Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

The Future of the F1 Tire Supply


  • Please log in to reply
67 replies to this topic

#1 Secretariat

Secretariat
  • Member

  • 396 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 03 January 2022 - 19:56

Obviously a lot of focus has been on the 2022 car itself and for good reason. However, what about the tires? Pirelli's contract is supposed to end in 2024. (https://www.motorspo...d-2024/5596123/) Of course, a new extension will make the following points moot, but are we now in a space to add more tire suppliers to the grid? Given that the FIA has the cost cap and are trying to limit car development via how they will police further developments, it seems natural that some of the development moves back to the tires. Opening up the supply also allows for more corporate participation and marketing for whoever wants to offer a tire supply. However, I think the caveat is that the FIA and F1  try and have future suppliers submit to a cap or be apart of the team cap in some way, shape or form. Also from a technology point of view, is this where we see tubeless tire technology grow? 

 

It's a thought about the future that is worthy of discussion given the history of complaints regarding Pirelli's participation and seems in line with the cycle of change that is happening in the sport at this moment. What's your opinion and thoughts regarding the future of the tire supply? Will it happen? Do you want to see it happen? Is a control tire in the best interest of the sport?



Advertisement

#2 Risil

Risil
  • Administrator

  • 47,862 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 03 January 2022 - 20:19

In theory I'd like a tyre war but in practice a lot of the strategic variety that drives interesting F1 races these days comes from rules and allocations that are (I think) predicated on a control supplier. I wouldn't want sporting purity to come at the cost of 20 identical and static races.

I'm not sure if anyone except possibly Michelin is up for a tyre competition in F1 anyway. And you need two equally committed manufacturers to make it work.

#3 shure

shure
  • Member

  • 9,100 posts
  • Joined: April 17

Posted 03 January 2022 - 20:22

I would love to see it happen, but it's not compatible with today's tire philosophy, so would need radical change.

 

People use the Pirelli tires because they have no choice.  But as a racing product they leave much to be desired.  If you push too hard, they deteriorate disproportionately quickly, and you race strategy is heavily compromised by having the necessary evil of using at least two compounds, which may not be what is actually best for your car.   The tires are not a performance enhancer, but deliberately engineered to be a performance limiter, unlike almost everything else on the car. The whole thermal degradation that we've heard so much about over the years is part of a deliberate policy to introduce a significant performance variable between cars, to create an imbalance which may lead to overtaking etc.  It's a joker card designed to allow the FIA to exert some control over how a race unfolds, by determining which compounds are available. But everyone is in the same boat, so no-one really has an advantage

 

That changes as soon as you introduce another supplier (or suppliers).  Because then there's an incentive for each supplier to improve their product, to give their customers an edge.  Which means the whole raison d'etre for these tires goes away.  Who's going to want to be with a supplier that makes tires degrade more quickly than the opposition?  Which team will be happy to make two stops while their competitors can get away with one?  Because no supplier will be happy being known as the worst tire manufacturer on the grid, just like no PU manufacturer currently enjoys being known as the weakest.

 

I just don't see the FIA moving away from this, as it's been a central tenet of their race philosophy for a decade now and would require a complete change.  Possible, but unlikely IMO



#4 Secretariat

Secretariat
  • Member

  • 396 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 03 January 2022 - 20:37

I think one of the things that makes me think about it is the move toward the 18 inch wheel/tire combination. If it was the 13 inch tech, no way a company would want to make a unique solution. However, given that there is some cross over with WEC with Michelin and Goodyear and the fact that Pirelli will have garnered more experience with the 18 inch tech in F2 and F1 by the time the contract comes due, it's an interesting thought. However as noted, it cannot be free development of the tire and it would need to be incorporated into the cost cap. Otherwise, it would be a non-starter from a FIA/F1 point of view in my opinion.   


Edited by Secretariat, 03 January 2022 - 20:42.


