38 replies to this topic

[HistoryFan]

2.3 seconds - the fastest pit stop was the Button stop in Hockenheim.

Perhaps we can draw the history of pit stops. First just the driver and the riding mechanic was allowed to do the pit work.
What can you say about that topic.

[john winfield]

2.3 seconds - the fastest pit stop was the Button stop in Hockenheim.

Perhaps we can draw the history of pit stops. First just the driver and the riding mechanic was allowed to do the pit work.
What can you say about that topic.

Watching modern Grand Prix and US single seater pitstops (I still want to call it USAC...), I realise I wouldn't have the courage to hold position and do my job properly while cars from my team and others were flying in and out. I would run and hide. Of course there is a strict pit lane speed limit now but, even in the not so distant past, mechanics were very brave. Working on cars in unprotected pits at Le Mans prior to 1971? Porsche 917s flying past at 150+mph? No thank you! I'm not sure I would have fancied being in the Brands (BOAC) or Watkins Glen (GP) pits in 1970 either, with Pedro tearing in for a dressing down / splash and dash respectively. I doubt if he bothered switching on the pit lane speed limiter...
HF, sorry, rambling, but I'm not quite old enough to remember riding mechanics. The 1965 Birkett 6 Hours at Silverstone is my earliest memory of pit stops. Lots of them, involving coloured sashes if I recall, although I might be muddling this with memories of school sports day.

[D-Type]

The big change is the powered wheel nuts [fixings?]. It was considered good when one of the prewar German teams changed rear tyres in 23 seconds.

If you go back far enough, you'll find that Renault's detachable rims won the inaugural Grand Prix for them in 1906!

[arttidesco]

2.3 seconds - the fastest pit stop was the Button stop in Hockenheim.

Perhaps we can draw the history of pit stops. First just the driver and the riding mechanic was allowed to do the pit work.
What can you say about that topic.

No history of pit stops can be complete without mention of The Wood Brothers .

[Stephen W]

No history of pit stops can be complete without mention of The Wood Brothers .

The trail blazer was Junior Johnson whose pit crew once changed an engine during the race!

[Doug Nye]

The big change is the powered wheel nuts [fixings?]. It was considered good when one of the prewar German teams changed rear tyres in 23 seconds.

If you go back far enough, you'll find that Renault's detachable rims won the inaugural Grand Prix for them in 1906!

Ah yes - a stop all right, but pre 'pits'...

DCN

[nicanary]

These modern wheel changes are really impressive, but it's over so fast you hardly have time to blink.

Oh how I'd love to see Alonso have to get out and stand there seething, gesticulating at the mechanics and pacing up and down , muttering in a mixture of Spanish and italian about their efficiency and parentage. Ferrari used to be so "Fred Karno" and I really miss it. It was all part of the race - back when they lasted a decent time before we pandered to the ADD brigade.

Lewis Hamilton got a puncture in Sunday's German GP - why didn't he get out, run back to the pits for a wheel and jack, and go fix it himself? Sigh.

[kayemod]

Lewis Hamilton got a puncture in Sunday's German GP - why didn't he get out, run back to the pits for a wheel and jack, and go fix it himself? Sigh.

No, all F1 cars should be made to carry a space-saver replacement with a jack and tools to fit, just like the examples that most of us have forced upon us by car manufacturers.

[nicanary]

No, all F1 cars should be made to carry a space-saver replacement with a jack and tools to fit, just like the examples that most of us have forced upon us by car manufacturers.

And a first-aid kit, spare bulbs and a warning triangle, together with two breathalyser kits.

(Off-thread , beg pardon, but so many cars get punctures from carbon fragments that something needs to be done. Why the safety car? Why not make them all effect their pitlane limiters, reducing speed to the point where marshals could safely go on track to sweep up the mess? They've all got radio contact after all.)

Time was when drivers could effect roadside repairs - today they care more about "who's the celebrity in my pit?".

[D-Type]

After the Renault detachable rims I suppose the next development was the Rudge-Whitworth detachable wheel with 'knock-off' hub caps

[elansprint72]

I would like to make a list of pit-stops and what happened during their varied times but... I'm off to Le Mans in the morning.

[arttidesco]

Lewis Hamilton got a puncture in Sunday's German GP - why didn't he get out, run back to the pits for a wheel and jack, and go fix it himself? Sigh.

Can't be doing with getting my hands dirty with all that brake dust and poxy inadequate wrenches, I think calling out a very nice man with a low loader is the way to go when tyres suffer pressure loss ?

