Pirelli's or DRS

[Daniel]

Some of the people in the DRS thread were whinging about how it's not real racing when someone gets past because of DRS. Well I'm wondering what they're thinking about the Pirelli's now? Today we've seen overtakes where the person being overtaken has no chance to fight back because their tyres are shot. Personally I think both have been good, but I wonder what some of the uptight purists think?

Is it cos tyres is black?

[Robinho]

i think they've both worked out ok, in isolation either look that they would have made for more passes, but the combination of the both adds to it also. Don't forget KERS also has an impact on these things. unlike many, i have to say i'm not anti any of these three things. The best people still end up at the front

[MrJan]

I'm no purist, I like both. I think too many people moan about DRS being too effective without considering that it might be other factors too. eg. in Turkey there were a few passes made on pace alone long before the DRS activation zone. There was also some good passing around the rest of the track. IMO the passing we've seen is mainly down to the tyres, and I like that. F1 had grown so stale that I think anythign that brings in excitement is good for capturing new viewers, even if it isn't the true type of racing that we want to see.

I'd also argue that if we want 'real racing' we can also get rid of all wings and aerodynamics...oh and run same engines, and one tyre type.,..in fact lets just put the drivers in go-karts.

[Daniel]

Agree with the both of you. Whilst I've made it well known that I don't like Pirelli, I think the tyres have made for more overtaking, but in comparison to last year it's no less artificial than DRS. I think the DRS haters need to admit that their only reason for disliking DRS is that it slept with their wife/girlfriend and move on with their lives.

[Whyzars]

Some of the people in the DRS thread were whinging about how it's not real racing when someone gets past because of DRS. Well I'm wondering what they're thinking about the Pirelli's now? Today we've seen overtakes where the person being overtaken has no chance to fight back because their tyres are shot. Personally I think both have been good, but I wonder what some of the uptight purists think?

Is it cos tyres is black?

I'll bite but I don't know that I qualify as an uptight purist.

Back in the days of yore, the tyres from different manufacturers were often the difference between winning and losing. One tyre was good at one track whilst lousy at another.

Now, its about the rules and the stage of a tyres life being the difference between winning and losing. It all depends on what your feeling is about tyre management as a critical component of race craft.

Is the best car/driver package winning each race and would the result change if the tyre rules were removed and tyre numbers were limitless?

Budget smudget. I say the teams should use as many tyres in a weekend as the driver needs to get the job done.

[Daniel]

I'll bite but I don't know that I qualify as an uptight purist.

Back in the days of yore, the tyres from different manufacturers were often the difference between winning and losing. One tyre was good at one track whilst lousy at another.

Now, its about the rules and the stage of a tyres life being the difference between winning and losing. It all depends on what your feeling is about tyre management as a critical component of race craft.

Is the best car/driver package winning each race and would the result change if the tyre rules were removed and tyre numbers were limitless?

Budget smudget. I say the teams should use as many tyres in a weekend as the driver needs to get the job done.

I actually agree with you. If a team can't afford to run that many sets then they shouldn't be in Formula 1.

[Mark]

The teams get the tyres for free.

[Daniel]

The teams get the tyres for free.

now, but back in the day if they wanted to use more tyres they paid for it.

[ioan]

Honestly both the DRS and the Pirelli's are crap.

The first is a crappy gimmick the later are crappy quality tires for this level of motor racing.

[MrJan]

Aaah, Ioan is upset that Ferrari aren't winning :D :p :

[ioan]

Aaah, Ioan is upset that Ferrari aren't winning :D :p :

Exactly! :D

[Sonic]

Honestly both the DRS and the Pirelli's are crap.

The first is a crappy gimmick the later are crappy quality tires for this level of motor racing.

Rather predictable.

I like both, but if I had a gun to my head I would drop DRS in favour of the drivers being more flexible with strategy. Jenson on a four stop would have been P4/5, but nursing his tyres on a three stop won him a podium - fab!

[wedge]

Some of the people in the DRS thread were whinging about how it's not real racing when someone gets past because of DRS. Well I'm wondering what they're thinking about the Pirelli's now? Today we've seen overtakes where the person being overtaken has no chance to fight back because their tyres are shot.

Button doing a different strategy a really making it work.


. I think the DRS haters need to admit that their only reason for disliking DRS is that it slept with their wife/girlfriend and move on with their lives.

Not at all. I'd take crap Pirellis over DRS which is by far the worst of the two evils.

[ioan]

I like both, but if I had a gun to my head I would drop DRS in favour of the drivers being more flexible with strategy. Jenson on a four stop would have been P4/5, but nursing his tyres on a three stop won him a podium - fab!