#5 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 34,757 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 03 January 2022 - 21:08

Even in an uncapped manner, a tyre war rarely works to provide the best racing. The tyre is too important to the performance of the car. It's too easy to end up with seasons where who wins is decided purely on who's tyres are best that day. Now if the suppliers provide their teams with the same tyres, like Michelin did, then at least there's a good chance of competition between their teams. But if the supplier favours one top customer exclusively, like Bridgestone ended up doing, then when they're the tyre to have there's no competition at all.

 

As for a tyre war in a cost capped situation? Surely that is just locking in advantages for the haves and the disadvantages for the have-nots. I think we've had enough of locked in advantages in F1 recently.



#6 SkidmarksLeadToTheCrash

SkidmarksLeadToTheCrash
  • Member

  • 34 posts
  • Joined: September 20

Posted 03 January 2022 - 21:36

Great thread topic and question.

I've always wondered why one manufacturer for all. Not compatible with much else related to motorsport competition. If more than one manufacturer would compete for a team selecting it, competition among manufacturers would skyrocket and there would be more diversity in the equipment from team to team. Engines are different among the teams, designs are modified, electronics are unique from team to team, as long as the rules are followed (which is why you have inspections pre- and post-race). Ultimately, I'd like to see multiple manufacturers supplying tires to teams in the spirit of competition. 



#7 Fastcake

Fastcake
  • Member

  • 11,960 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 03 January 2022 - 21:41

If we had a tyre war there's a high probability Mercedes and Red Bull would have ended up with different tyres, with Mercedes having an exclusive deal (best team attracts best supplier), and we would have had to deal with endless Horner whining over it. Enough of a reason to banish the thought.

 

In theory I'd like a tyre war but in practice a lot of the strategic variety that drives interesting F1 races these days comes from rules and allocations that are (I think) predicated on a control supplier. I wouldn't want sporting purity to come at the cost of 20 identical and static races.

I'm not sure if anyone except possibly Michelin is up for a tyre competition in F1 anyway. And you need two equally committed manufacturers to make it work.

Last time we had the tyre tender Michelin were up for competition and Pirelli wanted exclusivity, and no one else appeared interested. I guess that answers that.



#8 onewingedangel

onewingedangel
  • Member

  • 1,363 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 03 January 2022 - 21:43

Michelin wanted 18" as a prerequisite previously, so it removes a hurdle, but F1 tyre supply is largely a commercial agreement and I can't see F1 going back to open competition between tyre manufacturers.

So it'll be about who is willing to pay the most to be F1's tyre supplier.

#9 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 14,704 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 03 January 2022 - 21:50

Previously it was 1 year 13" and the rest of the contract 18" with Corona, the 13" got used an additional year. But no one wanted to develop a tire for a single year and start over for the 18"



#10 Secretariat

Secretariat
  • Member

  • 396 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 03 January 2022 - 22:28

Given that the FIA and F1 are clearly interested in "the show", how does this sort of commentary influence the overall discussion of tires for the future? Here is some commentary from David Coulthard in June: https://www.racefans...ring-coulthard/

 

 

“I’ve driven on Goodyears, Bridgestones, Michelins and actually none of them were what I would call ‘bad tyres’,” he told RaceFans in an exclusive interview. “There was obviously times where either Bridgestone or Michelin had a circuit advantage. But they were great companies to work with, pushing the boundaries, lots of new tyre developments. “We never spoke about thermal degradation. We never spoke about ‘[you] can’t push the tyres’. They peaked when they were new, they dropped off, maybe you got some graining, maybe you got some blistering, but they were tyres.”

 

“This whole Pirelli era is just confusing to me and boring to me to have to talk about, and super-boring for me to have to listen to the drivers going ‘I was trying to avoid pushing too hard on the tyres’.”  “We’ve got engine wars, we’ve got chassis wars, we’ve got driver wars and then we’ve got one single tyre manufacturer, where all the drivers complain about the tyres,” he said. “I would rather go to Avons or Goodyear or something and they just have two generic compounds but good tyres and then we don’t have to listen to the bulls**t.”

