Gillan: Mercedes will be hurt but the rest will benefit from Pirelli hard tyre change
Innovation
XPB_573968_1200px
Posted By: James Allen  |  02 May 2013   |  10:15 pm GMT  |  199 comments

JA on F1 technical adviser and former Williams chief engineer Mark Gillan thinks that Mercedes will be hurt by Pirelli’s decision to make a small tweak to the hard tyre compound.

Last week the Italian tyre manufacturer said it will change the hard tyre, rather than the soft as expected, to be closer in specification to the 2012 tyre, which would make it more durable. It will likely have a larger working range, so will be more versatile, and Gillan adds that the move will help every other team on the grid except for Mercedes.

“Pirelli specified at beginning of season that the working range for the hard tyre is 110-135 degrees,” said Gillan in the latest edition of the JA on F1 podcast. “Mercedes are able to get into that range very quickly which is part of the problem. In qualifying, they can get a very good lap but they then go out of the working range and overheat the tyre too quickly so they will want to provide further cooling to the tyres.

“Other teams struggle to get into the working range quickly enough for qualifying, so by reducing the lower temperature from 110 to maybe 100 degrees, it brings the hard more in line with the medium which starts at 90 degrees. That will certainly benefit all the other teams bar maybe Mercedes.”

Speaking in the May edition of the JA on F1 podcast, Pirelli’s motorsport director Paul Hembery added that he believed the new hard tyre “should work better in cooler temperatures” while stressing that teams have been putting Pirelli “under pressure not to change” the compounds.

Looking ahead to 2014, when the sport will see a fundamental change to the engine regulations with 1.6 lire V6s replacing the current V8s, Hembery said he is little concerned about the specification of next year’s tyres because Pirelli don’t have a 2014 chassis to develop the new rubber. Instead, the manufacturer must rely on simulations from the teams.

“It will be quite a challenge,” he said. “Simulations we’ve had from a few of the teams who have been able to share some of the data with us suggests that in terms of power delivery, we are going to see some differences.”

One of those differences will be more torque, which as Mercedes motorsport director Toto Wolff told the JA on F1 podcast, will be exacerbate the German team’s current problem of overheating the tyres even more.

“We are overheating the rear tyres a bit more than our competitors – and that has been in the DNA of the car over the last few years,” said Wolff. “We’re working very hard to find out why that is the case.

“In 2014, we’re going to have much more torque with our turbo engine which might bite us even more next year so we need to get on top of these things.”

Hembery added: “The new power train will have more torque than the current V8 and that will create potential for more wheel-spin and traction issues coming out of the corners. That, from our point of view, can lead to overheating issues.

“Also there is some comment that the balance of the new cars will be hard to find a suitable set up for with the current tyre size dimensions. You might want a narrower front tyre or preferably a wider rear tyre.

“There is a lot of discussion going on but if we’re talking size changes, it’s a bit late in day unfortunately to do it. So overall, it’s not going to be too straightforward for the teams or ourselves next year.”

Gillan says: “Pirelli face a big task for 2014. It’s an incredibly difficult balancing act as they need to develop a tyre for a car that doesn’t exist and a power unit which only exists as a dyno at the moment.

“The vehicle dynamics will be very different to what we have in 2013. Because they don’t have a test platform for next year, they are relying on feedback from the teams but that will continuously change. Plus the performance between the big teams and small teams won’t be two second gap like we’re seeing at moment but rather five or six seconds.”

To listen to the full interview with Paul Hembery and Toto Wolff, plus more from Mark Gillan, make sure you listen to the May edition of the JA on F1 podcast available to download via the iTunes store or directly here.

Featured Innovation
INNOVATION BRIEFING
technical innovation from tata COMMUNICATIONS
Previous
Next
Share This:
Posted by:
Category:
199 Comments
  1. Gaspar Tanke says:

    I feel sorry for Pirelli next year as the engines will probably receive far more media attention than the tyres.

    Maybe they’ll resort to changing the tyre spec. for every race just to maintain their ‘exposure’ at 2013 levels?

    1. Quade says:

      I don’t think Pirelli is getting any benefit from their F1 tyres. It might seem strange, but I for one would not consider Pirelli tyres for any road car after the way they’ve colluded to wreck F1.

      If the current tyre nonsense goes on next year, F1 would likely begin haemorhaging its old die-hard fans, while attracting a fickle new audience whose only interest would be to gain talking points at the pub.

      1. Andy says:

        Pirelli make very high quality road tyres. Remember that they are only doing what has been asked of them. I would image that it is more technically difficult to design and manufacture the racing tyres that they do, rather than the everlasting rubbish that Bridgestone supplied.
        People who complain about the marbles have very short memories, they’ve been part of racing for years.
        DRS and the Pirelli tyres are the answer to a problem that the FIA or teams don’t wish to tackle, Aero Regs.

      2. tank says:

        So Bridgestone tyres that were faster and more durable are rubbish. right.

      3. Quade says:

        The Bridgestone tyres NEVER had a negative effect on racing. That has always been due to aerodynamics, or in more explanatory (and historically accurate) terms, overtaking in F1 became difficult between 2006 and 2008, because of the excessive turbulence left in the wake of cars of that era.

        It is wrong on so many levels to conflate arguments against aero with arguments for the rubbish tyres.
        Tyres can never ever fix aero issues, only aero solutions can do that. And that is the reason we have DRS, spadelike front wings, barn door rear wings and a ban on 2006-2008 style aero attachments. These things are all aerodynamic solutions that have increased overtaking.

        That leaves the question; what is the purpose of the toilet roll tyres except to inject the spirit of lottery-style “WWF” into F1 and kill the sport?
        They make racing slower and cause drivers to drive within artificial limits

        Like I said earlier, I’m a long time F1 fan, but I am rapidly losing interest due to Pirelli’s tyres. That goes for a lot of good folk I know too.

        It is even arguable that the wretched things are unsafe. Up till now, Pirelli cannot account for why Lewis suffered such a frightening delamination when driving in a straight line. The same happened to Massa. Twice! Vergne suffered the same too. In Malaysia, all Jenson Button did was brake hard for the tyre to burst!

        In all honesty, Pirelli might produce the best road tyres in the World, but they are doing their image no favours when it seems they can neglect principle to produce poor tyres for a fee. I couldn’t even click the link to see the podcast, its that bad.

      4. Simmo says:

        +1

      5. Equin0x says:

        No the bridgestone was definitely the better tyre, they were far more advanced, they had more grip and yet doesn’t wear out and also they got rid of the marble effect discarded by Pirelli.

      6. Wayne says:

        I agree. I would not buy a Pirelli road tyre either. I have a company car so I am not even paying for them and I make sure they are not Pirelli.

        I realise that Pirelli’s road tyres will be as durable as any other road tyre out there, but I won’t buy them simply out of protest.

      7. marc says:

        Well I have to say that’s an incrediably sad and child lik!e comment considering pirelli were requested to build the tyres as such and to compare road tyres to f1 tyres is out there in fantasy land will people stop making such inane comments about pirelli and road tyres please

      8. Wayne says:

        Marc, it is not inane to have an opinion and back it up with action. I clearly said I do not think Pirelli road tyres are any worse than anyone else’s.

        People boycott products all the time for all sorts of reasons. There’s nothing wrong with it – it’s just expression of personal opinion and it’s a damn site better than moaning and doing nothing.

      9. Trent says:

        Would have to agree with marc. You’re free to boycott, but the basis of it is pretty shallow and does not show a good understanding of the situation. I suggest you boycott F1 rather than Pirelli.

      10. Simmo says:

        marc | +1

      11. franed says:

        You really think that F1 tyres have anything to do with road tyres?
        Pirelli have proved that they can make tyres to meet any specification. They were asked to make them with short life by the FIA, there are two hardness levels at each race only to give some credence to pit stops.
        Pirelli could easily make tyres to last the whole race if they were asked. Like back in the olden days of Senna vs Prost. Like driving on ice near the end of the race.

        Up until two years ago I had never head of “Winter tyres” being used in the UK but now apparently they give better grip in the cold and may affect your insurance. (they are a modification)

        Personally I think skid control should be part of the driving test and would have everyone spend money on training rather than winter tyres. Obviously in rugged parts the tyres are needed as well. But since ABS who can still cadence brake?

      12. Cos says:

        +1 @ franed

        can’t understand why people have a go at Pirelli….they were asked by the FIA to build tyres to/within the FIA’s specifications and thats what they have done…have a go at the FIA.