How would you know where Button would have finished if he would have had one more stop but actually been faster on the track?!

[Rollo]

I think the DRS haters need to admit that their only reason for disliking DRS is that it slept with their wife/girlfriend and move on with their lives.

No. This is why:
"It will happen where it doesn't close under brakes and spear someone off the track"
- Martin Brundle, 23rd May, 2011

The question of tyre strategy is one which has been around as long as there has been different tyre compounds in the same race. They were talking about this sort of thing in the early 80s.

The DRS though, exists for no other discernable purpose than to give the car following an advantage; that is inherently silly.

[wedge]

The question of tyre strategy is one which has been around as long as there has been different tyre compounds in the same race. They were talking about this sort of thing in the early 80s. .

Some people feel that requesting a tyre manufacturer to make softer tyres forms artificial racing.

It's not tyre strategy that is the problem or is it? After all its down to drivers and teams to make best use of the tyres given.

[Dave B]

It's all artificial. Why are the teams told which engine spec to use, and ordered to use no more that 8 per season? Why shouldn't a rich team with a powerful engine have an advantage, for example?

Unless you produce identical cars and let the best driver win on merit - which wouldn't be F1 - it'll always have elements which are artificial.

DRS was a bit farcical in Turkey, allowing drivers to whizz past on the straight without much effort - but hopefully that will have been a one-off.

[steveaki13]

It's all artificial. Why are the teams told which engine spec to use, and ordered to use no more that 8 per season? Why shouldn't a rich team with a powerful engine have an advantage, for example?

Unless you produce identical cars and let the best driver win on merit - which wouldn't be F1 - it'll always have elements which are artificial.

DRS was a bit farcical in Turkey, allowing drivers to whizz past on the straight without much effort - but hopefully that will have been a one-off.

I agree.

The only way to not have any element of artifical racing, is to allow the teams to spend as much as they want, to use as bigger wings or most powerful engines possible.

Use any tyres.

You could go on.

[wedge]

It's all artificial. Why are the teams told which engine spec to use, and ordered to use no more that 8 per season? Why shouldn't a rich team with a powerful engine have an advantage, for example?.

That's more down to cost-cutting being the primary MO.

The rev limiter is beyond a joke now that drivers are limited to number of engines per season.

[markabilly]

Okay, I can sort of deal with DRS................but once again , I scream what is the deal with the tires???????????????????????????

Okay, I know Pirrelli is doing an excellent job of producing tires based on bernie's standards, with huge differences in time per lap, and jumbling up results almost at random, causing strategy issues where Fred goes from 1st at the one-third point to a very distant fourth, where a car with a fresh pair of softs makes another driver who was leading the race, look like he is now incompetent and should be doing NASCAR..............

But should that really be the standard, where rubber randomness and tire strategy is the key to winning???????

[Daniel]

Okay, I can sort of deal with DRS................but once again , I scream what is the deal with the tires???????????????????????????

Okay, I know Pirrelli is doing an excellent job of producing tires, with huge differences in time per lap, and jumbling up results almost at random, causing strategy issues where Fred goes from 1st at the one-third point to a very distant fourth, where a car with a fresh pair of softs makes another driver who was leading the race, look like he is now incompetent and should be doing NASCAR..............

But should that really be the standard, where rubber randomness and tire strategy is the key to winning???????

Whatever criticisms are levelled at Pirelli, the FIA made them do it :rolleyes:

[steveaki13]

To be fair though the 4 fastest cars finished in the top 4.

It looked like Fernando's car wouldn't work as well on the harder tyres as it did on the softs. While the Red Bulls and Mclarens didn't appear to have the same problems.

[Mark]

Could do with DRS on the A19!

[Daniel]

Could do with DRS on the A19!

To require DRS you need to have some downforce to lose.

[Mark]

The D in DRS doesn't stand for downforce.

[steveaki13]

The D in DRS doesn't stand for downforce.

It stands for Drag Queen.

[Daniel]

It stands for Drag Queen.

Yes, but it's the downforce that produces the drag.

[ioan]

...causing strategy issues where Fred goes from 1st at the one-third point to a very distant fourth...

Make that 5th.

[ioan]

Yes, but it's the downforce that produces the drag.

Not always. Take the tires for example they produce no downforce but do account for most of the drag.

[Daniel]

Not always. Take the tires for example they produce no downforce but do account for most of the drag.

it's the downforce that is producing the drag that they're reducing ;)

[ioan]

it's the downforce that is producing the drag that they're reducing ;)

As far as the wings are regarded yes.

[Daniel]

As far as the wings are regarded yes.

No, as far as DRS is regarded :) You can't have a DRS system for drag from the tyres non?

[ioan]

No, as far as DRS is regarded :) You can't have a DRS system for drag from the tyres non?