 

The 2022 car are billed as having better "raceablity" then this current generation of car. After we see if that is actually true, does the FIA & F1 tweak that raceabilty with tire competition? 



#11 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 34,757 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 03 January 2022 - 22:47

"Raceablity" has to have two distinct factors. One is the ability to overtake, which encompasses the ability to follow closely and all the things the new cars are aiming to fix.

But the other factor is introducing differences in performance at different parts of the race, and creating opportunities for different strategies. That's where the less than perfect tyres come in. Otherwise, it doesn't matter how well the cars can follow each other or pass each other, they'll just instantly sort themselves into speed order and the gaps will grow. That's what was happening in 2010. The cars could just be pushed for nearly the whole race on the excellent Bridgestone tyres. There weren't natural opportunities for 

 

Pirelli have been given a very tough brief. But in a tyre war situation, you'd quickly get the sort of rock solid tyres we had prior to Pirelli coming in, only with the issues of one set of teams having a better tyre than others. If you're lucky, which tyre is better changes from race to race. If not, tough luck if you're on the wrong tyre.

 

I think there's a reason that most high level series run control tyres. They simple have too much influence on the pecking order, especially in modern times when tyre manufacturers are just too good at making tyres.



#12 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 14,060 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 03 January 2022 - 22:53

Even in an uncapped manner, a tyre war rarely works to provide the best racing. The tyre is too important to the performance of the car. It's too easy to end up with seasons where who wins is decided purely on who's tyres are best that day. Now if the suppliers provide their teams with the same tyres, like Michelin did, then at least there's a good chance of competition between their teams. But if the supplier favours one top customer exclusively, like Bridgestone ended up doing, then when they're the tyre to have there's no competition at all.

 

As for a tyre war in a cost capped situation? Surely that is just locking in advantages for the haves and the disadvantages for the have-nots. I think we've had enough of locked in advantages in F1 recently.

 

Maybe it could be more interesting (if that's the word for it) if each supplier could only provide two compounds for the season and the teams could only use one for both qualifying and the race (so they would have to use the practice sessions to determine which of the two compounds they were going to use).



#13 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 34,757 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 03 January 2022 - 22:55

Maybe it could be more interesting (if that's the word for it) if each supplier could only provide two compounds for the season and the teams could only use one for both qualifying and the race (so they would have to use the practice sessions to determine which of the two compounds they were going to use).

 

That was basically the rule in the Goodyear-Bridgestone war of 1997/8.



#14 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 14,060 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 03 January 2022 - 23:24

That was basically the rule in the Goodyear-Bridgestone war of 1997/8.

 

But it wouldn't be too much of a war if the compounds were homologated at the start of the season.



#15 kumo7

kumo7
  • Member

  • 4,390 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 04 January 2022 - 08:49

I would say, let FIA design the specific performance of the tyre as according to the chassis reg, and allow several makers to supply the executed version.



#16 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 34,757 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 04 January 2022 - 10:10

But it wouldn't be too much of a war if the compounds were homologated at the start of the season.


The you’re getting certain teams locked into an advantage or disadvantage for the season.

#17 Pingguest

Pingguest
  • Member

  • 932 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 04 January 2022 - 10:23

The you’re getting certain teams locked into an advantage or disadvantage for the season.

 

That is inherent to any homologation, like we will have with the power units in the coming seasons.



#18 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 14,060 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 04 January 2022 - 12:06

The you’re getting certain teams locked into an advantage or disadvantage for the season.

 

I don't see this as a problem. It's the way things are now (and, perhaps, have been in the past too). You cannot have cost limiting without locking advantages in.


Edited by pdac, 04 January 2022 - 12:07.


#19 Secretariat

Secretariat
  • Member

  • 396 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 04 January 2022 - 14:52

But it wouldn't be too much of a war if the compounds were homologated at the start of the season.

