Pirelli 2013

[Cam]

I think having a valid discussion on the 2013 tyres and why they were introduced - is a good thing. I brought up a point that Hembrey has admitted publicly. A little less eye rolling and a little more fact checking....... and we can discuss it.

That article is dated November 19, 2012. It also states:

Pirelli is supplying two sets of prototype tyres for Friday practice at the Brazilian Grand Prix in order to give the teams an opportunity to gather some data around which to develop their 2013 cars.

Again, the teams had equal opportunity prior to the offseason to collect data and use it accordingly in the design their cars.

If the argument is that it was unfair for Pirelli to produce a tire that doesn't specifically cater to a team's strengths, then I just don't know what to tell you on that one. Nor do I really know what to say about the idea that these tires were introduced to shake up the competition. For one thing, that's been Pirelli's stated goal from Day One, and for another, F1 has a rich history of rule changes seemingly formulated for that very reason: 2011 Silverstone EBD ban, 2006 ban of tuned mass dampers, 2005 ban on tire changes, 2004 introduction of Friday drivers... The list goes on.

But, nothing will ever change the fact that these terrible tires are the same for all teams; they've been the same for all teams; and all teams have had the same opportunities to use them.

yes, that was the statement from Pirelli last year as to what the 2013 tyres would be. I'm not arguing against bringing in rules, or changing rules or even bringing in crap tyres (although I hate them) - I was pointing out that Pirelli knew the cars would have the same aero for 2013 as they did for 2012:

Well the cars at least this year are not going to change too much between this year and next year

Knowing that, their changes were aimed at:

Although we know that the changes we've made will have an influence on things like aerodynamics for the teams

The best aero car was RedBull. Ergo, the changes were introduced to hamper Redbull.

The argument would be sustained if Pirelli changed the tyres to hamper the car with the best mechanical grip. It just so happens that last year, aero was dominant, RebBull had the best aero - they were the ones most affected by the 2013 tyres.

That said - my overarching point, was to simply disagree with this method of rule changes. Change rules, for sure, no problems, but make it based on equal effects/benefits (which you've shown in your post some examples of such [2006 ban of tuned mass dampers, 2005 ban on tire changes, 2004 introduction of Friday drivers - which of some were deemed against the existing FIA regulations. That's not happening here, there's no regulation breaches. It's seemingly only done to effect one team, which when you look at the statements, it's hard not to reach that conclusion.

[bhall]

Yet, you continue to ignore the plain fact that, going into the offseason, every team knew about the changes to the tires and had the same opportunity to test them and design their cars with that information. For me, that's both the alpha and the omega of this story. Everything else serves to obscure that reality.

It's funny how the team most affected by the new tires has yet to really whine about them. Ask a McLaren aerodynamicist how he feels about the added deflection of this year's tires, and he'll probably just point to the MP4-28's diffuser and burst into tears. Off the record, of course.

[raymondu999]

Tech regs Article 12.6.3 : Tyre specifications will be determined by the FIA no later than 1 September of the previous season. Once determined in this way, the specification of the tyres will not be changed during the Championship season without the agreement of all competing teams.

[ecapox]

I wonder if Hembree is talking before actually getting approval from all teams. You KNOW Lotus is gonna give it the big nay no. They have vocally said that they don't want the tires changed.

[Pierce89]

I think having a valid discussion on the 2013 tyres and why they were introduced - is a good thing. I brought up a point that Hembrey has admitted publicly. A little less eye rolling and a little more fact checking....... and we can discuss it.

That article is dated November 19, 2012. It also states:

Pirelli is supplying two sets of prototype tyres for Friday practice at the Brazilian Grand Prix in order to give the teams an opportunity to gather some data around which to develop their 2013 cars.

Again, the teams had equal opportunity prior to the offseason to collect data and use it accordingly in the design their cars.