        Don’t have any problem with Pirellis on road cars (P6000s etc) and I really don’t think that a handful of people will make much of a dent in their profits when they sell worldwide

        Not so sure about trying to stop aero though. As much as I hate the cars “look” with all these apendages I do see their worth. What I’d really love to see is a return to ground-effect cars….

      13. Quade says:

        Other tyre manufacturers don’t seem to like the contract terms.
        Michelin for instance say they will only consider a return to F1 if there is a full field of tyre manufacturers to compete against. Having several tyre manufacturers as Michelin wants, would guarantee that no one would produce the sort of low quality tyres we have in F1 today; FIA or not.

      14. MrBucket says:

        [mod] Tires are the single most important component on cars in regards to their performance and safety. It is blatantly obvious to me that you have never once driven a high performance car, let alone one with the very best warm/dry weather tires. I’m talking at a minimum 250hp here but really more like 400+ horsepower, and also tires that have a treadwear rating of 200 or lower while average tires on cars are 460 at least and the very hardest long lasting ones are over 800 even. The first time that I got tires with a UTQG of 200 installed on my car I was shocked at how well they gripped, it was just shockingly better. That was in the end of spring when the weather was nice and warm and was until I made it back home from my first semester at college at the end of November in which I didn’t have my car for various reasons. So anyway my soft tires were still on my car and I tried driving it very similarly with the low 40 degree (f) ambient temperature being the only difference. Going around a particular roundabout near my house that I knew was possible to take at 45+ mph with my car on these tires as I had done before. This time though I took it at only about 40mph but my car had massive oversteer but I was able to turn into the slide and recover perfectly. The tires had turned to rocks at that temperature and I’d even been driving somewhat aggressively for the previous 15-20 minutes so they had had time to get up to temperature for road tires. I’d felt a couple little times where the grip was more lively than normal but I’d disregarded them at the time as being unimportant unrelated events. The even softer (UTQG of 140)and grippier tires on my far more powerful car (450 hp or so) would have displayed this issue in an even greater fashion had I not learned this lesson previously.

        This experience completely changed my opinion on the necessity of using tires not only with the proper tread pattern for the road conditions, but also the right compound for the temperature. Fast cars on wheels with as much grip as the Flintstones had is not only scary but very unsafe as well. Why you think that using the right tires for the time is an excuse to justify poor driving abilities is just plain stupid. Saying that people should just suck it up and drive better on their own all of a sudden is completely ridiculous as well. Using your thinking we should get rid of airbags and seatbelts because all they are doing is “encouraging” people to drive poorly because they know that the punishment for it most likely wont be death these days.

        Also another situation that showed me just how big a difference tires make involved my very steep driveway covered in snow before being shoveled or snowblown. Both cars involved were Audi’s with quattro and manual transmissions. My car had on snow tires on it and the other had on what were supposed to be “good” all season tires. With my car I could put it in 1st and then use barely enough throttle over idle and I’d go right up though deep snow banks the plows formed on the side of the roads. The allroad with just its all season tires required you to get a running start and flooring it once you made the turn up it and also hoping you didn’t slide left or right too much along with the fact that even with doing all of that, that it was still possible to not make it to where you wanted to be 100% of the time.

        All season tires are garbage and are only suitable for people who live in areas that don’t have distinct seasons of weather and are only driving econoboxes to get from a to b as their most demanding needs. They preform at best mediocre in some situations and downright horrible at others, there isn’t a single thing in which they excel at. Soft performance tires are far better than any all season tires for all out performance in the warmth. Snow tires are an even bigger leap up in performance in the snow and cold against all seasons. As long as I’m living in an area with 4 seasons I’ll have two sets of wheels and tires per car like I have now. These cars still require you to drive them even if there are more and more computer aids. Giving yourself the tools and skills to best get around is not only the smartest thing to do, but also the safest and therefore the right way to do things.

      15. Mike from Colombia says:

        I agree. I run a performance car parts business and I will never recommend Pirelli to any customer..because of what they have done to F1.

        I recommend anything but Pirelli.

      16. William says:

        So you would recommend an inferior product to your customers? Based on a companys performance in doing exactly what they were asked to do? What’s the name of your business so I can avoid that sort of service…….

      17. JoeP says:

        Exactly, please – Mike from Colombia – name your business so that all right-minded, logical individuals can steer clear of your petty, dangerous and spiteful recommendations!

      18. Mike from Colombia says:

        I said do not recommend Pirelli – this means that I recommend other brands and not that I slate Pirelli tyres to customers.

    2. Random 79 says:

      Not sure about Pirelli as a whole, but honestly, I think Paul might be hoping for a bit of a rest from the media :)

    3. Joel says:

      According to me, Pirelli has made some questionable decisions in F1 – including buying HRT’s car when it was liquidated :).
      I have full faith that their road tyres are as good as a comparable quility from a competing brand. However, a casual fan don’t understand that Pirelli is deliberately building a cheese tyre. TV broadcast, newspaper, internet sites when they write about F1 races are now writing about overheating tyres, delaminated tyres – that sort of negative image sticks to readers/viewers mind. I’m pretty sure some of Pirelli’s competitors are quietly laughing – at this rate, none of them will be willing to enter the F1 arena as this drama is indirectly helping them.

      1. JoeP says:

        So then it’s really the responsibility of the media to properly report the “story” of the tires and not provide an open forum to self-interested drivers and teams who want to gain a sporting advantage by politicking and criticizing Pirelli, right? Yeah – like that will ever happen…

      2. Grant H says:

        Really boring reading all the moaning in this thread about tyres, people have so short memories, I for one don’t want to go back to dulls-ville days before 2009, no one is going to solve aero regs so sensitive tyres and drs is the next best thing

  2. F12012 says:

    How can Pirelli be changing the tyres so much, tyres shouldn’t be changed during the season

    F1 is just all about tyres, tyres, tyres

    1. Carl Craven says:

      If you don’t think tyres are important then take the tyres off your car, try driving it and see what happens.

      1. F12012 says:

        It’s the quality of the tyres in F1, Pirelli have went too far with them

        Just when a good a good battle for position develops on track, one of the drivers tyres have gone, so there not really racing

        In the last few grand prix’s we have had:

        Radio messages from the team not to fight other drivers
        Drivers are being told not to go flat in certain corners
        Drivers being told to drive to a time delta, 80/85 percent of maximum
        Commentators saying that the mclaren’s shouldn’t been racing each other as it destroyed buttons tyres and therefore his race
        Rosberg defending position didn’t help his race
        Hamilton’s tyre let go for a yet unknown reason
        The driver who gets the lead is able to look after his tyres as they are running in free air

        Pinnacle of Motorsport don’t think so

  3. Knuckles says:

    James, “Hembery said he is little concerned” or “a little”?

    1. Graham Passmore says:

      That confused me at first too. Without that little article, the sentence still is correct grammatically but communicates that Paul doesn’t give ‘a rodent’s rear end’. The balance of the article though makes it pretty clear that Paul is at least ‘a little’ concerned.

  4. Tornillo Amarillo says:

    It’s funny, we don’t have the 2013-tyre-problem resolved and we already have the 2014 problem on the table.

    Moreover, if teams will have such a gap among them next year, it will be of the greatest importance for drivers to secure a drive in the top 5 teams, example Hulkenberg, Di Resta, Grosjean, Webber…

    1. franed says:

      It makes a mockery of Paul Hembury saying that Pirelli have not agreed to go beyond 2013 as F1 supplier.

  5. Baghetti says:

    Maybe I missed it but is there already a contract for Pirelli to be F1′s tyre supplier beyond 2013? If not, I would be hesitant to spend much time and money on the 2014 tyre development…

    1. Andy says:

      I thought Paul Hembery had said Pirelli wanted to renew their contract past 2013, but the deal hadn’t been done. These recent comments suggest that it has.

    2. franed says:

      Pirelli say not but Bernie says yes!

  6. Stu says:

    Why not just tell the teams that the tyre will be exactly as per the final spec 2013 tyre? Run it foe one year then make changes based on knowledge. The teams will know the tyre at the end of this year and everyone will be on an even footing. Is this too logical?

  7. Helenka says:

    Well lets hope Mercedes get on top of their tyre issues…quickly!!! Or else it is going to be 2012 all over again!

    1. GTFO Pirelli says:

      You mean 2012, 2011 and 2010 :P

      This is the way Mercedes always did it. Start strong, then when the European races come, fight Force india for the rest of the season.

      Difference now being, they can use the tyre excuse.

    2. Well says:

      2012, 2011 and 2010. Start strong, after 5-6 races end up fighting Force India for the rest of the season.

      This is business as usual at Mercedes, which is why most people said this move by Hamilton was not that smart (to put it mildly). And the people who were celebrating too soon are going to wake up soon.

