Hot fun in Summertime
Budapest 2014
Hungarian Grand Prix
Pirelli to persist with old specification F1 tyres as teams fail to agree
News
XPB.cc
Posted By: James Allen  |  13 Jun 2013   |  7:27 pm GMT  |  221 comments

A frustrated Pirelli has today issued a statement with the tyre specifications for the next three Grands Prix, noting that it has not be able to introduce its revised 2013 tyres, due to a lack of testing and a failure of the F1 teams to agree to the change.

The revised tyres, aimed at solving the delamination issue, which some teams suffered in Bahrain and Spain, were brought to Canada last weekend, but only received scant testing due to adverse weather conditions. Pirelli was keen to substitute them for the old construction, claiming that the old ones were not unsafe, but calling for the change because the images of delamination were negative for the company’s image.

Some teams were briefing last weekend that the tyres must be replaced as safety cannot be compromised on high loading circuits like Silverstone, where corners like Copse and Becketts will put huge loads into the tyres.

However there is an atmosphere of suspicion between teams with the other camp – of those who have an edge from managing the tyres well – not wanting to give an advantage away to Red Bull and Mercedes in particular. With Red Bull on dominant form in both championships, despite higher tyre wear than rivals Ferrari and Lotus, the situation is fairly toxic.

Once again, Pirelli is caught in the middle. It is partly its own fault, as it deliberately went for ‘aggressive’ tyre compounds this year, which proved a bit too delicate in early races. After initial uproar, driven by Red Bull and Mercedes as well as many fans, it proposed to address the high degradation with a change mid-season, then the delimitation issue kicked in and complicated matters and since then the situation has unravelled.

In its statement today, Pirelli noted,

“The tyre construction will remain unchanged, contrary to Pirelli’s initial plans.

“This decision is due to the fact that the new tyres, which were brought to the Friday free practice sessions in Canada, could not be tested sufficiently due to rain – and that the teams failed to agree unanimously about introducing the changes.

“Instead a change in the tyre production process should now ensure that the delamination issue has been addressed.”

Pirelli is under pressure on several fronts at the moment; it is also a respondent along with Mercedes in the FIA International Tribunal taking place on June 20th, over the controversial Mercedes test session last month.

At the same time the company has not yet resolved a tyre contract for supply in 2014 with all teams. The the subject appears to have become even more of a political football than it was at the start of the season with high-degradation splitting the teams between those who could managed them and those who could not.

Media colleagues in Italy have begun to speculate on whether the company may reconsider its involvement in F1 in the light of the ongoing chaos and its doubts over why it has been roped into the FIA Tribunal as well as the potential damage to its brand.

However there has been some progress on Pirelli’s main gripe – lack of testing – as teams agreed in Montreal to do four two day tests following European Grands Prix next season. Motorsport boss Paul Hembery described this as “more than adequate” to develop racing tyres.

Hembery withdrew from an official FIA press conference in Montreal, instead hosting his own event in the Pirelli hospitality area, where he said that the company will be demanding some solutions from the sport to the problems it has faced this year, once the Tribunal is over.

For the record, the tyre choices for the next three races are:

Silverstone: Medium & Hard
Germany: Soft & Medium
Hungary: Medium & Hard

Featured News
MORE FROM JA ON F1...
Share This:
Posted by:
Category:
Tags:
221 Comments
  1. Steve says:

    The FIA has been known to make unilateral changes before, regardless of the supposed need for the unanimous consent of all the teams. They can always find some clause in the rules to do what they want to do.

    It’s obvious that the FIA are anxious to keep the current tyres, in spite of their well documented problems. I’ve noticed that mentioning WHY they feel this way is verboten in comment sections, so let me quote famous journalist Andrew Benson:

    “there have been complaints from Red Bull that their car has been held back by the deliberately fragile Pirelli tyres and Canada was the proof of it, as if one was needed.”

    Note the admission that the tyres are *deliberately* fragile.

    1. Matt says:

      If Red Bull has such a dominant car, why aren’t they always on pole position? The tyres are brand new and drivers only have to do 2 or 3 laps on them inorder to get pole position. This season, Red Bull failed to pay attention to 2013 Pirelli tyres and they are paying the price. It’s as simple as that.
      Red bull are the biggest whiners in F1. They weren’t whining a few years ago when Vettel won while doing 4 pit-stops. Paul di Resta did 56 laps on a set of tyres. Now Red Bull “changed their toon” with Vettel saying in the post-race press conference that their concern was never about proformance. It was about safety when none of their cars were affect by the delamination.
      As for you finding fault with the decision of the FIA, the FIA can only change the tyres if it finds that there’s a safety concern. Pirelli says that the delamination is actually safer for the drivers.

      1. Andre says:

        Some facts for you :
        After only 7 races
        3 polepositions
        5 frontrow starts
        7 podium finishes
        3 wins
        4 fastest laps

        Pretty dominant I would say..

        Do you really think a team like Red Bull with people like Newey didn’t pay attention to the 2013 tires??? When tires are so important the last years!!
        And what is exactly the price they are paying?

      2. JackL says:

        I agree. I think Red Bull made a concerted decision to improve the car and add more downforce and speed after last year. 2012 was the first time in the last few years that Red Bull was not clearly the fastest car, and they saw the results (Vettel barely winning from Alonso) and decided they didnt want to take that chance again. So think they decided to bring a much better package this year and were confident that Vettel and Newey would adjust accordingly and bring wins. And thats whats happening now.

      3. Matt says:

        When I said that Red Bull is not dominating is year, I was talking about like the did the previous 3 years. Sure, when Vettel can qualify on pole, they usually win, but head-to-head with Ferrari and Alonso, Vettel loss in Australia.
        Do you really think that Vettel would have beaten Alonso in Malaysia or Bahrain if Alonso had an “healthy” car in both races? You should consider those two wins by Vettel gifts from Ferrari. Do you really think that Vettel would have won the Canadian Grand Prix if Alonso would have qualified on the front row? I seriously doubt
        it.
        My point will be proven in a few weeks at the British Grand Prix at Silverstone where the front tyres take beaten until the circuit in Montreal, Canada. Mark Webber goes well there, but Vettel always shruggles at Silverstone. We all know that Alonso is a far better driver then Webber.

      4. Steve says:

        “Red bull are the biggest whiners in F1.”

        No, the biggest whiners in F1 are the people who whine about Red Bull.

      5. Matt says:

        Are you reffering to the (1)illegal traction control, (2)flexi-front wing, or the (3)illegal hole in the floor? That was all in one year.
        Red Bull definitely believes in the “if you’re not cheating, you’re not trying” philosophy.
        It’s funny to watch them protest against Mercedes. Cheaters, like Red Bull, are the first to react when they think that someone is getting over on them. It’s almost as if they are mad because they didn’t think of it first.
        “We turned it down”. Right! Why didn’t Christian Horner say that in Monoco?

      6. DonSimon says:

        And Paul Di Resta.

      7. David C says:

        You misspelled winners

      8. Kimster says:

        I completely agree with Steve. red bull are the biggest whinners…and red bull somewhat bringing more money and PR into the sport did get them some monopoly powers…and that’s pretty obvious from choices of tires used in F1 2013

        Silverstone: Medium & Hard
        Hungary: Medium & Hard

        Compared to F1 2012

        Silverstone: Soft & Hard
        Hungary: Soft & Medium

        I can be pretty sure that Lotus being in huge losses and not being a major voice in F1 has to suffer due to this…

        this may sound speculative but can’t ignore the shining beacon of conspiracy here…now can you?

      9. Steve says:

        Matt, none of the things you describe as “illegal” were actually ILLEGAL. None of them were deemed illegal by the FIA. And while we’re at it – the engine maps were not illegal either. When the FIA changes the rules to stop a currently legal practice, it does not make that practice retroactively illegal. The fact that EBD’s are currently banned does not mean that everybody was running “illegal” EBD’s in 2010.

        This sort of thing is why I say that the biggest whiners in F1 are the people who whine about Red Bull.

      10. Kimster says:

        No doubt red bull are the biggest whiners in F1. Let’s not talk about the politics in F1 which clearly is redbull’s play since their inception in WCC & WDC as champions over the past years.

