103 replies to this topic

[foreva]

Interesting article on BBC regarding Michelin's tyre tender, clarifying a few things about their proposal.

On hard rock tyres that 'you could put on at the first race and take of after the last race': 
- we are not opposed to bring technology to increase the show. So multiple pit stops is something we are not against.
- our philosophy is to bring a tyre that allows the drivers to drive at 100%.
- we could bring tyres that will last, for example, half a race and would keep the performance for the entire length of the stint. We know we can do that, because we do that every race in the World Endurance Championship

On bigger rims:
- we want to use taller tyres (72cm diameter (28.3in) rather than the current 66cm (26in) diameter) in addition to the bigger wheels, so although tyre sidewalls would reduce in size it would not be by as much as is first thought. This will allow the tyre to function at pretty much the same pressure as today.
- By doing that, you have a tyre that is more direct because the sidewall is a stronger spring and then your footprint is much more efficient.
- Because the tyre sidewall is not changing as much as teams thought, the effect on car design is much reduced and since F1 bosses are working on new rules for 2017, which include using wider tyres, the cars will need a redesign on this basis anyway

On performance
- 3 seconds faster than current tyres, without laptime degradation over a stint: more than two seconds in lap-time gain from the tyres (better and bigger footprint, compound), plus what you could gain with a different setting of the car (because of the stiffer sidewall you have less deformation in the sidewall, resulting in better height control of the car and the ability to run it lower than nowadays)


Sounds good to me (Y)

http://www.bbc.com/s...rmula1/34313145


PS. drivers and senior engineers in teams privately express their doubts about whether Pirelli could produce more durable tyres even if asked to do so.

Edited by foreva, 23 September 2015 - 13:43.

[shmoo]

We need Michelin back! I think Pirelli have become a law unto themselves. 

[superden]

Pirelli could do all that, but that wasn't their brief.

Edited by superden, 23 September 2015 - 13:48.

[noikeee]

Interesting article on BBC regarding Michelin's tyre tender, clarifying a few things about their proposal.

On hard rock tyres that 'you could put on at the first race and take of after the last race': 
- we are not opposed to bring technology to increase the show. So multiple pit stops is something we are not against.
- our philosophy is to bring a tyre that allows the drivers to drive at 100%.
- we could bring tyres that will last, for example, half a race and would keep the performance for the entire length of the stint. We know we can do that, because we do that every race in the World Endurance Championship

 

This is exactly what we need IMO, and I suspect Pirelli aren't capable of. I think Pirelli could do proper performance tyres if they wanted to, that would be much more durable than the current ones, but what we need is tyres that can be raced hard AND still wear considerably and I don't think Pirelli can do it.

 

No doubt there's a bit of PR on their side here, but I'd certainly back a return of Michelin.

[foreva]

Pirelli could do all that, but that wasn't their brief.

Not everyone in F1 seems to believe that according to the article

[stewie]

Makes sense to me.

Therefore it won't happen.

[RA2]

Michelin just needs to put in money into advertising and race sponsorship, more than what Pirelli are providing. Even if it is just a $ between them they would get the contract.

 

 

At the moment Pirelli puts in about $ 100 million into F1 (I guess in sponsorship alone as they cover their production and research cost by charging the teams $2 million each)  

[SealTheDiffuser]

Pirelli could do all that, but that wasn't their brief.

No.

 

look at their "rain" tyre

[iakhtar]

No more small windows or cliffs either please tyvm

[EvilPhil II]

It wasnt in the brief to have exploding poorly constructed tyres. 

[David1976]

Bring on Michelin.  Please Bernie don't mess this opportunity up.  

 

It annoys me every time I see a car losing huge amounts of laptime after small lock ups.  It is also upsetting that drivers cannot push 100% for fear of the tyres falling apart.  That isn't F1 in my opinion...

[shmoo]

Pirelli could do all that, but that wasn't their brief.

 

 

You mean their brief was to have inferior and sensitive tyres that could only operate under a small window? Very much doubt. 

