Pirelli 2013 ?

[kfzmeister]

Well, they're discussed on every other thread so they can have one of their own

Lets start with why they are changing the hard compound when 8 teams asked them not to?

Could it be because the most powerfull team in motorsport demanded it?

They are only slightly changing the hard compound. It will be a little closer to the 2012 spec tire. RB has issues with the softs (super), so no help there. Nice try. ...and i'm not even a RB fan.

BBC Sport - Pirelli resist Red Bull pressure to make tyres more durable

[Knock-on]

I thought it interesting their concern about Massa and Lawis tyre failures. Basically not concerned.

[Knock-on]

Mr Kfz. Lets talk about the hard. Monoco is a few races away so plenty of time before we worry about the ss

[dj_bytedisaster]

It just shows that Pirelli seem to think that people are window licking idiots. Even though we saw in Bahrain that even the two hardest compounds may neccessitate 4 stops, which I think is a friggin' travesty to begin with, the real problems were had (not only by RB) with the two softer compounds, so changing the hard one is a complete joke. I'm with those, who say that it was changed to cover up a design flaw that lead to Lewis' and Felipe's tire problems in Bahrain.

We've had four races so far and all of them have been ridiculous eco runs with drivers doing delta times, so it is safe to say that Pirelli truly and properly f***ed up F1. Renewing their contract would be desaster. The quicker they're gone, the better.

We had some nifty action at Bahrain, but nearly all combatants were immediately punished by destroyed tires. The only ones without tire probs were Vettel and Raikönnen, who mainly just drove a controlled cruise.

[donKey jote]

I lurve the smell of burning rubber in the morning

[kfzmeister]

Mr Kfz. Lets talk about the hard. Monoco is a few races away so plenty of time before we worry about the ss

What else is there to say? Apparently, there were some issues with Massa, Hamilton and another car's hard compound rear tires coming apart in Malaysia and Bahrain. At first it was thought that some debris caused this damage, yet Pirelli concluded that their (softer than 2012) design might be the issue. They redesigned the hard compound tire and it is now closer to the more durable 2012 version. Obviously this is a safety issue and all teams were consulted.
The tires that Red Bull wants redesigned are the soft(er) compounds, yet Pirelli refuses to change them.
Pirelli were asked to change the design from last year and have produced exactly what they were asked to.
Whether one likes it, or not, it has brought more action to the sport.
To suggest that Pirelli has failed and should be removed is utter nonsense. I just don't get it. Are some people really that thick?
It it were Michelin and they were asked to design tires that produced the same results, would those same people ask for Michelin's removal?? I just don't understand that sort of logic.

[CaptainRaiden]

We've had four races so far and all of them have been ridiculous eco runs with drivers doing delta times, so it is safe to say that Pirelli truly and properly f***ed up F1. Renewing their contract would be desaster. The quicker they're gone, the better.

What would that achieve? Bernie would just ask another manufacturer to make fast degrading, low grip tyres.

Of course nobody likes to see F1 turning into a tactical battle centered around tyres, but at least these tyres throw a spanner in the mix, and teams like Lotus have an outside chance with Kimi. Otherwise with durable long-lasting tyres, the best car would win every time, and F1 would be just a one sided Red Bull domination.

[dj_bytedisaster]

To suggest that Pirelli has failed and should be removed is utter nonsense. I just don't get it. Are some people really that thick?
It it were Michelin and they were asked to design tires that produced the same results, would those same people ask for Michelin's removal?? I just don't understand that sort of logic.

Pirelli HAS failed. There is a difference between a fast-degrading tire and a fast-degrading tire that suddenly loses 5 seconds a lap. In F1 dimensions, that's a week. Last year Kimi lost all his achievement of a whole GP in a single lap - he went from podium to outside the points on a single lap.
Yes Bernie asked them to build tires with certain characteristics, but they overshot the goal and Hembery's arrogant attitude of:



just adds to it. Well, newsflash, Pirelli - Tires that are shot after 15 miles are VERY WRONG. Drivers being told not to race to save tires is VERY WRONG.

The main problem here, however is when the friggin' midget decided to go single tire supplier. Back in the day suppliers developed tires that delivered the best possible grip for the longest possible time and drivers pushed the raw stuffing out of their cars until they started to beg for mercy. Now we get 'you can push a bit more, maybe, we think', 'don't fight, look after the tires'. It's a friggin' travesty.

And why should a team like RB suddenly be punished for building the best car? Shall they try to make their car worse, so the tires will work better? The Pirelli tires can nullify a team's development efforts completely. Have too much downforce and you're forced to dawdle around at half-throttle or you're forced to make your car aerodynamically worse to reduce strain on tires, which aren't fit for their intended purpose to begin with.

F1 has always been about building a car that is superior to the cars of the opposition. But these days we sabotage the best cars, so they won't outrun the mediocre? What sort of philosophy is that?
Hembery himself said that if they built a tire that would withstand the RB's cornering forces, the lemonade tins would win every race by miles. So what? Is it RB's fault that the other teams are too incompetent to build a car that can keep up? They did the same **** to Ferrari in 2005. What is this - Walldorf School? Should Usain Bolt run with a backpack full of weights to give the other runners a chance in the future? F1 is the only sport where you're punished for doing the best job...

[kfzmeister]

Oh, i see. Red Bull has a different set of tires than the rest of the grid. That makes sense now. Yeah, i agree. Why should Red Bull deliberately be given a completely different set of tires compared to the rest of the grid. That is just unfair BS.

And yes, tires that last 15 miles? Great point. How will they ever finish a race with tires that just don't get them to the checkered flag. Genius. Why didn't i see right through that.

Let's get a different tire manufacturer in there asap, that will give all teams the same kind of tire and allow teams to get to the finish line again. Then, will see some good racing. Right?

[CaptainRaiden]

F1 has always been about building a car that is superior to the cars of the opposition. But these days we sabotage the best cars, so they won't outrun the mediocre? What sort of philosophy is that?

Now where does the word sabotage come in? Did Bernie or Pirelli know that the Red Bull would be harder on its tires before the season began? Anywhoo, they are not doing so bad. Red Bull have won two out of four races, which shows that performance can easily be gained by a few setup tweaks. I don't get what the whole drama is about, TBH.

They did the same **** to Ferrari in 2005.

Whose fault is it if Michelin came up with a better tyre in 2005?