        Result of their “whining”

        Sponsor Money influx and profits == Control over politics == Influence over tyre choices

        If they cant influence the composition of tyres, THEY DID (may be with the help of merc too..) influence the conservative choices of tyres compared to last years which clearly hurt the likes of Lotus, Ferrari….and let’s not cite the example of Paul di resta…every runner in ferrari lotus force india could do over 50 laps….but it’s wise to decide when to do it or whether it is worth doing it…and kudos to force india for doing this very well.

      11. KRB says:

        Steve, the hole in the floor was illegal, teams could’ve protested in Monaco but didn’t. The traction-control engine maps were also illegal, but they got off b/c of “unclear” language. Also the manual ride-height adjustment hole was also illegal, but Jo Bauer had no evidence that they had used it. But the FIA’s eyes (and seal stickers) were on their cars for a few races b/c of it.

        RBR is the present-day Benetton, pushing the envelope where the rule book is concerned.

    2. Yago says:

      Of course the tires are deliberately fragile, do you think Pirelli is doing tires that degrade because they do not know how to do durable ones? They have been doing this kind of tires since 2011, Red Bull’s most successful year, so please: no more conspiracy theories! xD

      1. Tealeaf says:

        Actually yes I don’t think Pirelli can make durable tyres and generate as much grip as Bridgestone or Michelin.

      2. Yago says:

        On what basis? Do you have any hint to think like that? Because I don’t.

      3. Tealeaf says:

        Estimations on lap times compared to the Bridgestones

      4. Sean says:

        He’s reading his own Tealeaf’s.

      5. hero_was_senna says:

        I’m with you [mod].
        I have read articles that say to actually construct tyres tihat disintegrate after a certain amount of laps is actually harder than building durable ones.

      6. Ross Smith says:

        The easiest thing for Pirelli to do would be to create tires that lasted an entire race. If you read the facts, they were asked to design tires with high levels of degradation. They’ve been working with rubber since 1872 and understand it better than anyone.

    3. James M says:

      So the FIA are keeping these to have a tighter championship? To be fair to Pirelli they are deliberately fragile but not for the purpose of slowing down RB.

    4. knoxploration says:

      Pirelli have made their bed, and they sleep in it.

      They refused to admit that tires delaminating and throwing weighty chunks of rubber around — not to mention the risk of them failing at just the right moment to cause a crash — was a safety issue even though it clearly is.

      Having insisted publicly that it wasn’t a safety issue, they now cannot use the provision in the rules which allowed them to change the tyres without the teams’ unanimous agreement, if it was for safety reasons.

      And as usual, the FIA puts spectacle ahead of driver safety, just as is done with nonsensical rules like allowing the least experienced drivers to circulate around an acknowledged-dangerous track on their own recognizance ahead of the safety car to unlap themselves, instead of simply requiring lapped cars to drop back behind lapping cars under the safety car. And that’s but one example of the FIA’s idiocy; there are many others.

    5. Well says:

      The FIA only changes things mid-season to stop RBR (or whichever team is dominating). Changing the tyres would help RBR.

      Hence this lack of movement by the FIA.

  2. DJ Illusive says:

    Bring back Michelin and Bridgestone! Let the teams decide what rubber to use again!

    1. Zombie says:

      + a million ! Let F1 be what it was – the best drivers in best equipment competing against one another. Unfortunately, Michelin will never enter any sports where there is no competition. Hence they pulled out of Motogp too when offered to be the sole supplier.

      1. hero_was_senna says:

        All the teams moved from Michelin to Bridgestone because Michelin were being out-performed.
        It’s not because of competition, it’s because it was too strong.
        Bear in mind that the main Yamaha and Honda teams all used Michelin.

    2. Jeff says:

      And Goodyear as well! We could have tyre wars like with the engines. I don’t want to see F1 become like Indycars (which already have the V6…. they sound horrible, like ordinary race supercars).

      1. Pierce Wiederecht says:

        You obviously haven’t seen Indycars live, if you think the new motors sound bad. They rev 2000rpm higher than the old v8s

      2. Jeff says:

        No I haven’t, I watch it on TV and online like most people in the UK. And they sound like race sportscars, not proper formula cars at the pinnacle of motorsport.

    3. Curt says:

      You’re right, we should go back to those days when tires weren’t the main story. Except for when Bridgestone was accusing Michelin of illegal tires. And the fragile tires that ruined a race at Indy. And the constant attempts to argue which team actually had the faster car but was being held back by their tire supplier. And the favoritism of one team by a specific tire supplier.

      1. Dave C says:

        Actually it was Ross Brawn up to his normal tricks claiming Michelin was illegal.

      2. Doobs says:

        Jean Todt

      3. Agree – and the examples in MotoGP when Yamaha had to run two different tyre brands because Rossi got all jealous over the rubber his rivals were running. This is not an easy one to resolve to everyone’s satisfaction.

        You can open it up to competition and accept that tyres WILL be a factor in the success or failure of particular teams/drivers but strive to get better performing tyres. As a former racer this is not actually my preferred choice as it becomes an arms race and the luck of the draw from a driver’s perspective as to the deal your commercial team are able to negotiate and what brand you end up on.

        You can do what they currently do – which tries to throw some strategy into the race due to the lack of refuelling pit-stops. This does, at least, put the onus on the driver and team to a) get the car set-up right b) manage the tyre use across the weekend and c) throw some variation into race strategies.

        Or you can go the US route of a control tyre that everyone runs and is durable (maybe not ultimate grip and performance but takes tyres out of the race equation). However, this can lead to dull racing for F1 in its current 200 mile/2hr format. Maybe a switch to 2 or 3 sprint races would be a better spectacle?

      4. Kieren says:

        I’m in agreement here. Bring back a tyre war and let the tyres get as good as they can. F1 has got to this state because of year on year bad (but well meaning) fixes. The reason tyres are such a problem now is because the rest of the rules have forced it.

        Why was refueling taken out? This was a far more compelling reason for a pit-stop (and varying strategies) than treading carefully on super soft tyres. We also now have DRS which would help drivers taking more stops not get snarled up in traffic.

        Why do we still need to enforce the drivers use both tyre compounds in the race?

        All that’s going to happen if you keep focusing on how long the tyres last for is a constant flip-flip between too many and not enough pit-stops.

        F1 is broken and instead of making another fix, it’s time start taking out some of the old ‘fixes’ that just aren’t working.

        Saving tyres in qually to use in the race is also pretty moronic.

      5. Martin says:

        Hi Kieren,

        I feel that fundamentally the racing will never be good enough in F1 so people will look to change things to make it better. People can bring up individual races – Dijon 79, Suzuka 05, etc. But across a whole season the racing in F1 will be worse than more controlled classes with a lower standard of driving.

        The best resourced teams make the best cars and attract the best drivers. These naturally start at the front and pull away during races. If there is room to compete, even on engine oils, company A will decide it wants to win and invest more. F1 expenditure got unsustainable, especially after Max Moseley gave Bernie all the TV revenue, so costs need to be controlled.

        During the tyre war and the last Bridgestone, specific tyres were brought for each track. Prior testing is always handy to ensure the tyres were always suitable. A comment made on 2005 was that success between McLaren and Renault in the last few races was determined by which team worked out the tyres it got for the particular track. Michelin generally provided the same tyres to each team, but this can get awkward when teams have different suspension philosophies. If three teams are competing for a championship, as happened in 2003 with Williams, McLaren and Ferrari, the tyre requirements of the Williams and McLaren had to be blended, while Bridgestone made exactly what Ferrari wanted. What tends to happen is that it is very difficult for anything but the established top two or three teams to fight for wins as existing relationships have determined that the best tyres are not available.

        Refuelling went as part of the greening of Formula 1. Unlimited fuel was seen as wasteful. Now the cars conserve some fuel as the races are faster that way. It was also thought that teams had concluded that passing in the pits was easier than doing it on the track, so it was rare that passing was tried. So banning refuelling was a way of trying to force drivers to find a way passed. That didn’t work so we have DRS, so we could get refuelling back.

        The thing with F1 is that with competing teams making their own cars, there will the natural tendency for the fastest cars to start at the front. When there was a large variation in engine capabilities, up to 1995, there was ability from the mid 1970s for more powerful cars to run more wing and get pole position, but not necessarily be good in the race. Apart from qualifying with race fuel, the Pirelli tyres are the first time since the mid 1990s that there has been any reason for a variation in qualifying position and race pace.

