Monaco Tyre Strategies

**Valve Bounce** · 28th May 2007, 05:45

This is what I found, which is very interesting: http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpa...s_art_id=31586

It is interestin that both McLarens and Fisi appeared to prefer teh soft tyres over the super softs, as they each ran two stints on the harder compound. So, which compound was faster? the soft or Super softs?

I know that normally, having to run both types would rule out a one stop strategy as the poor guy would have to run half the race on a slower tyre and be killed by the two stoppers; but at Monaco, with the faster guys preferring the harder compound, the question here is obviously whether there was much difference in lap times between the two which would make one stoppers very attractive for the midfield runners.

**leopard** · 28th May 2007, 09:04

Originally Posted by Valve Bounce

This is what I found, which is very interesting: http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpa...s_art_id=31586
It is interestin that both McLarens and Fisi appeared to prefer teh soft tyres over the super softs, as they each ran two stints on the harder compound. So, which compound was faster? the soft or Super softs?

The softer one usually have wider surface on the ground and give more barrier to the car from going faster, therefore soft tires was usually faster than supersoft.

The use of supersoft on the third stint was probably for securing the car from driving out of the track once they know their positions were safe significantly to finish in front of anybody.

**wedge** · 28th May 2007, 13:47

It's to do with graining.

The softs was the most stable tyre, the supersofts went through a bad graining phase.

**Robinho** · 28th May 2007, 20:58

Valve, i think that most of the 2 stoppers used the harder tyre for 2 stints and the super softs for 1, given that the harder tyre was more stable and seemed to yield more grip on the longer runs, certainly more consistency.

**ioan** · 28th May 2007, 21:13

Well Felipe went for super softs just to be denied to use them at full by Davidson whom in his turn was amazed that he got a penalty after holding Felipe up for more than 5 laps and lost him about 15 seconds in the process.

**ioan** · 28th May 2007, 21:15

Originally Posted by Valve Bounce

the question here is obviously whether there was much difference in lap times between the two which would make one stoppers very attractive for the midfield runners.

There was someone stating that the super soft tires were between 0,8 and 1 second faster per lap, but graining was a problem that made them not very attractive.

**schmenke** · 28th May 2007, 22:09

From what I understand the graining wasn't as much a problem as expected due to the relatively cool track temps.

**Valve Bounce** · 28th May 2007, 23:15

Originally Posted by ioan

Well Felipe went for super softs just to be denied to use them at full by Davidson whom in his turn was amazed that he got a penalty after holding Felipe up for more than 5 laps and lost him about 15 seconds in the process.

I couldn't follow this on "live timing" which, infortunately, doesn't give the gaps to lapping cars. However, I would go s far as to say Massa didn't have the faintest chance of catching the car in front of him.

**call_me_andrew** · 29th May 2007, 00:42

Originally Posted by wedge

It's to do with graining.

The softs was the most stable tyre, the supersofts went through a bad graining phase.

Wedge is right. I believe this was adressed after the race.

The rain in the days before the race left the track green and abrasive at the start. As the race progressed, the track rubbered in and the super-soft tires became more desireable.