Does Pirelli think we are all stupid?
Discussion
Scuffers said:
Derek Smith said:
The Formula One Group said:
“Competitors should heed Pirelli’s expert advice when setting their race strategy and tactics, and if they do not, it is at their own risk. We are entirely satisfied that Pirelli was not at fault for any tyre-related incidents during the 2015 Formula 1 Shell Belgian Grand Prix.”
Watching coverage today, the new (silly) higher pressures they mandated have now been reduced again back within 1Psi of what they were before....
much guessing going on me thinks!
Derek Smith said:
Translation you must not say nasty things about Pirrelli is bad for the sportentropy said:
REALIST123 said:
So why do they think increasing the running pressure by 5psi will stop the tyres being cut?
In V8Supercars Dunlop mandated higher tyre pressures to stop tyre blow outs.Anyway, Ecclestone seems to think Pirelli have issues:
"If any one of them (the drivers) has got problems, they should talk to the people making the problems (Pirelli)"
Derek Smith said:
Well now I'm confused because this statement seems to be a public slap down for Ferrari for doing a risky strategy..... but we know Pirelli said 40 laps and the earlier press release about the tyres claimed Seb had about 30% wear and the failure was due to a cut.Seems like Pirelli are mixing their defence up here.... can't seem to make up their mind if they want to blame a cut or Ferrari..... neither line has a great deal of credibility IMO.
Call me cynical but it seems to boil down to "competitors must not criticize the tyre supplier as it is bad for business".
VolvoT5 said:
Well now I'm confused because this statement seems to be a public slap down for Ferrari for doing a risky strategy..... but we know Pirelli said 40 laps and the earlier press release about the tyres claimed Seb had about 30% wear and the failure was due to a cut.
Seems like Pirelli are mixing their defence up here.... can't seem to make up their mind if they want to blame a cut or Ferrari..... neither line has a great deal of credibility IMO.
Call me cynical but it seems to boil down to "competitors must not criticize the tyre supplier as it is bad for business".
I remember reading somewhere that the advice also included a statement not to drive over the kerbs. There is ample on my recording of the race that Vettel, despite his protestations on the day, did not avoid said kerbsSeems like Pirelli are mixing their defence up here.... can't seem to make up their mind if they want to blame a cut or Ferrari..... neither line has a great deal of credibility IMO.
Call me cynical but it seems to boil down to "competitors must not criticize the tyre supplier as it is bad for business".
I'm not knocking Vettel. If I'd had a tyre blow after coming through Eau Rouge, I'd have opinions, and I'd have been more than willing to share them. However, we have to treat what he said at the time with caution.
Pirelli were circumspect in their replies and have been quite consistent. But that's easy to do if you aren't definitive - deliberately?
That said, I've no idea who's telling lies and stretching the truth. But I would suggest that Ferrari have a wee bit of history when it comes to not blaming them for failures.
The statement from the F1 Group is provocative. It is a challenge to Ferrari and the pits as a whole. I think this will either run or the response will fascinate.
There is an option, of course, that the teams be ordered not to stir. But that wouldn't happen, obviously.
I'm confused about why you're confused about is. Bernie has agreed to keep Pirelli on board after this year. He has, to all intents and purposes, announced this today.
Pirelli have said they'll only carry one making the rapidly wearing tyres which Bernie believes makes F1 ever so popular, if he stops the teams and drivers criticising them.
He's had a word, especially with Vettel, and told them not to complain publicly but to tell Pirelli alone, should they have complaints.
OK, the middle bit is speculation but the rest is common knowledge.
Pirelli have said they'll only carry one making the rapidly wearing tyres which Bernie believes makes F1 ever so popular, if he stops the teams and drivers criticising them.
He's had a word, especially with Vettel, and told them not to complain publicly but to tell Pirelli alone, should they have complaints.
OK, the middle bit is speculation but the rest is common knowledge.
REALIST123 said:
As said, different issue.