        The good old days weren’t good most of the time. Most of the time it was obvious who was going to win with the best car winning by at least 30 seconds. The racing is better/closer now, but there are problems, which are amplified by drivers of fast tyre wearing cars complaining that they have to conserve. Most people watching footage of a 2005 car in a race wouldn’t pick a different in car dynamics from one in 2013. They know there is a difference from being told. They will see cars passing, in many cases because they are in a helpless situation with their tyres.

        I find F1 interesting on many levels. If I was just interested on watching racing for entertainment, I wouldn’t be watching F1 ahead of other categories. The category is not about having a level playing field for every driver.

        In regards to the fixes you mention, F1 will never get close to perfect. It is structurally unsuited to do so. Its first priority needs to find a way to get enough sponsorship for teams to be sustainable in the long term. This means that the sport has to be attractive to the right people globally. I don’t know what these people want, but I imagine one team winning two thirds or more of the races, usually from pole, in a season probably isn’t it.

        Cheers,
        Martin

      6. Peter says:

        At least the drivers had the tools to push. It wasn’t 3 laps of racing on eggshells followed by ‘managing tyres until the chequered flag.’

        Or at least, it didn’t seem like it was. Perception is everything.

      7. Martin says:

        The tyre management was still there, especially for the Mercedes drivers, but much less significant as Canada has no fast corners. The fastest lap was about 3.5-4 seconds off what pole would have been with a similar fuel load.

        Silverstone will be a better guide if dry and hot on race day.

    4. J says:

      Why would anyone come into the sport when the teams constantly whine for a change and then when you offer to make a change they all veto it so they can complain some more.

      And why not. If your team compromises a race due to a bad strategy call or a slow car isn’t it easier to blame someone, anyone else, rather than own up to your own mistakes.

      1. DJ Illusive says:

        I take it you’re an RBR fan. hahaha

    5. ShaBooPi says:

      [mod] two tire competitors led to domination from one side or the other. That is a daft idea.

      1. DJ Illusive says:

        2 tire competitors is still better than 1 crappy tire manufacturer who can’t seem to get it right. I rest my case.

      2. NickH says:

        Pirelli were instructed to make these kind of tyres by the FIA. I can’t believe people still think this is Pirelli’s fault. If Pirelli wanted to, they could make tyres that last a whole race distance. They have made these tyres on request. Do some research

      3. Steve says:

        “Pirelli were instructed to make these kind of tyres by the FIA.”

        I don’t think that’s true. If it WERE true then Pirelli would not be moaning about how they can’t get the tyres right due to the lack of testing with representative cars.

        No, they got the tyres wrong. F1 is so dysfunctional that they can’t change them now, which is why they are bringing harder than normal compounds to the upcoming races to try to compensate.

      4. Doobs says:

        Pirelli wanted tyres that were less durable than last year but had no car to test them on. The FIA has decreed no team can use a representative car (unless it’s a Merc) so Pirelli had to take a guess basically, based on their outdated Renault test car.
        And so we have this ridiculous situation.
        Good job the FIA don’t run a brewery.

    6. Cos says:

      Unfortunately I fear no matter, what tyre manufacturer nor how many different manufactureres enter the sport I think the FIA will still be dictating terms…so expect to see the same poor tyres albeit with Bridgestone or Michelin on the side and not Pirelli.

    7. Sean says:

      Both Bridgestone and Michelin left by choice. Their engineers are all now working for Pirelli, not twiddling their thumbs.

  3. ronik says:

    F1 has always been political since I started following in 1998 but this year it’s unbearable cause the sport is boring.

    1. James says:

      Yep, you nailed it!

    2. cosmosxiv says:

      It’s been political since long before you started following it! And much more unbearable too…

    3. Matt says:

      If F1 is so boring, why are New Jersey and Russia being added tp the 2014 Formula 1 schedule? And several other countries/ cities desparate for Bernie to add them to the schedule?

      If F1 is so boring, why is it reaching heights in attendance and tv audience?

      If F1 is so boring, why are you still watching it?

      1. Tealeaf says:

        He’s saying its boring because Hamilton can’t win, Hamilton fans are not real F1 fans they will discredit the sport if ut suits them I wouldn’t rise to it let these people and the english speaking media suffer as they watch Vettel battle it out with Alonso yet again for the title.

      2. dzolve says:

        @tealeaf
        You really don’t like Hamilton do you?!

      3. The Catman says:

        Exactly!!

        Also, who do the “tyre-war” proponents think is going to pay for it?

        Tyre companies aren’t going to, as there would have to be a lot of parallel expensive development, only one would be successful and the others losers. The teams aren’t, most of them are effectively insolvent, and the FIA and Bernie aren’t.

        Nothing would turn people off F1 more than a return to the Schumacher-Ferrari-Bridgestone borefests of a few years ago.

        TC

      4. Anne says:

        Well I can only give you my point of view. To the first question. Because it is good publicity for any country and city. In some cases it is used for government propaganda.

        T.V. audience: It is high at the moment but if we have one particular team with many years of dominance. Those t.v. viwers will drop huge in some places. If everything is too predictable becomes borings

        How we fix this problem? Not manipulating the tyres. We need teams with budgets big enough to make them competitive

      5. TV viewing figures are down on last year

      6. Kimi4WDC says:

        People still watch it on TV? Unless you in England having SkyF1 as option, you must be living in a cave if you allow yourself to be forced into watching a commercials every 5-7th lap. I’d imagine there are plenty more people watching F1, just over internet instead.

        Just shows how outdated the F1 model is and how incompetent are the people running that department.

      7. @Kimi

        I have yet to find a reliable online option that doesn’t cut off halfway through the race and require me to find a new source. Hardly armcharir viewing, and an extremely frustrating way of viewing which I’d take adverts over any time of the day.

    4. Andrew Carter says:

      If you want boring re-watch the 2004 season, 2013 is excillerating in comparison.

      1. Strange that. I’m currently re-watching the 2004 season. It’s a shame that Schumacher is running away with every race but at least there’s a lot of decent close racing behind him – which is a legion better than “Oh. Alonso’s caught Hamilton with 10 laps to go. I wonder how long before the *inevitable* pass”

  4. Sebee says:

    Yeah!

    Thanks for not messing with it this year’s championship. Anyhow, it looks like teams are getting a handle on these tires as is.

    1. Sebee says:

      Wayne,

      I thought I was wrong, and that I was on the losing side. I was ready to go down with the ship in my conviction that this year’s tire should not be touched. Yet like that Nigerian guy who got pulled out of the ocean floor living for 60 hours on an air bubble in the ship he went down on – I’m rescued! And my wish for 2013 tires to be left as is is realized.

      I am 100% that my comments made all the difference! :-)

      1. Quade says:

        Just pray that the air in your bubble has happy stuff in it. :)

      2. Andre says:

        Pirelli will hate you for it.

        They are pretty frustrated that they can’t make the changes.

        If I where you I would go into hiding.

      3. Sebee says:

        Well, they cartainly haven’t contacted me about a free set of tires!

        I really think this whole 2013 tire issue is much ado about nothing. Racing is good. It is certainly not slower as many falsely believe. And this whole outrage about racing to a delta is like getting upset that water is wet. F1 always races to a delta, that’s why races can’t be longer than 2 hours.

        So for the sake of maintaining a fair playfield for all in 2013, the tires really can’t change. RBR can complain all they want. I’m a Vettel fan, but I want them to work it out not have the tires handed to them. Anyhow, they don’t seem to be doing poorly on these tires as is.

        Now, the issue of Mercedes having 2014 tire data – however crude…that one needs to be addressed. And in an effort not to hang Mercedes and Pirelli out to dry, FIA simply need to allow same exact test of 1000km for all others, Mercedes excluded ofcourse.

    2. Agree – unless it is for safety reasons then leave alone and (if the teams get majority agreement – it’s a democracy, forget about trying to get total agreement) make changes to NEXT year’s rules. They have got to play with the hand they have been dealt with and not try and shift the balance of the game mid-way through. They are all on a level playing field at present and the onus is on the teams to manage the tyres and get their car setup right.

