Jump to content


Photo

In need of more compounds


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#1 Shiroo

Shiroo
  • Member

  • 4,012 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 31 October 2012 - 18:12

According to this article (http://www.autosport...t.php/id/103899), Hembery says that more compounds would bring more thrill to sport. From my perspective it is rather useless. Why they won't just bring a bit "softer" compound on some tracks, for example in India, they could bring Soft & Super-Soft (you could do like 20 laps on soft). Or make tyres that has big difference in lap time (like 1sec between compounds but less durability). At the start of the season, and in general in 1st half of it, compounds were way better than atm. Drivers can go for half a race on 1 compound that is a softer one from 2 possible. I'm not a big fan of 4/5 stoppers, but these 2-3 stoppers should be there in each race.

Isnt it just better idea to make tyres a bit more fragile, but with wider operating window?

Advertisement

#2 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,391 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 31 October 2012 - 18:30

Tyres are exactly the same than starting the season, just teams know how to use them way better.

They´re right, they need more tyre compounds. During tyre war era it wasn´t strange a brand taking 6 compounds to a track for a racing weekend, so expecting them to cover every circuit with 4 is a joke. This way you´ll always get ridiculous 4 stoppers somewhere and rule inforced 1 stoppers in others.

#3 MrAerodynamicist

MrAerodynamicist
  • Member

  • 13,712 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 31 October 2012 - 18:56

I'd like the whole compound selection to be thrown open.

At the start of the year each teams gets a set number of each compound, and it's up to them how they allocate them across the 18 or so weekends. There'd be no spare capacity; bringing a softer compound one weekend would mean having to trade to a harder tyre another weekend. They'd be free to turn up with just a single compound on a given weekend, or all four. The compound of tyre they hand back after FP would be nominated before the start of the weekend, so they couldn't hedge their bets.

It strikes me it'd throw up a serious number of permutations that would make life difficult for the engineers and their spreadsheets to predict the optimum.

#4 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,928 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 31 October 2012 - 19:01

I actually liked the durability of the tyres in India. I guess mostly that the tyre situation isn't the same everywhere - fine with me if sometimes long fast stints are possible without looking after tyres a lot, and sometimes not.

#5 Slowinfastout

Slowinfastout
  • Member

  • 9,681 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 31 October 2012 - 19:17

It's easy from my armchair to criticize this and that, but generally speaking I think Pirelli are doing a good job. I think their more open approach compared to Bridgestone brings them some flak, but that's always the price for a bigger visibility and openness.

I think the point with this latest thing is that it should be difficult to do a one-stopper, and the softer compound shouldn't be able to easily last half a race distance.

Maybe it could be interesting if the teams were able to choose between 3 compounds or more and have to use two of them in a race, but sometimes this kind of thing looks good on paper and in reality it's just a mess.. so who knows.

I'm happy they announced they will throw something different at the teams in 2013 because not much else is changing technically, which is unusual.

#6 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 9,956 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 31 October 2012 - 19:51

Sure, can Bridgestone be the one to bring more compounds?

#7 schubacca

schubacca
  • Member

  • 799 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 31 October 2012 - 20:09

My initial thoughts are why does Pirelli need to ensure 2 or 3 stops per race?

Even if we are to run with this "FIA mandated us to improve racing...." line that we hear, how is 2 or 3 stops improving racing?

Wasn't Perez's 1-stop specials exciting?

I am afraid that the whole thing is just becoming farcical.

I have had enough of race manipulation, even in the name of competition.

#8 Slowinfastout

Slowinfastout
  • Member

  • 9,681 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 31 October 2012 - 20:24

Well, you said it... the Perez one-stoppers were special. Hembrey doesn't seem to say he want to eradicate that kind of thing, Pirelli wants more flexibility in order to bring stuff that is closely tailored to every track.

Having something that brings the team closer to a catastrophic tyre failure is a big no-no for any manufacturer, and having bricks that don't wear off makes the 'use two compound' rule stupid and pointless, like what we saw in India.

They just want the flexibility to be able to provide something that will stay in the middle of that balance at each event.

#9 Shiroo

Shiroo
  • Member

  • 4,012 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 31 October 2012 - 20:25

My initial thoughts are why does Pirelli need to ensure 2 or 3 stops per race?