Anyway, Ecclestone seems to think Pirelli have issues:
"If any one of them (the drivers) has got problems, they should talk to the people making the problems (Pirelli)"
Sorry, but are you and Scuffers experts/have experience on this sort of thing?Anyway, Ecclestone seems to think Pirelli have issues:
"If any one of them (the drivers) has got problems, they should talk to the people making the problems (Pirelli)"
“The compound and construction can only do so much,” Butler emphasized. “We can advise the teams but once you start running outside the [operating] boundaries – too much camber, too low a pressure – or you start hitting curbs, then the tire will get damaged, just like any road tire. And if it does bulge then it’s hard to see because it’s on the inside sidewall, where the maximum load and deflection is." - Dunlop UK/BTCC http://www.tiretechnologyinternational.com/article...
Saying that I cannot ignore that something smell fishy with Pirelli.
REALIST123 said:
I'm confused about why you're confused about is. Bernie has agreed to keep Pirelli on board after this year. He has, to all intents and purposes, announced this today.
Pirelli have said they'll only carry one making the rapidly wearing tyres which Bernie believes makes F1 ever so popular, if he stops the teams and drivers criticising them.
He's had a word, especially with Vettel, and told them not to complain publicly but to tell Pirelli alone, should they have complaints.
OK, the middle bit is speculation but the rest is common knowledge.
Pirelli pay Bernie/FOM/CVC millions in trackside advertising.Pirelli have said they'll only carry one making the rapidly wearing tyres which Bernie believes makes F1 ever so popular, if he stops the teams and drivers criticising them.
He's had a word, especially with Vettel, and told them not to complain publicly but to tell Pirelli alone, should they have complaints.
OK, the middle bit is speculation but the rest is common knowledge.
VolvoT5 said:
tbh I would just like to see decent tyres again, especially for qualifying. On balance I don't think these heavily degrading tyres have added much to the racing but they have certainly made it more dangerous and become a constant talking point.
+1 this concept of tyre has only brought controversy, but has not improved the actual racing, only the unpredictability of the outcome. It's 2015, not 1965. It is possible for Pirelli to manufacture durable tyres and not get the flack they do on such a regular basis.If spicing up the show is so important then this can be done by mandating two 10-sec pit stops with no more that 10 personnel in the pitlane. This will ensure that cars loose track position, create the possibility of cock-ups from fingers issues and reduce costs. WEC cars stop for much longer, but this does not detract from the race.
The teams are their own worst enemies which ultimately allows Bernie to walk all over them. The FIA needs to get a grip and become a regulator again. It won't happen though.
entropy said:
Sorry, but are you and Scuffers experts/have experience on this sort of thing?
“The compound and construction can only do so much,” Butler emphasized. “We can advise the teams but once you start running outside the [operating] boundaries – too much camber, too low a pressure – or you start hitting curbs, then the tire will get damaged, just like any road tire. And if it does bulge then it’s hard to see because it’s on the inside sidewall, where the maximum load and deflection is." - Dunlop UK/BTCC http://www.tiretechnologyinternational.com/article...
Saying that I cannot ignore that something smell fishy with Pirelli.
I'm not a tyre expert other than using them on race cars, that said, I do know my way round them.“The compound and construction can only do so much,” Butler emphasized. “We can advise the teams but once you start running outside the [operating] boundaries – too much camber, too low a pressure – or you start hitting curbs, then the tire will get damaged, just like any road tire. And if it does bulge then it’s hard to see because it’s on the inside sidewall, where the maximum load and deflection is." - Dunlop UK/BTCC http://www.tiretechnologyinternational.com/article...
Saying that I cannot ignore that something smell fishy with Pirelli.
the link you posted, this is the relevent paragraph:
Dunlop said:
"Our engineers take the temperatures and we like to see a 10°C spread across the tire from inside to outside," Butler continued. "We also like to see pressures of 2 bar and above; we advise 2.2 bar but we know that teams never get [that high]. But when they start running 1.9 bar and 4° of [negative] camber, and going out on 1.1 bar cold, then you’re very vulnerable for those first few laps because it takes three to four laps for the pressures to come up. Add a curb strike, and you could be in trouble! It’s about getting the balance right.”
Now, all tyre makers have their own constructions, some use stuffer sidewalls, braced at different angles, made with different layers, etc, so go softer.Dunlop (UK) usually have gone with softer, thus starting pressures become more critical, as the article says, the first lap on a cold tyre can be somewhat risky until they have warmed up enough for the pressure to rise to the optimum running pressure, this is the problem the Aussie V8's were contending with and they solution to them over-pressuring was to start them even lower, making that issue more problematic.