      1. Sebee says:

        Exactly! Funny that RBR are complaining, being in the lead on all charts and all. They won me over as a fan, but I’m starting to feel like maybe they are just doing this to be visible and to keep F1 in the news.

    3. Steve says:

      “Thanks for not messing with it this year’s championship.”

      They were “messing with the championship” by introducing these tyres in the first place. As Hembery put it, “sure we can decent tyres, but then Red Bull will win”.

      Which seems like an odd thing for a supposedly neutral parts supplier to be worried about.

      1. Hansb says:

        You are turning things around. It is RB that made a car that can ruin these tyres. The tyres themselves were already tested last year by all teams and so far, RB and Mercedes can’t handle them on circuits with long fast corners.
        If Pirelli would change the tyres to make them more durable it is obvious RB and MB would benefit.

        Last note: the compounds chosen for Silverstone, germany and especially Hungary are a shame. It is clear all this whining still pays off.

      2. Sebee says:

        I can’t believe they didn’t figure this out earlier. They should have simply gone for the harder compunds – end of story. At least the 2013 tire can be used without changes, take positives from that.

      3. Sebee says:

        And remember everyone…June 20th coming up. Clean your keyboards, crack your fingers, get ready.

        Maybe James will save us from ourselves and do a COMMENTS OFF on his ruling article. That would be hillarious.

      4. James Allen says:

        No chance

        Comments On!

  5. scott moyse says:

    F1 will be lucky to have a Tyre supplier next year after all this arrogance.

    1. Dave C says:

      Good buy the tyres like engines, brakes, suspensions and so on… relying on this loser of a company Pirelli is killing the racing.

    2. Rich C says:

      +10000000

      1. Sebee says:

        That’s how many tires are needed for a season!

    3. Dan says:

      This year is quite embarrasing for F1.
      Such a mess.
      So bad is it that I find myself watching NASCAR..

  6. Sossoliso says:

    Does that make the Mercedes 20th June Hearing in Paris a moot point. OK Mercedes was testing the modified tyre which has been discarded.

    1. Sebee says:

      1000km of free testing ignored? No way.

    2. Scott says:

      They were still running their 2013 car when they weren’t supposed to. There has to be some penalty for that.

      1. slim says:

        any penalty would make merc go higher to a real e.u court, not some f.i.a made up one.

      2. Sebee says:

        What do you think about this panalty?

        Silverstone Test after GP, 1000KM for each team on same tyres Mercedes got. Mercedes is excluded from the test.

        A token 100K Euro fine to pay for the 3 track days at Silverstone.

        Are we good? I think so. :-)

      3. Sebee says:

        Ooops…test may need to be in Germany. Not enough time after Silverstone.

    3. Quade says:

      It was a moot point from the outset. NOTHING WILL HAPPEN.

      At worst, Pirelli will leave, but that is something I don’t see happening. They are too tightly wrapped in F1′s dirty linen; they will only leave if F1 is bad for their brand.

      Can anyone recall how many times Paul Hembery has mentioned keeping the tyres to stop Red Bull? Does anyone wonder why he has never been sanctioned by the FIA? Or why Red Bull has not filed a complaint about what is a full catalogue of open bias against them by the tyre supplier?

      Now, guess which car is the fastest (hint; count pole positions). Following that, compute how quick that team would be if they had the tyres under control. Next factor in the FIA’s past form with targeting specific teams (e.g. McLaren). Couple that with the fact that dominance from a single team spoils the “show”, especially with superior genius aero (as against raw skill) flattering a specific driver… Voila! Suddenly Pirelli’s words and the “secret” test make sense.

      People, its all a wrap and the players understand the game. Its the way of Bernies F1.

      1. “At worst, Pirelli will leave”

        At best…

  7. Steve says:

    Of course the FIA has a long history of fiddling with the regs to try to adjust the outcomes on the track. In fairness to them this usually results in closer and more exciting racing, which is why everyone goes along with it.

    This year however they seem to have decided that the quality of the racing is of a lower priority than trying to stop RB/Vettel from winning again.

    1. James Allen says:

      If that’s true it’s not working!!

      1. Dave C says:

        Well it did work when the FIA did many things to make Ferrari more even with rest of the field when Schumacher was dominating, where was Newey and his genius brain then??

      2. Andrew Carter says:

        Flip flopping between McLaren and Jaguar, then Red Bull.

    2. If you look at the history you could argue that they have a history of fiddling with the rules to help Ferrari win.

      If they want to stop Vettel from winning then they have to create a rule that prevents Mr Newey from developing the car!

  8. Quade says:

    The entire tyre situation is rotten. However, its a very good lesson for the FIA and those who take madcap decisions to “spice up the show.”

    The only spice we need is drivers displaying their extraordinary skills. And it never was a show, it has always been F1 motor racing. Let those who want a show go watch bingo.

    1. JK says:

      You nailed it.

      F1 of the past is to me like a delicately balanced and well created classic dish, where all the subtle flavours compliment and bring out the tastiness in the ingredients used.

      To the uneducated tongue who cannot appreciate this masterpiece, F1 of past could come across as bland.

      And the problem maybe is, in pursuit of larger and more global audience F1 has set out to reach out to, the classic cuisine got messed up with too much spices and condiments that got dolloped all over it.

      I preffered it as it was before. I never was the one who complained that there was not enough overtaking. But evidently, too many think that racing and its quality can be quantified by the number of overtakes completed during the race.

      Sad…

    2. Doobs says:

      The modern F1 (TV) audience wants a reality soap opera and they get it.

  9. Robert N says:

    What were the corresponding choices last year?

    Also what does “a change in the tyre production process” mean? Is this simply more glue, or a different glue, to prevent delimitations? Are there any checks in place that Pirelli does not introduce additional changes?

    1. I believe it is to do with the material they use to form the tyre carcass and this year they made a change. It is generating more internal heat (to help the tyres get up to temperature and aleviate the issue many teams were having last year) and causing the tyres to fall apart under extreme loads. So more glue is not the answer.

    2. Timmay says:

      Steel anti delamination vs something else

    3. Andrew Carter says:

      It’s a change in the glue they’re now looking at. Originally it was going to be a change of the steel belt to the old kevlar belt in the rear tyres, but that reduces the running tempreture by up to 10 degrees (ironically it seems that most of RB’s problems are with the front tyres, so it’s Merc that would gain most).

      Obviously Ferrari and Lotus arent happy about that which is why Pirelli are looking at changing the glue, it wouldnt be classed as a change in specification so they could impliment it whenever they want.

  10. Robert N says:

    As regards the agreed tests after the European GP next year, this does not really help with the introduction of new tyres for 2014. So how are they going to square that circle?

    1. Richard C says:

      A bit of an oxymoron really…the reference of that mathematical conundrum. The circle cannot be squared!

  11. Ryan Goodwin says:

    How do these allocations compare with what was brought last year?

    1. Multi 21 says:

      Silverstone was hard & soft.

      Germany was at Hockenheim, so there is no comparison for last year. But in 2011 at Nurburgring it was soft & medium.

      Hungary was soft & medium.

      The selection for Hungary surprises me, but if you consider each tyre is a step softer from last year, then it is basically the same selection as last year.

    2. David C says:

      Last year
      UK- MED/SOFT
      HUN – HARD/SOFT
      GER – Soft/MED

      But as the tyres themselves are different this year its not a direct comparison.

      1. Joel says:

        Looks like some benefit to Ferrari…

      2. Irish con says:

        Depends on the temperatures. Ferrari need it boiling hot like Barcelona was to over stress the front tyres on the red bull. Can u really see it being 25 + degrees in silverstone and nurburgring? No me either.

      3. Doobs says:

        It’ll be cool in northern Europe, so this will favour RB and (surprise) Merc

  12. AlexD says:

    James, it looks like Ferrari should be strong in the next 3races, they are ok with these tyres…not so with super softs. Agree?

    1. James Allen says:

      Mmm but RBR is always mighty at Silverstone

      1. Tealeaf says:

        Really James? Remind me who won in 2011? And also even in 2010 for most of the race Webber could barely pull away from Hamilton!?! and last year even that dog of a Ferrari came close to winning.