If the argument is that it was unfair for Pirelli to produce a tire that doesn't specifically cater to a team's strengths, then I just don't know what to tell you on that one. Nor do I really know what to say about the idea that these tires were introduced to shake up the competition. For one thing, that's been Pirelli's stated goal from Day One, and for another, F1 has a rich history of rule changes seemingly formulated for that very reason: 2011 Silverstone EBD ban, 2006 ban of tuned mass dampers, 2005 ban on tire changes, 2004 introduction of Friday drivers... The list goes on.

But, nothing will ever change the fact that these terrible tires are the same for all teams; they've been the same for all teams; and all teams have had the same opportunities to use them.

yes, that was the statement from Pirelli last year as to what the 2013 tyres would be. I'm not arguing against bringing in rules, or changing rules or even bringing in crap tyres (although I hate them) - I was pointing out that Pirelli knew the cars would have the same aero for 2013 as they did for 2012:

Well the cars at least this year are not going to change too much between this year and next year

Knowing that, their changes were aimed at:

Although we know that the changes we've made will have an influence on things like aerodynamics for the teams

The best aero car was RedBull. Ergo, the changes were introduced to hamper Redbull.

The argument would be sustained if Pirelli changed the tyres to hamper the car with the best mechanical grip. It just so happens that last year, aero was dominant, RebBull had the best aero - they were the ones most affected by the 2013 tyres.

That said - my overarching point, was to simply disagree with this method of rule changes. Change rules, for sure, no problems, but make it based on equal effects/benefits (which you've shown in your post some examples of such [2006 ban of tuned mass dampers, 2005 ban on tire changes, 2004 introduction of Friday drivers - which of some were deemed against the existing FIA regulations. That's not happening here, there's no regulation breaches. It's seemingly only done to effect one team, which when you look at the statements, it's hard not to reach that conclusion.

To say the tires were designed specifically to hamper Red Bull is ridiculous. Plain and simple.

[VIZSLA]

I wonder if Hembree is talking before actually getting approval from all teams. You KNOW Lotus is gonna give it the big nay no. They have vocally said that they don't want the tires changed.

It will be done "for the good of the sport" and the teams will fall in line.

[GTSpeedster]

I will never understand those who defend these jelly tires. A race is about being the fastest, not tire whispering.

I’m sure a boxing match held in an ice rink with pillow gloves would show the real "masters". It’s just that it wouldn’t be boxing anymore, so masters of what?

Evolution with the correct amount of change can be a good thing but if you change too much and too fast you might end up changing what defined the particular sport in the first place. That's not what one should aspire to if they really cared for the sport.

[Cam]

To say the tires were designed specifically to hamper Red Bull is ridiculous. Plain and simple.

Ok. I've supplied some evidence as to why I think that. The least you could do is to produce some evidence to counter that. I'm not adverse to being shown that I'm wrong or on the wrong track - but "'cause I said so" doesn't have much weight with me.

If it's ridiculous - then why? What publicly accessible info suggests that it's not possible? There's a lot of, albeit circumstantial, evidence showing publicly stated quotes towards not having one team dominate - back that up with tyre changes that effects the top team the most and you have some something. Not damning, but something. Open ears to anything that can oppose it.

Yet, you continue to ignore the plain fact that, going into the offseason, every team knew about the changes to the tires and had the same opportunity to test them and design their cars with that information. For me, that's both the alpha and the omega of this story. Everything else serves to obscure that reality.

It's funny how the team most affected by the new tires has yet to really whine about them. Ask a McLaren aerodynamicist how he feels about the added deflection of this year's tires, and he'll probably just point to the MP4-28's diffuser and burst into tears. Off the record, of course.

