[Tech Issue] 2011 Pirelli tyres

[Bononi]

Originally Posted by Marbot

He was, and probably still is, a quick and talented driver. No doubt about that.

Since then he has been competitive in NASCAR. A series where being competitive is much more difficult than just jumping into a sure fire thing in F1.

Come on Knowlesy, back me up here.

Just for the sake of sanity, this is a thread about black rubber.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Sensible, I thought.

Point being that you'll have to change something more significant than just parc ferme regulations to make any definite change to the running order. Parc ferme pre-2003 was just another opportunity to make fast cars go even faster if you had the resources to do so. It may have helped the top teams, but it did nothing to help the bottom teams to close the gap.

Bought some really nice transporters / portable hotels, and built several really fancy factories and a number of grand houses with the money saved though!

[HughGJohnson]

I hope this isn't off topic, but...

Is anyone is else... um, disapointed that the hard tire is so much slower and yet not much more durable? I like the idea of 3 stops, but it seems like there's very little strategy involved. The only strategy seems to be to come in before the tires are shot. It doesn't look like it's going to be possible to stretch the tires far enough to cut out a stop.

[phoenix]

I think in today's race there were some who stopped three times and others who stopped four times - and that was because of different strategies, not because of unforeseen problems.

[HughGJohnson]

It seemed like the guys who stopped four times ran the tires off four times, rather than planned a strategy to do so. Heidfeld, Hamilton and Schumacher (twice) all came in after having offs and there may have been more that I don't remember or who weren't shown. Hamilton had to make an extra stop with less than 5 laps to go after he ran off the hard tires.

I don't really like the idea that the drivers can't predict when the tires are going to go, but my biggest complaint is why is the hard so slow and hardly more durable?*

* I blame the FIA, of course, because we all know Pirelli could make a square, teflon tire that would grip and ride smooth--if they wanted.

[phoenix]

Originally Posted by HughGJohnson

It seemed like the guys who stopped four times ran the tires off four times, rather than planned a strategy to do so.

According to what I heard on the BBC broadcast, Red Bull had a couple of plans - Plan 'A' and Plan 'B'.

Webber was on Plan 'A' and Vettel was put on Plan 'B' during the race - so presumably he was on Plan 'A' up until that time. Webber stopped one more time than Vettel.....

[Adam43]

I get your point Huge. Surely the hard tyre should last (significantly) longer as well as be slower. That brings another element into play - a choice for team and driver.

A car bad on tyres could mainly go for the hard ones. A car good on tyres could either go for hards and less stops, or maybe softs and the same number of stops.

I guess Pirelli might still be finding their way a little. However we should also remember that the tracks influence this alot and for some we may not see what we want. The change (and uncertainty) from one race to another is a good thing.

Originally Posted by phoenix

According to what I heard on the BBC broadcast, Red Bull had a couple of plans - Plan 'A' and Plan 'B'.

Webber was on Plan 'A' and Vettel was put on Plan 'B' during the race - so presumably he was on Plan 'A' up until that time. Webber stopped one more time than Vettel.....

Yes this was interesting. They seemed to be understanding the tyres, evn if they couldn't do anything about it!
They went with two plans depending on how it turned out. They also talked about 'phases' which seemed to indicate that Vettel could tell when they were going off.

[phoenix]

Button, I think, managed 19 laps on the harder 'Prime' tyre in his last stint. This was 3 laps longer than anyone had managed to run on the Prime (according to MacLaren) and a lot longer than the Options would last. So, some difference in durability, but maybe not enough....?

[phoenix]

Originally Posted by Adam43

They also talked about 'phases' which seemed to indicate that Vettel could tell when they were going off.

Yes, Phase '1' and Phase '2' you mean? From what he said on the radio, he plainly could feel when they went away. Also, the stopwatch would confirm I'm sure....

[Marbot]

Whatever is happening with the tyres, they are certainly more challenging for the drivers than Bridgestones last efforts.

Pirelli wanted to avoid one stop races at all costs. Which may be the reason that the harder tyre only lasts marginally longer than the softer tyre.

[phoenix]

Originally Posted by Marbot

Pirelli wanted to avoid one stop races at all costs. Which may be the reason that the harder tyre only lasts marginally longer than the softer tyre.

If the Prime tyres could last half race distance and Options anything less, wouldn't that achieve the desired effect? Button managed nearly 34% race distance on a lighter-than-average fuel load on the Primes. If this was extended to 50% of race distance, then a two or three stops (with two sets of Options designed to run maybe 25% and no more each) would really open things up between the Q3 dropouts and the guys starting on 'used' Options ahead of them. Maybe that is just too artifical...

[HughGJohnson]

Originally Posted by phoenix

According to what I heard on the BBC broadcast, Red Bull had a couple of plans - Plan 'A' and Plan 'B'.

Webber was on Plan 'A' and Vettel was put on Plan 'B' during the race - so presumably he was on Plan 'A' up until that time. Webber stopped one more time than Vettel.....

That's what I mean... they had two plans. There's a saying in American football: 'if you have two quarterbacks, you really don't have any.' I think they had two (or more) plans because they were unsure of what would happen with the tires. It sounds like everyone else is just diving into the pits when they have to, because the tires are so unpredictable.

Originally Posted by Adam43

I get your point Huge. Surely the hard tyre should last (significantly) longer as well as be slower. That brings another element into play - a choice for team and driver.

A car bad on tyres could mainly go for the hard ones. A car good on tyres could either go for hards and less stops, or maybe softs and the same number of stops.

I guess Pirelli might still be finding their way a little. However we should also remember that the tracks influence this alot and for some we may not see what we want. The change (and uncertainty) from one race to another is a good thing.Yes this was interesting. They seemed to be understanding the tyres, evn if they couldn't do anything about it!
They went with two plans depending on how it turned out. They also talked about 'phases' which seemed to indicate that Vettel could tell when they were going off.

Yes, Vettel was very good with the tires. I would say that's surprising given his quick pace, but maybe the chasis helps. However, many experienced and quality drivers got caught out by the sudden dropoff. Maybe if Vettel is ever not on pole he will have some problems.

As for Pirelli I really don't blame them, but I'm sick of hearing them 'brag' about what a good job they did making a bad tire. And saying they could make a good tire. I'm sick of that and they make it easy to mock them and it's fun... so I do.

Originally Posted by phoenix

Button, I think, managed 19 laps on the harder 'Prime' tyre in his last stint. This was 3 laps longer than anyone had managed to run on the Prime (according to MacLaren) and a lot longer than the Options would last. So, some difference in durability, but maybe not enough....?

The other exception. Button was able to make them work, but there still seems to be no rhyme or reason why. He said the car came alive after they put the hard compound on. Everyone else was much slower and Hamilton's race was ruined after he went to the prime. Obviously Hamilton is harder on tires, but in 20 races in the same car he hasn't been that much harder (with the possible exception of Australia last year).

I don't object to tire management/strategy being hard, but I feel like it's very random.

[Adam43]

I see what you mean. I'm not sure if it is random, or whether it is just new and we just don't get it yet. The jury should still be out.

As an aside, if I were at Pirelli I'd have started saying I was doing a good job. The drivers (bless) were whinging about them and forums such as this was full of Pirelli rubbish tyre action.

[phoenix]

Originally Posted by HughGJohnson

The other exception. Button was able to make them work, but there still seems to be no rhyme or reason why. He said the car came alive after they put the hard compound on.

If there was only Rhyme and Reason, we would watch qualifying and not need to see the race, as the result would be a forgone conclusion!

My other thoughts are that, whilst Button may seem to be 'A-political' and 'Mr Niceguy' he is not daft and is as good a game-player as anyone - just by saying those few words he has probably un-nerved his biggest rival at the next race - his team mate!

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by phoenix

If the Prime tyres could last half race distance and Options anything less, wouldn't that achieve the desired effect? Button managed nearly 34% race distance on a lighter-than-average fuel load on the Primes. If this was extended to 50% of race distance, then a two or three stops (with two sets of Options designed to run maybe 25% and no more each) would really open things up between the Q3 dropouts and the guys starting on 'used' Options ahead of them. Maybe that is just too artifical...

I'd doubt that Pirelli are able to get tyres to last for exact percentages of race distances at each and every race track. You only need to look back to Melbourne to realise that.

It may be that China is more like Melbourne was or it may be even more extreme than Sepang. That's what I like about these tyres.

[phoenix]

Originally Posted by Marbot

I'd doubt that Pirelli are able to get tyres to last for exact percentages of race distances at each and every race track. You only need to look back to Melbourne to realise that.

No, I'm sure that would be expecting too much - but for all other cars the Prime had only been expected to last 28% race distance based on the practice sessions. So durability something closer to 50% race distance would be better maybe, and a reasonable "window" for Pirelli to aim for?

Remember that the main problem with the Brdgestones is that two sets of tyres (one prime, one option) would normally get them through Q3 and the whole race...

[HughGJohnson]

Originally Posted by phoenix

If there was only Rhyme and Reason, we would watch qualifying and not need to see the race, as the result would be a forgone conclusion!

My other thoughts are that, whilst Button may seem to be 'A-political' and 'Mr Niceguy' he is not daft and is as good a game-player as anyone - just by saying those few words he has probably un-nerved his biggest rival at the next race - his team mate!

When I'm talking about rhyme and reason I mean they should give the biggest trophy to the guy that wins, stepping on the brake pedal should slow the car and hard tires that are much slower should last a lot longer than the soft tires. I don't want a forgone conclussion, please inform Vettel.

Interesting take on Button--I love it! I didn't even consider that. I guess I lowered my BS guard when he didn't begin with: "to be honest". Everytime an F1 driver says that I put my boots on and am surprised if what comes next seems remotely true. Of course, it's not a big stretch. Either the car came alive or he did. Something happened. No doubt, Lewis will be asked why the disparity between his performance and Button's on the prime...especially since Button's car 'came alive' on the prime.

[bjohnsonsmith]

I thought Button certainly showed how it can be done with those Pirellis.

[Wims]

Originally Posted by HughGJohnson

...

* I blame the FIA, of course, because we all know Pirelli could make a square, teflon tire that would grip and ride smooth--if they wanted.

I believe it was the teams themselves and not the FIA that asked for tires that were more unpredictable than the Bridgestones. They wanted a situation like Canada 2010 every race.

During one of the practice sessions the BBC radio team went through a few tweets, in one of them one of the viewer asked "If the tires are designed to be like Canada in every race, what will happen when they race in Canada". Its an interesting question

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Wims

During one of the practice sessions the BBC radio team went through a few tweets, in one of them one of the viewer asked "If the tires are designed to be like Canada in every race, what will happen when they race in Canada". Its an interesting question

Despite the increased tyre degradation in Canada, the better cars still only required two stops.

Driver Result Tyre Choice by Stint
Jenson Button 2nd Super Soft | Medium | Medium
Lewis Hamilton 1st Super Soft | Medium | Medium
Michael Schumacher11th Medium | Medium | Medium | Super Soft
Nico Rosberg 6th Super Soft | Medium | Medium
Sebastian Vettel 4th Medium | Super Soft | Medium
Mark Webber 5th Medium | Medium | Super Soft
Felipe Massa 15th Super Soft | Medium | Medium | Medium | Super Soft
Fernando Alonso 3rd Super Soft | Medium | Medium
Rubens Barrichello 14th Super Soft | Medium | Medium | Medium
Nico Hulkenberg 13th Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium | Super Soft
Robert Kubica 7th Medium | Medium | Medium | Super Soft
Vitaly Petrov 17th Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium | Super Soft
Adrian Sutil 10th Super Soft | Medium | Medium
Vitantonio Liuzzi 9th Super Soft | Medium | Medium
Sebastien Buemi 8th Medium | Medium | Medium | Super Soft
Jaime Alguersuari 12th Super Soft | Medium | Medium | Medium
Jarno Trulli DNF Super Soft | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium
Heikki Kovalainen 16th Medium | Medium | Medium | Super Soft
Karun Chandhok 18th Medium | Medium | Super Soft
Bruno Senna DNF Medium
Pedro de la Rosa DNF Medium | Medium | Medium
Kamui Kobayashi DNF Super Soft
Timo Glock DNF Medium | Medium | Medium | Super Soft | Super Soft
Lucas di Grassi 19th Medium | Medium | Medium | Super Soft

[Knowlesy]

Still not really keen on these tyres. The marbles off line and the ridiculous artificiality of it all. Drivers having to make four stops is just epic mongishness of the highest order.

I much preferred the 2005 solution to tyre management but hey ho.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

Still not really keen on these tyres. The marbles off line and the ridiculous artificiality of it all. Drivers having to make four stops is just epic mongishness of the highest order.

You could also say that tyres that last an entire race distance and don't degrade or wear at all, are equally artificial. Something that Pirelli can easily do, since they aren't competing with anyone. Trying to do something in between (Bridgestone after Michelin left) would also be artificial.

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

I much preferred the 2005 solution to tyre management but hey ho.

I can see your point. But, generally speaking, the race order was pretty much decided in 2005 after about the first 3 corners (unless you happened to be in a Ferrari). Not even having to stop for fuel made much difference. No surprise then, that it only survived one season.

[Knowlesy]

It made for some brilliant races that evolved gradually. Monaco for example was enthralling.

This current solution is very much instant gratification. It grates.

The reason it wasn't retained beyond 2005 was...well, it was nothing to do with entertainment put it that way.

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

Monaco for example was enthralling.

Yes, that was a good race. Christijan Albers had a lot to do with that though. And Raikkonen led every lap.

[Wims]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

It made for some brilliant races that evolved gradually.

US GP 2005 was particularly bad because of the tyre situation back then