Just count on Pirelli for making something that achieves that, like exploding tires or something along those lines.

BTW let us know how would you devise a DRS for the diffuser, known to produce a big part of the downforce of a F1 car. :D

[Daniel]

Just count on Pirelli for making something that achieves that, like exploding tires or something along those lines.

BTW let us know how would you devise a DRS for the diffuser, known to produce a big part of the downforce of a F1 car. :D

Yes, but not as much drag considering the downforce it generates :)

[ioan]

Yes, but not as much drag considering the downforce it generates :)

Which was my point, not all downforce comes with significant drag attached to it and not all drag produces downforce.

And DRS is still pants.

[ArrowsFA1]

Both DRS and the current tyres (and KERS) are simply the FIA tinkering around the edges and not addressing the real issue which, as we all know, is the aerodynamic properties of the cars.

One is not better or worse than the other.

[Daniel]

Which was my point, not all downforce comes with significant drag attached to it and not all drag produces downforce.

And DRS is still pants.

But Ioan, if you read my post. The drag that produces downforce is the drag they're reducing. A roadcar has little/no downforce therefore you can't have drs on a roadcar.....

[ioan]

Both DRS and the current tyres (and KERS) are simply the FIA tinkering around the edges and not addressing the real issue which, as we all know, is the aerodynamic properties of the cars.

One is not better or worse than the other.

The worse part of it is that they dismissed the return of ground effects which would have solved most of the problems the FIA is trying to solve with DRS, KERS and crappy tires.
Oh well! :\

[ioan]

But Ioan, if you read my post. The drag that produces downforce is the drag they're reducing. A roadcar has little/no downforce therefore you can't have drs on a roadcar.....

Some road cars have good downforce also even though they have no wings. Sure compared to F1 is nothing and thus there is no way to reduce the drag with a DRS type of solution, and I am pretty sure that Mark was kidding anyway.

[Daniel]

Some road cars have good downforce also even though they have no wings. Sure compared to F1 is nothing and thus there is no way to reduce the drag with a DRS type of solution, and I am pretty sure that Mark was kidding anyway.

And I was kidding back, but in a factual manner.

[Retro Formula 1]

The tyres are doing exactly what the FIA wanted. They are mixing it up and adding to the excitement.

I have no problem with that as Motorsport needs to appeal to the masses to survive and not a few die-hard fans.

DRS, although adding to the excitement, is not the way to go. You cannot engineer a device that benefits one driver and not another. F1 is not a handicap rated sport but a test to find out which package is best. I would much rather them reduce drag and air disruption so cars are not penalised when trying to overtake.

[Daniel]

The tyres are doing exactly what the FIA wanted.

Ah. The mystical FIA requirements which seem to cover every inadequacy that the Pirelli's have shown :laugh:

[ioan]

Ah. The mystical FIA requirements which seem to cover every inadequacy that the Pirelli's have shown :laugh:

Looks like Pirelli did find the perfect cover for their crappy product. :D
And the FIA will have to cover them unless they are ready to accept that they chose the wrong provider and then kick them out.

They sure made the race strategy easier to understand for the casual viewer, or maybe NOT! Talk about missing the target. :rotflmao:

[Sonic]

How would you know where Button would have finished if he would have had one more stop but actually been faster on the track?!

Bless you Ioan *shakes head* of course I can't 'know' where anyone would have ended up with different, but take a look at your own signature; that was simply my opinion, and based on the fact that Button is the second fastest driver at McLaren, which produced the second fastest package of the weekend it is a fair bet to say that, all things being equal, he would have wound up 4th.

[markabilly]

Looks like Pirelli did find the perfect cover for their crappy product. :D
And the FIA will have to cover them unless they are ready to accept that they chose the wrong provider and then kick them out.

They sure made the race strategy easier to understand for the casual viewer, or maybe NOT! Talk about missing the target. :rotflmao:

i find it very hard to figure it out as to what to expect as to where they will all finish at the end of the race, while the race is going on....like ferrari and fred. What happened?? Did ferrari decide to run 25 laps on hards?? at the rate of losing 2 seconds a lap?? Was MS about to pass Fred or did he need to make another pit stop.

Or was MS about to pass Fred because he was driving brilliantly and fred was not?????


Will Lewis pass Vettel or run out of tire before he can do it?? Or is Lewis passing vettel because vettel ran out of tire..... or because lewis has more talent (hey, the car differences seem to matter less than the newness of the tires and which set --the hard or the soft)

Or did he fail to pass vettel because his tires ran out or because vettel has more talent??

No way to really answer those questions, but it seems the answer to all the above is simple: Tires and their conditions

And then the order of cars gets all jumbled up.

