Does Pirelli think we are all stupid?
Discussion
I posted this in the Spa F1 forum, but think it deserves a dedicated keyboard zone for people like me who feel like we are being taken for idiots.
Thus it was...
Pirelli are judge and jury with regard to their product failing or otherwise.
As Vettel grasped, and was vocal about, is that Pirelli are not going to say they made a bad/faulty tyre (again), are they?
Normally tyres wear out by the black rings you see of missing tread that is worn out in holes/patches.
Now a worn out tyre just explodes.
Pirelli are not making sense, are they?
With regard to Rosberg's failure, and listening to Pirelli's explanation is that the tyre was punctured/cut, but kind of inside-out, so it fell to bits on the inside first, then exploded. So Rosberg drove for half a lap at full speed, in an F1 car at Spa, with a tyre that had a cut in it?
I don't think so.
Last year as soon as Hamilton was tapped by Rosberg his tyre was punctured/cut it went flat, not half a lap later.
And presumably Vettel's 3 remaining tyres were about to explode as well?
On a clockwise circuit like Spa you would expect more wear on the outside tyre, not the inside as in Rosberg's and Vettel's.
Nothing makes sense. Not only are F1 drivers being treated like they are thick, but we all are. Again.
The guy in charge of Pirelli appears better suited to managing a supermarket store/bank with his 'blame everyone else' culture. He's always been a bit arrogant/smarmy I think. Rather than looking into the problem properly and going through the motions, he has upset the teams as well as making a fool of Pirelli, at a time when Michelin are looking into taking over things again.
Finally, Paul Hembery (Pirelli main man) reminds me of David Brent, but at least he was funny in 'The Office'.
Thus it was...
Pirelli are judge and jury with regard to their product failing or otherwise.
As Vettel grasped, and was vocal about, is that Pirelli are not going to say they made a bad/faulty tyre (again), are they?
Normally tyres wear out by the black rings you see of missing tread that is worn out in holes/patches.
Now a worn out tyre just explodes.
Pirelli are not making sense, are they?
With regard to Rosberg's failure, and listening to Pirelli's explanation is that the tyre was punctured/cut, but kind of inside-out, so it fell to bits on the inside first, then exploded. So Rosberg drove for half a lap at full speed, in an F1 car at Spa, with a tyre that had a cut in it?
I don't think so.
Last year as soon as Hamilton was tapped by Rosberg his tyre was punctured/cut it went flat, not half a lap later.
And presumably Vettel's 3 remaining tyres were about to explode as well?
On a clockwise circuit like Spa you would expect more wear on the outside tyre, not the inside as in Rosberg's and Vettel's.
Nothing makes sense. Not only are F1 drivers being treated like they are thick, but we all are. Again.
The guy in charge of Pirelli appears better suited to managing a supermarket store/bank with his 'blame everyone else' culture. He's always been a bit arrogant/smarmy I think. Rather than looking into the problem properly and going through the motions, he has upset the teams as well as making a fool of Pirelli, at a time when Michelin are looking into taking over things again.
Finally, Paul Hembery (Pirelli main man) reminds me of David Brent, but at least he was funny in 'The Office'.
Derek Smith said:
BlimeyCharlie said:
Pirelli are judge and jury with regard to their product failing or otherwise.
As Vettel grasped, and was vocal about, is that Pirelli are not going to say they made a bad/faulty tyre (again), are they?
I would suggest that Vettel tried to be judge and jury by blaming Pirelli before any investigation. As Vettel grasped, and was vocal about, is that Pirelli are not going to say they made a bad/faulty tyre (again), are they?
I feel certain that Pirelli will check the other covers after the race and, taking into consideration the mileage, the cornering forces, the variable loadings, the acceleration and the speeds the various covers were subjected to, will then submit their findings to the FIA. I think they will be asked to justify any conclusion with evidence.
I can't see Pirelli being allowed to come to their own conclusions.
Whether or not the failure was down to Pirelli is something that must be worked out with evidence and not criticisms from irritated drivers. I like Vettel, and I can understand his frustration at losing a possible (probable I think) podium spot and a component failing just after Eau Rouge. However, it was wrong to broadcast it. Pirelli is as entitled to the facts being presented as any other contributor to F1.
How does that work?
Are we expected to believe that it was an inside out puncture? To me the tyre fell to bits and then exploded. That was not a puncture.