    3. Sikhumbuzo says:

      @Helenka

      A simple look at the Lotus exhausts you ll see that is pointed more inward an down and the Merc more outward and my guess is that’s what’s hurting them, the exhaust gases are cooking the rears. They need an revised exhaust.

      ST

  8. JPS says:

    James,

    Are Pirelli actually doing damage to their own brand? I know they are getting publicity from everyone talking about the tyres but it is generally negative. Tyres not lasting, excessive tyre degradation, not real racing. When I think of Michelin I think of performance with longevity. When I think of Pirelli I think of overheating and excessive wear. I know that F1 tyres aren’t the same as road tyres, but I’ll be dammed if I would buy Pirelli after what they are doing to F1.

    1. AuraF1 says:

      Would you refuse a Mercedes AMG road car because it might burn out its rear tyres and get overtaken on the motorway by a Renault Clio?

      ;)

      1. mhilgtx says:

        Best comment of the thread!

      2. Mitchel says:

        +1 great stuff!

      3. brendan says:

        they can send me an SLS AMG and a shed full of tyres ,I will test them (free of charge).

        it might sound silly but a f1 tyre is nothing like a road tyres,its like saying am never buying a Mercedes again, because nico broke down twice this year.
        as for the tyres surely Pirelli no the what characteristics are needed for every race and what temperature window they have to work in.
        and how many laps they was told they have to last for,then put a factor of safely in(stop it delaminating)
        didn’t they do any pre season testing?
        or are they on a bonus for every tyre used?

        they should have a qualifying tyre and drivers choose to use any tyres for the race.
        bring back refuelling, stop all this messing.

    2. Brent says:

      Pirelli have designed the tires to FIA specification, they are not “doing” anything to F1. If the FIA wanted one set to last the whole race Pirelli would build them like that. “When I think of Michelin I think of performance and longevity”; I think of Indy.

    3. Quizzical Eyebrow says:

      When I think of Michelin I think of Indianapolis 2005…

      1. brendan says:

        I remember that, what a joke ,was it 6 starters? sure rubens had to let Schumacher win that.
        that was the nail in Michelins coffin.
        why did berni let the race start?

  9. Paul Hembry stressing that teams have been putting Pirelli “under pressure not to change” the compounds is a joke. As is his claim that 8 out of the 11 teams say they are happy with the tyres.

    Red Bull, Mercedes, Williams and McLaren have all publicly criticized the tyres. As Torro Rosso essentially have no choice but to tow the Red Bull corporate line, then that makes almost half the grid who are unhappy with things.

    Porsche recently confirmed that the focus on tyres was one of their main reasons for not re-entering the sport.

    Viewing figures were down for Bahrain compared to last year.

    Ticket sales for Silverstone are down compared to this time last year.

    Pirelli’s sales of their premium tyres are down in Europe compared to last year.

    1. Anne says:

      Tickets sales are down but not because of the tyres. There is a economic crisis in Europe. Bernie should make the tickets cheaper. Besides McLaren is not performing very well. So that is also hurting Silverstone.

      1. Brent says:

        And Vettel jumping into the lead in the championship isn’t helping either.

      2. Anne says:

        Well Germans and Austrians will always go. I guess Vettel doesn´t have fans in the UK. People should go to see Lewis, Alonso, Kimi.You never know

      3. Linda says:

        Im not going to silverstone this year because of my dislike of the way F1 is now with the Tyres & the DRS & THere are several other members of my family who feel the same.

        So in my case it is the tyres (As well as DRS) putting me off attending races.

        Don’t watch every session on TV anymore either.

      4. Anne says:

        What if it rains? No DRS and wet tyres. High chances of rain in the UK. Buy your ticket in the last minute if it´s raining

      5. j says:

        You said in the other thread that it was ticket prices keeping you away. Which one is it?

      6. Mike from Colombia says:

        The economic crisis has been running for quite a while now.

        Ticket sales are probably down because diehard fans are losing interest.

        No real wheel-to-wheel battles. DRS ha made is so easy to overtake…you might as well place turn signals on F1 cars to let the driver in front now that you plan to sweep past on the straight.

      7. Anne says:

        Die hard fans in Italy will go only to Monza. They can´t afford more races. Die hard fans in Spain might go nowhere. The same can be said about die hard fans from France. Only the upper class people can go to several races

    2. Sebee says:

      Porsche really should not talk. They play high and mighty a bit too much.

      When asked if Porsche is joining F1 they should say yes or no and stop their critiques. You don’t see anyone in F1 make fun of typical 911 buyer or the out of whack proportions of a 911? Have you noticed the short wheel base and huge overhang past the wheels at the rear? It’s like a sheet of plywood on a shopping cart. There Porsche…we’re even now.

    3. colin grayson says:

      the whole tyre market in europe is down since last year !
      why pick out one segment from 1 manufacturer to comment on ?

  10. Poyta says:

    I don’t see how this would disadvantage Mercedes. Mercedes has the advantage in qualifying at the moment by being up able to bring their tyres up to temp quickly but they are only dropping the start of the working range temp in the Hard Tyres which aren’t used in qualifying.

    1. AuraF1 says:

      Good point.

    2. Andy says:

      You don’t get any points for qualifying, finishing is what counts and Mercedes are struggling with race pace.

    3. Ganesh says:

      It will be a disadvantage cause – a) currently they are able to get the tyres to working range quickly in quali while other teams are not able to. With lowering of the start range, the other teams will also be able get it working for Qualis going forward

      1. Poyta says:

        Yes but as per my original comment, the Hards are not used in qualifying so no team will get the upper advantage over Mercedes in qualifying. In some ways they may even get an advantage with the hards in the race being able to get into its working range faster too. The problem will be controlling the heat in the tyres and not overheating them – hopefully with cooler tracks coming up they can.

  11. Carlo_Carrera says:

    Nobody does Q3 qualifying tomes on the hard tire so this change doesn’t really have much effect there.

  12. goferet says:

    Am not sure Mercedes will be that disadvantaged to be honest because with the change having been made to the hard tyre, this won’t really matter as that’s the racing tyre which is hardly used in qualifying by the top teams in Q3.

    So yes, I can see a scenario whereby everybody is up to speed on the hard tyre once it’s bolted on towards the end of the race in effect creating an even playing field.

    Now, from what I understand, Mercedes’ tyre heating issues are dependent on track temperatures and so therefore, if track temperatures are super high, their tyres take a beating.

    But seeing as we’re back to the lower temperatures in Europe, Lewis was optimist that the team will perform better as Bahrain was the team’s big worry in terms of tyre performance.

    Also, on a personal note, the hards have always been Lewis’ favourite racing tyres more so after they have been made more durable, so I expect good things from his side of the garage.

    As for that season every team is worried about and gunning for i.e. 2014, well me, am just readying myself to get surprised.

  13. sandman says:

    My first thoughts when pirelli changed the hard tyre was that it was done to reduce graining. Shouldn’t the soft tyre also be modified ? I believe their working range is between 105 – 125 degrees.

  14. Vig says:

    Hi James,

    This is probably not the place to ask this question, yet I am very much intrigued to know about the DRS operation. Presently there is a video on the formula 1 website explaining how the F138 activates the DRS.

    How is that they have such crucial information from Ferrari and not other teams. Whats the story behind revealing such information?

    Initially i was led to believe that DRS once operated/opened it’s kept open and only closes once the driver hits the brake pedal at the end of straight. Until I saw Ferrari’s where it has be held open by the foot until the point of braking.

    Are you able shed any light on the Redbull DRS operation?

    Thanks,
    Vig

    1. James Allen says:

      I imagine it’s Giorgio Piola who supplies technical drawings and animations to F1.com

      He has been doing the tech beat in F1 for decades and is by far the best in the business.

      1. Vig says:

        Thanks for that James.

        Following this I was checking out other content in your innovation and tech section.. and came across similar vids from last year – thoroughly enjoyed it.

        Wonder if you can chat to your mate Giorgio and get more vids explaining certain features. ;) For eg: I only realised what exactly Double DRS meant when it says – “stalls” the front wing when i watched the vid on this section.

        As many people have already said, brilliant work done by you.. cheers
        Vig

    2. Koopra says:

      They can close the DRS how ever they want, as long as braking also closes it. I haven’t seen this, but maybe Ferrari want DRS to close a little bit before braking.

      1. Knuckles says:

        I read about it last year on AMuS.

        Back then, their problem was that the flow took a while to reattach at the RW after the flap closed. Hence, if the start of braking and the DRS closing happened at the same time, the driver would feel instability in the first moments of braking.