[Alx09]

Sounds good to me.

 

No.

 

look at their "rain" tyre

 

Yeah... doesn't work unless it's almost dry.

[KingTiger]

Michellin just want to use their oversized and ugly sportscar tires to F1 without doing any work on them. That way they can advertise to a real viewerbase, without spending any money for development.

[OO7]

The only aspect of the Michelin tyre proposal I'm not in favour of, is the larger diameter tyres.

[Tourgott]

On bigger rims:
- we want to use taller tyres (72cm diameter (28.3in) rather than the current 66cm (26in) diameter) in addition to the bigger wheels, so although tyre sidewalls would reduce in size it would not be by as much as is first thought. This will allow the tyre to function at pretty much the same pressure as today.
- By doing that, you have a tyre that is more direct because the sidewall is a stronger spring and then your footprint is much more efficient.
- Because the tyre sidewall is not changing as much as teams thought, the effect on car design is much reduced and since F1 bosses are working on new rules for 2017, which include using wider tyres, the cars will need a redesign on this basis anyway

 

Thanks, but no thanks, Michelin. Please leave us alone!

[Spillage]

- our philosophy is to bring a tyre that allows the drivers to drive at 100%.
- we could bring tyres that will last, for example, half a race and would keep the performance for the entire length of the stint. We know we can do that, because we do that every race in the World Endurance Championship

 

Sounds delightful, but is it feasible? If the tyres last half the race at 100%, wouldn't the drivers just drive at 80% and make them last nearly the whole race? How hard are the drivers pushing this season anyway? We've not heard nearly so much about drivers driving within themselves this year.

 

Defintely would like to see the cars 3 seconds a lap quicker than they are at the moment, though. At least.

[DampMongoose]

Do they work on all types of corner?

[noikeee]

Sounds delightful, but is it feasible? If the tyres last half the race at 100%, wouldn't the drivers just drive at 80% and make them last nearly the whole race? How hard are the drivers pushing this season anyway? We've not heard nearly so much about drivers driving within themselves this year.

 

Defintely would like to see the cars 3 seconds a lap quicker than they are at the moment, though. At least.

 

Different tyres have different characteristics and a different "sweet spot" as to how optimal it is to push them. I'm pretty sure the drivers currently are instructed not to complain, but there was A LOT of moaning initially when Pirelli first came in and they started having to drive very differently. The first testing sessions were ridiculous, drivers were hitting a massive cliff in like less than 10 laps. It can be seen by the naked eye - do the current cars look like they're being pushed in the corners? Not at all.

 

You'd want a tyre where the sweet spot is to push most of the time, and maybe gain a few laps if you nurture them. Not a tyre where the fastest way to finish a race is to not even approach the limit and heavens forbid you go a bit past it once. Because that's how it looks like it is right now.

Edited by noikeee, 23 September 2015 - 16:47.

[STRFerrari4Ever]

I would welcome what Michelin are suggesting.

I personally think they'd produce higher quality tyres than Pirelli and if they were in competition with Pirelli, I think they'd beat them hands down too.

[ThisIsMischaW]

Pirelli could do all that, but that wasn't their brief.

 

Disagree, Pirelli were asked to make tyres with a limited lifespan, but there is scope within that to make much better tyres than what Pirelli manage.

[ardbeg]

Pirelli could do all that, but that wasn't their brief.

Problems with Pirelli has always been that hey are very sensitive. Peaky. The temperature range in which they work as so narrow that the driver has to drive the tires more than the track. I don't like them and I don't think any of the drivers do.

[Seanspeed]

No thanks. Rock hard tires make for boring, processional racing.

[RedOne]

No thanks. Rock hard tires make for boring, processional racing.

No, it makes drivers less scared of damaging them pushing hard or trying an overtake. Besides they did just say they won't be rock hard but just able to survive a stint without tiptoeing about on egg shells until you box.

[Tapz63]

No thanks. Rock hard tires make for boring, processional racing.

And delicate,fragile tyres that are too unsafe to be run at the optimal performance parameters are so much better?