[Roger Clark]

After the Renault detachable rims I suppose the next development was the Rudge-Whitworth detachable wheel with 'knock-off' hub caps

Detachable wheels first appeared in Grand Prix racing in 1912. Before that, the ACF regarded wheels as an integral part of the car and therefore not to be changed during the race. Hispano-Suiza had successfully used the ridge-Whitworth wheel in voiturete racing in 1909.

[D-Type]

Can't be doing with getting my hands dirty with all that brake dust and poxy inadequate wrenches, I think calling out a very nice man with a low loader is the way to go when tyres suffer pressure loss ?

My brother discovered the hard way that if you run over a piece of scrap metal in a hired car you have to buy the replacement tyre

[ryan86]

The trail blazer was Junior Johnson whose pit crew once changed an engine during the race!

IIRC in Canada 2004 or 05, Sato came into the pits with a problem. I can't remember what the problem was or even what year it was, but about 30 laps later, he was sent back out again. I believe the rules at the time decreed that the result of the previous race was the running order for Q1 (single car at that time), and so it was beneficial to do as many laps as possible to get ahead of those who had done a more permanent job of retiring their car.

I know it's quite common in America wjhere everyone scores points, but it was the first time I remembered it happening in F1

[Robin Fairservice]

I sure that I remember, in a film, of seeing Fangio's long pit stop in the 1957 German Grand Prix pit stop, when he got out of the car and dived into the pits. For a pee?

[john winfield]

In 1976, at the Silverstone 6 Hours, I was impressed with the Martini Porsche mechanics' determination to return the Ickx/Mass 935 to the fray. The clutch burned out / exploded on the first lap and I think it took them an hour and three quarters to retrieve the car and replace the damaged parts. All chance of a win had gone, but we were treated to Ickx and Mass thundering around faster than anyone else for four and a quarter hours (they finished tenth) while, at the front, the Walkinshaw/Fitzpatrick BMW held off the Wollek/Heyer Porsche to win by just over a second.

[TrevorMiller]

As I read these comments, I started wondering at which point the pit stops actually won their importance for the winning of the game? I mean, generally they probably always played a role, but with rising technology and efficiency I think there must have been a period when it really became THE thing to decide a race, (which I sometimes think is a shame). of course I like it when the whole team is responsible for winning and at the stop they might be able to show it all stopping the time with their Frederique Constant automatic in order to improve each time anyway I love racing.

Edited by TrevorMiller, 26 July 2012 - 06:54.

[7MGTEsup]

I remember in the 1980's when 10 seconds was considered a good stop. Mechanics in shorts and even members of the public in the pit lane durin the grand prix. Watch races from the mid 80's on youtube to be shocked and amazed by how far pit stops have come in 25 years lol.

[Roger Clark]

The reasons for pit stops have changed over time. Until 1951, cars could not carry enough fuel and tyres were insufficiently durable to last a full race. In 1952 the cars became less powerful and lighter and the need for stops vanished but some drivers would elect to start on a lower fuel load and attempt to gain an advantage by it. The most famous example is Fangio in the 1957 German Grand Prix but the way he had to drive after his stop shows the risks involved. In 1958 the cars became lighter and less powerful and the races became shorter. Pitstops then became very rare unless a car was in trouble. The only exception was Monza when the banked track was used. In 1982, Gordon Murray realised that the gains to be made from softer tyres and lower fuel loads were sufficient to justify a planned stop. It also made possible a smaller car and soon all teams did the same.

At some point (I don't know when), somebody (I don't know who) decided that pitstops were part of The Entertainment and they became compulsory. That is a shame, in my opinion.

[Allan Lupton]

The reasons for pit stops have changed over time. Until 1951, cars could not carry enough fuel and tyres were insufficiently durable to last a full race. In 1952 the cars became less powerful and lighter and the need for stops vanished but some drivers would elect to start on a lower fuel load and attempt to gain an advantage by it. The most famous example is Fangio in the 1957 German Grand Prix but the way he had to drive after his stop shows the risks involved. In 1958 the cars became lighter and less powerful and the races became shorter. Pitstops then became very rare unless a car was in trouble. The only exception was Monza when the banked track was used. In 1982, Gordon Murray realised that the gains to be made from softer tyres and lower fuel loads were sufficient to justify a planned stop. It also made possible a smaller car and soon all teams did the same.

At some point (I don't know when), somebody (I don't know who) decided that pitstops were part of The Entertainment and they became compulsory. That is a shame, in my opinion.