This is interesting. Tire companies can be given development tokens to try and balance any performance difference, a tire BoP if you will. I think there are two tracks here: a sporting case which PayasYouRace lays out nicely, but then a business case of having more companies in F1. 



Advertisement

#20 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 14,060 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 04 January 2022 - 15:03

This is interesting. Tire companies can be given development tokens to try and balance any performance difference, a tire BoP if you will. I think there are two tracks here: a sporting case which PayasYouRace lays out nicely, but then a business case of having more companies in F1. 

 

My layman's  thinking is that tyres work in combination with track surfaces. The tyres from one manufacturer might work well at one track, but not so well at another. The tyres from a different manufacturer might work well at the second track, but not the first. The number of laps each lasts might be different too. So I think it would be difficult to judge whether one particular manufacturer was behind the others. I'd keep it simple (to start with, at least).



#21 Deeq

Deeq
  • Member

  • 7,399 posts
  • Joined: November 02

Posted 04 January 2022 - 16:12

I don't see this as a problem. It's the way things are now (and, perhaps, have been in the past too). You cannot have cost limiting without locking advantages in.

Since we are for locking in advantages Why not bin the cost limiting (extra step)...KISS
Or decklare spec series.
This monster-chimera is worst of all worlds.

#22 Burai

Burai
  • Member

  • 1,776 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 04 January 2022 - 17:22

Without testing, F1 is effectively a closed shop. It's taking engine suppliers and rookie drivers years to get up to speed. Why would any new tyre manufacturer want to open themselves up to the potential humiliation of "doing a Honda"?



#23 ProSportsCars

ProSportsCars
  • New Member

  • 20 posts
  • Joined: December 21

Posted 04 January 2022 - 17:50

Tbh I never liked the idea of Pirelli being the sole tire supplier, would be nice if Bridgestone and Michelin make a comeback so we have more options. At this point its all about who has the better engine, tire strategies have become less and less relevant and its not as interesting as before.



#24 Secretariat

Secretariat
  • Member

  • 396 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 05 January 2022 - 13:46

Without testing, F1 is effectively a closed shop. It's taking engine suppliers and rookie drivers years to get up to speed. Why would any new tyre manufacturer want to open themselves up to the potential humiliation of "doing a Honda"?

Marketing and competition. Using Michelin as an example, I think they have been clear about the possibility of participating provided the rules moved away from 13'' wheel/tires which now they have. With the contract coming due and the rules more inline with what they already produce, the conditions seem right for them to re-evaluate their situation. However if they were to return, I would prefer that Pirelli stay.  



#25 alframsey

alframsey
  • Member

  • 4,082 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 05 January 2022 - 13:50

I do not want to go back to the days of tyre wars, I hated it then and I'm sure I will do now. They need to open up the choices teams have on race weekends and not be so prescriptive, I hope next seasons tyres are more durable too but we will see.



#26 Sterzo

Sterzo
  • Member

  • 2,971 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 05 January 2022 - 14:11

One spec of low grip, durable tyre please. Why?

  1. Visible movement by the cars, showing up when a driver is on the limit.
  2. Everyone on the same tyres, rather than a field split into separate groups.
  3. Tyres which depend less on laid-down rubber can take multiple lines, so better racing.
  4. Longer braking zones result from lower grip, so more overtaking.
  5. Slower cornering speeds are safer and enable a return to more appealing circuits.
  6. Strategy kept for endurance events, balls out racing for Formula One.
  7. Massively cheaper and more environmentally friendly.

Edited by Sterzo, 05 January 2022 - 14:13.


#27 Afterburner

Afterburner
  • RC Forum Host

  • 7,932 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 05 January 2022 - 14:18

Given that modern F1 rulesets seem to be primarily concerned with locking down areas of variability to narrow the gaps in the field, and that allowing two different tyre suppliers will inevitably achieve the opposite (at least for a while), I think it's unlikely we see another tyre war.

