Okay folks, it is the off season time for useless debates.
If you could change one thing about F1 (and just one thing you anoraks) what would it be and why?
Okay folks, it is the off season time for useless debates.
If you could change one thing about F1 (and just one thing you anoraks) what would it be and why?
Reintroduce another tyre supplier on top of Pirelli forcing competition rather than the artificial throttling of tyre life we get now in order to make racing closer. I am sick of Pirelli being told what to do with tyres to introduce competition. Lets have the cars being able to max out the tyres for longer. Make it mandatory that the grid is evenly split between brands and not by PU.
It was bad during Michaels time with Bridgestone as Bridgestone only made tyres for Michael and Michael tested endlessly to provide data to improve the tyres (and rest of the car). Testing is limited now, although we will probably need a few testing days just for tyres over and above the current schedule.
But the issue is the FIA wants to have a certain tyre degradation, how would a second supplier bound by the same rules solve anything?
Whole point is to scrap that stupid rule. Its a hold over when the cars had too big a performance gap between the top and bottom.
If we scrap tire deg then we have few to no pit stops which eliminates strategy and leaves the results up only to the fastest car. The tire manufacturers have claimed over and over they could easily make tires that last the entire race and then some but the FIA doesn’t want that
US GP 2005.
That’s why we will never see two tyre manufacturers again. And I agree with that. F1 wants certain degredation. It’s not a manufacturer problem. Pirelli can make a tyre that will last the entire race. F1 doesn’t want it. They want tyre strategy.
Ofc you can want to change that. But it’s for good reason we are where we are with tyres
I’m not seeing how Michelins problems at one race would prevent this? It’s not like Pirelli hasn’t had multiple races with issues of exploding tyres or concerns about it happening. Sure, Michelin might still be shy but it wouldn’t prevent another company if the deal was right.
People always talk about the Pirelli claim of tyres lasting all race, which misses the point on both what I want for the rule change and Pirells statement. Tyres for race cars are a balance between performance and lifespan.
Do you really think that Pirelli could make an all out tyre that could lap at a qualifying pace for an entire race? It’s not a cost free benefit, the tyres they talk about are going to be slower. Besides we still have the two compound rule, so it’s pointless for the to make them.
Tyres that last an entire race would be slower than ones that do not. With out tyre competition it’s the same for everyone so who is more kind on tyres, such as a team with bags of performance in the bank, has a big advantage in the race. With competition between tyres you can claw back performance at the expense of laps per tyre lifespan.
The current quali tyres often cannot even do a full lap flat out, that is pathetic and down to policy not tyre limitations as the policy for false competition has gone too far. It has also made the tyres too hard to understand for all teams and made the cars too sensitive to conditions.
Since you’re the tyre expert that seems to know all about rubber I’m just gonna have to take your word for it then. But just to touch on something. Do you think ANYONE could make tyres that can do qualilaps for 60 laps straight?
Pirelli makes tyres to the specification of F1. Simple as that. They have a certain deg in mind. Pirelli makes the tyres to match that.
And if you can’t see how the USGP 2005 problem would prevent two tyre manufacturers i just don’t know what to tell you. Maybe watch the race and let me know how much fun that looks. And if that’s a situation you want to repeat.
I’m not the one claiming that they can, just that it’s patiently false that those tyres would be competitive as you originally claimed, if you actually read what I said, I said the opposite.
The excuse that pirell could make dog shit slow tyres that lasted an entire race is just garbage. Their competitors would just make faster tyres, especially as a single stop is mandated by the two compound rule.
Your lack of understanding of how much the tyres are gamed by pirelli at the request of FIA to provide artificial cliffs for tyre life and video game style performance deltas between compounds when both are impossible irl is the problem here.
Again your lack of understanding that pirell has had some serious safety issues over multiple seasons makes a mockery of 2005 as an excuse for anybody but Michelin.
Hardly. Pirelli tyres in other series of motorsport show that more durability doesn’t have to come at the cost you put on it.
And competitiveness is not lost when everyone is playing on the same field. It’s always relative to your opposition.
You can think I lack understanding all you want. Because anyone who doesn’t share your opinion simply doesn’t understand how right you are, no?
I understand plenty. And I still disagree with you that multiple tyre manufacturers is the solution. I think it would only make it worse by creating an inevitable repeat of the 05 US GP.
We’ve already had a repeat of 2005 under pirelli or you forgetting the multiple TDs issued for tyres to make the race happen under their watch? Or the punctures suffered such as Max’s blow out at Baku?
2005 only didn’t happen because Bridgestone teams vetoed a speed reduction on one corner despite it being requested on safety grounds. Very very easy to prevent that veto or the need for it from happening again. And it’s rubbish to suggest we haven’t had similar last minute changes for safety reasons under pirelli.
You still missing the point that the tyres are artificially nobbled for F1, they are nowhere near optimal.
When did we have only 6 cars race on a track since 2005? Please tell me.
I am well aware that the tyres are designed to desires specification of F1 with a certain degredation in mind. I’m not missing anything. No one is under the impression that it’s impassible to make longer lasting tyres
Again, only reason that happened was the veto, veto is easy to remove, its a complete non issue. Any team or group of teams trying to veto something on a safety issue of that level in modern F1 isn’t going to get very far.
If one or two teams fuck up, thats their problem, if half the grid fucks up, thats the FIAs problem. You must have missed all the complaints about tyre pressures…
Its not even just longer lasting, the tyres deliberatey have a short operating window in the sake of creating false drama, its that the ability of any tyre manufacturer in a series as complicated as F1 to make than predictable and reliable. All too often one of the two race tyres is abysmal. This often makes the race uncompetitive.
The strongest example of this is the quali tyre, it often cannot take a single full lap even after being babied on the outlap, for a full flat out lap. If that isn’t completely unacceptable to you, then I am going to call Poes law here.