        By holding the DRS open with the foot, the flow had time to reattach during the time it took the driver to move the foot from the DRS pedal to the brake pedal.

        In addition, AMuS believed that the system removes mental load from the driver by not having to coordinate a finger movement for DRS and a foot movement for braking.

        I don’t know whether they haven’t solved the flow reattachment problem or whether they consider the system so beneficial that they have kept it anyway.

  15. tim says:

    Why is F1 always trying to destroy itself? New engines will mean gaps between the front and the end of the grid of five or six seconds, yet Marussia can’t even get part of the broadcast pie? This of course on top of having to pay more for their engines next year? If F1 was a country, its roads in its best neighbourhoods would be paved in gold and its side streets would be dirt tracks with ruts and mud. I find it laughable how badly governed it all is.

    1. Peter says:

      Creating a system whereby people and entities get to reap the rewards of their efforts is a “badly governed” one?

      It’s not politics, it’s sport. It’s all about heroes with zeros …and zeros with zero.

      Otherwise what next? Letting people pass so they can have a turn at winning?

      1. Tim says:

        Creating a system where some get to reap more rewards than others is a poorly governed one, absolutely. Were F1 a country, it’d have just invited entrepreneurs to set up shop with new incentives, because their business is necessary for economic output. Then, after convincing three new companies to invest huge amounts of money, it would then have sided with its state-backed companies and left the new, private firms to rot. Then, to add insult to injury, it would change the business rules, and make running a business even more expensive in the future, thereby further favouring its state-backed companies rather than the private ones. F1 isn’t about letting people win, it’s about preventing some from winning by giving some money and others none. Ridiculous.

      2. Robert says:

        [mod] Let’s take it to the logical extreme to ilustrate – suppose that nearly ALL of the purse only went to the team that won either the WCC, and a bit for winning the WDC. Everyone else got nothing. “Heros with zeros”, as it were.

        How long do you think Lotus would last? Or WIlliams? Or Force India? Basically, two years of that and you would have a start grid with 3 Ferraris, 3 Red Bulls, 2 McLarens, and 2 Mercedes. If you are lucky, you might get a Sauber or a Williams too. And THAT would be THAT. Can you imagine how boring those seasons will be? And how impossible it will be to develop new talent? Cut forward another few seasons, and that would probably be the end of F1.

        The money is in the TV rights, and EVERY team performs for the cameras, and spends money to do so – huge amounts. It’s not an Olympics, it’s more like the NFL, where EVERY team gets a slice of the TV revenues, because more teams/drivers helps drive more TV diversity in the fans and larger TV markets…so everybody wins. Killing Marussia will not help F1 TV viewership when the Russian GP eventually happens. Letting Force India die will help kill the viewership in a country with a billion people as potential fans. Etc.

        So get it out of your head that this is “Championship” money. It isn’t. It is about the teams getting back their costs for playing actors in F1′s hugely profitable TV show. Except that under the new formula, Bernie has stipulated that at least one of the actors will not be getting paid, period, regardless of how much viewership revenue they help generate.

        And that is just hugely bad business…

    2. Brent says:

      I agree; they bring in new team with promises of spending controls and then when they can’t spend a 100 million a year to race they flush them away. Three quarter of a billion dollar purse and they can’t find 20 or 30 million for the back markers; ridiculous. “Money doesn’t talk, it swears”.

    3. mhilgtx says:

      HaHa you perfectly describe many of the countries F1 does the most business with. China, Maylasia, India ….

  16. Gilbert says:

    Nobody use hard for qualifying in Q3 even Mercedesz.

  17. Rodney Marchant says:

    The current 13″ dia wheels have no relevance to anything else automotive. They should go to 18″ tyres for next year to stop them using the tyres as the suspension. Probably slow them down a bit too.

    1. aveli says:

      larger wheels will mean less rubber on the tyres, meaning not enough tyre mass to spread the heat so tyres would overheat.

    2. Robert says:

      There are a number of issues with larger wheels on an F1 car. Firstly, they would look stupid, being much larger than anything else on the low-slung chassis. More importantly however is that they would require the car’s suspension to be changed dramatically, probably by increasing the overall width of the car, so that those large tyres would not hit bodywork and/or suspension components. Also, a detached 18″ wheel is a lot more dangerous than a smaller, lighter wheels, and in fact it could be a challenge to tether a heavier wheel to the car as they currently do. Lastly, as you say, the aero performance of larger tyres is much worse, so the cars will be _considerably_ slower. In fact, that was one of the reasons the old 6-wheeled cars were faster than the 4-wheeled cars – they used lower diameter front-tyres for better aero – had a very large effect (as well as great grip levels in the corners).

      But I think the big one is just that they would look stupid, massively out of proportion to the car…

      1. GT_Racer says:

        Michelin wanted to go to 18″ rims when they put forward there bid in 2010.

      2. Koopra says:

        Umm, you realize that he means “18 wheel and low profile tyres? So the overall size is the same.

        F1 wheels are made of magnesium alloy and weigh less than 3kg each. While Pirelli front tyres this year weigh 12kg. They have steel in them.

        Lower profile would give better performance and be more relevant. Only reason they haven’t changed is the costs of re-designing suspensions.

      3. ferggsa says:

        I think Rodney means using low profile tyres, taller wheels, same diameter overall, similar to modern road cars, rather than bigger overall

  18. CHIUNDA says:

    Did Mercedes inherit this bad DNA from Brawn GP or does it go all the way back to Honda?

    1. Grant says:

      They had so much time to focus on the 2013 car last season, and they still didn’t sort this problem out.

      Guess it’s fair to assume they won’t figure this one out, at least for the next few years.

    2. AuraF1 says:

      Hard to know those cars were built to Bridgestone spec tyres and were virtually indestructible. That said the 2009 brawn suffered from low tyre warm up on colder tracks which suggests the opposite problem. Maybe the Mercedes being built for Jenson Button originally was too different when they tried to tweak it to both Schumacher and the new Pirelli era a year after that?

    3. Robert says:

      The 2009 tyres were fairly durable, so tyre wear issues where not a real concern for Brawn GP or anyone else at the time. As for the DNA, it is likely that the Mercedes engines may have more torque than the Honda that Brawn had to ditch quickly, but that was several seasons ago – time enough for Mercedes to have worked it through. It is hardly the same car in 2013 as it was in 2009.

  19. Danny Almonte says:

    Hard to believe but turbo’s might be bad for F1. This is the Pirelli era. Their tires aren’t made to last.

    1. Bring Back Murray says:

      They’ll have to have about 10 pit stops for every race!

  20. Rich C says:

    Why do they have to change the stupid tires anyway?
    When ppl complain about the tires I’ve always defended Pirelli for just doing as tasked by the FIA. But surely it would be better to have a stable tires design and not be messing around with it all the time.

  21. McLaren78 says:

    I’m confused. The 2013 tyres are a notch softer than the 2012 ones. I thought the hard tyre was reverted to to 2012 spec and hence harder, i.e. higher working temp?

    1. colin grayson says:

      they have reverted to the 2013 hard as tested at brazil ; at first they thought it was still too hard to meet their remit and softened them yet more …experience of the first races has convinced them that it was a step too far , and they have reverted to the original 2013 spec as tested , not 2012

  22. Rob Newman says:

    Has Pirelli signed a new contract to supply tyres?

    1. James Allen says:

      Not yet but it’s on the cards. There is a question mark about the tendering process, which the FIA normally carries out for a single tyre supplier

      1. Stephen Taylor says:

        What questions are those?

      2. Cliff says:

        I’ve read somewhere that EU Competition Rules state that the FIA should have had a tendering process.

  23. Richard says:

    I completely disagree with high degradation tyres. In this formula Arton Senna would not have been the great champion he was. He would have been forced to reign in his considerable talent just to keep the tyres in their operating window. A car in his hands came alive, and now we have to watch the boring tyre whisperers while the real talent have their hands tied. – It really is a disgrace.

    1. Sebastian says:

      The real talent? Formula 1 isn’t a drag race, it’s about managing a complex operating environment with close to zero tolerance for errors. If the driver can’t handle it, he is lacking required talent. Some drivers whine about it, others just adapt.

      1. Richard says:

        The drivers have no option, but to handle it, and to be fair most accept it. – but is it still fun to compete – No! The tyres have the effect of leveling the playing field to a degree because there is a limit to how much energy you can put through these tyres. Push too much and they degrade and the car goes backwards.

      2. Sebee says:

        Richard,

        Everything has limits and tolerances.

        You think the 2010 Bridgestones could handle a 1500HP engine? Nope.

