463 replies to this topic

[superdelphinus]

Can someone summarise it please

[redreni]

Same here, but they must have expected that when they agreed to make cheese tyres. I seem to remember Bridgestone refused to do it for the very reason that they didn't want casual viewers thinking their tyres were s**t.

It's an epic clusterf**k.

Yep, but Pirelli were banking on the fact that, if your tyres wear out after not many laps, you can say "they're designed to do that". It's a pretty simple message that you can easily get across even to the most simple-minded casual viewer. But if your tyres explode, you cannot say "they're designed to do that".

The fundamental problem is that although the tyre company may try to make the tyres so that they only last 15 laps, the teams are fighting against that and trying to make them last significantly longer. And the teams are always going to win because they develop their cars through the season whereas the tyres (supposedly) remain the same. So in this, the third year, having had a string of 1-stop races at the end of the previous year, it pushed Pirelli to make a very extreme tyre in terms of durability. And this in turn forces the teams to do more extreme things to get more life out of them - under-inflating the rears in particular is good for durability.

The mistake Pirelli have made in engineering terms is in agreeing to supply tyres to a formula that has no regulation forcing the competitors to run the tyres in spec, and then designing a tyre where the way to get best performance through a stint is to run it out of spec. Then they did not object in any serious way to the fact that people were running the tyres out of spec, and did not even ask the FIA to consider using its powers to force the teams to run the tyres in spec. That, I'm afraid, was reckless and I don't sympathise with them particularly for the reputational damage they've now suffered.

[ExFlagMan]

Can someone summarise it please

And get slated for adding ones own bias - if you cannot be arsed to read it yourself then that is up to you

Edited by ExFlagMan, 03 July 2013 - 20:43.

[MikeV1987]

Kingshark you made my day.

[ExFlagMan]

Yep, but Pirelli were banking on the fact that, if your tyres wear out after not many laps, you can say "they're designed to do that". It's a pretty simple message that you can easily get across even to the most simple-minded casual viewer. But if your tyres explode, you cannot say "they're designed to do that".

The fundamental problem is that although the tyre company may try to make the tyres so that they only last 15 laps, the teams are fighting against that and trying to make them last significantly longer. And the teams are always going to win because they develop their cars through the season whereas the tyres (supposedly) remain the same. So in this, the third year, having had a string of 1-stop races at the end of the previous year, it pushed Pirelli to make a very extreme tyre in terms of durability. And this in turn forces the teams to do more extreme things to get more life out of them - under-inflating the rears in particular is good for durability.

The mistake Pirelli have made in engineering terms is in agreeing to supply tyres to a formula that has no regulation forcing the competitors to run the tyres in spec, and then designing a tyre where the way to get best performance through a stint is to run it out of spec. Then they did not object in any serious way to the fact that people were running the tyres out of spec, and did not even ask the FIA to consider using its powers to force the teams to run the tyres in spec. That, I'm afraid, was reckless and I don't sympathise with them particularly for the reputational damage they've now suffered.

I guess Pirelli could always fall back on the 'Well they worked OK on our test car' argument, 'you know the one the FIA and teams did their best to ensure we had to use'.
OK it does not help Pirelli's image that much, but is it any worse for their image them just walking away and leaving the FIA and the teams to sort out its own sorry mess. Seems to me it would be cheaper to walk away, saves a lot of grief and money, unless they have already signed a new contract.

Edited by ExFlagMan, 03 July 2013 - 20:42.

[artista]

Michael Schmidt's opinion on the half truths from Pirelli:

http://www.auto-moto...it-7358828.html

The article is pretty interesting, not just because of Schmidt's opinion saying Pirelli should have stayed firm to make teams follow their indications, but also because of some of the details included there. For example, it's interesting that Lotus and Force Indida didn't have any damage in the tyres, not even the cuts or damage in the inside side we could see in Red Bull's tyres. Schmidt says, both, Lotus and Force India have stated they followed Pirelli's advice regarding pressure, left/right and camber angles

Edited by artista, 03 July 2013 - 20:47.

[KnucklesAgain]

Best post I have ever read, TC3000

[ExFlagMan]

TC3000 - wish I could have posted anything that incisive - but then as someone said at my graduation about 40 years ago - '3 years ago I couldn't even spell inguneer, now I are one'

[Atreiu]

I laughed. http://plus.autospor...16/bamber-week/

[alfa1]

The article is pretty interesting, not just because of Schmidt's opinion ...

Also see he notes that the tyre swapping (left to right) issue cannot be to blame for Massa and Vergne, since the tyres that blew were new unused sets on the correct sides of the car.

[artista]

Also see he notes that the tyre swapping (left to right) issue cannot be to blame for Massa and Vergne, since the tyres that blew were new unused sets on the correct sides of the car.

Of course, but I have not found too reliable information about camber and tyre pressure in Ferrari and Toro Rosso yet.

I was really curious since Sunday about if those 'cuts' were found in all cars or not, because it could be very usefull to really know what happened, and I was positively surprised when I saw Schmidt had that information, that's all.

Edited by artista, 03 July 2013 - 21:42.

[Brother Fox]

Can someone summarise it please

And get slated for adding ones own bias - if you cannot be arsed to read it yourself then that is up to you

I'll give it a crack.


Is Pirelli alone responsible for this situation? No.
Its been caused by competing interests from Pirelli, the teams, the FIA, drivers, and probably also fans.

What to do? - I'm not touching that one.

[ray b]

how about making a tyre that can do a 1/2 speed lap after it lost pressure

:ie semi-run flat

compound and tread life is something very different

tyres cut by whatever SHOULD NOT EXPLODE
nor take the car out of the race

[Sakae]

O.k. let's see if we can wrap some things up - Sorry it will be a longish post, but will be my last one, because most has been said, and the discussion will go around in circles for most of the time....
So finally the end of a long and probably useless rambling anyway - Let's hope their is some decent racing going one for the rest of the season, and may the best win.

Enjoy

Thank you, I did.