F1 is a bit different as they don't start with cold tyres, thus the temp driven pressure rise s not so great (biggest issue for them is SC laps when the tyres cool back down).
Now, yes running them too low a pressure means the sidewalls get more punishment, and they will only take so much before they get damaged, however, F1 must be about the most data-logged cars on the planet, they know exactly what loads are transmitted through the wheels/tyres so so be able to make tyres that can deal with these, it's even easier when you consider they are not in a tyre war and are not competing with anybody else, so they don't have to make the performance/strength compromises they would normally be looking at.
Yes, having minimum pressures and max camber is probably sensible, however, they should be out far enough not to impact on the teams needs/wants.
Listening to Alonso yesterday he was talking pressures unheard of in all his years of racing.
Long and short of it, they need to make better tyres.
If you remember from last years fiasco (Silverstone), they ended up changing the construction to use Kevlar to make them stronger, they did then admit the reason they had not done that already was cost.
Scuffers said:
Dunlop (UK) usually have gone with softer, thus starting pressures become more critical, as the article says, the first lap on a cold tyre can be somewhat risky until they have warmed up enough for the pressure to rise to the optimum running pressure, this is the problem the Aussie V8's were contending with and they solution to them over-pressuring was to start them even lower, making that issue more problematic.
Nothing to do with cold tyres/temperature differentials. Aussie V8s use soft compound tyres similar to Pirelli's in F1. They want to manage degradation, extend the life before reaching 'the cliff' and then it spiralled across the compounds. http://www.speedcafe.com/2014/10/10/v8-teams-face-...Scuffers said:
If you remember from last years fiasco (Silverstone), they ended up changing the construction to use Kevlar to make them stronger, they did then admit the reason they had not done that already was cost.
During the SC period the quick fix was to up the pressures and the blow outs immediately ceased.Pirelli didn't use the stiffer construction because of cost. They kept the same soft construction for the sake of 'the show' (because they and Bernie think more pits stops = better racing) and then admitted their utter stupidity of not taking into account of the teams' development and the extra loadings onto the tyre.
rdjohn said:
+1 this concept of tyre has only brought controversy, but has not improved the actual racing, only the unpredictability of the outcome. It's 2015, not 1965. It is possible for Pirelli to manufacture durable tyres and not get the flack they do on such a regular basis.
If spicing up the show is so important then this can be done by mandating two 10-sec pit stops with no more that 10 personnel in the pitlane. This will ensure that cars loose track position, create the possibility of cock-ups from fingers issues and reduce costs. WEC cars stop for much longer, but this does not detract from the race.
The teams are their own worst enemies which ultimately allows Bernie to walk all over them. The FIA needs to get a grip and become a regulator again. It won't happen though.
How durable is durable? Why do we have this fiasco? Because Bridgestone's tyres were too good where even their option compound could complete race distance and due to cost would not produce tyres that would have some significance in varying strategy and hence the racing in 2010 was not good at all at times much blame was on the tyres - except for the Canadian GP where a green track on race day produced massive degradation and lots of overtaking and crap tyres has since been flavour of the month(s).If spicing up the show is so important then this can be done by mandating two 10-sec pit stops with no more that 10 personnel in the pitlane. This will ensure that cars loose track position, create the possibility of cock-ups from fingers issues and reduce costs. WEC cars stop for much longer, but this does not detract from the race.
The teams are their own worst enemies which ultimately allows Bernie to walk all over them. The FIA needs to get a grip and become a regulator again. It won't happen though.
As for WEC. It's a completely different ball game where the race in hours and option to double stint tyres. F1 is more a sprint in comparison but in truth it combines elements of sprint and endurance racing.
entropy said:
rdjohn said:
If spicing up the show is so important then this can be done by mandating two 10-sec pit stops with no more that 10 personnel in the pitlane. This will ensure that cars loose track position, create the possibility of cock-ups from fingers issues and reduce costs. WEC cars stop for much longer, but this does not detract from the race.
