138 replies to this topic

[F1Newbie]

Pirelli says it can bring boring processions back to F1 if asked. Were Bridgestone durable tyres really boring? Are we having better racing now with Pirelli than we use to have with Bridgestone tyres?

Edited by F1Newbie, 13 May 2013 - 19:43.

[SpaMaster]

Anything is better than the Bridgestones..

[Pothead4Philosopher]

Racing is much more interesting now -- although I think Pirelli has a little tweaking to do to get it completely right. But I take this racing format any day over the 'wait until pit-stops and hope to win a spot' days.

[BRG]

When was the era when nobody gave a s**t about what rubber was wrapped round the wheels? That would be the best era.

[jimjimjeroo]

Goodyear mid late 90s

[Markn93]

I'd like to see a concoction of DRS, Kers and Bridgestone-like tyres just to see the outcome. I rather get the feeling most would quite enjoy it.

[apoka]

I'd like to see a concoction of DRS, Kers and Bridgestone-like tyres just to see the outcome. I rather get the feeling most would quite enjoy it.

Exactly my thoughts. Before we had Bridgestones without KERS and DRS. Bridgestones with both overtaking aids could be interesting.

I have argued for Pirelli quite a few times, didn't like Bridgestones and I usually enjoy every race, but Saturday was just unbelievably boring. I really hope they tweak those tyres such that drivers can push for something like at least 10% of the race (more would be better).

[rasul]

I'd like to see a concoction of DRS, Kers and Bridgestone-like tyres just to see the outcome. I rather get the feeling most would quite enjoy it.

This. It would be perfect.

[Zoetrope]

I have a very short memory of F1, but I like current era. Yes, Spannish Grand Prix was awful experience, but generally this year isn't that bad considering the tyres.

[artista]

Hmm, what do I prefer? the time when the "race" was decided during qualifying on Saturday? or now?
No doubt, I prefer what we have now. I never understood the logic behind a racing series that was decided on Saturday instead of Sunday.

[Seanspeed]

I'd like to see a concoction of DRS, Kers and Bridgestone-like tyres just to see the outcome. I rather get the feeling most would quite enjoy it.

I prefer Pirelli, but I wouldn't be averse to this. Watching races back in the 2000's is painful now, to be honest. DRS would help with that, but I enjoy the added dimension the Pirelli tires bring. Its a different type of racing - a bit more 'thinking man's' and strategic while also being more action-packed. F1 cars are still extremely impressive compared to any other road-racing car, so I dont quite fall in with the 'I need to see them go faster' crowd.

Edited by Seanspeed, 13 May 2013 - 18:09.

[Gene and Tonic]

The tyre-war era

[Nonesuch]

I'd prefer a full blown 'tyre-war' with 3+ manufacturers. Since that is unlikely to happen and we'll probably be stuck with spec-tyres, I prefer whichever makes them least relevant.

[Jimisgod]

When was the era when nobody gave a s**t about what rubber was wrapped round the wheels? That would be the best era.

You mean the era when everyone was whinging about fuel levels "oh he was fueled light in quali" etc.? The one where every overtake happened in the pits?

[Paco]

Personally I've accepted its a very difficult thing to analyze but I do feel the current generation of tires this year is way to weak a construction. I'd rather see 2 strong compounds but soft and hards. Whatever you qualify on you must race exclusively and not mandate that both be used. That way, some teams could gamble on softs with more stops vs. Hard and long runs.

That said, its also a matter of the ban on refueling too that's taking away from the show. I for one initially wanted a ban and letting the drivers feel their way as a car lightened up and drivers looked after their tires but I admit I may have been wrong. I very much liked the era of all out lap after lap on the limit racing. This conservation era F1 simply is tooooo boring and its more about who drives the least harse and eases of the throttle more then who's on the ragged edge. I perfer racing vs. Looking after yoyr car from lap 1 to end of race.

[drag]

Pirelli , we had really spectacular races to be honest not just for the top spot but also great midfield battles.

[spacekid]

Why does it have to always be - Bridgestone or Pirelli?

What was wrong with this?

[Paco]

Also, I think DRS + refueling + way more durable pirelli's would help tremendously. Or else, bernie's idea of a random sprinkler system of years ago may be the only solution.

[Kingshark]

Well, on most circuits the Bridgestone tyres were so durable that you could do 40 qualifying laps on them and still have decent grip left.

Pirelli on the other hand, fall apart like cheese.

Make your pick.

[ivand911]

I'd like to see a concoction of DRS, Kers and Bridgestone-like tyres just to see the outcome. I rather get the feeling most would quite enjoy it.

I would like to see that.
Tyres should be neutral. Bridgestone era was more fair than now. Qualifying has importance, if slow car qualify ahead it has chance to stay there. If you have good car and qualify bad it is your problem, you should fight to move ahead. You don't deserve any help for that. You should fight, and now they have DRS and KERS. If that is not good enough, probably you are not for F1. This was normal F1 that I remember. Now we have WWE. Now they don't have one race, everyone have his own race?? Car trains means they we racing closely, now they don't race because they don't meet on the track. Now they separate on delta groups.

[Seanspeed]

This conservation era F1 simply is tooooo boring and its more about who drives the least harse and eases of the throttle more then who's on the ragged edge.

Thats such a false simplification, though. Of course being able to conserve tires now is important, but its not about who does it most. A driver could go out there and drive 20 seconds a lap slower than necessary, make the tires last a whole lot longer, but would finish last because they weren't pushing hard enough. Its about a balance between conservation and aggressiveness, knowing how and when to do each to maximize pace and strategy/track position.

[ivand911]

Why does it have to always be - Bridgestone or Pirelli?

What was wrong with this?

It is not fair , why they don't conserve tyres, they should be ashamed for racing.

[Shiroo]

Anything but bulletproof Bridgestones. God damn it, Barcelona was then a procession, after the 3rd corner you knew the result of the race. Only overtakes in pit stops or due to tactic (when was refueling stil there). Horrible times, simply horrible.


I would like to see F1 where tyres last 20laps but 20 laps that are like quali laps, where they have downforce like in 80-90s so they can follow someone ahead of them like 0.3 and dont get too much of dirty air, ground effect, small wings, DRS, KERS and ERS and V12 or V10 engines with turbo just for sake of having a turbo in it.

THAT WOULD BE amazing F1. Cars going 360 on Monza, 3100+ in 130R or so. Simply ****in amazing.


But if I would pick from Bridgestone bulletproof / Pirelli cheesetyre then, with all due respect Pirelli is a winner. Cause everything might happen.

[SpaMaster]

I think there would be a great revelation if you could make it as a poll.

[ivand911]

But if I would pick from Bridgestone bulletproof / Pirelli cheesetyre then, with all due respect Pirelli is a winner. Cause everything might happen.

You mean like in circus? Yeah, if I want that I will go to circus ,not on F1 track. I prefer best car and driver to win. I prefer logic in F1, than BS. Even with Bridgestones now , they have KERS and DRS, this should be enough.

[tjkoyen]

As long as the tires last enough that drivers can push to their and the car's maximum for more than 1 lap, I will like it. I was to see aggressive racing action, not parades of drivers driving to a delta, letting each other pass without fighting.

If you recall Kobayashi's driving at Suzuka 2010 where he overtook 5 cars with aggressive attacks into the hairpin, I feel like that would not be possible with the current crop of Pirelli tires. Fighting like that would destroy the tires. I want to see racing.

Hearing Lewis' radio transmission in Spain, "I can't drive any slower." was pitiful. Sure Mercedes and some teams are partially to blame for not figuring the tires out or having a car that is hard on tires, but forcing teams to build cars that have less grip built into the car so they make the tires last is ridiculous. Red Bull have said (and take what they say with a grain of salt) that if they push 100% and go for the optimal lap in qualifying, the tires won't even last 1 lap on the softs.

Tires shouldn't be the limiting factor of the racing. Sure, they can play a role and tire conservation skills are valid, but to make them dictate this much of the strategy, driving, and car design is pretty weak.

[tkulla]

I think the current era is the best I've seen (1988-present). Yes, it could use a bit of tweaking but Pirelli has managed to make F1 cars about more than downforce. Mechanical grip and suspension design are important again in a way they haven't been for a long time, and that's a good thing. F1 shouldn't be just about aerodynamics.

Tyre wars are awful because the end result is a two driver championship, as each manufacturer caters to their top team. Since one of those teams will be Ferrari the other manufacturer and their chosen team is forced to focus on one driver as well in order to compete. This is great if you're an Alonso fan since he'd benefit from such an arrangement, but if you root for anyone else it's not as much fun.

[pacificquay]

Back in the day they'd use the same tyres for almost half a season

[FastnLoud]

For me if we had 2010 all over again with Bridgestones and DRS it would be brilliant

2010 has been the best season for a long long time.

2011 was shocking, 2012 was very good but wasn't that special and this year it's just becoming a joke.

2010 end of season with Alonso trying to pass Petrov was on the edge of your seat stuff with will he won't he, him going off track trying everything to pass.

[Spillage]

I really think it a choice between one or another, you can't have both. If Pirelli built tyres that could last 20 qualifying laps, the teams would still have the drivers going at 80% in order to make them last 40 laps. The only way to have drivers flat-out all race is to have a situation like in 2010, when I remember we had the ridiculous incidence of Vettel managing all but one of the race laps on the soft tyre.

This is why I like the Pirelli era of racing. It is really only in the past ten years that drivers have been able to go flat out all race anyway - back in the 70s and 80s they'd still be moderating their pace to conserve th engine, gearbox etc.

[Coral]

I would like to see the return of Bridgestones and refuelling. The kind of racing we saw in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 is the racing I want to see...the best drivers in the world fighting it out, driving as fast as they can. I could not care less about midfield battles or "underdogs" getting into the points. For me, F1 should be a sport, not a show. It wasn't broken, but they fixed it anyway.

[ashley313]

Pirelli is choosing to ignore that there is something between what we saw yesterday and "boring processions". There is a balance among all the regulations and equipment that creates interesting, fair racing..and right now the Pirelli tire is out of balance. I wish they'd be less defensive about what they have done and just accept that they've missed the target. Its fine to remind us that they may have missed that target because of the limited testing and out of date car they use for their own testing, but they don't need to be throwing around hyperbole and deflecting the responsibility.

[P123]

We have DRS and KERS now so any comparisons to the past will be skewed by the absence of these two factors.

I'm not so sure three and four pitstops per race are a requirement for exceitement. And DRS passing which drivers tend not to fight is no more entertaining that pitstop passing- in fact give me an Alonso v Schumacher Imola situation over that any day. If you want ideal tyres for 'excitement/ show' purposes then the Michelin's from the early '00s would be ideal. Tyres which grained up badly, provided a challenge for the drivers then came back to life. It would be like having the opening laps of the USGP in every race. They also weren't hugely durable, in case anybody is worried about being deprived of pitlane entertainment.

[tkulla]

Pirelli is choosing to ignore that there is something between what we saw yesterday and "boring processions". There is a balance among all the regulations and equipment that creates interesting, fair racing..and right now the Pirelli tire is out of balance. I wish they'd be less defensive about what they have done and just accept that they've missed the target. Its fine to remind us that they may have missed that target because of the limited testing and out of date car they use for their own testing, but they don't need to be throwing around hyperbole and deflecting the responsibility.

Lotus is the argument that they haven't missed. Clearly it's possible to manage these tyres well if you design the car to do so. In the 5Live podcast they looked at tyres after the race and apparently Kimi's looked beautiful. He was even able to use the Mediums for long stints. That tells me there's nothing wrong the tyres - just that teams are slow to catch up to the new paradigm.

[P123]

F1 shouldn't be just about aerodynamics.

Very true. But the current approach to tyres (and the use of DRS) is just a sticking plaster to artificially create racing made impossible by the over-reliance on aero for performance.

[Seanspeed]

I could not care less about midfield battles or "underdogs" getting into the points.

I would expect this from a casual fan, but to see it from somebody who obviously cares enough about this sport to make an account and post somewhat regularly, I find it an incredibly sad attitude.

For me, F1 should be a sport, not a show.

Its always been both and still is.

These sorts of comments and other lousy appeals to emotion really do no good in terms of constructive discussion.

[ashley313]

Lotus is the argument that they haven't missed. Clearly it's possible to manage these tyres well if you design the car to do so. In the 5Live podcast they looked at tyres after the race and apparently Kimi's looked beautiful. He was even able to use the Mediums for long stints. That tells me there's nothing wrong the tyres - just that teams are slow to catch up to the new paradigm.

Kimi was coasting around out there - is that what you want to see? He practically came to a stop before turning in. DC even thought his car was broken at one point. If doing a 3 stop race means crawling around, is it worth it for the fans? If he had 4 stopped maybe we would have seen him a position to actually fight with Fernando rather than cruise around in 30 seconds of isolation. Not worth the risk for the team to make that call though, so a consequence of the product delivered by Pirelli is that teams are choosing not to fight. How anyone could want that I don't know.

[Shiroo]

I think the current era is the best I've seen (1988-present). Yes, it could use a bit of tweaking but Pirelli has managed to make F1 cars about more than downforce. Mechanical grip and suspension design are important again in a way they haven't been for a long time, and that's a good thing. F1 shouldn't be just about aerodynamics.

Tyre wars are awful because the end result is a two driver championship, as each manufacturer caters to their top team. Since one of those teams will be Ferrari the other manufacturer and their chosen team is forced to focus on one driver as well in order to compete. This is great if you're an Alonso fan since he'd benefit from such an arrangement, but if you root for anyone else it's not as much fun.

Imo F1 should be only about aero downforce. Even more, we should just measure cars aero downforce and the one with the best is winner, without racing, without spending cash onf uel etc. What's the point of suspension or engine at all

[muramasa]

80s or 90s cars that are significantly less aero sensitive.

Or GP2 cars of mid 00s that had little bit of ground effect ie less aero sensitive.

[The Kanisteri]

60's tyres. They lasted few GPs...