      2. Glennb says:

        2009 RB 1st & 2nd
        2010 RB 1st
        2011 RB 2nd & 3rd
        2012 RB 1st & 3rd
        I’d call that mighty.

      3. KRB says:

        Yeah, and 2010 would’ve been another 1-2 if Vettel didn’t pick up a puncture on the first lap.

        Plus 2011 Britain was the only race where off-throttle exhaust blowing was banned. If it was allowed, would’ve been another 1-2.

        So, barring external factors, they would’ve been only one position from perfection over the last 4 seasons. So yeah, that’s mighty.

        Some people here are just working to some self-serving agenda.

      4. Irish con says:

        They always used to be mighty at Barcelona as well but they lost there because of front tyre wear which might cost them in silverstone and Hungary also with the longer corners. Ferrari have improved on the faster corner tracks as past 2 years since there b spec car in silverstone 2011

      5. But it is all going to come down to the weather! Notorious Silverstone weather. If it is hot then RBR will dominate. If it is wet then RBR will dominate. Hmmm, perhaps we need to change something other than the tyres! Chances are, though, it won’t be Malaysian-hot, could be rain affected but with mixed dry/wet spells. That will produce exciting qualifying and racing. Then we might see Alonso work his magic.

      6. Miha Bevc says:

        I would say if it is hot, Ferrari will dominate, or maybe Lotus.

      7. Robert N says:

        I agree with you no the weather bit and that RBR (and Mercedes to some extent) will dominate if it is wet.

        But surely if it is dry and hot, then Ferrari (and Lotus) will dominate.

      8. NickH says:

        Why on earth are they taking Hard and mediums to Hungary? All the journalists say every year “it’s just like Monaco without the barriers”. Yep, lets take the hard tyres then. Stupid

      9. Doobs says:

        Not if your name is Mr Vettel or you drive the three pointed star

      10. Aaron says:

        Hungaroring is actually very hard on the tyres. There are no high-speed corners, but there is no straight either to allow the tyres to cool. It’s a slow circuit because the lap is a constant stream of low and medium-speed corners, requiring a lot of traction. Add in that it is normally 30°C and you have a lot of tyre wear.

  13. Bring Back Murray says:

    I’ve got it.

    Have all teams agree to turn down the horsepower on the engines to an agreed amount. Lets say everyone uses 500 horse power. Then, in theory, they’d still feel like they are able to race properly, and the tyres will be able to last for a decent amount of laps.

    1. JK says:

      sounds crazy, but interesting.

      Gonna be hard to get engine manufacturers to agree, but then again maybe they can be allowed to compete and develop on fuel efficiency and weight/size saving side (which will all contribute to a faster car).

      But all this to cover up for the mess tyres are causing…

      It seems that it is only a cure to the current problem, not a prevention.

    2. Cos says:

      ….in addition, how about getting Kwik-Fit to supply the tyres and get their people to run the pitstops for all the teams?

    3. Martin says:

      Could have interesting results. Using non-steam age units, 375 kW would result in teams greatly reducing the wings as there wouldn’t be the power to overcome the drag to maintain reasonable lap times. This would be the factor that reduces the tyre wear – wheelspin/acceleration is basically irrelevant – probably to the degree that the teams would struggle to get the tyres up to the required temperature. It would be like pre season practice in Spain where the tyres grained in a couple of laps and Perez was talking about 10 top races…

  14. Rob Newman says:

    Is anyone in charge of F1 anymore? At the moment it looks a bit of a shambles. No concorde agreement, teams who don’t want to agree on anything, everyone suspicious of the other … and Pirelli is caught in the middle.

    1. JK says:

      FIA should be relieved of its duty.

      Instead, JA on F1 should take biannual polls to determine in which direction regulations should be modified, if necessary.

      It is always the end user who understands better the products downfall than the designer.

    2. Andrew Carter says:

      “teams who don’t want to agree on anything, everyone suspicious of the other”

      How is that different to any other year in the last 60?

      1. Rob Newman says:

        Remember the Piranha Club?

    3. Martin says:

      Yes, that seems about right to me. The FIA said it would issue a tender for the tyres but has left it too late for anyone to do a reasonable job in 2014 unless they’ve started already. Bernie and CVC are just interested in money these days. Before CVC Bernie had a degree of long term thinking, but these days he’s working for people wanting to sell pretty soon.

  15. Lee says:

    I’m getting a bit tired of all this. Why don’t they all get a grip and stop treading on each other.

    This messing about is just compounding the problem. I don’t have time for this I’m looking for a new place to live at the moment……..I’m Flat Spotting!!!!!!!!

    1. Chapor says:

      Excuse the pun… lol

    2. CarlH says:

      “Why don’t they all get a grip”

      They can’t – their tyres have gone off the cliff.

  16. I know says:

    There was never going to be agreement between the teams about a change of tyres. Apart from major disasters like the 2005 American GP, where everyone lost, different tyre choices are just going to mix the running order, so one team’s gain is another team’s loss. I cannot believe that Pirelli actually developed new tyres before securing agreement from the FIA that they were going to be used, because they knew they were never going to get unanimous support.

    Pirelli are lucky that tyres were not a big factor in Montreal, although Mercedes seemed to have greatly improved tyre management, which will only fuel speculation about how much they learned during their private test. But even without new controversies, the relationship between Pirelli and F1 is delaminating fast, and even though the carcass is holding for now, it’s not pretty to watch.

  17. kfzmeister says:

    This is undoubtedly good for Alonso and Ferrari.
    Bring on the next four circuits :-)

    1. Andre says:

      Well looking back at the last races Vettel and RBR aren’t doing to bad either.

      1. Richard says:

        Last two tracks were low demanding on the tyres.

  18. Tornillo Amarillo says:

    IMHO the delamination problem goes beyond any intent by Pirelli to be aggressive with the 2013 compound, and FIA should impose a new tyre just for safety reasons.

    Pirelli could remain always the solely responsible if an accident occurs.

    Hamilton could win in Hungary, I bet.

  19. Jock Ulah says:

    The machinations beggar belief…

    Wouldn’t be surprised if Durex put in a bid to supply the 2014 rubber –
    the present farce appears to be boundless…

    1. Bernt Rubha says:

      Hope not –
      Safety would be their prime concern and one set would last the whole boring race.

  20. RR says:

    Any sanctioning body I know of can issue a rule (especially in the name of safety) and the teams just have to take it or leave it. The FIA has become almost irrelevant in their own series.

    The tires suck! Someone is going to get seriously hurt by a failure. Things need to change NOW!

    (Plus, I hate the racing this year – I admit it!)

  21. from all the elements of this debate i do think that it can be distilled down to pirelli having the freedom to change the compound formulations from those that were in use at the end of ’12.

    why was this done? the last races of the prior season were really competetive and made for good viewing. it appears that the FIA, by giving pirelli ‘carte blanche’regards the compounds it was designed to bring red bull down. hembery has said that in previous statements that to proceed with alterations would allow red bull to again dominate.

    pirelli went too far and what we are seeing is the extension of those decisions. there is absolutely no way that mercedes would have got nothing by way of advantage out of the tests.they know it and so do all the other teams. they should receive serious sanctions.for pirelli to claim that it was mercedes decision to test with a ’13 car and driver is disingenious. they, pirelli, would have been totally conversant with the sporting rules and regs. hence they are by association complicit.

    there seems to be no easy fix. i would dearly love to see michelin back into the frame with tyres that will not be designed to fail.

  22. Random 79 says:

    Looks like after taking it on the chin from everyone, Pirelli are starting to hit back.

    It’s just a shame that they put themselves in this situation to begin with – yes, they were asked to make more exciting tyres for more exciting races, but no-one asked them to go overboard.

    Hopefully they get the whole sorry mess sorted soon, but I think that might be a little too optimistic on my part…

    Oh, and when will they finally appoint an individual or body to listen to all the teams, take an objective view, and then make a decision for all of them in the best overall interests of all of them. I’m not thinking of FOTA here (which is arguably a failure) but something more independent.

    I know that’s an optimistic idea too, but I think it would solve a lot of F1′s basic problems.

    1. Doobs says:

      Pirelli didn’t have a car to test the new tyres on (used an old Renault) so they were taking a shot in the dark. The new cars are more demanding on the tyres than Pirelli expected.

