New F1 Tire Regulations

[Tosh]

Pirelli's junk tires ruining not only F1, but also GP2 feeder series:
http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns32803.html

"The biggest problem, he said, is that - just like in F1 - the Pirelli tyres degrade too quickly.

"So all these young drivers who need as much seat time as they can get and need to hone their race craft by racing hard from start to finish are basically cruising around," said Johansson.

"I spoke to a couple of the current GP2 stars and they all agree.

"One of them is 20 years old and very promising and he told me he's sitting there in the middle of a race asking himself if this is really what he was hoping to do when he became a professional driver -- cruising around at 80 per cent just to make it to the end of the race," he added.

 

[gofast182]

To make better sense of the new regs. watch this video. Now that I understand it, it's STILL convoluted. They're making the rules more complicated to have even more stops and try to force some of the front-runners back and mid-pack qualifiers up. I don't like them tinkering with the racing like this (and DRS). The combination of best car and best driver should win. Right now it's Mercedes and I'm OK with that. If you force them back 5 laps into a GP and the mid pack driver goes on to win is it really allowing the best car and driver to win? I suppose it would be a consequence of the tire selection but I'd rather see man and machine duke it out without having to drive at 80% to save tires as mentioned above.

http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/1...-2016-explained

 

[Garak]

Tosh: Unfortunately, that's the design. It is one of the unintended consequences of good intentions. They try to balance grip and durability and create a strategy, but the result isn't exactly what was intended in the first place.

gofast182, Jenson Button made a chilling comment about the new tires and all the hype surrounding it. He says in very short order, the engineers will have a solid understanding of the tire compounds. And, since different combinations will result in different race times, and one choice is going to be best, and this is fairly scientific, the engineers will all converge to the same choices, as is the case now, with a few outliers on occasion.

Give them 50 different compounds. One set of choices and one strategy will still be the fastest and be almost the universal choice. The only really interesting part, I fear, is making them choose their non-European venue tires so early that they are making a shot in the dark.

Don't worry. A mid-pack car isn't going to win anything unless the top cars and drivers screw up or have some mighty bad luck, as always.

As an aside, Christian Horner is grousing again about Mercedes dominance driving away fans. Of course, things were different when Red Bull dominated (or Ferrari, or Williams, or McLaren), and he has the audacity to claim that, too.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: Garak
......As an aside, Christian Horner is grousing again about Mercedes dominance driving away fans. Of course, things were different when Red Bull dominated (or Ferrari, or Williams, or McLaren), and he has the audacity to claim that, too.


It's to be expected. After all, they're European. Crying is their specialty.

 

[Garak]

Well, I'm not so sure about that, but it is a little strange to watch him claim how it's different with it being Mercedes than with it being Red Bull in such a position. In any event, he lost a lot of credibility when he kept inventing and then pushing back deadlines to pull out of F1 if no engine deal was reached. Now you know why Bernie is nuts. It's a requirement for him to survive the job.

 

[billt460]

Originally Posted By: Garak
........Now you know why Bernie is nuts. It's a requirement for him to survive the job.


That I won't argue with. I cannot imagine the personality required to manage all of these spoiled little children.

 

[gofast182]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Tosh: Unfortunately, that's the design. It is one of the unintended consequences of good intentions. They try to balance grip and durability and create a strategy, but the result isn't exactly what was intended in the first place.

gofast182, Jenson Button made a chilling comment about the new tires and all the hype surrounding it. He says in very short order, the engineers will have a solid understanding of the tire compounds. And, since different combinations will result in different race times, and one choice is going to be best, and this is fairly scientific, the engineers will all converge to the same choices, as is the case now, with a few outliers on occasion.

Give them 50 different compounds. One set of choices and one strategy will still be the fastest and be almost the universal choice. The only really interesting part, I fear, is making them choose their non-European venue tires so early that they are making a shot in the dark.

Don't worry. A mid-pack car isn't going to win anything unless the top cars and drivers screw up or have some mighty bad luck, as always.

As an aside, Christian Horner is grousing again about Mercedes dominance driving away fans. Of course, things were different when Red Bull dominated (or Ferrari, or Williams, or McLaren), and he has the audacity to claim that, too.

As a rule that won't happen but I expect the field to tighten in 2016 as Honda comes up to speed, Ferrari builds on their progress, and Renault introduces a revised PU. The worst part is drivers having to hold back to preserve tires. If FOM "needs" pit stops just mandate 2-3 depending on the circuit but have the tires (thus the drivers) able to operate at peak performance over the maximum stint.

 

[Garak]

No, of course they won't go to 50 compounds. But, it doesn't matter how many they get. They're all going to be doing virtually the same thing anyhow, at least once they get some data and experience on the compounds.

The problem is, every rule has unintended consequences. Tires that degrade so much by design has left us with people nursing tires. And just mandating two or three stops, depending upon the track, would be pointless, too, since if there's no real strategy issue there (aside from possible traffic avoidance), if the tires haven't lost performance, a stop is really artificial and won't accomplish anything, other than wasting 22 seconds times the number of pit stops, and they might as well just add that time to the end of the race, right?

 

[Whitewolf]

Is this any help?
http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/24100/1...-2016-explained
Still sounds messy to me!

 

[Garak]

I'll have to watch the video a little later. Yes, and I can't wait until someone like Ron Dennis finds some ridiculous loophole to exploit, or maybe Sir Frank will this time. After all, they had a few tire mishaps this season, and he's entitled to a break.

 

[HerrStig]

Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: Garak
......As an aside, Christian Horner is grousing again about Mercedes dominance driving away fans. Of course, things were different when Red Bull dominated (or Ferrari, or Williams, or McLaren), and he has the audacity to claim that, too.


It's to be expected. After all, they're European. Crying is their specialty.
And bringing "equality" to the world.

 

[HerrStig]

I haven't seen good honest "run what you brung" racing since the Cam Am series of unlimited engine, aero, tire size, and anything else you wanted to try. Jim Hall was the master.

 

[Garak]

Running what you bring is what a lot of engineers would like to see. But, running what you bring in Formula 1 would end the sport in half a season, unless you consider three or four teams run as sideshows by gargantuan corporate entities a sport.

 

[gofast182]

Originally Posted By: Garak
No, of course they won't go to 50 compounds. But, it doesn't matter how many they get. They're all going to be doing virtually the same thing anyhow, at least once they get some data and experience on the compounds.

The problem is, every rule has unintended consequences. Tires that degrade so much by design has left us with people nursing tires. And just mandating two or three stops, depending upon the track, would be pointless, too, since if there's no real strategy issue there (aside from possible traffic avoidance), if the tires haven't lost performance, a stop is really artificial and won't accomplish anything, other than wasting 22 seconds times the number of pit stops, and they might as well just add that time to the end of the race, right?

No. You still have the variables of how hard drivers can push to overcome a pit lane delta of a driver who's leading them. We've also seen plenty of stops where a wheel nut doesn't seat properly or something causes a delay of the .2s it takes to change positions. Understanding that solving the problem with rules isn't necessarily solving it, I'd rather see the drivers able to run at 100% of their (and the car's) capability at any given time rather than "80%" of it due to fussy tires.

 

[Garak]

Oh, of course, there are still little things that could go wrong in a pitstop. But, we still don't want to be too unnatural. And, the 100% issue is always misleading. Yes, the cars are being terribly under-driven now, and it's not just tires. That's also fuel. But, there has always been a bit of an aspect of taking care of the car to ensure reliability.

 

[Tosh]

Another youtube video to explain it. Under 10 minutes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgERH1gWF1s