[olliek88]

I prefer the current era over the everlasting Bridgestone's, comfortably, but i think the weekends race was a little too much. 4 stops is 1 or 2 too many for my liking, 2-3 is perfect IMHO, also i wish they would give the teams an extra set or two for the race, hopefully to solve the qualifying issue and scrap the rule about the top 10 starting on the tyres they did Q3 on.

For me its not an issue overall, the odd race has been too much but other than that i'm happy with Pirelli's tyres and i really hope they don't go the other way and become too conservative. Its a fine line but its not the tyre deg that's the main issue, its a symptom of one or two other things not being optimal, old tyre allocations/rules that were introduced in the old Bridgestone era and are no longer relevant, DRS is another example of this but that discussion is for another thread.

[Massa_f1]

Goodyear mid late 90s

This

[Lelouch]

I think a combo of this era with the end of the previous one or maybe the goodyear era could be ok. Simply put maybe Pirelli tires that would a few seconds faster for everyone and still we could have 2-3 pit stops.

The problem seems to be that if the tires aren't like this the Red Bull will dominate ( at least according to Pirelli but I think it's very possible ). Maybe for next year they should rethink a few things because although it's possible that Pirelli was working towards the right direction they went too far. As many state I enjoyed the 2005-2008 seasons even though my favourite driver was retired in the last 2. Also I liked the racing in 1998-2000 and the tire war was ok.

I think what most of us want is to avoid one-team domination and that's Pirelli's aim too. Keep the field shuffled as much as possible. But at the end of the day the fastest car+driver combo has to win. Last year was a pretty good year and I think all of us need to realize that if we remove the tire factor the field won't be shuffled so what we need is probably a better balance between the factors that make a car win.

Furthermore, even with extreme tires (not this year's because they have gone too far again IMHO) in the end the teams come on top (except for Mercedes) and we can still have processional racing.

The thing is that you can't have it all and in F1 we want both top technology, aerodynamics and innovation but at the same time we want it to be like a spec series were the best driver wins but you won't have him lap half the field for example.

So the bottom line for me is that I we can't create a new and different era I would like to have this era with less extreme tires, fewer pit stops (2-3 is ok and is what Pirelli wants too) and I don't want DRS and a few boring tracks need to go. The question is what you do when the teams come on top for the tires after the first half of the year and what you prepare for the next year.

Softening the compounds will work for only 2-3 years as 2013 has indicated as we have reached a dead end already (or we are getting there).

[britishtrident]

Firestone v Goodyear was good war withmajor new developments at almost every race.

[ivand911]

They should rename the WCC to World Championships for best car with Pirelli tyres(WCBCPT). Or Oscar for best usage of Pirelli tyres goes to ...........
Now Pirelli make WCC and WDC useless. Because there isn't constructor and driver competition anymore.

Edited by ivand911, 13 May 2013 - 19:31.

[FerrariV12]

The best tyre era?

The one where manufacturers could actually compete against each other, whether they chose to or not (so I include the all-Goodyear years in that).

Was no fan of the spec Bridgestones, but at least they were a product of competition.

[Anderis]

The ideal case scenario is to make the tyres that allow you to push as much as you can for certain amount of laps without any damage (for example: primes 15 laps, options 8 laps) and then start to degrade quite quickly, but steadily. I don't know if it is achievable though. If not, I would pefer 2011-2013 Pirellis over 2010 Bridgestones way more.

Perhaps the best dry races I had seen in F1 in the last few years were those, when frontunner's strategies were split between 2 and 3 stops. I agree 4 stops may be a bit too much, because tyre degrade so quickly that driver in front doesn't even try to defend, because he thinks it's better to manage his tyres or his tyres are in such a bad shape that he is in a lost position no matter how hard he tries. Still I prefer everything of those more than situation like in 2010, when you could even go the whole race on 1 set of tyres if there only wasn't a two compound use rule.

[F1Newbie]

I think there would be a great revelation if you could make it as a poll.

I was trying to make a poll but I guess I failed. My attempt was:

Which era do you prefer.

Bridgestone [2007 , 2008, 2009, 2010]

or

Pirelli [ 2011, 2012, 2013]

I don't know why the poll didn't appear with the thread.

[VoltagE]

I would like a tyre era of two (or possibly more) manufacturers who will bring a tyre compound they think is best for that GP.
Each driver will get 3 sets of both tyres for free practise sessions and from qualy every driver has to chose the manufacturer allocation so that they will have to take 6 sets from one and 3 sets from the other manufacturer.
And both manufacturers tyres has to be used in a race and everybody has to start on the tyre they set their best time unless the qualy session was not a completely dry session.

Wet and intermediate tires would be alternating between manufacturers. Ie on one race the manufacturer A will bring wet tyres and manufacturer B the intermediate tyres and on next GP the other way round.

[muramasa]

Jeez, when will people realize it's the car, mainly aero, and to great extent engine freeze and rev limit as well, that is the problem, not tyres?