Immediately blaming the tyres...

[Shrieker]

These cars have more downforce, so it's a moot point to argue how another manufacturers tires would have behaved in a different era, different regulations and different cars. Bridgestones was also never tasked to develop tires such as these.

Nevertheless, those tires on that race wore down to the bare white canvas, it was clearly visible, and they didn't fail. Everyone knows this is nigh on impossible with the pirellis. Also, you could have tires made to perform to specific distance and still keep going on the canvas if it came to it, but pirelli simply can't, or choose not to. More likely the former.

edit: JRindt has worded it better.

[dans79]

Ironically here are some good shots of hamilton's left rear in Bahrain 2013. It let go on the strait with enough force to break the suspension, yet it still stayed inflated. however this is the exact same spec that had the spectacular failures in Silversone that year.

This is what the tire should do.







As far as I'm concerned this is Pirelli's fault and issue to fix. They have the ability via the fia to control pressure and chamber angles to ensure safety, and as yesterday showed they have failed horribly (again).

[Phil]

Nevertheless, those tires on that race wore down to the bare white canvas, it was clearly visible, and they didn't fail. Everyone knows this is nigh on impossible with the pirellis. Also, you could have tires made to perform to specific distance and still keep going on the canvas if it came to it, but pirelli simply can't, or choose not to. More likely the former.

edit: JRindt has worded it better.

I can guarantee you, those tires would have failed just as easily or similar if they had been compromised by debris. Also, that race you are referring to, wasn't Silverstone, and I'll repeat, not under the same cars, with the same downforce and the tires being subject to the same amount of load. You are therefore comparing apples and oranges.

Formula 1 wants tyres from Pirelli to gradually lose their grip and get slower over a certain number of laps and then fall off the cliff. That’s it. No less, no more.

They’re not supposed to delaminate. They’re not supposed to blister, grain or become risky to use at low pressures (Ironically, one of the reasons touted for yesterday’s failures was higher pressures of 25 psi for fronts, according to F1.com).
They’re certainly not supposed to deflate(as suspected for Kvyat’s crash) or explode at random.

Arguably, that isn't as easy as one would think. Think about it; they aren't asked to make the most durable tire, they were asked to design a tire that only lasts a number of laps and then have a cliff. This is contra to what Bridgestone or any other tire manufacturer was ever asked of doing.

In other words, we want tires to have a limited tire life, but at the same time we also want them to be indestructible when going over that limit. Sounds pretty contradictory to me.

And then adding to having to design delicate and sensitive tires, they also have to factor in different loads, different strategic elements, drivers happy to go over curbs, some more aggressive than others, then there are different climate conditions to consider.

The amusing thing is, people will bitch anyway. They will bitch about the tires when they don't self destruct and barely degrade and thus produce boring races (Socchi). On the other hand, when they do happen to produce a spectacle and unpredictability (high deg) people bitch and moan too. Quite frankly, I'm amazed Pirelli is still happy to produce these tires according to the wishes of F1 as it seemingly is lose/lose.

[dans79]

Arguably, that isn't as easy as one would think. Think about it; they aren't asked to make the most durable tire, they were asked to design a tire that only lasts a number of laps and then have a cliff. This is contra to what Bridgestone or any other tire manufacturer was ever asked of doing.

In other words, we want tires to have a limited tire life, but at the same time we also want them to be indestructible when going over that limit. Sounds pretty contradictory to me.

And then adding to having to design delicate and sensitive tires, they also have to factor in different loads, different strategic elements, drivers happy to go over curbs, some more aggressive than others, then there are different climate conditions to consider.

I have to say I disagree with you here Phil. Pirelli has access to all kinds of data from the teams and the FIA, No to mention they have ultimate control over how the tires are used.

• They choose what tires are available to race on every track.
• They can specify minimum tire pressures
• They can specify maximum camber
• They can inspect any teams tires during free practice and mandate a change to tire pressure and or camber for the rest of the weekend
• As other seasons have shown they can change their mind mid season based on safety grounds.