      1. Random 79 says:

        That’s a fair point, but they did come out near the end of 2012 and say they wanted to go more aggressive on the tyres so that part was intentional – but yes, having a proper test car would have helped matters considerably.

  23. iGOR BdA says:

    I strongly wish Pirelli would go.

    1. docjkm says:

      This opinion is widely prevalent, but sadly uninformed. Pirelli have simply done a very good job of what they were ASKED TO DO. They are not to blame!
      The request originated from the commercial rights holder, by all reports, as he was unable to get sprinklers installed for similar effect.
      To comply with such request, and be largely successful in satisfying the inherent goal bespeaks technological mastery.
      Now, I despise the whole endeavor, but to blame Pirelli is to admit a central lack of understanding.

      1. NickH says:

        + 100%, you couldn’t have said it better. So many uninformed (some would say naive) people on this thread. It’s actually funny that people think Pirelli have tried their best but failed, they have done exactly what is asked of them! The manufacturer is not the problem, Pirelli (fairly large global tyre company by the way) could easily make tyres that last the whole race distance if they were asked to do so.

      2. David Goss says:

        I agree, up to a point. Pirelli did what thry were asked in terms of making tyres that degraded in such a way as to make for interesting viewing, yes.

        But now, in the face of all the criticism (which I acknowledge is not their fault) they are doing silly things. Backtracking by choosing harder tyres for upcoming races is messing with the championship.

        Plus, they’re saying they can fix the delamination issue by altering the production process. So why didn’t they just do that in the first place instead of trying to change the compounds? Their tyre making skills have proven to be great, but their management and PR is all over the place.

  24. as a result of further deliberations there does appear to be another line of thought here. the season start saw the introduction of steel belts and different compounds to the tyres available for use. surely the these two elements form the basis for the ‘whole’ tyre performance.

    the fact that under certain circumstances [questionable] the tyres fail then by seeking to alter the construction does that not affect the ‘whole’ tyres performance as well? the difference in thermal transfer between kevlar and steel would most certainly be affected.

    i am just posing another thought here and maybe there are a few techs out there james who could voice a professional opinion.

  25. Carl says:

    Props to Pirelli for the decision to bring their hardest tires to the up and coming British and Hungarian grand prix. Looking forward to see how the teams tire managment has developed specifically on tracks with high energy corners.

    1. Stephen Taylor says:

      But Hungary doesn’t have many fast corners?

      1. Doobs says:

        RB want harder tyres. Merc need them. On whines, the other tests. Lotus may as well stay at home.

  26. Clear View says:

    The cars had traction control for most of the other modern tyre suppliers so over heating from wheelspin just didn’t happen and having a computer control the diff is a very different story to the way things are now.

    1. J says:

      First time I’ve seen this brought up and it makes a lot of sense.

      They have more downforce than ever and the fronts have no problems. And when Kimi was making the rear tires last longer than others the team called out the fact that he only broke traction twice in the whole race. .

      1. Clear View says:

        Exactly my point, glad someone gets what I’m saying.
        Next years cars will have more torque so even more chance of spinning up the rears so this year’s tyre must be altered dramatically to at least let the teams have a year to find out what the cars are really like without the data being warped by the tyres.
        Also it’s a bit wierd how Pirelli believe to have “fixed” the delam issue by using better gluing techniques. Why was that not done originally? Very suspicious, perhaps the pending tribunal has made the dodgy dealers wind their necks in and the pressure has eased on Pirelli. I seem to be the only one to question why they didn’t try better glue before even mentioning construction and compound changes in the media.

    2. Traction control appeared in the late 90s and was finally banned in the late 2000s. Only Michelin both entered and exited the support in that given timeframe.

      Goodyear were there before it came in, and Bridgestone still there after it was banned.

      1. User0815 says:

        Actually Alain Prost ran a traction controlled Williams with GoodYears to his 4th championship.
        Goodyear were in Formula one from 1959 – 1998, they have seen ground effect cars, 1400 horsepower turbo engines (in qualifying) and whatnot.
        And their tires for sure gave us some really great racing in the 90s.

  27. Irish con says:

    I think everyone wants to see all the drivers flat our from start to finish but if we do that then vettel wins every race basically. We need the perfect balance between pushing like hell but still having to watch u don’t cook the tyres.

  28. Tom says:

    F1 is turning into a circus, the only reason I still watch it is because I’m still loyal to it and hope that change will happen.

    Geez I hope these engines next year turn out and sound better than what everyone is expecting.

  29. seeing scarlet says:

    Yes, sorry RBR you’ll have to drive what you have, rah ha ha hs

  30. Hey James – not sure how to get suggestions to you and whether this has been suggested/requested before but can you get “Agree” and “Disagree” buttons developed for people to vote on comments made by others? Some comments I totally agree with and would like to “Like” or show my agreement without having to submit an actual post. And other comments I think are so wrong that I feel a need to mark my disageement but refrain from submitting a contentious post. Possible? Anyone else want something like this?

    1. docjkm says:

      You have my vote

    2. Random 79 says:

      Sounds like a good idea to me :)

    3. Oz Geezza says:

      In the land of OZ, there is a People
      Republic of Victoria,and there is a Queensland
      ah,Queenslanders famous for thier lateral
      thinking ?.

  31. Nadeem says:

    Why can’t the teams agree for the good of the sport. Everytime it seems as a good idea comes out they all say lets do it. However when a vote comes some will veto it just because they think it will disadvantgae them that much.

  32. Nasidas says:

    james i’m pretty sure you can just start ending all article titles with ‘teams fail to agree’ – where’s the (relative) unity from the FOTA gone?

  33. David C says:

    As long as the safety issues are addressed in the “change in the tyre production process” lets get racing and see this sesason out. I do feel a bit for Pirelli as some teams wouldnt meet them have way to help their reputation but they can always take revenge on compound selection. Both Hungary and UK are more conservative this year and I suspect we will see alot of races with HARD / MEDIUM tyres this year. God help us if RBR get a delamination!!!!

  34. vivek says:

    James,

    When was the last time we had hard and medium in hungary? Very conservative in my view.

      1. Bayan says:

        This should help Merc right?

    1. Andre says:

      When you consider that :
      Hard(2013) is equivalent to Medium(2012)
      Medium(2013) is equivalent to Soft(2012)

      Last year they raced Hard/Soft, so that would mean in 2012 ‘names’ they are racing Medium/Soft.

      So they went from Hard/Soft to Medium/Soft.
      Not so conservative as it looks.

    2. Robert N says:

      Conservative, yes. But also very understandable from Pirelli’s point of view. They were not allowed to change the tyres, so all they have left it to choose slightly harder tyres at each event.

      Having said that, last year the medium and soft were used in Hungary. But it has been said that this year’s tyre are all one degree softer compared to last year. So in a way all they have done is gone back to last year’s choice after having been too aggressive at some of the early races this season.

      1. Hansb says:

        Yes, but all teams have a lot more experience with these tyres now and already last year Hungary was conservative.

    3. Multi 21 says:

      Last year the selection was soft/medium. If you consider that this year’s tyres are a step softer than last year’s (S/M from 2012 is M/H for 2013) it is as close to the same as 2012 as you can get.

      When you look at the track temperatures that can be experienced in Hungary in August, you can understand why they are playing safe with compound selection.

    4. Anne says:

      And Lotus agree with you. Now they are complaning that the tyres for Hungary are too conservative

    5. NickH says:

      They have to take hard tyres at the expense of Lotus and Ferrari because if they took soft Red Bull and Merc would whinge beyond belief

      1. Hansb says:

        I guess the choice of compounds is compromised indeed. They are afraid to make more headlines, so they chose the safe way.

      2. NickH says:

        Exactly, I fear this will be a pattern for the rest of the season

  35. PAD says:

    In my opinion Pirelli have done an excellent job. The problem lies with the aerodynamic rules and regulations. A couple of years ago we had the exhaust driven diffusers so the rules were changed to insist exhaust pipes came out higher and pointing slightly upward. So what did the teams do? They made these coanda exhaust ports and use this air to seal around the rear wheels. Brilliant yes, but visually a waste of money as spectators – you and me – can’t see this.