That's it Roger.
As for the compulsory pitstop it is one of the many ways in which what was a sport has been micromanaged as Entertainment - many, many decisions that used to be the province of the designers, the team managers and the drivers are now incorporated in the Rules and the result is disappointing, as we see it today. I would like to see again some enterprising team manager permitted to run on one set of tyres and one fill of fuel to try to beat another team which scheduled to use up several sets of tyres and whilst they were about it topped up the small fuel tank a few times.
Similarly a starting grid assembled in practice time order was an attempt at improving the safety of a grid start: we now have a penalty system that can deliberately position a car amongst far slower cars so where's the logic in that?

[arttidesco]

As I read these comments, I started wondering at which point the pit stops actually won their importance for the winning of the game? I mean, generally they probably always played a role, but with rising technology and efficiency I think there must have been a period when it really became THE thing to decide a race (which I sometimes think is a shame).

Afraid that goes back at least as far as those detachable rims that Renault had in 1912 as mentioned above.

[scheivlak]

At some point (I don't know when), somebody (I don't know who) decided that pitstops were part of The Entertainment and they became compulsory. That is a shame, in my opinion.

They became almost -though not literally- compulsory in 1994 when the possibly of refuelling was reintroduced, I think together with a limitation of the volume of the fuel tank (anyway, that's when all the teams decided to limit them). That was of course a FIA decision so I guess that was Max Mosley's choice, maybe triggered by Bernie.

Of course we all know -because of its uniqueness- that Mika Salo once famously covered the Monaco GP distance without refuelling (in 1997), helped by the rain and the shortening of the distance as a result of the 2 hour time limit http://www.forix.com...19970005019&c=0

Edited by scheivlak, 24 July 2012 - 18:45.

[HistoryFan]

Very interesting answers:)

[Roger Clark]

They became almost -though not literally- compulsory in 1994 when the possibly of refuelling was reintroduced, I think together with a limitation of the volume of the fuel tank (anyway, that's when all the teams decided to limit them). That was of course a FIA decision so I guess that was Max Mosley's choice, maybe triggered by Bernie.

As I understand it, refuelling was banned in 1984. Maximum tank capacity was reduced throughout the 80s: 250 litres initially, 220 in 1984, 195 in 86 and 150 in 1988. What was it reduced to in 1994 and what changes have been made since then?

[ryan86]

Refuelling was reintroduced I believe in an effort to improve "the show". Since the size of the tank and the weight of carrying a whole races fuel was uncompetitive nobody ever took that strategy. Refuelling was banned at the end of 2009 in an effort to improve the show as well I believe.

Pit stops these days aren't quite compulsory. If you do not use a intermediate or wet tyre during the race, you have to use both dry options during the race (in an effort to improve the show), even if only for 1 lap. You are not however required to stop if you have the wets or inters on, though given Pirelli haven't produced the worlds most durable tyres (in an effort to improve the show), so I'm not sure whether or not it's feasible.

In the finale of 2010, due to the fact that the Bridgestones appeared to be as hard as bricks, a handful of drivers stopped after 1 lap and proceeded to complete the race distance - 1 lap without at stop.

Edited by ryan86, 25 July 2012 - 12:38.

[Michael Ferner]

Refuelling was reintroduced I believe in an effort to improve "the show"...

... in which object they failed miserably. 1994 was the year I started to lose interest, a process which did take less than a decade to be completed.

Come to think of it, I believe they were actually pandering to a new type of customer, the "ADD kids". I always thought that racing was perfectly entertaining, and "a good show" without pit stops. The stops ruined it for me, but they may have kept the ADD kids awake.

[Arjan de Roos]

2,3 seconds is cool. I remember that the Brabham boys once changed wheels in 3,8 seconds. That was in the days they had re-invented the pitstop, 1983-ish.

[kayemod]

... in which object they failed miserably. 1994 was the year I started to lose interest, a process which did take less than a decade to be completed.

Come to think of it, I believe they were actually pandering to a new type of customer, the "ADD kids". I always thought that racing was perfectly entertaining, and "a good show" without pit stops. The stops ruined it for me, but they may have kept the ADD kids awake.

Pretty much my experience as well, that's when my interest started to wane, but the worst period of all were the 'sprint' years, when they were adding fuel and changing tyres four or even more times in a single race, so the cars were always running in something like qualifying condition. I still watch every race, and I haven't got ADD, but I've dropped off a few times during races, though that's probably mostly due to a couple of glasses or so during lunch.