Even if we are to run with this "FIA mandated us to improve racing...." line that we hear, how is 2 or 3 stops improving racing?

Wasn't Perez's 1-stop specials exciting?

I am afraid that the whole thing is just becoming farcical.

I have had enough of race manipulation, even in the name of competition.

but if these tyres gonna be bulletproof, drivers that care about their tyres more (and especially CARS, cause these are the most important factor in that [look at Mercedes and compare it with RBR/Lotus/Sauber]) wont have any "+" for their driving style and car properities. + it is boring (I mean boring as f***) when on some track, tyres are bulletproof and track doesnt give you a chance to overtake unless smn will hit the cliff, in that case, we won't see any overtake (even this so called "artifical").
tyres as supplier to F1 should find a common language with teams/FOTA/Bernie/whoever is important and think about how it should look like. Cause if Monaco would have fragile tyres -> people would even have chance to overtake there (for example 1stopper vs 2 stopper).

#10 MrPodium

MrPodium
  • Member

  • 592 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 31 October 2012 - 21:00

Why not just design a range of compounds that will offer drivers the chance to one, two or three stop without significant time penalty due to pit stops?

#11 BigCHrome

BigCHrome
  • Member

  • 4,049 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 31 October 2012 - 21:21

If Pirelli thinks that they can improve the championship with more compounds they should be allowed to do it ASAP. I hate how archaic and unresponsive F1 management is.

#12 F1Champion

F1Champion
  • Member

  • 2,925 posts
  • Joined: September 01

Posted 31 October 2012 - 21:23

I don't want Pirelli playing with the tyres anymore. Just as the teams get used to them, Pirelli go and make them more delicate. Now let the teams get on top for 2013 with no more tyre changes.

#13 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,391 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 31 October 2012 - 21:31

I don't want Pirelli playing with the tyres anymore. Just as the teams get used to them, Pirelli go and make them more delicate. Now let the teams get on top for 2013 with no more tyre changes.


It´s not playing with them, it´s doing what it was always done in F1: build different tyres for different places.

They aren´t making them "more delicate" either. They just try to bring the correct tyre to match every track, which is impossible with 4 compounds.

#14 schubacca

schubacca
  • Member

  • 799 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 31 October 2012 - 21:48

It´s not playing with them, it´s doing what it was always done in F1: build different tyres for different places.

They aren´t making them "more delicate" either. They just try to bring the correct tyre to match every track, which is impossible with 4 compounds.


Pirelli placing a gap between the 2 compounds that they offer on race weekend = Playing with them.

They are not interested in providing the right tyre. They want to provide spectacle.

I just feel that they need to restrain themselves a tad....

#15 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,391 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 31 October 2012 - 23:45

Pirelli placing a gap between the 2 compounds that they offer on race weekend = Playing with them.


It´s just a stupid rule remanent from the BS era. Noting to do with them. And when it´s too much nonsense, they just do what they have to do, like red+yellow or grey+white.

They are not interested in providing the right tyre. They want to provide spectacle.


Their interest in more compounds to chose from shows that´s not true.


#16 Alx09

Alx09
  • Member

  • 1,278 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 01 November 2012 - 00:05

Why not just force minimum two pit stops per race? That way, when they supply tyres which holds up and can be raced, there will still be pit stops and timings.

Edited by Alx09, 01 November 2012 - 00:06.


#17 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 9,956 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 01 November 2012 - 00:28

Why not just force minimum two pit stops per race? That way, when they supply tyres which holds up and can be raced, there will still be pit stops and timings.

Take it the other way around, band mandatory pit stops altogether.

Stationary cars surrounded by twenty mechanics to change tyres. How old fashioned is that?

#18 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 01 November 2012 - 04:21

Pirelli placing a gap between the 2 compounds that they offer on race weekend = Playing with them.

They are not interested in providing the right tyre. They want to provide spectacle.

I just feel that they need to restrain themselves a tad....

I think that they need to be restrained, because of they are going to interfere with the championship just three races to go, sparks will fly.

#19 packapoo

packapoo
  • Member

  • 731 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 01 November 2012 - 05:36

I don't want Pirelli playing with the tyres anymore. Just as the teams get used to them, Pirelli go and make them more delicate. Now let the teams get on top for 2013 with no more tyre changes.


