28 replies to this topic

[EvilPhil II]

Its now been a few years since Bridgestone left the sport and left Formula1 considering a spec supply of Avon tyres at one stage before settling on Pirelli.

 

I believe we have seen the influence a tyre manufacturer can have on our sport and the spectacle of the cars on track. 

 

So I've made a poll just out of interest regarding how people now feel about the tyre regulations and suppliers. 

 

Lets see what people on this forum think... 

 

 

Edited by EvilPhil II, 06 September 2015 - 15:45.

[Massa]

Michelin or Bridgestone - Moto GP style.

[Victor_RO]

Would prefer a tire war, but the costs nowadays would be prohibitive towards that alternative. Realistically, the best I think we could get nowadays (if Bernie weren't allowed to interfere in the decision) would be control Michelins (but undergoing constant development) with teams being given free reign on what compounds to pick, and without mandatory pitstops.

[Nonesuch]

Either an all out competition, or failing that, a tyre that becomes about as much of a non-factor as is possible.

 

I don't think control tyres should ever be designed to be bad, or designed to degrade so fast that the drivers can't push their cars and engines for more than a handful of laps per race.

[RealRacing]

Any of the mentioned manufacturers can produce a quality tyre for F1. It's what they are asking them to produce that's wrong. Having said that, Michelin want a larger rim so no. A single set of tyres per race would increase the probability of on-track passing so I voted for that. Next best option is free choice of a given option of compounds (maybe 3). But just a tyre that can be pushed close to 100% for the duration of the window would be enough, given the state of F1 these days that is.

[SirVanhan]

Everyone has their pros and cons. Bridgestone used to concentrate on Ferrari alone, Michelin never was better than Bridgestones except for 2005, Goodyear... just look at the disaster NASCAR is. All in all, these days, it's not about the brand, but what FIA and/or FOM dictactes. Tires manufacturers do as they have been told. Of course ideally I'd love to open F1 to all the manufacturers, but at the same time I don't want championships decided only by the black round things as in Schumacher's era.

[BlinkyMcSquinty]

The manufacturer is not the issue, Pirelli are building a tire to the customer's requirements. Why no option for Firestone?

 

An open tire war allows the cars to be pushed to 100% for the entire race duration, but eventually everyone settles into similar compound types and strategies, thus creating incredibly boring races.

 

The basic concept of just one manufacturer so the sanctioning body can control the tires, and requiring running two different compounds per race is valid, but the FIA and Formula One have managed to completely screw it up.

[smitten]

The basic concept of just one manufacturer so the sanctioning body can control the tires, and requiring running two different compounds per race is valid

Really? Would making them run two different fuels, or brakes, or wings during a race be valid? I'm not sure why it holds for tyres other than reducing racing to pitstops.....

[Rob]

Tyre war. I'd prefer that things were opened up rather than tightened down.

[Knowlesy]

Open tire war is my favoured. Failing that, a proper manufacturer like Michelin with teams free to choose compounds and strategies.

[Fastcake]

Control tyre manufacturer, it doesn't matter who as the FIA decide the specifications and they'll all do a similar job, and either have tyres that degrade quickly like now, or ones that could last an entire race distance with enough management.

 

As for the race weekend regulations, keep the two compounds and the current number of tyres available after practice (they need something to encourage more Friday running), but allow teams to do what they want with them from that point forwards. No mandatory pitstops, though you'll probably still have to, and if you want to mix the tyres up on a car (accidentally or otherwise!) go nuts.

 

Oh, and if you don't pay attention to the tyre manufacturers recommendations and you blow a tyre up, that's your own stupid fault. No need to make regulations for it. 

[EvilPhil II]

Some interesting metrics appearing above.

[Crafty]

Doesn't matter which manufacturer you pick, they follow the direction of the FIA as to what is required from the tyre, so thats what we get.

 

In any case, the manufacturer of the tyre has no bearing on todays events, which was basically a complete cockup by the FIA

[Volcano70]

Bridgestone

either motoGP or tire war.

[TheRacingElf]

Voted for a tyre war

 

We have a chassis war, an engine war, brake war, fuel war, etc. but a tyre war is out of the question for some reason.

I know there is a risk of one manufacturer getting it right and one getting it wrong but that is also what happened with the engines and nobody is even mentioning a spec/control engine.

[maximilian]

Want an interesting situation?  Allow multiple tyre makers, with NO pit stops - the objective is to build the quickest and most durable tyre.  I have to puke every time I hear "tyre strategy"   Let's RACE!

Edited by maximilian, 06 September 2015 - 19:34.

[ANF]

Want an interesting situation?  Allow multiple tyre makers, with NO pit stops - the objective is to build the quickest and most durable tyre.  I have to puke every time I hear "tyre strategy"   Let's RACE!

You're so conservative!