[PayasYouRace]

It's the Goldilocks thing:

 

Bridgstone: These tyres are too hard.

Pirelli: These tyres are too soft.

 

Will Michelin have a tyre that is just right?

[OilFour]

Interesting article on BBC regarding Michelin's tyre tender, clarifying a few things about their proposal.

On hard rock tyres that 'you could put on at the first race and take of after the last race': 
- we are not opposed to bring technology to increase the show. So multiple pit stops is something we are not against.
- our philosophy is to bring a tyre that allows the drivers to drive at 100%.
- we could bring tyres that will last, for example, half a race and would keep the performance for the entire length of the stint. We know we can do that, because we do that every race in the World Endurance Championship

On bigger rims:
- we want to use taller tyres (72cm diameter (28.3in) rather than the current 66cm (26in) diameter) in addition to the bigger wheels, so although tyre sidewalls would reduce in size it would not be by as much as is first thought. This will allow the tyre to function at pretty much the same pressure as today.
- By doing that, you have a tyre that is more direct because the sidewall is a stronger spring and then your footprint is much more efficient.
- Because the tyre sidewall is not changing as much as teams thought, the effect on car design is much reduced and since F1 bosses are working on new rules for 2017, which include using wider tyres, the cars will need a redesign on this basis anyway

On performance
- 3 seconds faster than current tyres, without laptime degradation over a stint: more than two seconds in lap-time gain from the tyres (better and bigger footprint, compound), plus what you could gain with a different setting of the car (because of the stiffer sidewall you have less deformation in the sidewall, resulting in better height control of the car and the ability to run it lower than nowadays)


Sounds good to me (Y)

http://www.bbc.com/s...rmula1/34313145


PS. drivers and senior engineers in teams privately express their doubts about whether Pirelli could produce more durable tyres even if asked to do so.

i stopped reading after this line, we can't have a show Lewis lapping the whole field ... Including Rosberg ... So it will not happen.

[fridge46]

What is the definition of "stint"?

 

What ever it is, by whoevers definition, F1 teams will also go beyond that - so it is useless claiming tyres will last a certain period when no one will stick to it.

 

We see it now. Pirelli tyres have a stint length of "x" laps pushing at 100%. But who does that? No-one. They go at 90% to go an extra "y" laps, 80% for "z" laps until the grip is no longer there, to avoid having to do an additional stop, or anticipation of other factors.

 

If Michelin tyres have a stint length of "w" laps at 100% (where w is greater than x), what makes you think teams will no longer push at 80-90% until the tyres die for those additional laps.

 

I see nothing positive in Michelins proposal compared to the tyre situation today - unless we want more races like Russia!

[ANF]

It's the Goldilocks thing:
 
Bridgstone: These tyres are too hard.
Pirelli: These tyres are too soft.
 
Will Michelin have a tyre that is just right?

I think it's more a case of fast vs slow. I wouldn't be surprised if a team could set up a 2015 car for a set of 2010 medium Bridgestones, then do three or four laps around Singapore and be faster than with the supersoft Pirellis.

[Clatter]

No.

 

look at their "rain" tyre

The problem isn't the tyre, but Parc Ferme rules that prevent setup changes.

[RedOne]

i stopped reading after this line, we can't have a show Lewis lapping the whole field ... Including Rosberg ... So it will not happen.

They already do lap the whole field? And that's an engine disparity problem anyway.

[foreva]

What is the definition of "stint"?
 
What ever it is, by whoevers definition, F1 teams will also go beyond that - so it is useless claiming tyres will last a certain period when no one will stick to it.
 
We see it now. Pirelli tyres have a stint length of "x" laps pushing at 100%. But who does that? No-one. They go at 90% to go an extra "y" laps, 80% for "z" laps until the grip is no longer there, to avoid having to do an additional stop, or anticipation of other factors.
 
If Michelin tyres have a stint length of "w" laps at 100% (where w is greater than x), what makes you think teams will no longer push at 80-90% until the tyres die for those additional laps.
 
