2020 Formula 1 70th Anniversary Grand Prix - Silverstone, August 7-9

[El Scorchio]

This is nonsense. No one knows if the 2020 tire would have been better.

Regarding spicing up: No one has the right to call for hard tire compounds and tire changes that only favor them. Tires, pressures, compounds have always changed. Now that Merc does not like softer tires this is "artificial"??? There was a clear target to have 2 stop races, now still teams are running successful one stoppers...of course the tires should be softer.

This is modern day engineering where everything is possible to project. If Pirelli couldn't get it right to produce better tyres for 2020, then it's a failure on their part. 2020 Tyres were tested and rejected by teams, unanimously.

The problem is not about harder or softer tyres and it's not about Merc liking it or not. Everyone wants 2 stoppers. The problem is making tyres that blow up when pushed beyond performance life, instead of losing performance. The problem is, tyres that blister because Pirelli wants to save their skin with failing tyres and induces pressures that were unheard of in any racing, definitely never in F1 racing. Get that fact right.

Pirelli failed to meet the needs of the fastest car by regulations. They don't know how to handle the situation and because that fastest car is taking the tyres to it's limits, the tyres are blowing. That is not spicing up. Blowing tyres and 27 PSI pressures are the mirror image of mediocrity, which Pirelli is. Fast degrading, soft tyres are welcome, not the tyres that are blowing up after the performance life is exceeded. FIA, LIberty or teams didn't ask for tyres to blow up after the performance is done from the tyres. Neither did FIA, Liberty or teams asked for 27 PSI pressures. Pirelli trying save their own skin, is mediocrity.

I think a general Pirelli discussion is a bit off topic...but ok, I will try to stick close to Silverstone:
- That the 2020 tires were rejected had pure political reasons. If you make tires with thicker, more enduring sidewalls they get slower...that caused critics from the drivers. That you need to invest into development if the tires are changed got the critics from small teams...in the end it is more politics than projecting.
- That the tires failed was mostly due to parts on the track. That was down to drivers not keeping the cars on the track or in one piece and down to poor track cleaning. Putting blame to Pirelli because they in the end raised the pressure to make the issues more unlikely is not going into the right direction. One can now go into a general discussion again about the shitty rubber and thin sidewalls/threads. There are reasons for it, but I do not think this is the right place for opening this discussion again.
- The fastest car by the rules was the RedBull and the tires were fine on this car. The third fastest was the RacingPoint without big issues. Then the Ferrari could even go with a one stop....I do not see how "fast" correlates with the Mercedes issues. They simply got the setup wrong.
- That you have slight blistering in these hot conditions is normal in my point of view. One can fight the issue because one team does not like it...of course...

Mercedes just got it wrong or miscalculated with their setup, plain and simple. Overcautious and over-reactive following the British GP, in the knowledge that this race required softer tyres and the fronts wouldn't last.

How you feel about that is entirely down to what side of the fence you sit on. For anyone who wants to see Merc cars winning, then it's a huge shame they clearly were not able to run to anything like their true potential from a combination of tyre choice/pressures and their own mistake. You can view them as victims of their own success, with a car that works the back tyres so well in usual circumstances, as it was clearly working 'too' well.
For anyone who doesn't want to see that, then it was great, and a really exciting and refreshing race.

I don't think anyone needs to fight the issue. Even though the stipulations for the 70th Anniversary GP were a bit unusual (esp. the pressures) Mercedes just got it wrong and gave this race away, and knowing them they will go away and learn from it. IMO there's no need to hysterically call pirelli or the FIA out on it, but then there's also not the need for quite a tremendous amount of gloating that's been happening since. It's all a little bit 'playground', really.

[Big Tea]

This is modern day engineering where everything is possible to project. If Pirelli couldn't get it right to produce better tyres for 2020, then it's a failure on their part. 2020 Tyres were tested and rejected by teams, unanimously.

The problem is not about harder or softer tyres and it's not about Merc liking it or not. Everyone wants 2 stoppers. The problem is making tyres that blow up when pushed beyond performance life, instead of losing performance. The problem is, tyres that blister because Pirelli wants to save their skin with failing tyres and induces pressures that were unheard of in any racing, definitely never in F1 racing. Get that fact right.