:up: :up:

Advertisement

#20 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 5,775 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 01 November 2012 - 07:15

but if these tyres gonna be bulletproof, drivers that care about their tyres more (and especially CARS, cause these are the most important factor in that [look at Mercedes and compare it with RBR/Lotus/Sauber]) wont have any "+" for their driving style and car properities. + it is boring (I mean boring as f***) when on some track, tyres are bulletproof and track doesnt give you a chance to overtake unless smn will hit the cliff, in that case, we won't see any overtake (even this so called "artifical").
tyres as supplier to F1 should find a common language with teams/FOTA/Bernie/whoever is important and think about how it should look like. Cause if Monaco would have fragile tyres -> people would even have chance to overtake there (for example 1stopper vs 2 stopper).

but if the tyres are sh!t then drivers who are quick and push do net get any + for their driving style

is it a smoothness contest or a speed one?

#21 Peat

Peat
  • Member

  • 1,326 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 01 November 2012 - 07:59

Am i the only person that thought that the 2005 tyre rules were quite good??

Anyway, i'm sick of Pirelli. They should just make ONE compound. ONE. That is a control tyre. Why won't anyone accept that the car 'formula' is still very much broken and needs addressing rather than these band-aid gimmicks like toffee tyres and flappy wings?

#22 Puhoon

Puhoon
  • Member

  • 236 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 01 November 2012 - 08:02

Am i the only person that thought that the 2005 tyre rules were quite good??

Yes.

#23 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,928 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:11

I think that they need to be restrained, because of they are going to interfere with the championship just three races to go, sparks will fly.


Who said anything about the 2012 championship?

#24 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,928 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:13

Am i the only person that thought that the 2005 tyre rules were quite good??

Anyway, i'm sick of Pirelli. They should just make ONE compound. ONE. That is a control tyre. Why won't anyone accept that the car 'formula' is still very much broken and needs addressing rather than these band-aid gimmicks like toffee tyres and flappy wings?


And you propose to make one tyre that works in Monte Carlo and at a permanent high-speed track, how exactly?

#25 Ferrari_F1_fan_2001

Ferrari_F1_fan_2001
  • Member

  • 3,111 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:18

I'd love to see tyres pushed to their absolute limits instead of all this nursing around nonsense.

#26 KirilVarbanov

KirilVarbanov
  • Member

  • 851 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:19

More compounds would be OK, but the teams need to be allowed to use whatever they wish!

#27 Disgrace

Disgrace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 10,164 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:22

More compounds would be OK, but the teams need to be allowed to use whatever they wish!


This. The mandatory compound gap at each race means one tyre will always be the best, simply removing that gimmicky rule would mean we wouldn't need to see more compounds. Pirelli should provide a choice of two tyres that work, then let the teams extract the best from whichever suits their car.

Edited by Disgrace, 01 November 2012 - 09:24.


#28 Fourjays

Fourjays
  • Member

  • 242 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 01 November 2012 - 09:38

More compounds would be OK, but the teams need to be allowed to use whatever they wish!

Definitely. It was only introduced because the Bridgestone's never wore out and nobody would have pitted otherwise. Simply no point to it now.

#29 MrMontecarlo

MrMontecarlo
  • Member

  • 546 posts
  • Joined: May 12

Posted 01 November 2012 - 11:02

More compounds for what? They don't make the right choices for each track anyway.

#30 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 9,956 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 01 November 2012 - 11:22

Am i the only person that thought that the 2005 tyre rules were quite good??

Anyway, i'm sick of Pirelli. They should just make ONE compound. ONE. That is a control tyre. Why won't anyone accept that the car 'formula' is still very much broken and needs addressing rather than these band-aid gimmicks like toffee tyres and flappy wings?



2005 worked fine with me.

#31 Peat

Peat
  • Member

  • 1,326 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 01 November 2012 - 12:38

And you propose to make one tyre that works in Monte Carlo and at a permanent high-speed track, how exactly?


If it's black and round it will work on any track. Don't believe all the BS so readily.



#32 Shiroo

Shiroo
  • Member

  • 4,012 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 01 November 2012 - 13:56

If it's black and round it will work on any track. Don't believe all the BS so readily.

well tbh it would work definetly, but you would have the tyre that is almost bulletproof and has insane grip.