At no stage has the FIA said they'd looked at Pirelli's evidence. Unless the FIA or otherwise state they have looked at the evidence Pirelli have found to reach their own conclusion then the process is flawed, hence why I said Pirelli are judge and jury. Did Mercedes see the evidence Pirelli had 'found'?
Also, Vettel did not leave the track, as in overshoot or visit a gravel trap. Running over a kerb is what everyone did all weekend. Verstappen did it in style and his tyres didn't explode.
So it appears most of us have accepted Pirelli's public stance over people like Vettel, Rosberg, Hamilton and Alonso, who you'd think know what they are talking about.
The point I made about Verstappen overtaking offline/over kerbs was if we take Pirelli's viewpoint of punctures caused by driving over kerbs (Rosberg) then surely Verstappen's tyres would have also exploded like he'd driven over a police stinger? But they didn't blow up did they? Nor did Ricciardo's after his moment at Eau Rouge.
Pirelli are contradicting themselves. I'm not.
Pirelli are contradicting themselves. I'm not.
Pistom said:
BlimeyCharlie said:
I posted this in the Spa F1 forum, but think it deserves a dedicated keyboard zone for people like me who feel like we are being taken for idiots.
Thus it was...
Pirelli are judge and jury with regard to their product failing or otherwise.
As Vettel grasped, and was vocal about, is that Pirelli are not going to say they made a bad/faulty tyre (again), are they?
Normally tyres wear out by the black rings you see of missing tread that is worn out in holes/patches.
Now a worn out tyre just explodes.
Pirelli are not making sense, are they?
With regard to Rosberg's failure, and listening to Pirelli's explanation is that the tyre was punctured/cut, but kind of inside-out, so it fell to bits on the inside first, then exploded. So Rosberg drove for half a lap at full speed, in an F1 car at Spa, with a tyre that had a cut in it?
I don't think so.
Last year as soon as Hamilton was tapped by Rosberg his tyre was punctured/cut it went flat, not half a lap later.
And presumably Vettel's 3 remaining tyres were about to explode as well?
On a clockwise circuit like Spa you would expect more wear on the outside tyre, not the inside as in Rosberg's and Vettel's.
Nothing makes sense. Not only are F1 drivers being treated like they are thick, but we all are. Again.
The guy in charge of Pirelli appears better suited to managing a supermarket store/bank with his 'blame everyone else' culture. He's always been a bit arrogant/smarmy I think. Rather than looking into the problem properly and going through the motions, he has upset the teams as well as making a fool of Pirelli, at a time when Michelin are looking into taking over things again.
Finally, Paul Hembery (Pirelli main man) reminds me of David Brent, but at least he was funny in 'The Office'.
Glad I'm not on my own on these points. Thus it was...
Pirelli are judge and jury with regard to their product failing or otherwise.
As Vettel grasped, and was vocal about, is that Pirelli are not going to say they made a bad/faulty tyre (again), are they?
Normally tyres wear out by the black rings you see of missing tread that is worn out in holes/patches.
Now a worn out tyre just explodes.
Pirelli are not making sense, are they?
With regard to Rosberg's failure, and listening to Pirelli's explanation is that the tyre was punctured/cut, but kind of inside-out, so it fell to bits on the inside first, then exploded. So Rosberg drove for half a lap at full speed, in an F1 car at Spa, with a tyre that had a cut in it?
I don't think so.
Last year as soon as Hamilton was tapped by Rosberg his tyre was punctured/cut it went flat, not half a lap later.
And presumably Vettel's 3 remaining tyres were about to explode as well?
On a clockwise circuit like Spa you would expect more wear on the outside tyre, not the inside as in Rosberg's and Vettel's.
Nothing makes sense. Not only are F1 drivers being treated like they are thick, but we all are. Again.
The guy in charge of Pirelli appears better suited to managing a supermarket store/bank with his 'blame everyone else' culture. He's always been a bit arrogant/smarmy I think. Rather than looking into the problem properly and going through the motions, he has upset the teams as well as making a fool of Pirelli, at a time when Michelin are looking into taking over things again.
Finally, Paul Hembery (Pirelli main man) reminds me of David Brent, but at least he was funny in 'The Office'.
Someone mentioned earlier about Niki Lauda not being vocal about Vettel's failure. Of course not, he's employed by Mercedes, not Ferrari.
If a tyre explodes, which is different to 'wearing out' why is it so difficult for people to understand the difference between the 2?
