Tyre rant
 

It's not a ruddy soft compound if it can do a whole GP distance! I'm counting down the days till we get rid of the ultra conservative Bridgestone.

I agree! Time to rant:

http://www.stephencjensen.com/wp-con...d-noises-b.jpg

The entire structure of compulsory stops is rubbish. Senna hated compulsory pit stops and he was right.

The tyre company ought to make ONE tyre and let everbody race.

Of course there also ought to be competition between tyre companes - but lets not forget f1 has become a sport that caters to the lowest moron that has the attention span of a retarded gnat and requires "entertainment".

So no pitstops is the way to go? I don't think so.

Have you ever watched grands prix sans pit stops? I did for over ten years and it is far better.

The onus is placed on the driver to make the tyres work for the entire distance and racing becomes between drivers not indirectly the fumblings of mechanics.

There is plenty of them which means that the FIA and FOM are using the right marketing policy, sadly.

Can't call it soft if you can do the whole race on the tyre. Might as well be hard.

I have posted this view before but never the less:
My Answer would be

A range of up to 4 tyre compounds.

A Hard: With a struggle will last the whole race, but at a steady pace and only with a kindness to the tyre i.e Buttons style.

A Medium:A tyre to do a 1 stop but faster than the hard compound and not as much tyre managment needed.

A Soft: You can attack from the outset but wear will mean a 15-20 lap stint but gaining 2 seconds a lap over Hard and a second over Medium.

Super Soft: A Qualifying tyre for Quali, and if you wish an 8-10 lap stint and 3-4 seconds faster.

I know the timings are a bit mythical, but you get my point hopefully.


In a race imagine
Button trying a whole race with no stop v Hamilton banzi-ing a 2 or 3 stops at 3-4 seconds a lap faster.
While Vettel comes into play with stopping once just at the right time.

A bit far fetched, but would be cracking in my ideal F1. I would like to think you'd get drivers playing to their strengths or track conditions giving you different strategies and the speed differential to overtake, which Hamilton would need to do in that scenario 2 or 3 times.

You may not agree and it will never happen but thats my view.

Well, if you can lap:

1. 3-4 seconds / lap faster for 10 laps than those using hard
compounds

2. 2 sec/ lap faster than with hard tires and 1 sec/lap faster than using medium for 20 laps

Than what use to even bring the medium and hard tires to the race tracks?! You can run circles around them using soft and supersoft tires! http://www.motorsportforums.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

IMO there should be 2 different compounds only:
- hard tires should last a race distance without problems (no pit stops required but optionally allowed)
- the softer ones should need a pitstop with a 33% race distance window and allow for completing the race distance in approximately in the same time as with the harder compound, +/- 1%, (including the pitstop duration)

I told you my timings were a bit out. http://www.motorsportforums.com/imag...es/biggrin.gif Not enough working out done http://www.motorsportforums.com/imag...lies/dozey.gif Opps.

Oh well I won't run for FIA president yet then.

My personal hope?

Pirelli were known for great pace and poor longevity so I would love to see them turn up with aggressive compounds so we can get rid of this rule making tyre stops mandatory and just have them as a logical requirement because the tyres can't last.

But my hopes are dashed with a quick look at the official Pirelli website showing that they will follow the Bridgestone model with 4 dry compunds on offer. Buggerfeck http://www.motorsportforums.com/images/smilies/mad.gif

Yes. For example the 1992 German GP. Senna didn't pit and made a terrific race against Patrese and Mansell.

there are plenty of things to complain about with the FIA but last on my list are the tires. I for one am happy that they are not a factor in the race per say and that other things like, "driver skill" determine the outcome of races rather than contrived hurdles.

I think that bridgestone engineers are brilliant in developing their tires and it will be a shame to see them go. I expect a lot of teething problems with pirelli next year and probably the odd controversy.

how sad is it to be complaining about tires that are too good as a detriment to an exciting race. I for one want to see the best cars performing at their best during a race not suffering from extreme and unnecessary tire degradation so the odd fan here and there can get an extra pitstop or watch a driver struggle around.

If you want a better show, I suggest bringing back refueling but mandating that fuel tanks be big enough for no refueling. That would make for different strategies, different pit stops, more overtaking, cars being reeled in at the end of the race, etc.

But tires are the least of my complaints.

We just get back to the Senna - Villeneuve idea of motor racing:

Powerful engines, FAT tyres, minimal aero or none at all and no stops for tyres or fuel or driver aids or gimmicks like the double diffuser or the "f-duct".

But then the "average fan" - and the term fan used to be a very honorable concept - would moan and complain and whine that its boring and given the Nietsche form of self-centerdness that is so prevalent in society today, these people believe that THEY are the most important entity in racing.

But I am a dinosaur in racing terms - and while there are loys of us, we are significantly outnumbered by "sportsfans".

So many people these days require "entertainment" and it does not help when the media is mostly populated by idiots who think that Senna is a medication linked to "Pods".

Agreed. Mandatory stops have always irked me, and they should go. If someone can make it thru all the way, let them!

You have to make a mandatory stop for an option tire. The irony! Just make the tires out of chewing gum. Whoever can manage their tires best, wins.

Problem is NOW they can make tyres which run the distance with ease.

This means if the tyres run the distance and they can't overtake due to aero then basically the race positions are defined on Saturday save for a couple retirements.

We're close enough to that at the moment I reckon!

I would bring back refueling myself (but not starting on quali fuel load), anything to switch things around a little.

That's the difference! Back in the day there simply wasn't a tyre that could last an entire race distance and remain competitive, so changing tyres was nearly always the way to go.

There should be 2 tyres to choose from.

One would have less grip and be capable of going 2/3 of the race before going off and the other should start dying after 1/3 distance.

Exactly my thoughts on the subject. Although as different tracks have different grip and wear levels, it's not easy for the tyre manufacturer to get that right!

But crucially we need to get rid of the "use both types of tyre" rule so we can have some cars using the softs and doing a 2 stop (or even 3 stop - remember that?!) race, and some on hards 1 stopping.

I've been watching since 82 so yep, I have seen a couple. 1990 French GP was a great one, Capelli with Newey's Leyton House didn't stop while others behind him did and we had a great race. So pitstops, yes, but perhaps not mandatory if the tires don't perform as well as, let's say in Monza.