I would be happy to see Pirelli replaced, though.

#28 eibyyz

eibyyz
  • Member

  • 1,169 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 05 January 2022 - 19:00

The heffalump in the room is that tyres are an ecological nightmare that hasn't been brought up before in a rush toward carbon neutrality and new fuels. 

 

Maybe someone more allied with the auto industry has some insight into tyre recycling and sustainability--I'd love to see it happen.


Edited by eibyyz, 05 January 2022 - 22:20.


#29 Secretariat

Secretariat
  • Member

  • 396 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 05 January 2022 - 19:18

The heffalump in the room is that tyres are an ecological nightmare that hasn't ben brought up before in a rush toward carbon neutrality and new fuels. 

 

Maybe someone more allied with the auto industry has some insight into recycling and sustainability--I'd love to see it happen.

Very true. There was a time in recent F1 history tires were mandated to last a whole race. Also, we saw at LeMans tires capable of 4 and 5 stints. This tells me, it can be done provided the sport wants it to be done.  



#30 MKSixer

MKSixer
  • Member

  • 2,315 posts
  • Joined: November 14

Posted 05 January 2022 - 19:25

 

One spec of low grip, durable tyre please. Why?

  1. Visible movement by the cars, showing up when a driver is on the limit.
  2. Everyone on the same tyres, rather than a field split into separate groups.
  3. Tyres which depend less on laid-down rubber can take multiple lines, so better racing.
  4. Longer braking zones result from lower grip, so more overtaking.
  5. Slower cornering speeds are safer and enable a return to more appealing circuits.
  6. Strategy kept for endurance events, balls out racing for Formula One.
  7. Massively cheaper and more environmentally friendly.

 

Your #6 should be the first consideration and all other rules and regulations descend from this.  I'm sick of drive to a delta, preserve the tires, the brakes are overheating, cool the car, etc.  

 

Can we just have foot-to-the-floor, screw-the-fuel-and-tires, straight up racing?  



#31 Beri

Beri
  • Member

  • 6,251 posts
  • Joined: January 14

Posted 06 January 2022 - 08:36

Your #6 should be the first consideration and all other rules and regulations descend from this.  I'm sick of drive to a delta, preserve the tires, the brakes are overheating, cool the car, etc.  
 
Can we just have foot-to-the-floor, screw-the-fuel-and-tires, straight up racing?


I hope the FIA does involve you when it's crunch time to create a new set of rules when it comes to tires.

#32 iSpeedFreak

iSpeedFreak
  • Member

  • 59 posts
  • Joined: February 18

Posted 06 January 2022 - 10:15

With 18inch wheels now introduced.. i reckon the next tender will be very competitive. 

 

I remember Michelin was very much interested in the last one as they saw a synergy between their WEC programme & F1.

 

Not sure if Bridgestone wants to get involved again but i could see a few companies submit a tender. Michelin will be a clear favourite I think. It all depends on how well Pirelli do with their compounds for the next few years.

 

I presume their brief has been not to produce the cheese tyres we saw over the past few years as they did little to improve racing/overtaking?



#33 danmills

danmills
  • Member

  • 2,470 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 06 January 2022 - 10:28

Michelin will be back.

#34 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 14,060 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 06 January 2022 - 12:16

Can we just have foot-to-the-floor, screw-the-fuel-and-tires, straight up racing?  

 

Nope. I think you'll find that is no longer a possibility (and has not been for many years). Racing with resource limits is now the order of the day. But they do not need to control the resources in the way that they currently do and I'm sure it can be done in a way that will produce exciting (and proper) racing.



#35 Secretariat

Secretariat
  • Member

  • 396 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 06 January 2022 - 13:32

With 18inch wheels now introduced.. i reckon the next tender will be very competitive. 

 

I remember Michelin was very much interested in the last one as they saw a synergy between their WEC programme & F1.