I see nothing positive in Michelins proposal compared to the tyre situation today - unless we want more races like Russia!

They will do what is fastest to get the race completed.
Say at one circuit, they have to do 60 laps, and the tyres last 35 laps at 100%. They will do 2 stints at 100%. If at another circuit they have to to 65 laps and the tyres there last 30 laps at 100%, they will do 2 stints below 100%.

Thing is, they will Always have the possibility to drive at 100% for certain moments in the race without fear that the tyres will just fall apart, contrary to what's the case now.

Edited by foreva, 23 September 2015 - 21:20.

[ANF]

What is the definition of "stint"?
 
What ever it is, by whoevers definition, F1 teams will also go beyond that - so it is useless claiming tyres will last a certain period when no one will stick to it.
 
We see it now. Pirelli tyres have a stint length of "x" laps pushing at 100%. But who does that? No-one. They go at 90% to go an extra "y" laps, 80% for "z" laps until the grip is no longer there, to avoid having to do an additional stop, or anticipation of other factors.
 
If Michelin tyres have a stint length of "w" laps at 100% (where w is greater than x), what makes you think teams will no longer push at 80-90% until the tyres die for those additional laps.
 
I see nothing positive in Michelins proposal compared to the tyre situation today - unless we want more races like Russia!

Do you see anything positive about it if it turns out that 80% Michelin is greater than 100% Pirelli?

[Atreiu]

No thanks. Rock hard tires make for boring, processional racing.

 

 

I think there a clear distinction between rock hard tyres and Michelin's proposal (tyres designed to be pushed for a given distance instead of nursed all along).

[peroa]

No thanks. Rock hard tires make for boring, processional racing.

Did you even read the article?

[peroa]

Pirelli could do all that, but that wasn't their brief.

lol, just lol...

[RealRacing]

F1 to Michelin: "Thanks guys, but even if tyres could be pushed at 100% for the whole race or a determined length of stint, the fuel limitations, engine limitations, gearbox limitations, among others, of our current regulations, would not allow drivers and teams to take advantage of that anyway. Thanks for giving a suggestion for trying to improve F1, but we get that everyday from everyone and have chosen not to listen. Best,..."

[GTRacer]

You mean their brief was to have inferior and sensitive tyres that could only operate under a small window? Very much doubt. 

I was told in 2011 that what they were asked to do was to try & ensure 2-3 stop races, How they achieve that is entirely upto them (Pirelli have opted to use thermal degredation) & they can in fact choose to ignore that if they wish & the same would be true for anyone else who was brought in to supply tyres.

 

Thing is, they will Always have the possibility to drive at 100% for certain moments in the race without fear that the tyres will just fall apart, like it's the case now.

Not true with the Pirelli's because of the thermal degredation. If you push 100% for a lap you overheat the tyres & not only is it next to impossible to get temperatures back down to the optimal window but it takes several laps of life off the tyres.

 

On the Bridgestones & Michelins we had before if you pushed too hard & overheated the tyres then you just needed to back off for a lap or 2 & temperatures would come back down & performance would come back with very little affect on wear & overall tyre life.

 

I think it was Jenson Button who said not long ago that with the Pre-Pirelli tyres the driver could read them very easily, They understood the way they wore & had a good feel for what they were doing. The Pirelli's are giving much less feel & are far harder to understand to the point where the drivers sometimes struggle to understand if a loss of grip is down to tyres or a problem with the car (Look at Bahrain 2013 with Alonso's DRS sticking open for example).

[foreva]

Not true with the Pirelli's because of the thermal degredation. If you push 100% for a lap you overheat the tyres & not only is it next to impossible to get temperatures back down to the optimal window but it takes several laps of life off the tyres.

Of course I meant 'in contrast to Pirelli'. Adjusted it

[Donka]

What is the definition of "stint"?

 

What ever it is, by whoevers definition, F1 teams will also go beyond that - so it is useless claiming tyres will last a certain period when no one will stick to it.