How durable is durable? Why do we have this fiasco? Because Bridgestone's tyres were too good where even their option compound could complete race distance and due to cost would not produce tyres that would have some significance in varying strategy and hence the racing in 2010 was not good at all at times much blame was on the tyres - except for the Canadian GP where a green track on race day produced massive degradation and lots of overtaking and crap tyres has since been flavour of the month(s).As for WEC. It's a completely different ball game where the race in hours and option to double stint tyres. F1 is more a sprint in comparison but in truth it combines elements of sprint and endurance racing.
When I said that long pitstops did not hinder WEC, I was not drawing a direct comparison. I am suggesting two jacks and 8 wheel changers in a minimum 10 seconds. Not one wheel gun, driver change, refuelling etc in about a minute. My suggestion is to ensure changes of track position only. Fresh Pirrelli rubber is not sufficiently durable for a sustained attack from a following driver. Loose front end grip equals reduced tyre life.
The use of control tyres should be about reducing costs. If money was no object, I would rather have an all out tyre war. The idea of the race is to find out who has the fastest driver / chassis combination. I don't really give a fig about who can drive slowest, to protect their rubber, or who can do the riskiest strategy to help mitigate the shortcomings of their engine / chassis.
rdjohn said:
The use of control tyres should be about reducing costs. If money was no object, I would rather have an all out tyre war. The idea of the race is to find out who has the fastest driver / chassis combination. I don't really give a fig about who can drive slowest, to protect their rubber, or who can do the riskiest strategy to help mitigate the shortcomings of their engine / chassis.
Yes, 100% - and in reality, it's done almost the complete opposite.The teams are paying Pirelli whatever they ask, and having to deal with the fallout.
rdjohn said:
When I said that long pitstops did not hinder WEC, I was not drawing a direct comparison. I am suggesting two jacks and 8 wheel changers in a minimum 10 seconds. Not one wheel gun, driver change, refuelling etc in about a minute. My suggestion is to ensure changes of track position only. Fresh Pirrelli rubber is not sufficiently durable for a sustained attack from a following driver. Loose front end grip equals reduced tyre life.
Sorry, I wasn't having a go at you per se, more of a reaction to previous posts regarding tyres in WEC.However as much as I would like to see far fewer personnel doing pitstops I don't think it would work well in reality given the fuss over pit deltas these days. Longer pits stops means less likely of strategy variation - if you go back to the refuelling era about decade or so ago the increase in the pitlane speed limit actually allowed for greater variation in pit strategy. And the thing with endurance racing is that you're looking looking to stretch your stints, looking to minimise pit stops/time spent in pits - some prototypes can run hard on their tyres and double stint but GTs are closer to managing the tyres to double stint and therefore you can gain massive time and offset/delta from the ACO refuelling rules tyres as refuelling and tyre changes can't be done at the same time.
Pirelli reporting more cuts this weekend and even a 'quite substantial' piece of glass in one of the tyres - http://m.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/120670/p...
rscott said:
Pirelli reporting more cuts this weekend and even a 'quite substantial' piece of glass in one of the tyres - http://m.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/120670/p...
how much of this is a case of them actually looking for cuts now?Scuffers said:
rscott said:
Pirelli reporting more cuts this weekend and even a 'quite substantial' piece of glass in one of the tyres - http://m.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/120670/p...
how much of this is a case of them actually looking for cuts now?There's been a clarification issued to teams that tyre pressures will be monitored continuously as there were reports that teams were heating tyres excessively in tyre warmers so that initial pressure met the minimum level...
rscott said:
Pirelli reporting more cuts this weekend and even a 'quite substantial' piece of glass in one of the tyres - http://m.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/120670/p...
On Friday's Inside F1/BBC News Channel IIRC Paul Hembrey said there were substantial cuts but the tyre didn't fail/still in good shape.As i see it the FIA are starting to look stupid and Pirelli look to be backed into a corner of partialy their own making, rather like a dum dog looking sorry when it's just got it's head stuck in fence, you laugh and point then help it get out even if the little Bstd bites you.
The way some on here refuse to see pirelli side of things make me think they may have purchased some P6s back in the 90's are now holding a grudge, actually i can see thier point i had some P6s and they were turely fooking awfull in the wet or after a year of use
The way some on here refuse to see pirelli side of things make me think they may have purchased some P6s back in the 90's are now holding a grudge, actually i can see thier point i had some P6s and they were turely fooking awfull in the wet or after a year of use
Edited by S0 What on Sunday 6th September 19:31
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff