cases worse. The drivers drive at slower delta times many times for various reason even before Pirelli came. Some drivers moan now because they have vested interest in losing a competitive edge to some other teams. We don't hear Lotus drivers or Sauber drivers complaining. There are teams that work their car with a different philosophy on the tyres - less one lap pace and more race pace.

#1836 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,184 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 07 April 2013 - 07:24

Aha. So pushing was the fastest way then. Same tyre wear, more speed. Happy now? Nah, why asking, the apocalypse brigade members never are.

There is also Webber's comment which you seems choose to ignore.

#1837 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 239 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 07 April 2013 - 07:32

Don't forget that the teams will master the Pirelli's in 4/5 races. Yes, they are that smart, despite their constant complaining.

Think back to Austin last year for example....

#1838 Alx09

Alx09
  • Member

  • 1,278 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 07 April 2013 - 08:55

I'll go through and add quotes listed here to OP. I'm sure I've missed some though, so please paste quote + source and I'll include them in the list.

For example, if anyone can find proper quotes from Rosberg/Schumi after Bahrain 2011(I believe?) and Schumacher's "like driving on eggs" comments as well + and any of the recent ones I've missed, it would be appreciated!

I'll also try to add more date-boxes after each quote source link, like (March 16, 2013)

Edited by Alx09, 07 April 2013 - 09:14.


#1839 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,385 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 07 April 2013 - 09:31

What he meant was perfectly clear unless you're either catestrophically stupid or being wilfully obtuse.


I don't have time for this crap

I'm just fascinated as to why you're so immensely passionate about preventing the world's best drivers from ever driving fast or racing each other :drunk:


Please provide quotes showing that I did this.

Advertisement

#1840 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,385 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 07 April 2013 - 09:34

KnucklesAgain - listen to the racing drivers - they are telling you they are not racing!

Forget what Edd Straw is saying, its just another opinion like the rest of us because he's not racing.

Schumacher has done all the recent era's, and when he says this is crap, I believe him.

There is no reason to debate here, the drivers have said it all.


Yes, we have these quotes. We also have quotes by Alonso ("I was fighting every lap", 2013), Räikkönen ("the tyres are not so different (...) they have good grip (...) all in all they are good tyres" 2012) and other similar ones. And no doubt we could find quotes by drivers about nursing their cars home from every era.

#1841 Group B

Group B
  • Member

  • 13,971 posts
  • Joined: March 02

Posted 07 April 2013 - 09:50

I don't have time for this crap

Really? Given that you've posted more than anyone else in this thread it appears you have plenty of time :eek:

Please provide quotes showing that I did this.

You're the number 1 defender of the tyres that are providing said outcome, so I can only assume you enjoy it.

#1842 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,184 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 07 April 2013 - 11:23

Don't forget that the teams will master the Pirelli's in 4/5 races. Yes, they are that smart, despite their constant complaining.

Think back to Austin last year for example....

Getting most out of 2013 specification (today) does not equates to necessarily better, or different racing; just that team can say - "that's best we can do with this stuff".

#1843 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 239 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 07 April 2013 - 11:46

Getting most out of 2013 specification (today) does not equates to necessarily better, or different racing; just that team can say - "that's best we can do with this stuff".


I though the big complaint was that Pirelli's tires degrade too fast, and make the drivers not push, making the racing boring (a viewpoint which I disagree with).

Halfway through the season, they understand the tires enough for the drivers to push for entire races. Austin being a great example. Hamilton was pushing Vettel for the whole race, not backing off for a moment.

Personally, I don't mind the tires degrading at the moment. The above mentioned is just a counter argument to the complainers.

#1844 skid solo

skid solo
  • Member

  • 2,051 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 07 April 2013 - 11:58

Personally, I don't mind the tires degrading at the moment. The above mentioned is just a counter argument to the complainers.


The complainers sounds like a movie title :smoking:

I think we should bring back traction control, that should sort it. :drunk:

#1845 swiniodzik

swiniodzik
  • Member

  • 606 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 07 April 2013 - 12:24

I was reading through the Mercedes team orders thread and it looks like the reason why Hamilton was so low on fuel was because he used up fuel when he was fighting Red Bull strongly for a small part of the race. What does this mean? The teams to go at maximum speed use much higher fuel and if they have to balance to optimal fuel they had calculated for race strategy the speed of the car would be as slow as Hamilton was driving. This is much worse than what people claim to be driving under the limit with Pirelli tyres. Was Hamilton pushing? Of course not. The difference was apparent with the optimized fuel ratio Rosberg was using. The question is what would be the difference with a fuel ratio that was design to push to the limit? Like many have pointed out earlier, the fuel strategy does the same and in many cases worse. The drivers drive at slower delta times many times for various reason even before Pirelli came. Some drivers moan now because they have vested interest in losing a competitive edge to some other teams. We don't hear Lotus drivers or Sauber drivers complaining. There are teams that work their car with a different philosophy on the tyres - less one lap pace and more race pace.


For me it's a question of principles. I want to watch races which are as exciting as it gets for both the spectators and the drivers, however hard that may be to achieve. These tyres are providing the excitement from a fan's perspective through different strategies and car philosophies but as I said earlier, this is somehow overshadowed by how the general feeling among the drivers seem to be about driving on these tyres. We can ignore or downplay the things said and collected in the OP but their extent and frequency is rather staggering, hence my concern.

Raikkonen said Australia was one of his easiest wins ever, which was highlighted by the mentioned James Allison words how he only broke traction twice in the entire grand prix. If anything, these comments from Kimi seem to be in the same ballpark with what the likes of Webber and Hamilton have been complaining about - driving on these tyres doesn't seem to be as challenging from a racing driver's perspective as it used to be, even taking into account any past or other current mechanical or component constraints.

It will be interesting to see how the season develops on the tyre front. If it goes again like last year from multiple-stop races early, when pushing is severely compromised to one-stop races later on, when it's encouraged, I'd be a nice compromise for both sides of the fence I'd have to admit.

#1846 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,184 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 07 April 2013 - 12:46

I though the big complaint was that Pirelli's tires degrade too fast, and make the drivers not push, making the racing boring (a viewpoint which I disagree with).

Halfway through the season, they understand the tires enough for the drivers to push for entire races. Austin being a great example. Hamilton was pushing Vettel for the whole race, not backing off for a moment.

Personally, I don't mind the tires degrading at the moment. The above mentioned is just a counter argument to the complainers.

It has been said (Horner), that tires do degrade fastest during close racing, which most demonstratively driver experiences during hunting down, following, and overtaking maneuver of another car. One can then ponder a question if this specification tire actually supports, or is rather counterproductive to type of racing Pirelli camp claims to support (MORE overtaking). If one collects sufficient amount of quotes over period, picture is rather hazy how to write the story of this tire, but my feeling is, that no one is actually totally happy with current situation. Perhaps for different reasons, but it is there, and you can feel it. (Last year it was a different compound, more durable, if I am not mistaken).

Edited by Sakae, 07 April 2013 - 12:47.


#1847 Jejking

Jejking
  • Member

  • 2,071 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 07 April 2013 - 14:19

I though the big complaint was that Pirelli's tires degrade too fast, and make the drivers not push, making the racing boring (a viewpoint which I disagree with).

Halfway through the season, they understand the tires enough for the drivers to push for entire races. Austin being a great example. Hamilton was pushing Vettel for the whole race, not backing off for a moment.

Personally, I don't mind the tires degrading at the moment. The above mentioned is just a counter argument to the complainers.

That was because Pirelli switched to harder tyres for that weekend ;)

#1848 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 3,895 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 07 April 2013 - 14:48

There is also Webber's comment which you seems choose to ignore.


Of course I do. If some cars are able to use the tyres the way you like, and others are not, don´t blame the tyres, blame the teams not doing a good enough job.


#1849 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 26,862 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 07 April 2013 - 15:52

It has been said (Horner), that tires do degrade fastest during close racing, which most demonstratively driver experiences during hunting down, following, and overtaking maneuver of another car. One can then ponder a question if this specification tire actually supports, or is rather counterproductive to type of racing Pirelli camp claims to support (MORE overtaking). If one collects sufficient amount of quotes over period, picture is rather hazy how to write the story of this tire, but my feeling is, that no one is actually totally happy with current situation. Perhaps for different reasons, but it is there, and you can feel it. (Last year it was a different compound, more durable, if I am not mistaken).


Your not mistaken, but the situation at the start of the season was very similar to now. Give them a few races and these tyres will seem just as durable as last years.