#33 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,928 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 01 November 2012 - 15:00

If it's black and round it will work on any track. Don't believe all the BS so readily.


If "working" for you means that the car is able to trundle around the track, then yes. Otherwise no.

#34 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,800 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 01 November 2012 - 16:08

the 2011 soft tyre ran pretty much every race

and 2 stop average is needed as 1 stop average is fricking dull. remmber 2010?:p


#35 Slowinfastout

Slowinfastout
  • Member

  • 9,681 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 01 November 2012 - 16:28

That's the problem with giving the teams access to all the different compounds every race, the teams will figure out which one will do 85% of the job, they'll build around that and spend most of the time on it.. and they'll qualify on whatever is the fastest at each track.

This translate into 1 stop races..

For example, if we take last race in India, if you give full access and Pirelli brings everything, we remove the tyre usage rule; you could have the teams qualify on the super soft and easily run the race on hards without even stopping or make 1 stop and use the softs if you can win back the time spent in the pitlane, which is a gamble in that example because the tyres showed signs of lasting forever..

Also, almost forgot again, if you remove the rules and thus remove Pirelli's ability to keep things on the safe side with the combination of the various tracks characteristics and what the tyres can do, the teams will invariably lean towards the edge and one of these days something bad will happen, someone will kill himself with an ugly tyre failure and Pirelli is gonna be a murderer.

Edited by Slowinfastout, 01 November 2012 - 16:44.


#36 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,800 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 01 November 2012 - 17:38

tbh its perhaps the super soft wouldnt be ok for some tracks, and perhaps the hard at monaco wouldnt be great, but the 2 middle compounds would be ok anywhere on the current calanader

#37 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,928 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 01 November 2012 - 21:38

tbh its perhaps the super soft wouldnt be ok for some tracks, and perhaps the hard at monaco wouldnt be great, but the 2 middle compounds would be ok anywhere on the current calanader


But running medium in India would mean a 1-stop race most likely, which you said you don't want. And only softs at a tyre eating track would mean 4 stops, which most peopel think is too much.

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 01 November 2012 - 21:47.


#38 pingu666

pingu666
  • Member

  • 8,800 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 01 November 2012 - 21:45

i ment as a safety/viability thing

#39 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 4,928 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 01 November 2012 - 23:41

i ment as a safety/viability thing


Oh I see, didn't realize that at first.

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 01 November 2012 - 23:41.


Advertisement

#40 ch103

ch103
  • Member

  • 728 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 02 November 2012 - 02:03

i think they should really make a show out of it.

one compound will be radio denoted by a fan to go flat. the fan can detonate the tires of any driver they wish, but it is a secret up until they detonate them.

it would create total randomness in every race!

even more fun - the fans just pick on one driver and ruin their every race!

#41 Peat

Peat
  • Member

  • 1,326 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 02 November 2012 - 09:31

If "working" for you means that the car is able to trundle around the track, then yes. Otherwise no.


What's the difference between that and what the majority of races have been this year? Stroking around 10s off the pace.

1 tyre, it will react differently to every surface/temperature, teams will have to setup the car accordingly to make them work/last depending on the track.

Having Pirelli meddling with compounds etc is un-needed and was only ever a quick-fix for dull races. As was proved in India, if the tyres last, nothing much happens. Which proves that the car/circuit formula is still as broken as it was 2 years ago. If everyone is happy for 'whacky-races' to continue with Pirelli creating EVEN more toffee compounds, then fine, but i'll go watch some actual motor racing instead.

Edited by Peat, 02 November 2012 - 09:32.


#42 amarelo

amarelo
  • New Member

  • 19 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 02 November 2012 - 11:04

Let Pirelli create at least 8 different compounds and let the teams test them pre-season.

Abolish the forced use of 2 compounds per race.

Each driver chooses before FP1 the 2 compounds for that weekend (from the 8 available) and let them use them in any possible way during the race.

We may see different strategies and nothing forced upon the drivers/teams, actually all the good/bad choices will be back on the ones that matter, the teams/drivers. The main thing for this to work is to have a very large choice of different but close to each other compounds.

Edited by amarelo, 02 November 2012 - 11:06.


#43 Peat

Peat
  • Member

  • 1,326 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 02 November 2012 - 21:22

That would mean taking 3x more tyres to every GP. Just sayin'.