****The Official Belgian (Spa) Grand Prix thread 2015****

[ajprice]

Scuffers said:

kerb hopping is part of motorsport:



you don't see touring cars suffer so many catastrophic tyre failures do you?

That looks more like a stress on suspension than tyres, F1 cars don't bounce one side a foot in the air over kerbs, unless it's Maldonado (only half joking, unfortunately)

[Vaud]

Scuffers said:

you don't see touring cars suffer so many catastrophic tyre failures do you?

Massively different energy levels through the tyre.

(But I agree that there should not be the structural failures that we have seen)

[Scuffers]

Vaud said:

Massively different energy levels through the tyre.

(But I agree that there should not be the structural failures that we have seen)

True, better illustration would be LMP cars.

[Scuffers]

Vaud said:

Massively different energy levels through the tyre.

(But I agree that there should not be the structural failures that we have seen)

True, better illustration would be LMP cars.

[KarlMac]

Suppose this is the downside of having single source tyre supplier, wheres the incentive for Pirelli to improve?

One other thought, RBR hand in notice, Lotus in deep bother and whispering sweet nothings to Renault, too convenient?

[entropy]

Scuffers said:

Mr_Thyroid said:

But as fans we want to see drivers hammering it over kerbs and trying risky one-stop strategies. There has been so much talk about improving the show over the last few months that Pirelli's shortcomings should not be allowed dilute these aspects.

As mentioned it's also dangerous so, y'know... better fix it.

kerb hopping is part of motorsport:



you don't see touring cars suffer so many catastrophic tyre failures do you?

More likely it happens at Thruxton. What causes it is the high speed and too much camber than recommend by Dunlop. Drivers own up its their own fault and don't bash Dunlop.

Blow outs in NASCAR isn't unheard of. Usually by wear and/or too much camber.

Edited by entropy on Monday 24th August 22:52

[NRS]

ash73 said:

The problem is the spin from Pirelli makes it impossible for teams to make strategy decisions. They were told Nico's tyre was due to a cut, so Ferrari thought one-stop was ok, then exactly the same failure happens.

Not exactly the same failure at all - Rosberg's just went, Vettel lost the tread first.

RichB said:

Mikey G said:

Is it just me that enjoyed the race? There certainly has been worse races recently... If all you lot can do is moan about boring F1 races with such quotes as "an excuse for a sunday afternoon nap" then maybe its time for you to stop watching and start doing more interesting activities instead like flower arranging etc...

It's become quite the fashionable thing on P'Heads to moan about the F1 race. Then say the motorbikes, NASCAR, BTCC, Stock Cars are more exciting.

I said it was pretty boring, but am not one of the regular "bashers" of F1. It's just the passes were too easy so there was no big fights where people were beside each other fighting for a place. One car just breezed past the other. Plus as mentioned by someone else the strategy overlap only really came about in the last lap or so, so the normal quiet middle part extended a bit longer than usual.

[Inertiatic]

The worst f1 race would still be orders of magnitude less boring than bloody NASCAR!

[JustinF]

Apples and oranges.

[andy-xr]

I think the tyre situation is part and parcel of racing, you throw the dice on it and see what happens. Vettel could have come in earlier, Ferrari could have had a different strategy, but they didnt, and the tyre failed. I have no idea whether bumping the kerbs was a factor, I'm not really interested if it was or wasnt.

I think sometimes there's too much attempted control over things that wear and break, just one of those things. Unfortunate, but racing incident

[Scuffers]

andy-xr said:

I think the tyre situation is part and parcel of racing, you throw the dice on it and see what happens.

so you're suggesting that playing russian roulette should be part of racing?

Really?

[mollytherocker]

Scuffers said:

so you're suggesting that playing russian roulette should be part of racing?

Really?

Taking risks is part of racing, yes. It always has been.

[andy-xr]

Scuffers said:

so you're suggesting that playing russian roulette should be part of racing?

Really?

Pretty much. I'm sure something fked up somewhere but no-one'll ever get to the bottom of it, somewhere between Pirelli's estimation of heat and wear, Ferrari's pit strategy, Vettels driving style and 100 other things. Rear lefts going on a clockwise circuit on 2 unrelated cars, to me is just one of those things.

[Scuffers]

andy-xr said:

Scuffers said:

so you're suggesting that playing russian roulette should be part of racing?

Really?

Pretty much. I'm sure something fked up somewhere but no-one'll ever get to the bottom of it, somewhere between Pirelli's estimation of heat and wear, Ferrari's pit strategy, Vettels driving style and 100 other things. Rear lefts going on a clockwise circuit on 2 unrelated cars, to me is just one of those things.

Vettel's was rear right Nico's was rear left.

having a tyre that wears out quick or has crap grip is one thing, having them catastrophically fail is something else and un-acceptable.

[thainy77]

Why take unnecessary risks with your life when a solution can be engineered to mitigate the risk?

I don't agree at all i'm afraid.

[andy-xr]

Scuffers said:

Vettel's was rear right Nico's was rear left.

having a tyre that wears out quick or has crap grip is one thing, having them catastrophically fail is something else and un-acceptable.

I'm pretty Meh to the whole tyre thing really

[longblackcoat]

Scuffers said:

Vettel's was rear right Nico's was rear left.

having a tyre that wears out quick or has crap grip is one thing, having them catastrophically fail is something else and un-acceptable.

They were both rear right.

[Scuffers]

longblackcoat said:

Scuffers said:

Vettel's was rear right Nico's was rear left.

having a tyre that wears out quick or has crap grip is one thing, having them catastrophically fail is something else and un-acceptable.

They were both rear right.

you're right, I was looking at the wrong picture!

interestingly, just seen this one too, from Nico's car...

[KarlMac]

Scuffers said:

you're right, I was looking at the wrong picture!

interestingly, just seen this one too, from Nico's car...

Wont that be from locking up as he went off?

[NRS]

Scuffers said:

andy-xr said:

Scuffers said:

so you're suggesting that playing russian roulette should be part of racing?

Really?

Pretty much. I'm sure something fked up somewhere but no-one'll ever get to the bottom of it, somewhere between Pirelli's estimation of heat and wear, Ferrari's pit strategy, Vettels driving style and 100 other things. Rear lefts going on a clockwise circuit on 2 unrelated cars, to me is just one of those things.

Vettel's was rear right Nico's was rear left.

having a tyre that wears out quick or has crap grip is one thing, having them catastrophically fail is something else and un-acceptable.

How do you propose making a tyre fail safely? There's only so much you can do when you consider what it is.

Not to mention tyres are mentioned, but how many front wing failures have we had compare to tyre failures? And what is the percentage of front wing to tyre failures in percentage of those used? Tyres seem to be an easy thing to pick on, yet the drivers don't go off on one about car parts failing.

13 sets of tyres allowed per weekend for a driver, so 52 tyres per driver. 20 drivers means 1040 tyres. Remove 40 tyres for those not in Q3 gives you 1000 tyres. So with 2 failures this weekend that gives you a 0,2% failure rate. Then look at the total season numbers and it should be lower. Also add on that Vettel was pushing his tyres more than he "should" (40 laps is mentioned, but this would surely be "they could last this long with a x% probability of not failing". It's not a simple "they will last 40 laps"). Obviously the more worn they are the greater the chance of failure.

And the final point is Vettel's tyre didn't completely fail - it delaminated first, giving some warning (what else could a tyre do to give you warning in practice)?