 

Not sure if Bridgestone wants to get involved again but i could see a few companies submit a tender. Michelin will be a clear favourite I think. It all depends on how well Pirelli do with their compounds for the next few years.

 

I presume their brief has been not to produce the cheese tyres we saw over the past few years as they did little to improve racing/overtaking?

Pirelli has been working on more durable tires that are less heat sensitive. To what extent they will be those things, we will see. It would be pretty cool to see Pirelli, Michelin, Goodyear and Hankook submit a tender. In the era of control tires, exclusivity deals and corporations being the "official this of that", it would be even cooler to me if multiple companies do submit a tender and multiple companies are asked to provide tires. However, I can imagine the teams will have some level of input on this too. Reality will tell us soon as the parameters for what the FIA/F1 will be looking for in the next cycle will probably come out this year.



#36 alframsey

alframsey
  • Member

  • 4,082 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 January 2022 - 13:41

I am intrigued to see if Pirelli can pull off this more durable and less heat sensitive tyre next season, I really hope they can. I hope we get better wet weather tyres (in both ranges) too as their wets have left A LOT to be desired since Bridgestone left, I remember their wets were amazing by comparison. I do kind of feel sorry for Pirelli though because they came in with a specific brief and thats exactly what they gave the sport and, whether it is right or wrong, got slated every single season for it.



#37 Secretariat

Secretariat
  • Member

  • 396 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 06 January 2022 - 13:46

I think Pirelli has done exactly what was asked of them during their presence which was a big ask. In reading some articles, the feedback for the upcoming tire has been positive.



#38 alframsey

alframsey
  • Member

  • 4,082 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 January 2022 - 14:22

I think Pirelli has done exactly what was asked of them during their presence which was a big ask. In reading some articles, the feedback for the upcoming tire has been positive.

That is good to hear. I can't wait to see who struggles to get to grips with these new tyres and who thrives, any ideas who might fall on either side?



#39 Secretariat

Secretariat
  • Member

  • 396 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 06 January 2022 - 14:27

I don't know. I will be finding out along with you.   ;)  :lol: 



Advertisement

#40 shure

shure
  • Member

  • 9,100 posts
  • Joined: April 17

Posted 06 January 2022 - 14:48

Pirelli has been working on more durable tires that are less heat sensitive. To what extent they will be those things, we will see. It would be pretty cool to see Pirelli, Michelin, Goodyear and Hankook submit a tender. In the era of control tires, exclusivity deals and corporations being the "official this of that", it would be even cooler to me if multiple companies do submit a tender and multiple companies are asked to provide tires. However, I can imagine the teams will have some level of input on this too. Reality will tell us soon as the parameters for what the FIA/F1 will be looking for in the next cycle will probably come out this year.

It's a nice thought, but I genuinely don't see how having more than one supplier would be possible, not without changing an awful lot.  They'd just go straight back to making performance tires again, which is a completely different concept



#41 Secretariat

Secretariat
  • Member

  • 396 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 06 January 2022 - 15:10

It's a nice thought, but I genuinely don't see how having more than one supplier would be possible, not without changing an awful lot.  They'd just go straight back to making performance tires again, which is a completely different concept

Depends on the parameters that the FIA/F1 lay out for the future. It is not like any of these companies do not know how to make "performance" tires. As noted, overall development would need to be capped (which honestly in the grand scheme of things is done easily with one supplier). Just being imaginative here but in addition to multiple suppliers being integrated in the budget cap, perhaps balance of performance targets, or perhaps a "degradation profile" suppliers have to achieve that is homologated, then suppliers get development tokens. Whether tire manufacturers want to engage in something like that in a scenario where they are only supplying 3-5 teams (in a multiple supplier scenario) is a legitimate criticism of trying to have multiple suppliers but control performance.    



#42 RA2

RA2
  • Member

  • 2,545 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 06 January 2022 - 16:01

I think the lemans hypercar tyre is 660 mm in diameter against the 720 mm for F1

#43 MKSixer

MKSixer
  • Member

  • 2,315 posts
  • Joined: November 14

Posted 06 January 2022 - 16:13

Nope. I think you'll find that is no longer a possibility (and has not been for many years). Racing with resource limits is now the order of the day. But they do not need to control the resources in the way that they currently do and I'm sure it can be done in a way that will produce exciting (and proper) racing.

It's possible if they have the will to do so.  Racing is a, "made-up", sport.  All of the rules are contrived to achieve a certain goal.  Resource limits are a bit ridiculous when you consider the waste simply on the area of tires.  How many sets are used each weekend and what happens to the tires afterwards?  How much energy and petrol did it take to make those tires, some of which will be used for less than 50 miles of driving.  

 

So the answer is more about will than anything else.  

 

The FIA has clearly demonstrated after the AD results that they don't care about what the outside world thinks about it's internal operations and race results as they unfold in realtime so managing a return to actual racing and not this managed BS they call racing.  

 

But perhaps we are confused about what we are seeing.  That is probably the  answer.



#44 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 14,060 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 06 January 2022 - 16:17

It's possible if they have the will to do so.  Racing is a, "made-up", sport.  All of the rules are contrived to achieve a certain goal.  Resource limits are a bit ridiculous when you consider the waste simply on the area of tires.  How many sets are used each weekend and what happens to the tires afterwards?  How much energy and petrol did it take to make those tires, some of which will be used for less than 50 miles of driving.  

 

So the answer is more about will than anything else.  

 

The FIA has clearly demonstrated after the AD results that they don't care about what the outside world thinks about it's internal operations and race results as they unfold in realtime so managing a return to actual racing and not this managed BS they call racing.  

 

But perhaps we are confused about what we are seeing.  That is probably the  answer.

 

It's all to do with politics and money (mostly the latter). So, no, it will never happen.



#45 Secretariat

Secretariat
  • Member

  • 396 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 06 January 2022 - 18:48

Additional comments on sustainability: I wonder if this future tender will include a need for longer life/race distance tires (ala 2005) with reduced number of compounds.  Something I was not aware of regarding Pirelli:

 

 

Pirelli's motorsport unit has been awarded three stars by the FIA ​​(International Automobile Federation), which governs world motorsport, as part of the Environmental Accreditation Programme. The three stars represent the highest score possible under the program, which is designed to show the various measures participants must take to achieve the best environmental standards. https://autonoumnews...-accreditation/

 

Also, one of F1's sustainability targets is "sustainable materials with all waste re-used, recycled or composted" by 2025. 45% of F1 carbon footprint in 2019 was related to logistics which includes race tires; logistics represents the largest contributor. It would seem inevitable that they would further reduce the volume of tires needed and therefore manufactured if they are serious. 2025 does line up nicely to have had some data and commentary regarding progress in dealing with the carbon footprint of logistics. 

 

https://corp.formula...site-vFINAL.pdf


Edited by Secretariat, 06 January 2022 - 18:48.


#46 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 34,757 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 06 January 2022 - 22:40

Depends on the parameters that the FIA/F1 lay out for the future. It is not like any of these companies do not know how to make "performance" tires. As noted, overall development would need to be capped (which honestly in the grand scheme of things is done easily with one supplier). Just being imaginative here but in addition to multiple suppliers being integrated in the budget cap, perhaps balance of performance targets, or perhaps a "degradation profile" suppliers have to achieve that is homologated, then suppliers get development tokens. Whether tire manufacturers want to engage in something like that in a scenario where they are only supplying 3-5 teams (in a multiple supplier scenario) is a legitimate criticism of trying to have multiple suppliers but control performance.    

 

When you start getting into such restrictions on competition, I don't see the advantage of having multiple suppliers. It would just solve so many problems by having a single supplier.



#47 PlatenGlass

PlatenGlass
  • Member

  • 3,293 posts
  • Joined: June 14

Posted 06 January 2022 - 22:54

Having one supplier or having a tyre war both have their disadvantages.

 

With a single supplier, as it is now anyway, they have too much power to influence races. They have these five compounds and can arbitrarily decide which are available for each race. And e.g. with some cars likely to work relatively better on the softer compounds and some on the harder compounds, it can look like they are deciding who gets to win a race, even if it is completely unintentional.

 

If it were up to me, I'd have a single tyre supplier, but all tyre compounds would be available at all races. That might seem like a lot of tyres to cart around that might then go unused, but how many compounds do we really need? With no competition from another supplier, I think one dry tyre could even cover it. Make it nice and durable as well, so that racing, rather than pitstops, are the primary determiner of the outcome of races. We don't actually need pitstops if the rest of the racing is sorted out. But I suppose in the meantime, you could allow for two compounds - one softer and one harder - and have a bit of strategy that way.

 

But also these tyres could be unchanged for, say, three years at a time, so teams can build their cars around what exists and not be subject to nasty surprises that come their way at the whim of a tyre company.



#48 pdac

pdac
  • Member

  • 14,060 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 06 January 2022 - 23:25

Having one supplier or having a tyre war both have their disadvantages.

 

With a single supplier, as it is now anyway, they have too much power to influence races. They have these five compounds and can arbitrarily decide which are available for each race. And e.g. with some cars likely to work relatively better on the softer compounds and some on the harder compounds, it can look like they are deciding who gets to win a race, even if it is completely unintentional.

 

If it were up to me, I'd have a single tyre supplier, but all tyre compounds would be available at all races. That might seem like a lot of tyres to cart around that might then go unused, but how many compounds do we really need? With no competition from another supplier, I think one dry tyre could even cover it. Make it nice and durable as well, so that racing, rather than pitstops, are the primary determiner of the outcome of races. We don't actually need pitstops if the rest of the racing is sorted out. But I suppose in the meantime, you could allow for two compounds - one softer and one harder - and have a bit of strategy that way.

 

But also these tyres could be unchanged for, say, three years at a time, so teams can build their cars around what exists and not be subject to nasty surprises that come their way at the whim of a tyre company.

 

If there were a single supplier who was on a 1-year contract, then they could be replaced the next year. That would solve the "too much power" issue.

 

As for carting so many tyres around, if they just had 2 compounds in total, then that would solve that issue too.



#49 Tony006

Tony006
  • New Member

  • 26 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 15 January 2022 - 00:42

Multiple tyre suppliers would work if tyre supply was get equal to all teams and the tyre suppliers, so instead of teams only using tyres exclusively from 1 tyre supplier, teams rotate through the different tyre suppliers on a race to race basis.

 

Each tyre supplier homolgates 4 dry compounds & 2 wet compounds for the season and brings 2 dry & 2 wet compounds to each race.

 

2 tyre suppliers after Friday practice each teams choose 1 dry & 1 wet compound from each supplier to use for rest of weekend.

This creates 4 dry tyre combinations using Pirelli & Michelin for example - Pirelli soft/Michelin soft, Pirelli hard/Michelin soft, Pirelli soft/Michelin hard, Pirelli hard/Michelin hard and 2 wet tyre combinations Pirelli inter/Michelin wet, Pirelli wet/Michelin inter,

 

3 tyre suppliers or more then before the start of the season each team assigned 2 of the available tyres suppliers for each race.

Team 1 tyre supplier A & B, Team 2 tyre supplier A & C, team 3 tyre supplier B & C, etc

 

This way all tyre suppliers supply all teams with the same amount of tyres per season creating similar supply costs for each supplier, while still creating a tyre competion. If there is 3 or more competing tyre suppliers than teams will be using tyres from different suppliers at each race which lead to greater variation in each teams performnce race to race as the different tyre impact car performance.



#50 r4mses

r4mses
  • Member

  • 2,143 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 15 January 2022 - 02:21

Sounds like just another gimmick. I hate gimmicks.