I'm not disagreeing with you. In fact, I agree with you. I've never suggested that RedBull are in any way worse off than any other team. That's not the point I was making. What RedBull or any other team can do with the tyres is secondary to the suggestion of why the tyres were changed. What was the underlying reason for making the tyres the way they are? What was the strategy behind it? What is it they (Pirelli & Co.) wanted to affect by introducing them? That is what I'm asking - this is the answer I seek.

edit: typo

[Cam]

Tech regs Article 12.6.3 : Tyre specifications will be determined by the FIA no later than 1 September of the previous season. Once determined in this way, the specification of the tyres will not be changed during the Championship season without the agreement of all competing teams.

Well that's interesting. So we're to assume that all the teams approved of the 'tweaks' so far and the 'tweaks' to come? Doesn't sound like it. Or maybe it's a public 'no' and and private 'yes'?

Good pick Ray.

[bhall]

[...]
What was the underlying reason for making the tyres the way they are? What was the strategy behind it? What is it they (Pirelli & Co.) wanted to affect by introducing them? That is what I'm asking - this is the answer I seek.

edit: typo

That's a big question. Either that, or I just have a big answer.

In my view, the tires are a capitulation to a sizable segment of the F1 fanbase who either don't know the difference between "real" overtaking and drivers passing one another on different strategies, or they don't care about that difference; they just want action. When the findings of the Overtaking Working Group were implemented in 2009 and had no effect on overtaking, those fans' wishes came true at the "chaotic" 2010 Canadian Grand Prix.

Since Pirelli entered the sport with an edict to reproduce that kind of action, the tires they've delivered have been a steadily devolving puddle of ---. That's the only way Pirelli can stay ahead of the curve, because F1 teams are ruthlessly efficient at optimizing damn near everything they get their hands on. This is evidenced by the steady decrease in the number of tire changes needed at each race from the beginning of a season to the end. If the teams were given 2011-spec tires today, they probably wouldn't need to stop at all except to satisfy the requirement to use both compounds, and feckless fans would then complain about the "procession."

All of this is to say that in Year Three of the Abominable Pirelli Era, there was nothing left for the company to do but slap multi-colored logos on turds and call them tires. I think the increased deflection of these tires is a side-effect of this "progression," because Pirelli can't make the turds everyone wants without that characteristic. If they could, I imagine the tread wouldn't randomly fly off, a condition the company calls a "puncture."

So, it's not that anyone has targeted Team X for destruction, it's that Pirelli can't do any better.

[Cam]

Maybe you're right. Here I am thinking Pirelli have a master plan, when probably, as you say, they're just a --- company making turds. Case closed.

[Nomore]

Tech regs Article 12.6.3 : Tyre specifications will be determined by the FIA no later than 1 September of the previous season. Once determined in this way, the specification of the tyres will not be changed during the Championship season without the agreement of all competing teams.

Well that's interesting. So we're to assume that all the teams approved of the 'tweaks' so far and the 'tweaks' to come? Doesn't sound like it. Or maybe it's a public 'no' and and private 'yes'?

Good pick Ray.

I don't know if that rule stands for basic and standards about tires or even in a level of degradation...if degradation is included in that rule, then the other teams especially Lotus have a good card to play, but Lotus needs the help of Ferrari...alone they can't win the battle.
Ferrari in the meantime has not a release a public opinion about tires.I really don't know which is their opinion, I presume that when Hembery said 8 teams complimented us, he included Ferrari in that list, but this doesn't mean that they want or don't want changes till now. They can even think to be stronger with more durable tires.

But there is also another thing that could play in Ferraris advantage(or in the interest of Ferrari). Pirelli before barcelona announced changes in the hard compounds to make the tires more durable...The race showed us that in terms of durability nothing was changed. Paul Hembery said that the cars has evaluated a lot so he needs "in season tests" to test the tires, and he also said that Ferrari was pushing for "in season tests"....so what if in Canada an Silverstone Pirelli said that we changed the tires, but the nr of pits doesn't really change (3-4 stops) ?...and the questions in 2014 about tires are even bigger...