'Wearing out' means holes appearing in the tread, or chunks missing, due to, guess what, 'wearing out'.
Next we'll be saying that Senna died as a result of forgetting how to go 'round a corner on tyres that are up to racing speeds and therefore correct pressures. But because 'The Sport' found it must have been Senna's fault (including not being able to access telemetry and on-board film because it was 'lost') then we all believe it, with a few exceptions.
entropy said:
Scuffers said:
Oh do get a grip!
F1 is not the hardest category on their tyres, they are not the fastest, heaviest, highest downforce etc etc. Yet none of the others have tyres disintegrate on them, do they?
This is 2015, not the 1950s
It doesnt help if teams are pushing the limits - in which they are entitled to out of choice - such as too low pressures, aggressive camber (latter now mandated), tyre swapping when advised not to which exacerbated the problem with sF1 is not the hardest category on their tyres, they are not the fastest, heaviest, highest downforce etc etc. Yet none of the others have tyres disintegrate on them, do they?
This is 2015, not the 1950s
t tyres.Another example is that V8 Supercars recently had a problem with teams setting tyre pressures too low.
It would appear that we (the armchair fans) generally lack the ability to question what goes on before us. Pirelli say all ok with their tyre and we take it as gospel.
I'm not anti Pirelli at all, but feel my intellect has been insulted by being led to accept that Rosberg and Vettel's tyres exploded to being worn out or punctured.
If I were to sit on the fence in an armchair, I'd like to see the evidence that Pirelli have* that Rosberg and Vettel's failures were down to their driving.
- As in they can demonstrate they have evidence, as oppose to claim they have evidence.
NRS said:
BlimeyCharlie said:
With all due respect, I have no idea about this, I'm just sticking with F1.
It would appear that we (the armchair fans) generally lack the ability to question what goes on before us. Pirelli say all ok with their tyre and we take it as gospel.
Not really, some agree some don't. Equally it could be claimed that you and others are doing the same as conspiracy theorists and claiming others can't see what's in front of them and of course the government is trying to take over/ hide aliens etc and we should all have guns and so on. It would appear that we (the armchair fans) generally lack the ability to question what goes on before us. Pirelli say all ok with their tyre and we take it as gospel.
It's just some disagree with you because one weekend two tyres go (in different ways) and then suddenly they're a massive safety hazard and completely unsafe. The drivers in question who made the claim said they were on track all the time, when video shows they clearly were not on the track. And in regards to the 40 laps thing - it's not a they WILL last 40 laps, but COULD last 40 laps depending on other variables.
Either argument could be right, just neither sides have the evidence to prove it and thus it's down to saying what you believe and why.
Pirelli state that Rosberg must have driven somehow to cut tyre or puncture it.
Where is the evidence?
It seems Pirelli have concluded their investigation into Vettel's blow-out, so they say today (Monday).
Nobody else has done any investigating, so as I said originally Pirelli appear to be 'judge and jury' into their own 'product' failing.
Not only that, but they will let the world know their 'findings' almost a week away at Monza GP.
I wonder what they'll conclude? Wear, a cut, kerbs and the beak of a Dodo caused the puncture...
Nobody else has done any investigating, so as I said originally Pirelli appear to be 'judge and jury' into their own 'product' failing.
Not only that, but they will let the world know their 'findings' almost a week away at Monza GP.
I wonder what they'll conclude? Wear, a cut, kerbs and the beak of a Dodo caused the puncture...
VolvoT5 said:
Pirelli investigate their own tyre and find an external factor to be the blame, what a surprise. 
Funny how we didn't see tyres letting go regularly 10 years ago.
Apparently there was 30% tread life left on Vettel's tyre.... that seems more than acceptable to me? So I also wonder if the critics will acknowledge that it wasn't Ferrari taking the piss with the strategy that caused this failure.
Well said. Funny how we didn't see tyres letting go regularly 10 years ago.
Apparently there was 30% tread life left on Vettel's tyre.... that seems more than acceptable to me? So I also wonder if the critics will acknowledge that it wasn't Ferrari taking the piss with the strategy that caused this failure.
So if we take it at face value from Pirelli then 2 cars have punctures from kerbs or debris. Not aware of any debris so must be the kerbs then.
So 2 cars rode over the kerbs and suffered cuts to the tyre.
Couple of questions;
What happened to all the other cars that used the kerbs? Why did they not have punctures?
