Thoughts on 2012 tyres?

[DaveKillens]

Obviously, one question is "why don't they make the tires more forgiving and with a wider operating window"? But if Pirelli did that, all of a sudden it would become a lot easier, and all the crazy finishes, unpredictable winners, and the reliance on complex strategy would disappear.

But that's not going to happen in 2012 because Pirelli have already stated that they will not alter any compounds, to maintain consistency and keep any team from discovering any "secrets" of a fresh altered compound. It's a level playing field for the remainder of the season.

Will we see changes in the 2013 tires? I believe that comes down to Bernie. If his TV viewership for 2012 goes up, and hence revenue, trust me, he will petition with all his resources to keep it that way.

[Tommy Cookers]

.... and how many more championships would Alain Prost won if the current rules and scoring had applied in his time ?

[marcush.]

my first thought back then was:
Wow all people who really know about the toyota chassis and aero characteristics of the 2009 car hare at a huge advantage with understanding the tyres ...as Pirelli is developing the rubber on this car....and won´t be able to change mauch on the side of the car so inevitably the tyre will be matched to the strengths and to the weaknesses of that car.
Same goes for the 2010 Renault they use...hooray cries Renault bags of data availble of that car ..you have to effectively just copy the suspension and look at the wing settings =aero loads used by Pirelli for the development and it´s a very good starting point for your car development this year....no wonder they are CONSTANTLY quick...?

[Cam]

Thanks Dave. I agree that strategy is an important part of F1, it's all about being first to the finish.

The problem with the Pirelli tyre is that sometimes the operating window seems too sensitive, although the teams seem to have got things figured out so they can now better predict the behaviour. I'd say the difficulties lie in the brief and adopting a narrow operating window. That then appears to result in variability due to changes you noted.

However F1 is not meant to be easy. So while the operating window is difficult, I welcome it as an challenge to the engineers.

Yes, challenging the engineers is a key factor for F1 and I'm all for that. Having a race whereby strategy plays a bigger part, yes, I'm all for that as well. The main issue for me has been Pirellis handling of the controversy. Schumacher came out in vocal criticism and Pirelli slammed him for it. Drivers and teams have questioned the tyres and Pirelli have stood stead fast - only to now admit they didn't know how the tyres would react. There in-lies the kicker.

Paul Hembreys admission is not so much about the quality (although I'm a staunch disliker - as we all know) - its about having a fair playground to compete on. The rules are fair for everyone and so should common components.

The NASA O ring incident is a great point. One could argue that with F1 being a development series, supplying tyres that haven't been tested is okay. And this would be fine if the tyres are developed through the year, however no adjustments to the tyres during the year are occurring, so any flaws found in the 2012 tyres, remain all year. If there was a fatality that resulted from a tyre failure, I wonder if the fact they were not tested for the current conditions would have an impact on any court action.

It's okay to f*&k up. It's okay to supply a bad service or product. It's all okay when you acknowledge it and put in measures to rectify it. It's not okay to blame everyone else when you know, I mean you really know, that you have no idea if your component is playing a major factor in results.

[Richard]

I think they did the right thing by not changing the compounds because that allows the teams to build their knowledge and better data set.

I recall Pirelli did say they were changing which compounds were used at certain races due to better understanding of the tyre behaviour. So they have changed to meet circumstances, but in a way that allows the teams to build up their knowledge and data.

[DaveW]

... but each compound is consistent for the entire batch.

I would be miffed if, for instance, one set of softs worked differently than another set of softs, but they are consistent...

Forgive me, but I would be interested to understand the background for your comments.

Arguably, an alternative view on tyres may be found here:

"Giving predictions in F1 is normally quite difficult but I have never known it quite as challenging in my 20 years in the sport – not knowing when you go to a new event whether you are going to be competitive or not, or even from day-to-day it seems."

[Richard]

Difficult to predict might be variable batches, or it could be because the tyres have a deliberately narrow window and are unforgiving outside that window - as requested by the FIA.

If you take tyres like that to different tracks with different surfaces, weather, downforce, configuration of twisty bits and straight bits, then every race is going to be unique and hard to predict. Some teams seem to figure it our very quickly and get good durability early on, Sauber perhaps?

As with anything in F1, the pack rapidly evolves to accommodate disruptive technology, we're only halfway through the season and most teams seem to have enough knowledge to better understand the tyre performance and hence strategies. We can see the pecking order become more established with less of a topsy turvy feel to it all.

[marcush.]

My own limited experience with Pirelli matches exactly the scenario we see in this season .
Some guys seem to have an advantage at certain tracks or in certain circumstances and you might be the lucky draw on one or another track .
in conversations with Pirellis technicians (wearing the darkest sunglasses you could potentially buy-I used to call the guy skiing instructor...)they came up with useless crap usually ...and had no idea or interest in hot pressure recommendations or guidelines for tyre temps .The only thing they did was spreading mandatory minium cold pressures for each weekend..
In Misano we happened to stumble over a tyre "treatment" worth a good second over the recomended proceedure we tried on the second set of tyres .The same " Treatment" had no measurable effect in silverstone just 2 weeks later.....so ...

[raymondu999]

Great anecdotal experience marcush - which series was that in? In PM, if you feel uncomfortable disclosing in public.