      3. Richard says:

        Of course evrything should be designed to withstand the particular application, but these tyres are designed to constrain the driver or fail.

    2. Hal says:

      Rightly or wrongly I share the same view.

      When Pirelli first started doing this I kept on saying to my friends that its ruining racing…they disagreed and liked the unpredictability but even they have come round to our view. It’s not allowing racers to race.

      1. Richard says:

        Good for you! There are a few of us who are no blinded by artifice.

    3. Aaron says:

      I hate to tell you but tyre management was just as important when Senna & Prost were driving in F1.

      1. Richard says:

        No! It was merely a factor not a prime consideration.

      2. Sebee says:

        OK, let’s say I agree that they had never wear tires back then.

        You had other factors then that are not as significant today, which put a serious wild card into things.

        You have engines that don’t fail.
        You have transmissions that don’t fail.
        You have hydraulics that don’t fail.
        You have electronics that don’t fail.

        You honestly didn’t know if you finished a race. I remember many races that ended with 1 or 2 laps to go for the P1 driver. Today, it’s exactly the opposite. Personally I’m surprised when there is a mechanical failure on track.

      3. Bring Back Murray says:

        They only had to change tyres once in those days. Not two or three times in a race. People could still push at 11/10ths near the end of the race and not worry if their lap times fell off by 5 seconds a lap

    4. Grant says:

      And next year high-tech turbo engines won’t be put to full use, as drivers will be nursing these tyres again?!
      We no longer see drivers failing to make a corner (driver errors) coz they not driving these cars to the limit anymore.

      1. Richard says:

        Next years engines will produce more torque than current engines and therefore the tyre problem is further exacerbated. Of course Pirelli will take account of this, but as they currently have no yearstick there will be some educated guesswork no doubt.

    5. Warren says:

      I totally agree. Pirelli have brought us some exciting unpredictable races, but I feel drivers hardly ever make mistakes on track these days since do not drive on the edge like they used to before the tyre nursing years.

      1. Richard says:

        Unfortunately unpredictable for the wrong reasons.

      2. Sebee says:

        They were driving primative cars back then.
        Today all the systems are perfected and refined to greatest of detail. 90s were just the start of that. Before, aero was hit and miss winglet or lucky coincidence. And so the development happened mostly in engines, which is why up to early 2000s or so we had crazy quali engines that lasted 3 laps.

    6. Sebee says:

      So what’s the alternative?

      What solutions do you propose to keep the racing competitive, unpredictable, close?

      1. Didn’t see the 2010 season?

      2. Sebee says:

        Did you pick 2010 because of Bridgestone?

        In my book 2012 > 2010

        How different is 2013 really compared to 2012?

      3. Richard says:

        Restrict aero so that there is greater reliance on mechanical grip. All that is wrong with current F1 can be attributed to highly developed aero, and so articial means are created to attempt to counter the problem.

      4. Robert says:

        +1

      5. Sebee says:

        Take away aero and then you would really see F1 slow down by 20%.

        I agree that less aero would mean lower forces to the rubber. But at the same time, wheels spinning on power delivery or under braking is just as bad for the tires.

        Do you think that just by taking away AERO the teams would stop pushing for more downforce?

        You can’t undo aero developments. You can take away a few wings, but they will claw it back. It’s what they do. It will in fact make F1 more expensive because they will work harder and longer to claw it back.

      6. Sorry, you asked for a season where *racing* was competitive, unpredictable, close.

        That’s discounts 2012

      7. Sebee says:

        That’s a surprising statement.

        What makes you say 2012 was not a racy season? Vettel’s strong finish?

        F1 is an engineering contest too, and they smacked the field with development at perfect time.

    7. Yago says:

      I totally desagree. Senna would have been the master driving in the low grip conditions given by worn pirelli tyres. Ok, maybe he would have to change his driving style a bit to preserve the tyres (as all other drivers do), but he would have been the best or one of the best also in today F1.

      1. Richard says:

        It was his no compromise driving style that made him great and made him so exciting to watch. The lack of latitude in these tyres don’t allow for great wheel to wheel or even catch up racing as what you are actually watching are cars going backwards as their tyres degrade. Push even harder and the problem merely gets worse.

      2. Bring Back Murray says:

        I’m with Richard (and Quade) on this one. I’ll also throw Hakkinen into the mix. Forget about maximum attack but maximum limitation! And Mansell too. Forget about driving at 11 tenths.

      3. Quade says:

        Who would have wanted to watch a tyre nursing Senna?

    8. Sebee says:

      Oh…and while you’re making suggestions, please don’t propose we go back in time technologically. That is just not possible. No one will use gated manual shifting.

      1. Richard says:

        Technology doesn’t have to go backwards just be different. Advanced aerodynamics are killing the sport because of the artificial means being used in an attempt to counter the effects. Yes aero keeps a car glued to the track, but an approaching car is disadvantaged in the dirty air. Once in the dirty air tyres are then being damaged such that it becomes rather pointless.

      2. Sebee says:

        Hence the logic for the DRS I’m sure you are thinking of when you say “artificial”. But I find it fair. It overcomes the disadvantage you talk about.

        You really seem to have it in for aerodynamics. As you know this has been a huge area of study and development as computing power grew over last 20 years. You can see it applied everywhere today in automotive technology and design.

        You cannot undo aerodynamic development. This cat cannot be put back into the bag. Every team will always look for aerodynamic effciency even with less wings. And there is safety in being glued to the track – something FIA and FOM as well as teams have to keep in mind.

        In a world where engine power will overall be limited to a high degree don’t fool yourself into thinking that magically one company will make an engine that is so much better than another in today’s highly advanced world.

        I would not be shocked to learn that the difference next year will be some “battery cooling fan” that will magically have it’s exhaust connected to the intake of the V6 turbo or something silly like that for extra 10HP.

        So on basis of car efficiency, reality that aero is here to stay, driver safety, F1 lap time speed I deem your first suggestion of less downforce a non-starter. Basically you are saying lets have 70s F1 back with backs that snap out control in a blink and don’t make it into the Tunnel @ Monaco.

        Unless you could tell me what will offset your proposed aero reduction. Bigger rear tires? Back to V10 engines with way more power than these new V6Ts will deliver?

      3. Richard says:

        The fact is that the powers that be can do almost anything they like. They introduce all sorts of rules and regulations to stop or reduce a particular advantage and so it would be perfectly feasible to restrict aero. A car can still be made very slippery aerodynamically but produce less downforce.

      4. Sebee says:

        Richard,

        They do, because they have to fine tune to respond to development. Rules can’t stand still as the ones with best engeneers and biggest wallets run a mock.

        Evolution.

      5. Richard says:

        Sebee No. If a restriction or restrictions are put in place it merely sends the engineers and designers in another direction so aero can easily be reduced as I’ve suggested. On top of that restrictions can be modified year on year, even during the season in some cases until the FIA realises the condition they are looking for.

      6. Sebee says:

        Richard,

        That’s exactly what they are doing. I thought you were against fine tuning rules.

        But please note, they can’t have knee jerk reactions. They need some hard data to make a determination. You know…be cool, act when time is right. GPs can be so wild, it takes time to gather the data to do the analysis on.

      7. Graham Passmore says:

        Wouldn’t a return to ground effects solve a lot of this? If we allow the chassis to generate the downforce, we can reduce in size or better, elimiate the rear wings altogther. It is my belief that most of the dreaded turbulance encounted by the following car is spilling off the rear wing, not coming up from the diffuser. Chapman was thinking along these lines back in the late 1970′s. The under-chassis venturis could be restricted in volume such that the chassis cannot develope any more downforce than currently is generated by the wings. We’d just be moving the centre of aero pressure back under the car.
        Vastly improved circuits of the modern era, with their acres of runoff area plus the 21st century safety regulations governing the chassis construction would preclude the nasty results of an FW07 losing suction in the “good ole days”.

      8. Sebee says:

        I don’t understand aero dynamics, and perhaps we need someone who does to fully comment.

        My thinking is that if you’re disturbing the air ahead it will impact the car behind. The car ahead will probably always have an advantage if it’s in clean air regardless if the downforce is generated with wings or ground effects.

        I really think that F1 is as close to the perfect forumla as it’s ever been. What we’ve seen last 2 years is that it’s possible to excel, but also not easy to dominate. Commpetitiveness is possible to many instead of few. What Force India, Williams, McLaren invest is not wasted by the track side. They all have highlights and achieve respectible results. Winning, podiums are possible and are not owned by one or two teams season round, seasons after season.

        I think the moaning of the drivers that they can’t race is false. I see plenty of lovely racy action on track. It’s smarter racing. It makes them work harder for it. Considering what they are paid, I think they should work even harder than they currenty have to.