    It all means the aerodynamics work the types so hard.

    Next year we will have the new engine with single exhaust exitting directly on the rear wing – supposedly. Teams will find some clever way of using this to their advantage. Lets hope mechanical grip is more important than aero.

    What is currently the problem is the massive front wing and aerodynamic regulations that allow exhaust driven effects. FIA should have changed rules several years ago when this first started to appear.

    Well done Pirelli for what you have done to make the racing as good as it has been. I don’t want to return to the tyres that last all race with no problem.

    1. Steve says:

      The “racing” has been dreadful. Some GP”s have been nothing more than simultaneous timed trials with everyone circulating to times radioed in from the pits as they try to keep the tyres in one piece. I’ve never seen such a sorry excuse for racing in nearly two decades of watching F1.

      1. Doobs says:

        No difference to teams pacing a short-fuelled car when an expected safety car period doesn’t materialise, or to look after an engine and gearbox that you have to use for another five races. F1 has moved on, better or worse, and whatever the tyres, some speed management is inevitable in modern F1.
        Multi 21

    2. User0815 says:

      Tires that deflate and delaminate are _not_ “an excellent job”. Tires that don’t ever come back, once they’ve been overheated are not a great job.
      Tires that must be treated like babies and still have to be changed after a couple of laps are not a great job – tires that can take a serious punishment for 15-20 laps before giving up, that would be too slow to compensate a stop, when tampered, would be. Pirelli is NOT making a good job.
      And Pirellis whining about tests sickens me: Pirelli has 11 teams, each running more than 1000km per car per weekend on a series of strategies and tracks, if Pirelli claim they need a “current car” to get data, they say they can’t properly extrapolate changes of construction with such an amount of data behind, now what does that tell us about the state of their research- and simulation capabilities?
      I’m pretty sure Michelin, GoodYear or Bridgestone would do a way better Job than Pirelli does.

      1. colin grayson says:

        and I’m pretty sure you have never been involved in manufacturing tyres
        you cannot design tyres by extrapolation….even for a basic road car the manufacturer will test the tyre on the actual vehicle before deciding to fit it ….

        unfortunately the information that pirelli gets from the seasons races doesn’t help , as they are not permitted to change the tyre …as recent events demonstrate

        and if you look at the statistics you will see that the current tyres are not puncturing as much as in the past , which is why they are delaminating …in my view a big safety improvement , how many cars have crashed this season after a puncture ?

        and tyres that don’t come back ? who told you that ? how many people realise that the rear tyres are actually spinning on accelerating throughout the race [ except for kimi it seems ]as we no longer have traction control ; whether or not the teams decide to go through the bad patch is up to them …have a look at di resta’s lap times on one set for nearly 60 laps in the last race …that shows you if the tyres come back

      2. User0815 says:

        You must be pretty new to Formula 1, or else you would know better. Think about it: No one has a 2014 car, yet Tires need to be designed for it. 2012 no one had a 2013 car, still tires need to be built.
        It’s the same story since day one of formula 1: No tire manufacturer ever knew the cars for next year, because they were not built yet (apart for those team that chose to run their car for more than a season). Each tire manufacturer saw the new cars for the first time, when they first rolled out, so they had to build tires for those cars from their experience. They’ve had pre season tests to perfect them and they tested between the races (that’s not possible anymore) and of course they all got data with every pit stop made.
        Pirelli may of course change the tire during the season for safety reasons, but that would include they had a safety problem, which I’m sure they wouldn’t like to admit.
        Yes, these tires don’t come back, it’s been in the news. Wheelspin is of course part of the factors that put heat into tires, just like brakes that are heating the rims and deformations while cornering and braking. As long as these forces keep the tire’s heat in it’s working range, everything is okay. But we’ve seen numerous times that drivers overheated their tires and despite going slower they never came back. Mercedes being a prime example. It’s not just degradation.

        “The symptom of the Mercedes problem is that, left to the car’s own devices, the rear tyres will run about 20-deg C too hot. There are things the team and the drivers can do to keep tyre temperatures down, but at these tracks even they were not enough to prevent a temperature threshold being crossed, beyond which there is no bringing them back.”

        http://www1.skysports.com/formula-1/news/12040/8713028/Mercedes-tyre-woes-continue-in-Barcelona

        ps: DiResta has nursed his tires, never overheated them, that’s why there was still life in them.

      3. Doobs says:

        I’m with COlin,

        Pirelli have already designed and built the tyres before the teams get to try them out in races. It’s a bit late to make changes if they’re rubbish.

  36. Bim says:

    James why cant Pirelli buy/lease a f1 car from the backend teams like Marusia or Caterham and then run its own test team as much as it wants?

  37. Andre says:

    James, do you know if Pirelli still plans to award this year’s GP2 champion with a F1 test? And if so with what car (team)?
    They announched that when they unveiled this year’s tyre range in January.

  38. kal says:

    james isnt this giving the championship to ferrari?

  39. what a lot of people tend to forget is that when we had sensible tyres that lasted longer the so called processions were not the fault of the tyres but the aerodynamics.

    to overcome the lack of possible passing the ‘movable’ front wing elements were introduced, then abandoned, then KERS was introduced, then DRS was introduced all of which have improved the ‘passing’. why then introduce ‘trash’ tyres?

    the real reason, IMO, is that redbull have won the last three WDC/WDC and that was an impediment to the ‘show’. they were going to be easy meat as they were the team with the most prodigious downforce. trash tyres under those massive downforce loads would suffer more than most. hence the red bull outcry.

    i have absolutely no reason to support red bull on the track owing to the fact that as a team i despise their MO. all that aside, the fact remains that pirelli have,IMO, in concert with others messed in their own nest by trying to be too clever. i have absolutely no sympathy for them. they could have always refused to provide trash tyres. i doubt if that characteristic was included in their contract.

  40. Danny Almonte says:

    Ecclestone is to blame. Based on a wet race in Montreal, in which the wrong tires were provided, they decided to make the tires more aggressive in hopes of recreating a chance occurrence in Canada. One year later, Pirelli screws up and brings the correct tires to Montreal and Vettel gets an easy win.

    I’ll be watching for Lotus to have a huge breakthrough since they’ve been adamantly against changes to the tires. I expect I’ll be watching in vain. Lotus look like an average team.

    1. Pfff says:

      Ecclestone has ZERO power over the regulations of F1. Still odd to see that people claiming they are F1 fans make this huge mistake.

      He just says his opinion like you and me and that’s it. He has no power to implement it, because he is the boss over the commercial side of F1 and making money deals with the parties involved and promoting the sport.

      FIA is the one having power over the regulations. Ecclestone is not FIA, in fact they oppose each other.

      So the tyres, looks of the car, safety car rules, parc ferme, new engines, etc… all FIA.

  41. Spyros says:

    Some time ago (but after his retirement/replacement), Max Mosley said in an interview that he felt that a dictatorial (for lack of a better word) approach was necessary in his day, i.e. that man-handling F1 teams and team bosses was needed, because otherwise their squabbling wouldn’t allow anything to get done…

    I didn’t like the man when he was in charge, but I miss him now.

  42. Mark in Australia says:

    Will we ever see two tyre manufacturers in F1 again?

    1. That would encourage manufacturers to make tyres that are both grippy *and* long lasting. Obviously not possible so they’d have to make a reasonable compromise between the two and get the best compound that their level of technology involves.

      It would involve manufacturers pushing each other to develop *better* tyres, as opposed to one manufacturer trying to design the *worst* tyres they can.

      Don’t you see that your plan makes FAR TOO MUCH sense to be implemented in modern day F1?

  43. colin grayson says:

    the truth of the matter is that delamination didn’t happen in the past because the tyres punctured and deflated when the tread was cut

    now , because the tyres are much more puncture resistant , when the tread is cut the tyre doesn’t deflate , the car continues so that the tread overheats and delaminates

    surely it is much safer to have less sudden deflations…not one of the cars that has suffered a delamination has crashed

    1. User0815 says:

      That doesn’t make sense. Why should a tire overheat if it’s punctured? What exactly does a little stitch in the rubber change in the thermal capacity of the rubber? Nothing.
      Pirelli have changes the construction from last year to this year, they have replaced the Kevlar belt on the inner shoulder with a steel belt (this is why this year, as opposed to last year, the tires have a preferred direction, some teams have discovered tat running the tires the other way round is beneficial, curiously the delaminated tires have been run in their preferred direction).