[Allan Lupton]

I still watch every race, and I haven't got ADD, but I've dropped off a few times during races, though that's probably mostly due to a couple of glasses or so during lunch.

Likewise and don't you find a couple of glasses are a real help when the inside of your eyelid is due for inspection?
Technical question: did they not have to have a pip-pin to stop the wheelnut coming off if it wasn't tightened properly, and when did that stop being obligatory?

Edited by Allan Lupton, 25 July 2012 - 17:42.

[RS2000]

The trail blazer was Junior Johnson whose pit crew once changed an engine during the race!

Not that unusual in NASCAR's top category then, to pick up finishing points. Later banned.
It happened in front of me (well, behind me actually... they did it in the paddock, not the pits) at the Pocono 500 in July 1978. They needn't have bothered, as they won the championship by Rockingham in October.
The only team in 78 to use an Oldsmobile (Cale Yarborough) for all races instead of switching to a Monte Carlo for shorter tracks - but it was reported in the GN press that empty cardboard boxes with a Northants, UK address were seen round the back of Junior's shop.

[RS2000]

No history of pit stops can be complete without mention of The Wood Brothers .

The Woods article mentions carrying the jack above belt level to avoid knees hitting it when running with it. On Junior Johnson's crew when I was watching he invariably acted as jack man himself and seemed to be strong enough to flail the thing one handed at arms length.

[Charlieman]

I am surprised that nobody has raised the etymology of pits. My vague recollection is that the term arose from an event (French GP?) where the service counters for cars had a trench for storing fuel etc. Can anyone turn that into a decent description, please?

At the last televised GP in Germany, the camera panned in on a mechanic wearing a balaclava. Is that still common, given the current (sensible) rules prohibiting in-race refuelling?

As for bonkers rules "for the show", what is the point of the requirement at dry races to use both of the two available tyre flavours? Surely it is up to the drivers and teams to use what they think will work for them. And they should be allowed to put a mixed set on the car if they wish. This would be tough on Pirelli who would have to bring more tyres to races, but it would be more sporting, more open.

And my final (for now) gripe is about the use of fake jargon: Prime and Option. Prime means harder and Option means softer, as commentators have to inform their audience. Given that there are plain English words, used for donkey's years to describe racing car tyres, it is time to drop the fake jargon.

[kayemod]

And my final (for now) gripe is about the use of fake jargon: Prime and Option. Prime means harder and Option means softer, as commentators have to inform their audience. Given that there are plain English words, used for donkey's years to describe racing car tyres, it is time to drop the fake jargon.

Fake jargon indeed. And what about "going for the undercut"?

[scheivlak]

And my final (for now) gripe is about the use of fake jargon: Prime and Option. Prime means harder and Option means softer, as commentators have to inform their audience. Given that there are plain English words, used for donkey's years to describe racing car tyres, it is time to drop the fake jargon.

'Prime' means the tyre of which 6 sets might be used and 'option' the tyre of which 5 sets might be used during the event. The FIA decides what the prime and what the option tyre is for each race following a recommendation of the manufacturer. See paragraph 25 of the Sporting Code.
AFAIK so far the prime tyre is always the harder compound and the option tyre the softer one but that's not a choice that's written in the regulations as such. Theoretically the prime might as well be the softer one for a weekend but so far that has never happened, though there was some speculation about that happening somewhere this year.

But yes, it's all pretty artificial.

[cpbell]

"Undercut" and "overcut" don't annoy me, as long as they're explained when needed. As far as I can see, the alternative to using those terms is a lengthy phrase, which could be cumbersome in commentary. My source of annoyance is some of the current crop of drivers moaning about having to look after their tyres and not being able to treat the races as a series of short sprints, as the heavy fuel load won't permit it. For heaven's sake, its Grand Prix motor racing - it's supposed to be that way!

[ryan86]

I'm sure I read one, maybe a couple of the plethora of lower level single seater racing series had introduced compulsory pit stops. Not too unusual you might think, but it in fact it involved driving into the pits, sitting for 10 seconds and driving away again.

[Robin Fairservice]

Why does F1 only have one pit for two cars?

[uechtel]

...but it would be more sporting, more open.

You did understand something completely wrong. "Sporting" is no criterium behind the rules. "Sporting" would it be to let a superior man/car/team combination dominate, even if it it would lead to "boring" races. Rules like tyre change, "safety" car, DRS, 10-place-down-the-grid-penalties-for-a-gearbox-change etc. etc. are an effort to keep the game "interesting", even if this is at the cost of "sport".