      9. Quade says:

        @Sebee
        A simple way to visualise the way F1 cars churn the air behind them is to look at the cars in the wet. Its a funnel of pretty violent winds they leave behind!

        If the rules made the rears more streamlined, then they’ll slip through the air more smoothly and throw up less of a buffeting for following cars.

        The only way you can enjoy current racing is if you’ve never seen drivers handling their cars on the edge of reality as used to happen in the old days. IMHO, there are just 3 drivers with such skills in todays field; Lewis, Kimi and Ricciardo. That proves how far the racing essence of F1 has been killed off.

    9. Spyros says:

      Actually Senna and Prost were quite familiar with tyre management, in their era. It wasn’t quite as bad, because there were several tyre suppliers so nobody made tyres deliberately degrade too bad, but there were plenty of races where the guy who had done an extra tyre stop was approaching the leader who had done one stop less at 2″ per lap, with 10 laps to go.

      Of course it’s one thing for tyres to be just one of the parameters, it’s quite another for them to dominate the sport. Back then, F1 wasn’t ALL about tyres (special qualifying tyres (that lasted 3 laps only) non-withstanding, plus (and someone correct me if I’m wrong please) I think the front-running teams all run the same tyre (Goodyear) most of the time…

      1. Richard says:

        I agree tyres have to some extent always been a factor, but now it is all about tyres. It has become a tyre strategy and conservation exercise not proper full on racing. Personally I preferred the refuelling era so cars ran lighter and were more responsive. There are dangers but design can sort out those issues.

      2. Sebee says:

        OK, now that’s an interesting suggestion.

        Would be an interesting poll to see who misses refueling.

        But in the end, I’m not sure it would make such a dramatic difference to the end result. They would simply have a easier time of it for the first 1/2 of the race. I’d rather they have to muscle that heavy car around at the start.

        Look at Bahrain, and Vettel moving on Alonso with full tank heavy elephant under him. What happened those first few laps was outstanding – tires were not in the way. And it is all the action you would usually get in a GP back in the Bridgestone era. Yet look at all the awesome racing that you got for the other 54 laps. So how can you say the tires were in the way?

        I recall some other commenter’s comment when he sentenced a anti-2013 Pirelli tire fan to watching a bunch of hours of Bridgestone Era racing and then to return to comment. I think we may have forgot what it was like to have hopefully one fight for P1 all season long.

      3. Bring Back Murray says:

        We seemed to have pretty decent racing with sturdier tyres before the refueling era. I’d suggest leave refueling to one side (too many overtakes done in the pit lane) but toughen up the tyres and fine tune the DRS a bit more. I don’t know for instance why they are now putting two DRS zones in some tracks.

        Or even ban DRS completely and introduce boost buttons through ERS devices?

        I’ll put myself forward for the working group!

      4. Quade says:

        @Sebee
        That was me levying the sentencing! Lol!
        And I’m sure it provided something of a cure.

        Here’s another. Its one of the best overtakes of all time. No DRS, no silly tyres, no artificial nonsense. Enjoy:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1WuWu8kGak

        –Diversion–
        Please, does anyone have a link to a video of Kimi’s audacious overtake, through thick, blinding smoke in the tunnel at Monaco?

      5. mhilgtx says:

        @Quade I guess I don’t see the difference between that pass and one with DRS. Other than you had to go back almost 13 years to find a decent pass (overtake). You can find many passes just like that in the last 3 races.

      6. Spyros says:

        I really, REALLY want to forget refuelling. It gave us exactly ONE exciting race: Schumacher’s 1998 banzai Hungary win, by doing an extra stop, light on fuel, to jump Mika at his next scheduled stop. That was it.

        I really like your idea of heavily restricting aero, though. Unfortunately, it seems it’s hard to make aero go away. After 2011, we thought we would never hear the words ‘exhaust’ and ‘blowing’ together, ever again. It took just half a season for them to reappear…

        I think F1′s rules should make it clear that the sport encourages only the technologies that stand at least an outside chance of being incorporated in our cars. On that basis, PLEASE cut the horizontal length on front and rear wings by half. And while designers are still trying to digest that, also stipulate that the single 2014 exhaust must be a single circular aperture AND the rear-most component in the car. That ought to spell the end of exhaust blowing…

    10. Quade says:

      Not just Airton, but all of F1′s greats.

      In this modern driver era, I still can’t get over seeing the way Lewis drove the Monaco races in 2007 and 2008. It was absolutely reverting and thouroughly electrifying stuff; the car drifting sideways corner after corner, in the dry and with scant respect for the wet; yet always a hairs breadth from the walls and faster than any of Hells hairy bats. Nerve-racking and beautifully entertaining.

      Many of the newer F1 fans have never seen such exciting driving. Pirelli’s gummy wheels have seen to that. :(

      1. Bring Back Murray says:

        not surprising he’s fallen down the pecking order recently is it. He seems to be the wrong man in the wrong era. In the 90′s he’d probably be winning every other WDC!

      2. Richard says:

        Lewis Hamilton is a great driver very much in the Senna/Mansell mould in that he was aggressive. Lewis is being reigned on two counts. First his driving style had to be modified to conserve tyres, and secondly he has not had a proper front running car that is reliable since 2008. He most likely would have won last year had the car been reliable and Mclaren had not had their operational errors, and so gifted Vettel his third championship. Give Lewis the car and he’ll win, but oh I would surely like to see that Senna-esque driving style again if we can get rid of these ridiculous tyres. I think we saw a glimmer of it in Texas last year when he showed Vettel who is the real boss.

      3. Sebee says:

        [mod]

        One post you sentence innocent commenters to hard labour in Japanese Brigestone forgotten camps. In another you dump on Pirelli.

        Which is it? Do you like last 2 seasons or not?

        Do we have more action on track or not.

        Do we have tight racing or not?

      4. Quade says:

        Haha!

        Hey there Sebee! What we want is not contrived action. We want to see unreal driving skills displayed with exuberance. We want danger, incredible stunts and near death experiences.

        Things have got so bad with artificial aids to excitement and the resulting rash of pay drivers, that there are only two drivers left in F1 with the skills to spin an F1 on a sixpence; Kimi and Lewis (Alonso is more the clever type).
        Both Lewis and Kimi have the skills to make an F1 car levitate and hit nirvana, if that is possible. However, they can’t even try, because of the tyres.

        Have you watched the 2008 Belgian Grand Prix? That was just pure blood on the wall, edge of the seat stuff. Both Kimi and Lewis miles faster than anyone else, because they were the only ones who could dare the wet; both taking turns to spin off track out of sheer desire, only to resume the dare-devilry. Thats what I want. No fake tyres.

      5. Sebee says:

        What you want makes sense. But what you want also is antiquated, out of style, not P.C.

        You can’t have death as part of the equation. Sponsors won’t have it. Massa’s accident I think reminded us of value of on track racing vs life lost. No one wants is. You know you don’t. I don’t. You are just fantasizing this whole thing about these drivers today putting their lives on the line. It just isn’t done. That racing ain’t comming back. Just think of the landscape if a Mercedes driver dies in a GP. How long before Mercedes pulls out of F1?

    11. Fan says:

      I suggested this a week ago and had my head bitten off. It seems some people awe in awe of the fact that Kimi only broke traction twice in a race or that he can do a race on 2 stops instead of 3 because he drives slow. Sorry not impressed. As a said before such drivers are not really drivers in my book and will not gain my respect. The senna example is a good one. In those days drivers were at their limit and you regualrly questioned your mortality because you were out there pushing you limits and the cars limits on every lap – not drive to a target time. Senna would turn over in his grave at the state of todays F1

      1. Me says:

        “Sorry not impressed. As a said before such drivers are not really drivers in my book and will not gain my respect.”

        I’m sure they’re all sat around worrying about that…

      2. Elie says:

        We are in awe of the fact that Kimi broke traction only twice on a dampish track at first whilst being the fastest guy in the race – particularly right near the end on tyres that were several laps older than everyone else. It’s not just the fact that he “nursed” his tyres you to comprehend that he was the fastest on less tyres AND the oldest tyres also !- if you don’t understand that- then you simply do not understand motor racing. You have to understand that drivers like Lewis Hamilton and Fernando Alonso- did not compliment any other driver other than Raikkonen for this reason

    12. Samir says:

      As some other posters have also pointed out, although Senna’s driving is romanticized by his banzai qualifying laps and uncompromising driving style, he was also possessed of a shrewd tactical brain, and mechanical sympathy. If anyone recalls his drives at Monza ’87, Hockenheim ’92 (both second place thus not often recalled), they demonstrate his ability to compete with superior machinery by driving tactically astute races. Similarly he drove around gearbox issues to outwit Prost at Monaco ’89, or win Brazil ’91 under damp conditions with only one working gear. Racing in the past was as much about managing machinery and strategy as it is now (anyone remember the 11 best points finishes rule?:-). That said, qualifying was low-fuel, qualifying tires, a one-hour session, a true exhibition of speed.