  44. Jon Read says:

    I feel pirelli have been the kicking post in all this, if you cant test the tyres in current conditions / climates with current cars, how are you supposed to get the balance right evry time (and i dont support what merc have done either). If they manage to make a tyre that lasts 60 laps, fans will moan about 1 stop. Tyres that fall away quickly, loads of pit stops, fans will moan again. I would like to see a tyre that you can go flat out on for a limited number of laps, say 20, then with the massive drop off in performance, like a couple of years ago.

  45. David H says:

    The true problem is that the cars are now too fast for the circuits. Aero efficiency and power mean there is generally only one fast way around a circuit and in order to overtake the driver has to deviate from the fastest course.
    In the sixties and seventies, the cars had little Aero and nowhere near today’s power. It was possible for drivers to take different lines and enough time between multiple corners for a driver o pull off a well crafted pass.
    Now – the speeds are such that even with a 20 or so k advantage passing is not possible on most straights.
    It,s Aero that is killing racing and not just in F1!
    Congrats Pirelli for finding a way to make races interesting again.

  46. Bayan says:

    Bring back refuelling during the race. I bet we will see more of the sprint type stints again. None of these extreme tyre conservation tactics.

    1. User0815 says:

      Please don’t bring back refuelling! Have you forgotten about all the “overtaking in the pit lane” tactics, when you could switch off the telly after the last stop, because that was the point when usually all was said and done? When even the pit stops were boring, because the time of the stop was dominated by the amount of fuel and no one ever knew if that was a very good stop or just an average one?

      And how would you think it stopped tire conservation? We’ve had drivers complaining in Qualifying that they had used too much of the tire on the start of the lap, so in the last corner the tires went away. If these Pirellis effectively don’t stand a whole qualifying lap without degrading, what would it change to refuel the cars?

  47. Richard says:

    Good stuff, means we actually have a championship this year.

  48. i fail to understand why having multiple pit stops for tyre changes floats anyones boat? sixteen ‘space invaders’ change wheels in under three seconds? so what?

    1. User0815 says:

      It was less of a problem without a speed limit in the pit lane, but that won’t ever return.

    2. Steve says:

      I honestly don’t think anybody really gets off on multiple pit stops per race. Fans of certain teams/drivers have pinned their hopes for success this year on the tyres remaining rubbish, which compels them to pretend that four pit stops per race and cars running to a delta time radioed from the pits is a gripping and exciting spectacle.

      1. yes, you are right there steve, as the sport now becomes even more farcical due the fact that races can be won or lost whilst the car is stationary!! how many times have we see a driver do his very best on track only to come undone in a botched wheel nut exchange? the more stops the greater the possibility of something like this happening.

        all rather pathetic, IMO.

  49. leeschumi says:

    The only way to fix this is a tyre war – plain and simple, 2 tyre companies keeping each other on their toes all in the name of sport using only 2 compounds soft or hard no mediums or supersofts . this should keep down costs too! its the only way to make this sad situation where its all about the tyres go away. I want to hear more about the drivers, cars and tracks etc more far too much f1 airtime being devoted to round rubber!!

  50. David C says:

    Stop whinging force India / Ferrari / lotus about the compound choices, everyone has the same tyres so just go and race, some people designed there cars better to run med/hard at Hungary, so stop trying to change Pirelli to your advantage. You are all whinging please stop trying to cheat ………. The shoe is firmly on the other foot now lads

    1. NickH says:

      Red bull and Merc whining in the first place has made them take medium and hard to Hungary. Pretty sure they have succeeded in changing Pirelli to their advantage.

      1. David C says:

        So it was redbulls fault when they complain about Pirelli and now it’s their fault that they don’t complain.? Humm what do you digest they do

      2. NickH says:

        They are not complaining because they have got their way. Everyone tested these tyres before they made 2013 cars. What I suggest they should have done is use the information from this test to develop their 2013 car, maybe then they wouldn’t have a car that destroys it’s tyres and then have to complain to get harder tyres.

      3. David C says:

        RBR wanted the tyres to be changed and that didnt happen so they didnt get their way. I dont see why Lotus should be allowed to pick and choose the tyre compounds for each GP, that is always something Pirelli have done and to let Lotus change the decision of Pirelli is crazy. Lotus recieved the Hard/Med tyre during development so they had the same chance to design a car as RBR or even Marussia, they also knew compound selection was at the descretion of Pirelli.

  51. User0815 says:

    Why can’t Pirelli build a tire that you can really push to the limit, but that’s done in a quarter of a race, if you do, while saving tires would save one or two stops, but end up slightly slower in the end, so the risk going flat out would still be the faster strategy?
    You see, I was re-watching the 93 season a while ago, and GoodYear seemed to have a tire like that. People were driving very hard, putting in two cool laps once in a while to bring the tires back and then switch back to attack mode. Eventually in the last stint some people were running out of juice, either because their tires were used too long or because they were used too hard but the point is: Drivers had the option to go very hard. With nowadays Pirellis going hard is no option anymore and that’s what makes it a bit boring. You don’t see heart stopping moments anymore, cars wiggling on the corner exit, only seldomly you see people outbraking each other with smoking tires, back in the days it was normal.

    And I seriously dislike DRS, it is a cure for a disease caused by fragile aerodynamics created with complicated wings. If downforce was rather created by the floor of the car and the wings would be hugely less important, dirty air would be less of a problem. When the FIA made the teams use a stepped, flat floor, it was one of the worst technical decisions ever made.

  52. B.Ware says:

    Whether it be tires, KERS, DRS, or the myriad other rediculus rules, the resultant political storm is what happens when the rules makers try to create “interesting” racing by artificial means. The outcome of this incessant rules twiddling is confused and angry fans. We might as well switch over to the totally contrived “show” that is NASCAR where the only interest is in making more money instead of true sporting competition.

  53. David C says:

    So it was redbulls fault for complaining about Pirellis decisions and now it’s their fault for not complaining decisions. What exactly should they do?

    1. Hansb says:

      You dont understand do you ?

      1. David C says:

        I understand that there is a lot of people who have an irrational dislike for RBR and Vettel, and what ever they do is wrong. These people have no objectivity, RBR complain about the tyres …… There trying to change with Pirelli have decided – RBR bad, Pirelli say they are brining hard/med ……… RBR say nothing and accept the decision RBR bad. What do people want?????

      2. NickH says:

        He doesn’t understand

      3. David C says:

        Well then explain, offer something.

  54. David C says:

    I understand that there is a lot of people who have an irrational dislike for RBR and Vettel, and what ever they do is wrong. These people have no objectivity, RBR complain about the tyres …… There trying to change with Pirelli have decided – RBR bad, Pirelli say they are brining hard/med ……… RBR say nothing and accept the decision RBR bad. What do people want?????

  55. paul hembery,[quote], ‘what do they want? for us to bring back last years tyres and let red bull run away with the championship again?’ or words to that effect. says it all really.

  56. JB says:

    FIA thought a rapid degrading tire are the way to go so there is an added element of risks. Pirelli complied without questioning. Teams have many opinions of it based on how suitable the tires were at that moment in time. Pirelli simply took in all these BS and hoped that it will die down eventually.

    Now it is escalating to a whole new level. Understandably, Pirelli feels they are getting a bad rep out of it.

    In the end, I think they should take leadership on what tires to be used in F1 and stop fiddling with the compound. Pirelli is in this awkward situation mainly because they simply did what others wished. They should dictate what tires should be used. After all, they are the only supplier.

  57. Yes! Finally something about all in one kitchen.

  58. Larae says:

    When I initially commented I clicked the “Notify me when new comments are added” checkbox and
    now each time a comment is added I get three
    e-mails with the same comment. Is there any way you can remove people from that service?

    Many thanks!

    Look at my blog post … fantastic abdominal, Larae,

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 News
JA ON F1 In association with...
Download the chequered flag podcast today
Download the chequered flag podcast today
MTS
Industry-Leading Testing and Sensing Solutions
Multi award winning Formula One photographer
Multi award winning Formula One photographer