#1850 JaredS

JaredS
  • Member

  • 1,142 posts
  • Joined: December 12

Posted 07 April 2013 - 17:38

The whole tyre situation has become a mess. It's a case of too many things to try and fix a problem that was really not all that bad in the first place. Adding DRS and tender tyres is a knee jerk surgery to fix a small papercut.

If we say that the general principle in F1, and in fact motor racing in general, is that the qualifying order is fastest to slowest and if all goes well then race order is the same.

Of course it doesn't always work out that way. Why? Because for various reasons, a car might qualify higher up the order than is typical of its race pace. This might be for any number of reasons or a combination of reasons, such as driver particularly good at qualifying, car is good at getting tyres to operating temp quickly, car/driver set up for one lap pace, car is quicker on low fuel etc etc etc.

So what do we want to avoid? We want to avoid the typical Trulli train. Where a car qualifies well and then holds up faster cars behind it for significant parts of the race. We don't want a faster car/driver combo unable to overtake because the aero wake effect is so bad that the car behind hits a pace brick wall as soon as within a second of the car in front.

Ideally what is needed is the car behind not be affected by aero wake such to prevent getting close enough to the car in front, but it seems the aero rule modifications introduced such as wider front wings and narrow, taller rear wings have been unable to make inroads into achieving an effective solution. Solving this would have been perfect as the driver behind would only have been able to get close enough to attempt an overtake, be that under braking, or better exit or simply getting close enough to put great pressure on the driver in front to make an error.

In lieu achieving this proper solution, instead DRS was introduced. Whilst I'm no fan of this, I could live with this in the interim whilst they worked on a proper solution. Set the zones up properly and it should be possible to allow a driver to get close enough down the straight to attempt an outbrake at the next corner or a better exit.

But no, they introduced putty tyres too. Tyres so sensitive and weak to being pushed that drivers no longer attempt to out brake down the inside, unless of course they are idiots. To compound the problem, the tyres leave bits of grained rubber over the track either side of the racing line which then removes all chance of a driver attempting to find grip using another line or attempting to outbrake.

So where are we now? Well let's summarise. Previously under no DRS + Bridgestone era we had Trulli trains where the driver behind couldn't get close enough so the typical way of passing the slow car in front was to wait for that car to pit. That is, passing was done in the pits and everyone thought it was crap because we didn't see overtakes.

What do we have now? We have putty tyres + DRS such that the only way of passing the slow car in front is to either wait for it to pit and pass it during the round of pitstops same as previous era, or alternatively hope that the other car's tyres falls away so it becomes an easy case of overtaking a car that is 2+ seconds a lap slower, and/or use DRS to easily pass a car down the straight and have the overtake completed even before the braking zone into the following corner.

Drivers coming out saying that they're driving to a delta and 8 tenths of their ability. Wow, fantastic racing. I like watching 24 hr endurance races too but I don't want F1 made into that.

What is needed firstly is to have tyres that allow drivers to push hard and also don't leave bits of tyre putty just outside of the racing line. With the Bridgestones, get the braking too wrong with a big lockup and the flat spot and ensuing vibration meant lap time loss at best or pitstop at worst. Perfect. Now, even braking at less than lock up i.e a perfect 10 tenths braking on the limit in the race lap after lap and the tyre life can be kissed goodbye.

Secondly, what's required is increase braking zones. With high tech brakes and huge downforce, the braking zones are much too short and the performance differentiator between drivers can't be realised. For example, if the difference between a great driver and a poor one is 10% in braking distance and the overall braking distance is, for a given corner, only 30 metres than 3 metres is hardly enough make a difference. However if braking performance was reduced, by way of smaller discs or similar and resulting in increase in braking distance to 60 metres than that will have a difference.

Keep DRS for now but tune it such that it doesn't allow for such huge speed differences on the straight between cars and purpose is to allow the following car to get closer to car in front. But main thing is to get rid of putty tyres polluting the track everywhere except the racing line. This is blasphemy in my opinion. Having a wider range of track allows the driver behind to try different lines, and importantly get out of the aero wake of the car in front.

Part of the beauty that was F1, is similar to football in that whilst not many goals are scored and similarly not many overtakes occurred, it is a beautiful exciting thing when it does happen. It was quite fantastic to see a well played defence against an overtake as it was to see a well played overtake. In the quest to solve the problem of a Trulli train, we've lost the plot.

Edited by JaredS, 07 April 2013 - 17:44.