I don't believe it's really evil intent, malice, nor intentional conspiration to create random results, but perhaps Pirelli (and, almost by extension, their engineers) are there almost not to help, but to monitor just what teams are doing to be just within health & safety limitations. ie if there are people who manage to get 100% on top of the tyres, good stuff, and if they don't - then so be it.

Maybe they just build the tyres based on what they know, or at least to the best of their capabilities - then leave the understanding to the participants.

[marcush.]

actually that was 2007 Ferrari Challenge trofeo pirelli,Coppa shell ,Scandinavia challenge and all in one year....every weekend a race or a test so I came across a fairly big bulk of tyres and tracks engineering three cars(and having access to data of 4to 5 other cars ).it´s old stories now...no problem to share.
I got some info from a german race tyre distributor back then and he hinted at that specialtreatment that worked for one of his cliénts but they had the same experience....sometimes it worked phenomenal sometimes it did not work at all .and nobody got around to fathom what the reason was...I think it has to do with the tarmac surface . Misano was brand new that year new pavement .We had it working on the test and the 2 weeks later at the race ...so itwas not a good set of tyres but a sweet spot of the tyre we lucked into to find and happened to "understand" sort of.
picture of cars in action #74

Picture of car #78 (Roland Asch)

[Cam]

Great anecdotal experience marcush - which series was that in? In PM, if you feel uncomfortable disclosing in public.

I don't believe it's really evil intent, malice, nor intentional conspiration to create random results, but perhaps Pirelli (and, almost by extension, their engineers) are there almost not to help, but to monitor just what teams are doing to be just within health & safety limitations. ie if there are people who manage to get 100% on top of the tyres, good stuff, and if they don't - then so be it.

Maybe they just build the tyres based on what they know, or at least to the best of their capabilities - then leave the understanding to the participants.

I hope you're right Ray that Pirelli aren't' screwing with the tyre deliberately. The fact they've admitted the 2012 characteristics are not what they expected kind of promotes that. If anything, it shows Pirelli are not top end manufacturers at all. If they build car tyres like they do racing tyres.......

No matter what anyone tells me, I'll never believe Button & Maldonados win was anything less than a fluke of tyres, which is a shame, because now I question every result - was it the best driver/car or just a freak of the right tyres on the right day, which if you ran the race the next day, the result would change. This is not what I want from my F1 experience. Many disagree and love it and I understand why, they want exciting races. I just want a finish where I can understand why they won.

[Dragonfly]

I just happened to see this old video and I post the link here. Do not mind who the driver is. Notice the 26 laps covered at full charge. Which shows that we do not need crap tyres for exciting racing. There must be something else. Unpredictability and lottery element bring some feeling of excitement but it's not as a result of calculated strategy and driver effort but rather a product of luck.
For me, the tyres are unacceptably large decisive factor for current F1.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZUfwjHMNrw

[Jersey Tom]

Double edged sword still. You've got guys saying not to criticize Pirelli because what they've got is "good for the sport." Good in the sense that it's mixed up the results and gives people a reason to watch the broadcasts. IMO that's still just a crutch for crap racing to begin with, and not really addressing the root cause.

In absolute sense, you don't need crap tires to have good racing. All other things being equal, as I've said many times... I'd rather have good tires so my driver can get up and attack the guy ahead of him.

As an engineer, I want to be able to do my job for pre-event work and predicting where we'll be at the start of practice. If teams are/were struggling with being able to predict if they'd be good or junk.. to me that says the data Pirelli provided was insufficient or inaccurate, or the tires were lacking consistency on a week to week basis. Personally that would frustrate the hell out of me.

It's challenging enough making the right or complete use of extensive, quality tire data. It's a good challenge, and the best engineers make the best of it. If you have crap or no data to work off of, you've taken the car performance out of the hands of the engineers and have washed it out, now random depending on how well the tires happen to suit your setup or driver on any given week... rather than how well your setup suits the tires.

[olefud]

Double edged sword still. You've got guys saying not to criticize Pirelli because what they've got is "good for the sport." Good in the sense that it's mixed up the results and gives people a reason to watch the broadcasts. IMO that's still just a crutch for crap racing to begin with, and not really addressing the root cause.

In absolute sense, you don't need crap tires to have good racing. All other things being equal, as I've said many times... I'd rather have good tires so my driver can get up and attack the guy ahead of him.

As an engineer, I want to be able to do my job for pre-event work and predicting where we'll be at the start of practice. If teams are/were struggling with being able to predict if they'd be good or junk.. to me that says the data Pirelli provided was insufficient or inaccurate, or the tires were lacking consistency on a week to week basis. Personally that would frustrate the hell out of me.

It's challenging enough making the right or complete use of extensive, quality tire data. It's a good challenge, and the best engineers make the best of it. If you have crap or no data to work off of, you've taken the car performance out of the hands of the engineers and have washed it out, now random depending on how well the tires happen to suit your setup or driver on any given week... rather than how well your setup suits the tires.

Yeah! What JT said. But we may be in the remote minority. It galls me when NASCAR winners abuse their cars with burnouts –I see the tires exploding or bursting into flames-but it’s part of the show.

Why would Pirelli want their tires shown in such a poor light?

[Jersey Tom]

Some will argue "FIA asked Pirelli to make tires like this" and there's a hint of truth to that, but, I generally don't agree with the statement.

I have nothing wrong with burnouts though.