And as was shown in 2015 then can mandata just about anything on the grounds of safety.
https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/fia-o ... 1&q=vettel

And with leading F1 drivers having called for action as they deem the failures 'unacceptable', motor racing's governing body has said it will step in and impose any operating limits that are viewed as necessary.

An FIA spokesman said: "We are working closely with Pirelli and Ferrari to make sure that what can be learned is learned, and what needs to be changed is changed.

"If any further guidelines are suggested, we will enforce them."

With Pirelli suspecting that Vettel's failure was related more to the stint length than anything else, it is possible the company could request a mileage limit on safety grounds. The matter may be discussed with teams imminently.

It was such a concept that, in a statement on Sunday night, it suggested had been ignored back in 2013.

Pirelli motorsport director Paul Hembery said in Belgium: "We discussed that a few years ago when we were a little bit more aggressive and people were pushing to try to reduce the number of stops.

"But it is hard to enforce and you take away the engineering aspect of the car where someone might be able to engineer a car to a point where they can reduce the number of pit stops.

"At that time, it wasn't feasible to introduce it. But maybe we can go back to having those advice levels and say 'no more than x laps on a certain tyre'."

[Shrieker]

Durable tire ≠ lasts forever. You're making poor excuses for pirelli's inability and go around calling people's opinions "bitching".

Also worth noting, Bridgestone had none of the privileges Pirelli currently has (as dans has pointed out), yet they had far, far less catastrophic failures. That has very little if anything to do with the cars of the era producing less downforce.

Repeated complete failures without warning despite all the precautions taken and privileges granted points towards lack of mastering the science, end of story.

[3jawchuck]

Pirelli are probably the only company who are willing to make the tyres that the FIA want them to make. Michelin at least have said they aren't interested in the FIA's vision for F1 tyres.

I'd be all for a tyre war, maybe three or more manufacturers involved. FIA gives a design brief and manufacturers provide that to whoever is interested.

[Just_a_fan]

Also worth noting, Bridgestone had none of the privileges Pirelli currently has (as dans has pointed out), yet they had far, far less catastrophic failures. That has very little if anything to do with the cars of the era producing less downforce.

Bridgestone had access to free-for-all testing. They used to make bespoke tyres for Ferrari with each one being tested by the team. Stints were also much shorter with refuelling, the cars were much lighter too.

That the current cars, weighing significantly more than in the Bridgestone days, can lap in the same time (or quicker) shows how much more energy the tyres are having to handle.

Would another manufacturer do a better job? Possibly. Would another manufacturer do it without a tyre war? No. Michelin don't want to be a sole supplier, for example. Does F1 want a tyre war? No, it would lead to speeds that the circuits would struggle to contain.

The tyre situation is not as simple as some would have us believe.

[dans79]

Bridgestone had access to free-for-all testing. They used to make bespoke tyres for Ferrari with each one being tested by the team. Stints were also much shorter with refuelling, the cars were much lighter too.

That the current cars, weighing significantly more than in the Bridgestone days, can lap in the same time (or quicker) shows how much more energy the tyres are having to handle.

You seem to be negating that technology has advanced significantly since then as well.

[Just_a_fan]

Bridgestone had access to free-for-all testing. They used to make bespoke tyres for Ferrari with each one being tested by the team. Stints were also much shorter with refuelling, the cars were much lighter too.

That the current cars, weighing significantly more than in the Bridgestone days, can lap in the same time (or quicker) shows how much more energy the tyres are having to handle.

You seem to be negating that technology has advanced significantly since then as well.

Not at all. But there is a world of difference between making a bespoke tyre for a given team based on unlimited testing, and producing one for the whole field based on extremely limited testing. No matter how good your simulations are, they're not as good as a real car on real tarmac at real speeds.

[ENGINE TUNER]

Pirelli are probably the only company who are willing to make the tyres that the FIA want them to make. Michelin at least have said they aren't interested in the FIA's vision for F1 tyres.

I'd be all for a tyre war, maybe three or more manufacturers involved. FIA gives a design brief and manufacturers provide that to whoever is interested.