Pirelli failed to meet the needs of the fastest car by regulations. They don't know how to handle the situation and because that fastest car is taking the tyres to it's limits, the tyres are blowing. That is not spicing up. Blowing tyres and 27 PSI pressures are the mirror image of mediocrity, which Pirelli is. Fast degrading, soft tyres are welcome, not the tyres that are blowing up after the performance life is exceeded. FIA, LIberty or teams didn't ask for tyres to blow up after the performance is done from the tyres. Neither did FIA, Liberty or teams asked for 27 PSI pressures. Pirelli trying save their own skin, is mediocrity.

I think a general Pirelli discussion is a bit off topic...but ok, I will try to stick close to Silverstone:
- That the 2020 tires were rejected had pure political reasons. If you make tires with thicker, more enduring sidewalls they get slower...that caused critics from the drivers. That you need to invest into development if the tires are changed got the critics from small teams...in the end it is more politics than projecting.
- That the tires failed was mostly due to parts on the track. That was down to drivers not keeping the cars on the track or in one piece and down to poor track cleaning. Putting blame to Pirelli because they in the end raised the pressure to make the issues more unlikely is not going into the right direction. One can now go into a general discussion again about the shitty rubber and thin sidewalls/threads. There are reasons for it, but I do not think this is the right place for opening this discussion again.
- The fastest car by the rules was the RedBull and the tires were fine on this car. The third fastest was the RacingPoint without big issues. Then the Ferrari could even go with a one stop....I do not see how "fast" correlates with the Mercedes issues. They simply got the setup wrong.
- That you have slight blistering in these hot conditions is normal in my point of view. One can fight the issue because one team does not like it...of course...

Mercedes just got it wrong or miscalculated with their setup, plain and simple. Overcautious and over-reactive following the British GP, in the knowledge that this race required softer tyres and the fronts wouldn't last.

How you feel about that is entirely down to what side of the fence you sit on. For anyone who wants to see Merc cars winning, then it's a huge shame they clearly were not able to run to anything like their true potential from a combination of tyre choice/pressures and their own mistake. You can view them as victims of their own success, with a car that works the back tyres so well in usual circumstances, as it was clearly working 'too' well.
For anyone who doesn't want to see that, then it was great, and a really exciting and refreshing race.

I don't think anyone needs to fight the issue. Even though the stipulations for the 70th Anniversary GP were a bit unusual (esp. the pressures) Mercedes just got it wrong and gave this race away, and knowing them they will go away and learn from it. IMO there's no need to hysterically call pirelli or the FIA out on it, but then there's also not the need for quite a tremendous amount of gloating that's been happening since. It's all a little bit 'playground', really.

I think they were hoping for a safety car in the first quarter. They would then have got the softer tyre done and have a bunched field on harder rubber and follow the plan to the finish. Seb did not cooperate though and re joined ( )

[PlatinumZealot]

This is modern day engineering where everything is possible to project. If Pirelli couldn't get it right to produce better tyres for 2020, then it's a failure on their part. 2020 Tyres were tested and rejected by teams, unanimously.

The problem is not about harder or softer tyres and it's not about Merc liking it or not. Everyone wants 2 stoppers. The problem is making tyres that blow up when pushed beyond performance life, instead of losing performance. The problem is, tyres that blister because Pirelli wants to save their skin with failing tyres and induces pressures that were unheard of in any racing, definitely never in F1 racing. Get that fact right.

Pirelli failed to meet the needs of the fastest car by regulations. They don't know how to handle the situation and because that fastest car is taking the tyres to it's limits, the tyres are blowing. That is not spicing up. Blowing tyres and 27 PSI pressures are the mirror image of mediocrity, which Pirelli is. Fast degrading, soft tyres are welcome, not the tyres that are blowing up after the performance life is exceeded. FIA, LIberty or teams didn't ask for tyres to blow up after the performance is done from the tyres. Neither did FIA, Liberty or teams asked for 27 PSI pressures. Pirelli trying save their own skin, is mediocrity.

Did you get where you went wrong with quoting my post?

You allneed to appreciate that engineering tyres is not easy. Especially when given some wear profile to meet.

How can Pirelli be mediocre when these are highest performing tyres ever made? The tyres failed because of extreme use. Pirelli anticipated this for 2020 but those tyres were rejected by the teams because drivers and engineers didn't want to learm new tyres that was to be in the last year of the regulations.

Anyway. I don't even care about the tyres anymore.. I am more interested in how redBull managed to go 1 second a lap faster and keep the tyre pressures low. This is the elephant in the room for me. I suspect some sort of trick suspension or special design in the gas used in the tyre or the wheel itself. Andrew shovlin mention that both teams were in the range of blistering, but RedBull as at the very low end and Mercedes was at the tip top edge of it.
Teams have thermal cameras to spy on other car's tyres... I am sure Mercedes would have been keeping an eye on RedBull's tyre temps on Friday and Saturday... Anyway.. I hope someone at Mercedrs looks further into what RedBull was doing.

[El Scorchio]

This is modern day engineering where everything is possible to project. If Pirelli couldn't get it right to produce better tyres for 2020, then it's a failure on their part. 2020 Tyres were tested and rejected by teams, unanimously.

The problem is not about harder or softer tyres and it's not about Merc liking it or not. Everyone wants 2 stoppers. The problem is making tyres that blow up when pushed beyond performance life, instead of losing performance. The problem is, tyres that blister because Pirelli wants to save their skin with failing tyres and induces pressures that were unheard of in any racing, definitely never in F1 racing. Get that fact right.

Pirelli failed to meet the needs of the fastest car by regulations. They don't know how to handle the situation and because that fastest car is taking the tyres to it's limits, the tyres are blowing. That is not spicing up. Blowing tyres and 27 PSI pressures are the mirror image of mediocrity, which Pirelli is. Fast degrading, soft tyres are welcome, not the tyres that are blowing up after the performance life is exceeded. FIA, LIberty or teams didn't ask for tyres to blow up after the performance is done from the tyres. Neither did FIA, Liberty or teams asked for 27 PSI pressures. Pirelli trying save their own skin, is mediocrity.

Did you get where you went wrong with quoting my post?

You allneed to appreciate that engineering tyres is not easy. Especially when given some wear profile to meet.

How can Pirelli be mediocre when these are highest performing tyres ever made? The tyres failed because of extreme use. Pirelli anticipated this for 2020 but those tyres were rejected by the teams because drivers and engineers didn't want to learm new tyres that was to be in the last year of the regulations.

Anyway. I don't even care about the tyres anymore.. I am more interested in how redBull managed to go 1 second a lap faster and keep the tyre pressures low. This is the elephant in the room for me. I suspect some sort of trick suspension or special design in the gas used in the tyre or the wheel itself. Andrew shovlin mention that both teams were in the range of blistering, but RedBull as at the very low end and Mercedes was at the tip top edge of it.
Teams have thermal cameras to spy on other car's tyres... I am sure Mercedes would have been keeping an eye on RedBull's tyre temps on Friday and Saturday... Anyway.. I hope someone at Mercedrs looks further into what RedBull was doing.

I'm not convinced Red Bull had a 'trick'. I think I might if all the other teams had similar problems to Merc and only the RB was not affected at all. But my feeling is the opposite that only the Merc was really blistering and tearing up the tyres. (Although if other teams experienced similar issues to the extent of Merc I'll revise that, although definitely the broadcast didn't flag such things at the time)

[Bsowles]

but both Merc and RedBull strategies were faaaaaar from "masterful".

Indeed. Seen articles stating that RedBull's strategy was brilliant. But they actually wanted Max to hang back. Doing so would have given the Mercs half a chance. By deciding to attack immediately, Max put himself ahead on track and in a position to use his tyres to the full.

It was an instinctive thing and it might have gone wrong, but it didn't and so has gone in to the pantheon of brilliant driving moments.

Goes to show that sometimes, in spite of all the data they have, the driver can still 'feel' better what the tires are capable of.

This ^^^