But anyway even if i'm a Ferrari fan i will disagree with them if they agree to change the tires. You can NOT change the rules of a game once the game has started...So in this battle i'm with Lotus till now and waiting for the official position of the Ferrari ...

[turbof1]

Tech regs Article 12.6.3 : Tyre specifications will be determined by the FIA no later than 1 September of the previous season. Once determined in this way, the specification of the tyres will not be changed during the Championship season without the agreement of all competing teams.

Good find.

Lotus and Ferrari probably didn't want the change, but could have agreed with just not to look to be the bad guys. We had similar situations in the past where all teams had to agree, while a few had no benefit with the new agreement, but suprisingly the changes got out there fairly quickly.

But anyway even if i'm a Ferrari fan i will disagree with them if they agree to change the tires. You can NOT change the rules of a game once the game has started...So in this battle i'm with Lotus till now and waiting for the official position of the Ferrari ...

Except that you can. It happened in the past before, with other teams too. Everybody probably remembers the 2011 debacle about off throttle mapping in Silverstone. This is nothing new to F1.

[bhall]

Maybe you're right. Here I am thinking Pirelli have a master plan, when probably, as you say, they're just a --- company making turds. Case closed.

Well, that's odd. I'm accustomed to these things ending via PM from a moderator.

Cheers.

[CBeck113]

That's a big question. Either that, or I just have a big answer.

In my view, the tires are a capitulation to a sizable segment of the F1 fanbase who either don't know the difference between "real" overtaking and drivers passing one another on different strategies, or they don't care about that difference; they just want action. When the findings of the Overtaking Working Group were implemented in 2009 and had no effect on overtaking, those fans' wishes came true at the "chaotic" 2010 Canadian Grand Prix.

Since Pirelli entered the sport with an edict to reproduce that kind of action, the tires they've delivered have been a steadily devolving puddle of ---. That's the only way Pirelli can stay ahead of the curve, because F1 teams are ruthlessly efficient at optimizing damn near everything they get their hands on. This is evidenced by the steady decrease in the number of tire changes needed at each race from the beginning of a season to the end. If the teams were given 2011-spec tires today, they probably wouldn't need to stop at all except to satisfy the requirement to use both compounds, and feckless fans would then complain about the "procession."

All of this is to say that in Year Three of the Abominable Pirelli Era, there was nothing left for the company to do but slap multi-colored logos on turds and call them tires. I think the increased deflection of these tires is a side-effect of this "progression," because Pirelli can't make the turds everyone wants without that characteristic. If they could, I imagine the tread wouldn't randomly fly off, a condition the company calls a "puncture."

So, it's not that anyone has targeted Team X for destruction, it's that Pirelli can't do any better.

Someone's not very happy with La Gomma
I believe that Pirelli did what they were told, but screwed up the tires this year.
My theory: the wall flex they built in to them was done on purpose to mess with the diffusors, making them less effective. They did not succeed, however, except maybe by McLaren, because the teams were able to fine tune the exhaust sealing of their diffusors. The change from carbon fiber to steel was simply a cost issue, but they screwed it up severely. The two major differences between steel wires and carbon fiber are the surface texture and the thermal conductivity, and both are very negative in the case of steel; it is too smooth and passed warmth 100x faster (lamda steel ca.15W/K*m) than carbon (ca. 0.12W/K*m). Basically the heat stayed in the tire surface in 2012, but now the steel belt is cooling the inside surface of the tire, making it less stretchable/flexible, causing a drop in the ability to cope with the mechanical stress in this layer of the tire. The tires rely on the adhesive properties of the compound to keep the tread where it is (like it did in 2012), but now have a much smoother surface to adhere to, which it apparently doesn't work when the rubber is too stiff. THIS is the reason why they are making the change - they have made an obvious mistake, and their actions are proving this. I just hope that they only change the layers parallel to the tread, and keep the flex in the flanks, and maybe make the performance dropoff take a bit longer, but then more severe. We'll see earlier than expected...