 

We see it now. Pirelli tyres have a stint length of "x" laps pushing at 100%. But who does that? No-one. They go at 90% to go an extra "y" laps, 80% for "z" laps until the grip is no longer there, to avoid having to do an additional stop, or anticipation of other factors.

 

If Michelin tyres have a stint length of "w" laps at 100% (where w is greater than x), what makes you think teams will no longer push at 80-90% until the tyres die for those additional laps.

 

I see nothing positive in Michelins proposal compared to the tyre situation today - unless we want more races like Russia!

 

Pirelli 100%   what's that 3-4 laps and then your tyres are shot.    That why "no-one does that" because they burn up and you're screwed.

[Seanspeed]

No, it makes drivers less scared of damaging them pushing hard or trying an overtake. Besides they did just say they won't be rock hard but just able to survive a stint without tiptoeing about on egg shells until you box.

Being able to push and overtake is an actual possibility, though.

I think people have forgotten what being able to push for the majority of a race leads to - processions. I have to give the FIA credit for understanding what makes good racing despite the vocal complaints of so many people. We are in a much better position than we've been in a long time.

[HoldenRT]

Only one person has mentioned so far that if Michelin returned, we might actually be able to have wet racing again.. ie having intermediates and especially full wets that actually work.  We already know Michelin could do it because they did it in the past.

[George Costanza]

The problem isn't the tyre, but Parc Ferme rules that prevent setup changes.

This...

 

Parc Ferme in the 1990s was radically different than now. If we had that today, (it would cost millions) it would be a big difference.

Edited by George Costanza, 24 September 2015 - 00:01.

[JeePee]

The only aspect of the Michelin tyre proposal I'm not in favour of, is the larger diameter tyres.

This.

 

I'm okay with the larger rim size, but larger tyre diameter just makes the cars look goofy.

 

Sounds delightful, but is it feasible? If the tyres last half the race at 100%, wouldn't the drivers just drive at 80% and make them last nearly the whole race? 

Not pushing them might let them cool down too much which can increase wear.

[Nonesuch]

I'm disappointed that Michelin abandoned its former principle about only joining F1 in a competitive environment.

 

As others have pointed out, tyres aren't the only reason why cars are so dramatically slower during the race than they are in qualifying - but it's nevertheless an important part of it.

 

If F1 wants to have spec-tyres, they might as well be as constant and unobtrusive as possible. Michelin's ideas might just fit nicely into that model.

[dweller23]

This sounds like PR BS to me, everyone goes like "wow sounds great" except for Michelin employees, who probably know what's really up and they go like "wtf is this about our product?". It's just the way corporations work.

[foreva]

Only one person has mentioned so far that if Michelin returned, we might actually be able to have wet racing again.. ie having intermediates and especially full wets that actually work.  We already know Michelin could do it because they did it in the past.

Michelin wants to bring their 'slick-inter' technology to F1. "Drivers in the WEC have expressed amazement about how this tyre performs in giving grip on a damp track despite having no grooves in it."

[Clatter]

Only one person has mentioned so far that if Michelin returned, we might actually be able to have wet racing again.. ie having intermediates and especially full wets that actually work. We already know Michelin could do it because they did it in the past.

It will make no difference whatsoever while we have parc ferme rules that prevent setup changes. The cars run so close to the ground that no matter what tyre is used they will likely aqua plane as soon as there is even a moderate amount of water on the track.

[Kalmake]

It will make no difference whatsoever while we have parc ferme rules that prevent setup changes. The cars run so close to the ground that no matter what tyre is used they will likely aqua plane as soon as there is even a moderate amount of water on the track.

Wets have a larger diameter. It could be even larger but then you start to lose too much downforce and aquaplane because of that.

[Kalmake]

This sounds like PR BS to me, everyone goes like "wow sounds great" except for Michelin employees, who probably know what's really up and they go like "wtf is this about our product?". It's just the way corporations work.

I'm not sure it's BS, but it's PR for sure. Michelin are not dumb, they know getting the deal from Bernie is a long shot. But why not get some free publicity.