Why did the tread fall off Rosberg's car if it suffered a cut(s), with the 'middle bit' still inflated initially?
Same, to a lesser extent with Vettel's.
I'm confused.
Bet Paul Hembery gets a warm welcome from the Ferrari team and fans at Monza!
MartG said:
BlimeyCharlie said:
VolvoT5 said:
Pirelli investigate their own tyre and find an external factor to be the blame, what a surprise.
Funny how we didn't see tyres letting go regularly 10 years ago.
Apparently there was 30% tread life left on Vettel's tyre.... that seems more than acceptable to me? So I also wonder if the critics will acknowledge that it wasn't Ferrari taking the piss with the strategy that caused this failure.
Well said. Funny how we didn't see tyres letting go regularly 10 years ago.
Apparently there was 30% tread life left on Vettel's tyre.... that seems more than acceptable to me? So I also wonder if the critics will acknowledge that it wasn't Ferrari taking the piss with the strategy that caused this failure.
So if we take it at face value from Pirelli then 2 cars have punctures from kerbs or debris. Not aware of any debris so must be the kerbs then.
So 2 cars rode over the kerbs and suffered cuts to the tyre.
Couple of questions;
What happened to all the other cars that used the kerbs? Why did they not have punctures?
Why did the tread fall off Rosberg's car if it suffered a cut(s), with the 'middle bit' still inflated initially?
Same, to a lesser extent with Vettel's.
I'm confused.
Bet Paul Hembery gets a warm welcome from the Ferrari team and fans at Monza!
They found 62 cuts on tyres used during the weekend at Spa, compared to an average of 1.2 at previous venues. Fortunately all but two did not result in the tyre failing
Of course you can, but reading something and just accepting whatever you've read without even questioning anything is the easy bit.
Do you also believe Senna forgot how to drive around a corner and died as a result? Do you believe that the 'black box' from his car was so badly damaged that the data could not be accessed? Do you believe that the on-board footage was not captured fully?
I also note Vettel has composed himself at Monza and gone all positive PR (publicly at least) about Pirelli.
It has often been reported that Vettel enjoys a good relationship with Bernie. Maybe one has encouraged the other to be a bit more polite and positive for the 'good of the sport', as it would now reflect badly on the FIA if Vettel remained critical of Pirelli as the FIA say they are also happy with Pirelli's conclusions.
Or you could just repeat what Pirelli say and not question anything you see with your own eyes.
The Pirelli 'findings' are not a surprise are they? They are not really going to conclude that 'our product just fell to bits' are they, even if it did, but it didn't though, did it? No, it didn't, it was full of cuts and the tyre failed because of that, because Pirelli said so.
Some folks have said I've waffled on in previous posts. Maybe I have.
However, the facts of the race today is that Mercedes both ran their cars below the minimum tyre pressure limit that Pirelli/FIA stipulated.
But not a single tyre exploded.
Does that mean none of the drivers used the kerbs then?
Or am I missing something?
However, the facts of the race today is that Mercedes both ran their cars below the minimum tyre pressure limit that Pirelli/FIA stipulated.
But not a single tyre exploded.
Does that mean none of the drivers used the kerbs then?
Or am I missing something?
Scuffers said:
BlimeyCharlie said:
However, the facts of the race today is that Mercedes both ran their cars below the minimum tyre pressure limit that Pirelli/FIA stipulated.
no, your 'FACTS' are wrong.at no point did they run the tyres below the minimums as specified by Pirelli.
what happened is the FIA did a random pressure test without meeting the correct test criteria, and got an erroneous result.
all the bulls
t about measurements being absolute etc is just showing their ignorance of the subject.http://www.brightstorm.com/science/chemistry/kinet...
The FIA are the ones that police the sport, not Pirelli. The tyres were below pressure, but then it was concluded that the test was flawed, although when measured the pressures were too low.
It took 3 hours for this to be 'investigated' and basically work out how to backtrack and avoid even more negative publicity for the sport.
Interesting that there were no mysterious punctures, or abnormal cuts, despite Singapore being a street circuit, as well as lots of debris on the track.
Pirelli also stated last week they demand 17 (I think) test days next year. Sounds to me like an exit strategy between the FIA and Pirelli, as I imagine the FIA won't grant them 17 days (of course so Pirelli and the FIA can save face by parting on good terms) and Michelin will of course be happy to take over. The FIA will blame costs and helping the sport to survive etc why it won't permit 17 days.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff