16 replies to this topic

[Atreiu]

I read the piece on the front page of Hamilton saying Only F1 drivers are "pushing" Pirelli to make better tyres.

 

While I'm not against tyres evolving and keeping up with F1, it does seem as if people expect Pirelli to make a tyre imune to turbulence.

 

Shouldn't people be pushing for teams and the FIA to work hard and constantly towards cars that do a better job negating turbulence?

 

I have been extremely cricitcal of Pirelli in the past, but now it seems as if they have been given an impossible task which should not even be theirs to begin with.

 

Or maybe I read it incorrectly.

 

https://www.autospor...prove--hamilton

[Marklar]

I still think that the drivers are a major reason why some things are as flawed as they currently are in F1 (just like fans btw). They change their demands on the product every damn time and when it arrives like demanded (even if not 100 %) they just demand the opposite again. Lewis for instance has asked in the past for tyres you can push on, last week he was complaining about 1 stop races. I mean yes, theoretically you can have everything (also not overheating tyres) but thats difficult and we know by now that we cant have that with Pirelli for a number of reasons that to be fair are not *only* their fault.

[Rodaknee]

Mark Hughes' opinion about the background to the current tyre issues.

 

https://the-race.com...recking-racing/

[Atreiu]

I read that as well. I don't like how it more or less has the same idea of Pirelli having to solve all of F1's problems. I think people should question why the cars have become so massive despite decades and decades of F1 racing have shown us they don't have to be.

[F1matt]

Change the model, bring in another manufacturer and have a good old fashioned tyre war. What fan wouldn’t want the drama?

[Atreiu]

Is it possible to have a tyre war and assure no team benefits from favouratism?

[MrAerodynamicist]

The problem with tyre wars is they are rarely even battles. If you look at the full history of F1, most of the time one tyre ends up drastically superior to the others. The last Bridgestone-Michelin era was an anomaly. 

 

I still think that the drivers are a major reason why some things are as flawed as they currently are in F1 (just like fans btw). They change their demands on the product every damn time and when it arrives like demanded (even if not 100 %) they just demand the opposite again. Lewis for instance has asked in the past for tyres you can push on, last week he was complaining about 1 stop races. I mean yes, theoretically you can have everything (also not overheating tyres) but thats difficult and we know by now that we cant have that with Pirelli for a number of reasons that to be fair are not *only* their fault.

 

You can have tyre that both allow pushing and have short life spans; see the qualifying tyres of the 80s/90s. They only lasted a lap or so but for that lap you could attack really hard.  The problem with Pirelli's tyres has always been their thermal sensitivity and the need to mollycoddle them for every single corner. I've seen it suggested a few times that it's a consequence of Pirelli's automated manufacturing process they use to meet their budget. Of course Pirelli won't ever  comment on that!

[TheFish]

I've been thinking recently about Pirelli and what a rough deal they seem to be getting. When they came into F1, they were asked to make tyres that degrade a lot to force more pit stops and varied strategies, which they did exactly as requested. There has been the odd race where things haven't gone to plan (Silverstone, mostly) but generally they've provided what they were asked to.

 

Now we're at the stage where we have the fastest race cars in history and the tyres are absolutely good enough to allow people to 1 stop at Spa with an early first stop (and even set a fastest lap on the final lap) and people are complaining that tyres are being managed too much. Previously the complaint was that the tyres have gone off too quick, or unable to be pushed. Whatever they do, the teams find a way to maximise performance. It's not Pirelli's fault - they have produced good tyres that allow 1 stop races after being asked to produce durable tyres for the fastest cars in history.

 

As soon as they produce tyres that degrade more, teams will just do more managing, a la Silverstone 2 where some drivers still managed a 1 stop despite the softer tyres and the failures the week earlier. Whatever they bring to races, they will be criticised and it's not their fault.

[Rediscoveryx]

Is it possible to have a tyre war and assure no team benefits from favouratism?

 

I came up with the (perhaps) brilliant (perhaps not) idea of a fictive tyre war yesterday.

 

Essentially it would work in the following way:

 

Instead of Pirelli giving teams the option of chosing number of sets from three pre-described compounds for each race, they would give teams the option of chosing between two different mixes of compounds. So as an example; perhaps Mercedes chose the soft/hard combo, and Red Bull would chose the ultra-soft/medium combo. Thereby you would have an intra-Pirelli "tyre war", where on some tracks, the top team(s) would have made the wrong tyre choices and the lower-tier teams would have a chance of fighting them due to a tyre advantage, sort of like in the tyre war years. But there would be no favouritism, and no situation where one tyre supplier is dominant over the other over the course of the entire season, with teams already locked in to one tyre supplier. In some races you would see Mercedes and Red Bull chose the same compounds an on others you'd see them diverge.

 

Of course, this would do nothing to solve the question of improving tyre technology that perhaps is at the heart of the issue as well.

Edited by Rediscoveryx, 01 September 2020 - 07:27.

[Beri]

I'd say:

1) Put on tyres on that can be pushed all the time and do not have to be managed

2) Mandate everyone to do 2 pitstops during a race

3) All three compounds have to be used during the race

4) Qualifying is done on qualifying tyres and the races will start on fresh new tyres

5) For free practice teams (both drivers) can only use 2 compounds to test. So the one compound left is a surprise on how it handles during the race.