[Peter Perfect]

Personally I quite liked Buttons comments on the tyres a little while ago. Basically he said he liked the Michelins behaviour which was.. push hard and the tyres don't last long, don't push and the tyres last longer. Which seems obvious but it's something that doesn't apply to the Pirellis at the moment. To have a variety of strategy to make the races more interesting the tyres need to be predictable. At the moment that's not the case.

 

Above all whoever supplies tyres going forward though must be allowed to test outside of the races. I know track testing in general has been restricted on cost grounds but there have been plenty of suggestions of cheaper ways of bringing it back, e.g. Mondays after the GPs.. etc...

[BlinkyMcSquinty]

Really? Would making them run two different fuels, or brakes, or wings during a race be valid? I'm not sure why it holds for tyres other than reducing racing to pitstops.....

 

 

You can't change fuels, or brakes, or wings as easily during a race.

 

But if all teams were allowed just one compound, in a very short time everyone would figure out the optimal strategy for those tires, and everyone would be running at relatively the same pace as everyone else. And if that happens, no one opens up a gap, no one closes a gap on the other. Boring. With two different compounds, one set of tires is supposed to be slower, but last longer, while the other set is quicker, but doesn't maintain that quick pace for as long. If this theory works correctly, there is no  one strategy that everyone can apply, leading to different times during a race when one car is quicker than another, thus leading to more action and passing scenarios.

[George Costanza]

Tire war would be very nice again, IMO.

[TennisUK]

Tyre war, though it's clearly utterly impractical in this day and age due to the absence of testing.

[FerrariV12]

I'd love a tyre war but don't see it happening. Apart from Bernie tending to get his way on these matters, I doubt there'd be much appetite from the teams either.

 

Obviously Merc would be dead against it, as they're dominating and a tyre war might be one thing that mixes things up much as it did when Schumacher/Ferrari had previously been dominating ('05 and '06, almost in '03 as well).

 

At the other end of the scale the smaller teams will be worried about costs etc.

 

In between those extremes, of the teams that could benefit from a tyre war, maybe Ferrari might be up for it, Red Bull could benefit but Horner said he wouldn't like it when asked about it (whether that's his opinion or Bernie's who knows), Williams are close to the front and could have something to gain but might be worried about costs, McLaren with Honda might benefit but are at the back for the time being anyway so probably have other things on their mind.

 

Second best choice for me would be if we have to control tyres, then they really are control - i.e. becoming a non-factor, much like the spec ECU (don't care about the brand). I don't see that happening either though

Edited by FerrariV12, 07 September 2015 - 10:40.

[andrewf1]

The manufacturer is not the issue, Pirelli are building a tire to the customer's requirements.

 

Indeed, but on the other hand I'm pretty sure the customer's requirements don't involve tires unpredictably blowing up and permanent lack of accountability.

[Seanspeed]

Shocked at how many people would choose to ruin the competition with a tire war again.

Personally I quite liked Buttons comments on the tyres a little while ago. Basically he said he liked the Michelins behaviour which was.. push hard and the tyres don't last long, don't push and the tyres last longer. Which seems obvious but it's something that doesn't apply to the Pirellis at the moment.

So you're saying there's no gain in holding back and all the drivers are out there, pushing qualifying-style the whole race?

That statement kind of goes in the face of everything we know about these tires.

Edited by Seanspeed, 07 September 2015 - 10:50.

[MattK9]

In my mind, the cars should be all as equal as possible. Tyre wars/engine wars are interesting to talk about but not to actually watch. I want to see the best drivers fighting against each other, rather than grown men whining about not having the best car.

[ThisIsMischaW]

If the tyres were deregulated then Red Bull and McLaren could go off and find a manufacturer who could make them amazing rubber which would help them close the gap to Mercedes. 

 

Over regulation always entrenches dominant positions. It used to be the case that a team would be dominant for 1 or 2 seasons and then the other teams would work out ways of closing the gap. Now it's a case of if you nail the regulations nobody can catch you. Boring.

[ThisIsMischaW]

In my mind, the cars should be all as equal as possible. Tyre wars/engine wars are interesting to talk about but not to actually watch. I want to see the best drivers fighting against each other, rather than grown men whining about not having the best car.

 

I want to see equal performance but not equal cars. Everyone should have their own individual strengths and weaknesses.

[Jon83]

I don't really care who provides the tyres. My opinion has always been that Pirelli have provided what the sport asked for. I don't really know why people would vote for one tyre manufacturer over the other. They could all easily provide the same thing.

[Tenmantaylor]

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rmula1/34313145

 

This is the best article I've read on the matter both from a business and technical perspective. Michelin director Pascal Couasnon's comments make a lot of sense regarding larger rims + slightly larger tyre diameter imporving performance in 2017. He may not be aware of the aero performance reductions but as he says the teams have already signed off on wider tyres which would also be an aero/cooling reduction so can't use that argument. 

Edited by Tenmantaylor, 21 September 2015 - 16:31.