      As has also been pointed out, today’s technologies (DRS/high-deg tires) are all aimed at counteracting the difficulty cars have in following each other due to modern aerodynamics. Aero was primitive in comparison in the 80′s, so gradual deg could produce good racing. Today you need a significant advantage to be able to overtake a slower car, so DRS and tires that “fall of the cliff” provide that. Yet today’s tactics revolve around staying out of DRS range of a pursuer, optimizing tire allocation between qualy/race, and knowing when to attack in a race. As a lot of drivers have said it is still racing, just different. In some ways it is reminiscent of the end of the last turbo era, when fuel rather than rubber was the critical resource.

      1. Quade says:

        How do high deg tyres help counter the difficulty cars have with following others?

        We have heard this thing recited over and over, even though it counters logic.
        The turbulence from the lead car makes the following car nervous and destroys its tyres as the driver has to make numerous corrections to slides. Now, how can higher deg tyres make a high deg inducing situation better?

        Lets drop that story.

      2. Samir says:

        Heavily degraded tires reduce traction and cause a car to be slower into corners/breaking zones and out of corners (esp slower ones that necessarily preceed straights in modern circuits), thereby affording pursuers opportunities to overtake, which are further amplified by the use of DRS. Were we in a situation with no DRS and tires with less dramatic degradation, due to the aero-dependence of cornering speed, a pursuing car would be hard pressed to overtake. Thus, my understanding is that, although high deg tires do not make it any easier to follow a car closely, they circumvent the need to be able follow a car closely in a corner to be able to overtake it… an indirect solution to the aero problem. The direct one of course would be to regulate aero (I suppose DRS is an aero-solution but not one that allows cars to follow each other)

        If you cannot nail an overtake, you do run the risk of destroying your tires, therefore planning ones move is important. I liked Vettel’s Bahrain overtakes and Kimi’s overtakes on the Mercs in Australia, both of which allowed the respective drivers to execute their strategies perfectly.

      3. Quade says:

        Nah, it just doesn’t work no matter how we look at it.
        A tyre wrecking phenomenon cannot be cured by the introduction of tyres that wear down even faster. A following cars tyres have to remain intact for it to be able to overtake the lead car; if they degrade faster, then both grip and traction fade away, and bang goes ability to overtake. As you’ve noted, an overtake has to be nailed first time or real risk of the tyre cliff coldly stares the driver in the eye.

        High deg tyres kill speed and cause drivers to avoid fights (for defense or offense). What has helped overtaking is DRS and changes to aero regs. The tyres are there only to provide some sort of weird show that demeans the definition of racing.

        In todays F1, you drive as conservatively as possible so as not to upset the tyres – its become an artificial race in which the tortoise always beats the hare. Thats as much sacriledge as a boxing match in which Klitschko and Mike Tyson get all perfumed and go at each other with gloves made of feather pillows.

    13. Spinodontosaurus says:

      Oh please. The cream _always_ rises to the top. It is no coincidence that, once again, the top 4 drivers on the grid have got themselves into the top 4 spots already.

      1. Me says:

        Agree with this…

        It seems most people are moaning because the driver that they like/support are not winning…

    14. brendan says:

      yes your right,lewis said he is only driving at 70 %they have to nurse the car round,
      the name gives it away its meant to be called f1 racing,guess its a long drag race with bends.

  24. Elie says:

    I think the extra testing session early next year will be very crucial for Pirelli. Whilst the Turbo V6 units on their own will place a slight increase in torque delivery at lower engine speeds.
    Its the extra boost from ERS which is effectively instantaneous torque on corner exit which will make the big difference. I think much more robust tyre compounds will be at lease required.
    How drivers use that ERS along with the different engines power delivery will really mix up the driving quite significantly and we will finally see more driving variation than we have for many years.

  25. Hal says:

    I was hoping a tyre change that will help Mercedes not the bleeding opposite! Oh well…

  26. Craig D says:

    I can imagine Pirelli going rather conservative next year. With such uncertainty they can’t risk a massive cock-up with tyres that don’t suit what they planned for because of the difficulty matching the car models to what the reality will be.

    I can easily imagine a 2009 type season, with one or two teams having significantly done better than others. But who will that be?!

  27. MISTER says:

    James, I am a bit confused by what Mark Gillan said in the quote below:

    “Other teams struggle to get into the working range quickly enough for qualifying, so by reducing the lower temperature from 110 to maybe 100 degrees, it brings the hard more in line with the medium which starts at 90 degrees. That will certainly benefit all the other teams bar maybe Mercedes.”

    What’s the qualifying got to do with the hard tyre? Very rarely teams qualify on the hard tyre and mostly are those just outside top10 or those which try a gamble with the strategy.
    I am not sure if I understood Mark, but the tweaks that Pirelli did to the hard tyre have nothing to do with qualifying in my opinion.

  28. Tony says:

    I can’t believe that the rules allow Pirelli to keep changing the tyres to the benefit of some teams over others. Surely this is just an allegation of corruption/cheating waiting to happen.

    1. F12012 says:

      Exactly what I was thinking, plus I want real racing not this crap were the tyres are done after two laps

      1. Bring Back Murray says:

        And when championship contenders don’t even bother to set a qualifying time in the first place

  29. Yago says:

    Sorry but I don’t buy this.I know that the modification on the working range side will help other teams more, but the tyre being more durable will benefit mercedes.
    I also want to say that in my view this change is logical and well done from pirelli, as the performance of the hard compound is too close to the medium. I am looking forward to see the compound selections from pirelli for the races of the second half of the year, as that could be championship decider (i.e. going conservative as last year could give the championship to red bull).

    1. Me says:

      Don’t buy away!

      I certainly know who I’d listen to:

      “JA on F1 technical adviser and former Williams chief engineer Mark Gillan”

  30. colin grayson says:

    yes , let’s go back to the days when the drivers had to look after the brakes , the engines , the gearboxes and…well , you get the idea

    then maybe be would get back to races with only a few cars finishing like in the good old days

    1. Uh says:

      Red herring argument.

      Before Pirelli’s cheese tyres, no cars were breaking down like you describe, especially in those numbers. In fact, 2010 (1 year before cheese tyres took over) was one of the best years in reliability in F1.

      The last 10 years, hardly anyone has to look after their mechanical parts, unless they are exceptions because of unexpected warm weather (so they didn’t bring the right parts) or bad luck.

      Nowadays, everyone has to look after the tyres 2 laps into the race, for the rest of the race, all the time, not defending, not attacking, not nothing. Just drive to delta like a robot so the tyres don’t get upset. It’s pathetic.

      The only reason the last race had some form of racing is because Pirelli was forced to bring the harder compounds after the bad press they got. [mod], they claimed it was planned all along, while the teams said they were told they would get the softer compounds and prepared for that. Lol.

      Pirelli supporters really should stop these red herring arguments by re-writing F1 racing before Pirelli.

      1. Me says:

        “Before Pirelli’s cheese tyres, no cars were breaking down like you describe, especially in those numbers. In fact, 2010 (1 year before cheese tyres took over) was one of the best years in reliability in F1.”

        Tell that to Vettel…

      2. colin grayson says:

        afraid you miss the point , it is the fact that the recent years the cars had become so reliable that pirelli have been instructed to make something marginal

        for the vast majority of the history of F1 even if someone had a healthy lead going into the last couple of laps you would be on the edge of your seat hoping it wouldn’t break down [ or maybe hoping it would ]

        I am not a pirelli supporter …I am a F1 supporter …the worst period of F1 for me was when we had bridgestone designing their tyre for ferrari and michelin for renault , that REALLY distorted competition

        and get your facts right …the teams had already been informed of the change of tyre before the previous race , not as a result of it , they decide themselves this was correct

  31. Anthony Young says:

    If Mark Gillan is correct, and the new hard tyre will be easier to heat up than the old one, that would certainly harm Mercedes in the races because they heat up their tyres too much anyway. However this does seem puzzling as most of the teams had problems with overheating the hard tyre in Bahrain and, if Mark is right, those problems would have been worse still with the new compound.

    I thought the teams that were complaining wanted the tyres to be made more durable, but are we to understand that Pirelli’s response is to make them less durable?