[Rediscoveryx]

I'd say:

1) Put on tyres on that can be pushed all the time and do not have to be managed

2) Mandate everyone to do 2 pitstops during a race

3) All three compounds have to be used during the race

4) Qualifying is done on qualifying tyres and the races will start on fresh new tyres

5) For free practice teams (both drivers) can only use 2 compounds to test. So the one compound left is a surprise on how it handles during the race.

 

 

I think some of your suggestions are good, and some aren't.

 

1) This is effectively a call for very hard tyres. If you can push without the need for management that basically means that the tyres will have to have a life-span that exceeds the GP length even when pushed to the maximum. It is to a large extent a law of nature that softer/faster tyres will degrade quicker, and thus they will in some sense need to be managed. It can only be circumvented through making them more durable but not as fast (ok, there are nuances here, but in essence the call for "grippy tyres that drivers can push on but that won't need any management" is either a call for very hard tyres or for some sci-fi-fantasy tyres).

2) I don't like this, I think what we need is more strategic variance, not more pit stops per se. One of my favourite races is the 1986 Mexican GP, where Gerhard Berger won on a no-stop strategy while most other drivers did three or even four stops. The ultimate scenario for me is when the compounds end up being calibrated enough so that there is little theoretical difference between different number of stops, and you'll see different strategies play out during the race. Mandating a certain number of stops is not a good idea (apart perhaps from Monaco where everyone would go no-stop if they could), as it limits strategic variance. What you'll most likely end up with is primarily a battle for undercuts. But perhaps it would gel with your first idea, as this means that no one will be driving on one set of tyres for too long, which reduces the need for management.

3) See point two

4) This one I like though. Preferably, the qualifying tyres should be way softer than the tyres available during the race so that the car that's fastest on quallies won't necessarily be the car that's fastest on the softest available race compound.

5) I like this, but why not let them practice solely on compounds that won't be used at all during qualifying and the race? That would give an even bigger effect.

Edited by Rediscoveryx, 01 September 2020 - 07:52.

[shure]

I get the argument that tyres that are too durable may limit strategies, but OTOH I also feel that the best drivers today are largely the ones who are the best at managing these tyres and overall I don't think this should have quite as much influence as it does.  I don't mind it being a skill, but it's pretty much become the skill that a driver must master.  At Spa Leclerc's fastest lap - set in the final stint when I believe they were on the same rubber? - was over 2s faster than Vettel's, despite being set 5 laps earlier.  And even if you feel Leclerc is quicker than Vettel, does anyone really think he's more than 2s a lap quicker?  Clearly Vettel was managing his pace, not pushing.  And I'll bet that's true of most of the drivers out there.  I'd rather have more durable and less sensitive tyres so I would at least come away feeling every driver had pushed, rather than feel like I've just witnessed a lesson in tyre management and patience

[Vesuvius]

I get the argument that tyres that are too durable may limit strategies, but OTOH I also feel that the best drivers today are largely the ones who are the best at managing these tyres and overall I don't think this should have quite as much influence as it does. I don't mind it being a skill, but it's pretty much become the skill that a driver must master. At Spa Leclerc's fastest lap - set in the final stint when I believe they were on the same rubber? - was over 2s faster than Vettel's, despite being set 5 laps earlier. And even if you feel Leclerc is quicker than Vettel, does anyone really think he's more than 2s a lap quicker? Clearly Vettel was managing his pace, not pushing. And I'll bet that's true of most of the drivers out there. I'd rather have more durable and less sensitive tyres so I would at least come away feeling every driver had pushed, rather than feel like I've just witnessed a lesson in tyre management and patience

True. However at Spa, didn't Leclerc do 2 stops, while Seb did just 1stop?

[eibyyz]

How about a tyre competition with an expense cap?  If a cap can be enforced with engines, chassis and car development, why not ancillaries?  

[Okyo]

I'd say:

1) Put on tyres on that can be pushed all the time and do not have to be managed with a decent gap between the performance of the compounds.

2) All three compounds have to be used during the race

 

There.
There's a fine line between being gimmicky.  These two changes would be more than enough. 
 

[Jazza]

Is it possible to have a tyre war and assure no team benefits from favouratism?

With all the testing restrictions it would be hard to get a Ferrari-Bridgestone type scenario again. So maybe tyres could be sold like a market place with no fixed contracts. Teams can buy whatever tyres they want for each race. The FIA can mandate a maximum price for a set of tyres and set absolute dimensions for the tyre so they are all exactly the same size. Then a team can decide what tyres they want to buy for use in future races. If one tyre company makes a crap product, it won’t be long before everyone starts switching to the competition during the season.

Of course there are heaps of issues with the above (especially logistics), but it would stop the possibility of one team being unstoppable because they had the right tyre contract all season.

[shure]

True. However at Spa, didn't Leclerc do 2 stops, while Seb did just 1stop?

yes, but that still shows the point that Vettel was having to heavily manage his tyres.and this really influenced how he ran his race to a significant degree.