A tire war is bad for F1, but pirelli are even worse. F1 should open the tire supply to all tire companies, but teams can not sign with a company. All teams should be given 1 set of each tire company's tire for Fp1&2. Then they have to qualify on a tire and must use that same tire in the race. Tire changes allowed(for safety), but possibly with a slow pit speed to dissuade tire changes and encourage more durable tires. F1 needs durable tires that can be pushed hard for the entire race(safely) like Kimi's Michelin tires from japan 2005. F1 does not need tire changes to be exciting, example motogp and formula E.

My proposal will
1) increase number of tire companies, thus increasing advertising revenue for FOM and tv presenters.
2) lower costs for teams, and possibly tire providers.(less tires mean less wheels)
3) lower the number of tires(and wheels) flown/shipped around the world, and need to be produced and disposed of. Better for the environment
4) eliminate teams being disadvantaged by having "the wrong tire" like Ferrari in 2005
5) eliminate tire problems at particular races like michelin in 2005 usgp
6) eliminate tires being tailor made for 1 team, leaving the smaller teams with an inferior tire
7) improve tires all around.

[JordanMugen]

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/pire ... e/4608851/
"The use of the 2019 tyres also guarantees the teams stability, with the advantage of using a well-known product during the final season of the current regulations."

Such a shame! The use of new 2020 (and now 2021) tyres could have mixed things up and made the racing more interesting.

Particularly given they were designed to be more durable and widen the operating temperature window.

[JordanMugen]

Pirelli has proven to be incapable of doing this for years now. High time for F1 to look for an alternate manufacturer.

Ahem, Hankook were rejected. Hankook were not good enough according to FIA and FOM, they had unacceptable commercial terms according to FIA and FOM. That is that. There were no other tenders.

Bridgestone had access to free-for-all testing. They used to make bespoke tyres for Ferrari with each one being tested by the team. Stints were also much shorter with refuelling, the cars were much lighter too.

That the current cars, weighing significantly more than in the Bridgestone days, can lap in the same time (or quicker) shows how much more energy the tyres are having to handle.

You seem to be negating that technology has advanced significantly since then as well.

Not at all. But there is a world of difference between making a bespoke tyre for a given team based on unlimited testing, and producing one for the whole field based on extremely limited testing. No matter how good your simulations are, they're not as good as a real car on real tarmac at real speeds.

It would be interesting to see how scaled-up Potenzas or Advans would perform in F1 size!





Putting aside Hankook, Yokohama, Avon/Cooper and older suppliers Bridgestone, Michelin and Goodyear/Dunlop, how come Continental have never supplied their superb tyres to Formula One racing!?

[ENGINE TUNER]

Pirelli has proven to be incapable of doing this for years now. High time for F1 to look for an alternate manufacturer.

Ahem, Hankook were rejected. Hankook were not good enough, they had unacceptable commercial terms according to FIA and FOM. That is that. There were no other tenders.

They had unacceptable commercial terms because they didn't agree to bribe FIA and FOM like pirelli does.

There were no other tenders because FIA attached 1 year of 13" tires to the 18" tire tender. It was nonsense aimed at making sure the pirelli bribery continued.

None of it has to do with performance. Before pirelli started as sole supplier in 2011 pirelli had the worst record of any tire supplier in F1 against other tire suppliers. I've even heard drivers in the Pirelli world challenge complain about the poor quality of the tires. Pirelli racing tires are trash.

[randomdude]

I think the only thing to blame are the teams. The front camber is ridiculous, the outside of the front tire does not even touch the tarmac on high load cornering. If you are gonna trade few km/h on straight by reducing rolling friction while losing on braking, cornering and endurance you are not doing it right.

[Shrieker]

I wanna say something else about pirelli tires. I've been following wsbk for nearly 2 decades now, and they've had inexplicable and unacceptable tire failures over and over and over again, much more than Bridgestone or Michelin had in MotoGP. Combined with their F1 pedigree , it leads me to think that there is something systematically wrong above anything else.