    They do say that any publicity is good publicity, but I agree with those who say that the tyre wear problems and the ludicrous fragility of tyres that are punctured by even the slightest contact is all really bad publicity for Pirelli. Of course there is little connection between the F1 tyres and consumer tyres, but if Mercedes F1 engines blew up a lot, would that be good publicity for Mercedes Benz road cars?

  32. Spyros says:

    I guess this is COMPLETELY the wrong time to bring up the old idea (actually it sounded a lot like a promise at the time) that Pirelli came to the fore when they appeared as F1′s next tyre supplier… i.e. to give us low-profile tyres.

  33. Gudien says:

    Yes, there is a certain team from Woking desperately in need of a true #1 driver. Forget Red Bull, Kimi, and come home.

    1. Stephen Taylor says:

      In place of who?

      1. Quade says:

        I think he’s pressing our Button.

  34. Ricardo says:

    off topic: James, any thoughts on Rush (the film)?

    1. James Allen says:

      I’ll tell you on May 16 – I’m seeing it then

      1. Ricardo says:

        Lucky you!

        Cant wait! preview looks amazing.

  35. Eric says:

    I hope I recall this correctly, but didn’t Pirelli use an old spec renault F1 car to test the 2012 and 2013 spec tires?

    Could this somehow be linked to the currect renault being so well balanced with its tires?

    Say, Pirelli tested the tires on their renault and made them work reasonably well on that car (or atleast the way they wanted them to work) and Renault kept (by accident or by trying to anticipate the tires) their car similar with regards to tire setup.

    I can’t find any old news item on the car Pirelli used in testing, so I could be wrong. And English isn’t my native tounge, so I hope I get my question across ok.

    Just something I was wondering.

  36. richardc says:

    Paul Hembery is going to fall on his own sword! The constant talk regarding the tyres is at best “Critical’. With this in mind I just can,t see Pirelli continuing. I know all about”there is no such thing as bad publicity” but come on the races are now all about tyre management and not about racing!!!!! I also don,t buy into this Mercedes thing about trying to get on top of the tyres. After 3 years they should be able to identify the problem. But even if they do Pirelli are going to change the compound so it s one step forward and one back.

    1. Me says:

      They’re only producing tyres to the specification requested by the FIA…

  37. Adrian J says:

    I think that maybe the best option for Pirelli for 2014 would be to build a range of really quite durable tyres and play it safe.

    With such a big change in the car design there will naturally be more overtaking and action on track, so let’s take tyres out of the equation a little bit.

    Then for 2015, once they understand the new formula of car a lot better they can tinker with the tyres…

    …plus if they build a good strong, durable tyre, then they may shut up some of their detractors!!

  38. Anon says:

    Pirelli should spend the first half of the 2014 season playing it safe with the tyres and then gradually introduce weaker compounds, they have no idea how the cars will treat the tyres so they must play it safe or risk ruining the championship.

  39. KRB says:

    So Mercedes won’t be directly hurt, but hurt in a relative sense b/c all their other competitors will gain an advantage.

    It’s something Mercedes have to get on top of, toute de suite. Their FRIC system should work better in Spain than it did in Bahrain, as it will be set up to reduce load in high-speed cornering, and there are not as many low speed corners in Spain, as in Bahrain. The ratio of high to low speed corners will mandate that Merc set up to take advantage of the high speed corners.

  40. James, can you please tell the working temperature of each of the four dry tyre compounds?

  41. Gazz says:

    Bernie: Can Pirelli make tyres that will degrade quickly offering more pits stops and wider strategies?

    Paul: Yes Bernie, if thats what you want.

    Bernie: Build em!!!

    Please understand that Pirelli are producing tyres to the specification ordered by the FIA. If they wanted to they could produce a tyre that lasted the whole race but that is not what Bernie wants. If you want to aim your annoyance at anyone, aim it at Bernie.

  42. kbdavies says:

    I do not understand why a lot of fans are complicating this tyre issue. The tyres are not helping F1 period – NOT because tyre management has not always been a part of F1, but because it is now affecting it to an extent that between the Pirellis, and DRS, the art of racing, and to a lesser extent, qualifying is now dead.
    What we have now is the art of tyre management (it is not even about strategy), the art of single lap qualifying whilst using the tyres as least as possible, the art of sub 2sec pit-stops, the art of driving to specified lap delta, and the art of getting to within 1sec of the car in front. Note, the main art missing from the list is “real hard racing”.

    Do most fans remember the face, or name of the Goodyear tyre representative, or Bridgestone, or Michelin? Hembrey has now achieved a Yoda like status, always being interviewed, constantly giving out PR sound bites. Week in week out, race day, qualifying, practice or break, all we hear are – tyres, tyres, tyres.

    Tyres have never been specifically designed to kill racing or overtaking, or last a few laps, or degrade suddenly and litter track with rubber marbles that means you may be doomed if you come off the racing line. The art of late braking in corners is certainly dead. God forbid you try that on the Pirellis, and you may be sporting a bald patch larger the Kojak’s – that is if the marbles don’t get you. Or you just simply wait for DRS.

    Anyone remember the qualifying duels of yore? Drivers coming out again and again trading purple sectors? That is certainly a thing of the past. In past seasons, drivers rarely did a single quali lap (unless stipulated by the rules, or even sat out qualifying because of tyres. They tried again, and again, and again to set the best time.

    Real racing is now so scarce that we foam at the mouth when we see any, like Bahrain (Button vs Perez), or the fight for the lead at the US GP 2012 (Hamilton vs Vettel). The epic battles between Senna, Mansell and Prost would never have happened in this Pirelli era, banging wheels, sparks flying, all the way into the corner, daring each other who will brake the latest. Or the epic battles between Schumacher, Hakkinen and Alonso. We would have certainly not enjoyed Montoya, Raikonnen and Kubica in this era, and we were quite lucky to enjoy a bit of Lewis. Where is the real racing I ask you? Where is proper overtaking?

    Oh, how I miss F1.

    1. V8 fan says:

      Who will be crowned WTMC (World Tyre Management Champion) 2013?

    2. Me says:

      Really?

      You’d never have seen Senna holding off Mansell in Monaco when his tyres were shot?

      (Granted, Monaco is one of the easiest places to defend)

      1. Kbdavies says:

        Sir, you solidify my point for me. At LEAST Senna was able to defend. With this nonsense Pirelli tyres, you simply cannot do that; or you would end up being lapped by the end of the race, or finish 2 laps down.

  43. roberto marquez says:

    tHESE TYRES ARE NOT SAFE FOR DRIVERS. THEY SHOULD STOP THIS NONSENSE.

  44. Max says:

    I’d love to see Pirelli stuffing it to doubters and only provide “very hard” and “super-hard” tyres called “soft” and “medium” next year. These tyres would then easily last the entire race distance.
    We will see the same people here moaning about them that “Pirelli is bad for the sport, why can’t they make tires that degrade more? This is nonsense, I will never buy a Pirelli and will never recommend them to anyone.”

    People apparently don’t get that F1 hasn’t been this exciting for many years. I love the different strategies, and that actually you don’t have to fight for your position as it has now become both a battle on track and with tactics.

    I love F1 as it is now, I loved it in from mid 90s to early 2000, enjoyed it from 2002-2007, was okay with it from 2008-2011. And now I’ve loved it from 2012 onwards again.

    1. Kbdavies says:

      What you are saying here is called the fallacy of bifurcation, or false dichotomy in more elucidated circles. There are alway more than two extremes available in any given situation.

      1. Max says:

        What I was saying was a hyperbole, and I hoped would be taken with a grain of salt.

        Apparently I failed.

  45. longchamp uk says:

    More power to you if you can take advantage of any of the myriad of coupon offers littering our mailboxes. A single came today directly from the CEO of Neiman Marcus �C spend $3000 to $5000 and receive a coupon for $400 off your next purchase. You would have to acquire two bags at full selling price in order to get a discount on a third. A lotta money saved there��.

  46. Andreas says:

    First off I would like to say wonderful blog! I had a quick question which I’d like to ask if you
    don’t mind. I was interested to fiind out how you center yourself and
    cpear your mind before writing. I’ve haad a tough time
    clearing my thoughts in getting myy thoughts out.
    I do take leasure in writing but it just seems like the first 10 to
    15 minutes tend to be lost juust trying to figure out how to begin. Any
    recommendations or hints? Cheers!

LEAVE A COMMENT

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Top Tags
SEARCH Innovation
JA ON F1 In association with...
Download the chequered flag podcast today
Download the chequered flag podcast today
Multi award winning Formula One photographer
Multi award winning Formula One photographer