It looks like someone is moving up very fast to 6th place, slows and then falls back to 15th after pitting.......and just who is on what tire......

[Somebody]

Well, the alternative is, essentially, what we got last year - in dry races (apart from Canada), everyone one-stopped (and some probably would have no-stopped had they been allowed to) because the tyres' lifespan was not meaningfully a limiting factor on strategy.

What we're seeing this year is what we were MEANT to see last year, with efforts to preserve the tyres. Would you prefer 2005-spec tyres, expected to last a whole race? Because that wouldn't be hard for Pirelli to do.

[I fundamentally object to the "only the car behind can use it" aspect of DRS though. And since that's basically the only reason it exists...]

[AndyL]

But Ioan, if you read my post. The drag that produces downforce is the drag they're reducing. A roadcar has little/no downforce therefore you can't have drs on a roadcar.....

Check out the new Ford Focus ;)

[Daniel]

Check out the new Ford Focus ;)

I reckon we're talking fractions of an mpg improvement there :)

[Rollo]

BTW let us know how would you devise a DRS for the diffuser, known to produce a big part of the downforce of a F1 car. :D

Diffusers don't produce downforce.

Diffusers change the flow of air underneath the car in an attempt to reduce the turbulence wash produced by the car passing through a fluid. Diffusers ARE a DRS.

You could always devise a system to increase the drag by introducing butterfly valves into the venturii under the car and thereby stop the efficiency of the diffusers. That brings us to the world of the Air-Brake like the Mercedes-Benz 300SLR, or when motorbike riders stand on the pegs to increase drag.

[Mark]

Pirelli have gone too far at the moment, ideally it should be a choice between 2 or 3 stops in a race. At the moment it's a choice between a marginal 3 stops or a more reliable 4 stops. Red Bull mentioned they were even thinking of going for a 5 stop race!

As has been mentioned on several occasions hard tyres should last 1/3rd of the race distance and softs 1/4er. Easier said than done!

[wedge]

Diffusers don't produce downforce.

Diffusers change the flow of air underneath the car in an attempt to reduce the turbulence wash produced by the car passing through a fluid. Diffusers ARE a DRS.

You could always devise a system to increase the drag by introducing butterfly valves into the venturii under the car and thereby stop the efficiency of the diffusers. That brings us to the world of the Air-Brake like the Mercedes-Benz 300SLR, or when motorbike riders stand on the pegs to increase drag.

http://www.mulsannescorner.com/diffuser.htm

[ioan]

Diffusers don't produce downforce.

Huh?!

[ioan]

http://www.mulsannescorner.com/diffuser.htm

Thanks! :up:

[Alex Langheck]

Pirelli have gone too far at the moment, ideally it should be a choice between 2 or 3 stops in a race. At the moment it's a choice between a marginal 3 stops or a more reliable 4 stops. Red Bull mentioned they were even thinking of going for a 5 stop race!

As has been mentioned on several occasions hard tyres should last 1/3rd of the race distance and softs 1/4er. Easier said than done!

Why can't they change the regs so someone can do a none stopper on ultra hard tyres? It's still too formulaic for me.

[ioan]

Why can't they change the regs so someone can do a none stopper on ultra hard tyres? It's still too formulaic for me.

What use? The ultra hard Pirelli tires can barely hold decent pace for 15-20 laps.

[Mark]

What use? The ultra hard Pirelli tires can barely hold decent pace for 15-20 laps.

But what they could have is so that a driver can go the entire race just using the hard tyres and not have to switch to the softs.

[Daniel]

But what they could have is so that a driver can go the entire race just using the hard tyres and not have to switch to the softs.

I very much doubt that Pirelli could make such a tyre even if the FIA asked them to.

[Sonic]

But what they could have is so that a driver can go the entire race just using the hard tyres and not have to switch to the softs.

Indeed. The whole reason for that rules introduction (i.e. The removal of refuelling and therefore the very real possibility of 24 cars all sticking on the Bridgestone 'soft' and racing to the flag in grid order) is now gone.

[Daniel]

Indeed. The whole reason for that rules introduction (i.e. The removal of refuelling and therefore the very real possibility of 24 cars all sticking on the Bridgestone 'soft' and racing to the flag in grid order) is now gone.

If there weren't just 2 compounds then that sort of thing wouldn't happen.

[MrJan]

I'm still waiting to see someone go for hards on the rear and softs on the front, a la MotoGP.

[Daniel]

Sadly not allowed.

[MrJan]

Well that's rubbish, would add something a bit interesting IMO

[Mark]

I don't believe that is allowed. Edit: Well beaten to it :p

[555-04Q2]

Pirelli's for me.