[drkakkilaya]

Originally Posted by anachronix

Going by your logic, why would FIA bring the slicks back!?

I agree, no team officially released any figures under the RRA!

Slicks were brought in to increase the mechanical grip as at the same time they reduced the rear wing size while increasing the front wing size and knocking off all bits of aerodynamic pieces on the body. They wanted to reduce the aero influence on the car running behind.

If two tyre s were to be made of identical compounds and one were to be grooved and one slick , slick would provide better grip due to more contact patch than grooved. In turn turns to more speed through corners., then FIA compensated that by reducing aero grip as i mentioned above.

[anachronix]

Originally Posted by Hatari

This whole thread is about how the current Pirelli slicks are slowing down the cars more than they should

Thanks for acknowledging that!

Originally Posted by drkakkilaya

Slicks were brought in to increase the mechanical grip as at the same time they reduced the rear wing size while increasing the front wing size and knocking off all bits of aerodynamic pieces on the body. They wanted to reduce the aero influence on the car running behind.

If two tyre s were to be made of identical compounds and one were to be grooved and one slick , slick would provide better grip due to more contact patch than grooved. In turn turns to more speed through corners., then FIA compensated that by reducing aero grip as i mentioned above.

Thanks for the perfect details Doc!

It was only aero that FIA was after and the slicks were brought back in to negate the aero loss of the F1 cars. I would also say KERS was brought to the sport with the purpose of compensating what the cars lost from losing the critical aero parts.

If the tires complimented the aero loss by proving more grip and dont fall off the cliff, FIA would have achieved what they were after and we wouldnt be watching the endurance races every sunday.

BTW, FIA was not slowing down cars for safety reasons, but mixing things up in the field and not let the driver on pole run away with it. All these talks of losing aero and all that became serious when Ferrari & Michael were becoming an unbeatable force in F1. We also saw thestupid tire rule that was there back in 2005, right

[Sn1p3r]

Originally Posted by anachronix

It was only aero that FIA was after and the slicks were brought back in to negate the aero loss of the F1 cars. I would also say KERS was brought to the sport with the purpose of compensating what the cars lost from losing the critical aero parts.

BTW, FIA was not slowing down cars for safety reasons, but mixing things up in the field and not let the driver on pole run away with it. All these talks of losing aero and all that became serious when Ferrari & Michael were becoming an unbeatable force in F1. We also saw thestupid tire rule that was there back in 2005, right

My take on KERS: it's a profitable lab test for the teams as it's direct implementation lends advantage in road going future models.

Mixing they did very well. There was a chance for a team going out of championship to help JB gain championship and sell it to Merc. Not many could wrap things thinking how a Honda became Merc

I am hopeful to see something new about tyres starting Canadian weekend.

Cheers! To F1.

[PuntoMania]

I'm not sure why we're discussing grooves vs Slicks again ?

Yes, Grooves were introduced in 1998 with the sole intention of slowing cornering speeds for safety.

Slicks were re-introduced to increase the mechanical grip and at the same time reduce aerodynamic grip (you know, the type of grip you get from putting those small and ugly winglets all over an F1 car)

-How does this relate to Pirelli's decision to bring fast degrading tyres that are restricted by a very narrow range again ?

Once again, I would request everyone involved in this thread :to see the core issue here : Drivers CANNOT push their cars because of these tyres. Because they operate optimally in a very narrow range of temperature. In a cold race, Mercedes have an advantage, in a hot race, Lotus will be very strong. How is any of this meritorious or keeping in with the principles of sport ?

No one cares if we're going to have 1 or 4 pitstops as long as we know that these guys are pushing to the limit, and that the race is not a tyre dominated management exercise but just another factor in the whole scheme of things.

I think we have reached a dead end in this discussion, honestly

[Sn1p3r]

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

I think we have reached a dead end in this discussion, honestly

We did fell off the cliff a long time ago.
Wholeheartedly agree to your post.

[anachronix]

Oh no! Even Jacques pissed about the Pirellis

'Drivers are daddy's boys lacking respect' | Planet F1 | Formula One News-

[Hatari]

^^ I think he's more pissed at the Daddy's boys!
Would love to see him commentate one day...

[anachronix]

^^
You will love this thread

Villeneuve: Current F1 drivers are daddy's boys playing video games - The F1 Slate

[asr245]

^^
That was totally . Dialogue between "MS" and "JV" and the wall of champions comment had me in splits.

Whoever wrote - it's bloody hilarious!

[Hatari]

Did not want to reopen our 'discussions'
But this article deserves to be mentioned

Brilliant one by Peter Windsor for ESPN F1 :

Tyred of all the criticism - Peter Windsor comment - GP Week | Formula 1 | F1 features | ESPN F1

[Sn1p3r]

Originally Posted by Hatari

Did not want to reopen our 'discussions'
But this article deserves to be mentioned

Brilliant one by Peter Windsor for ESPN F1 :

What a ridiculous one, I must say.
Hush hush teams lest Pirelli will leave and no tyres to run on next year

Amazing that he starts with a shout on Internet and he himself explains why no criticism should be levied.

Disjointed article at best. IMHO.

[PuntoMania]

I find nothing brilliant in that article at all : The quality of journalism falls off a cliff as soon as Windsor mentions Indy 2005 and some Michelin shod teams ridiculous suggestion of installing a chicane at turn 13. Apparently this was an 'easy' solution. Completely ignoring the fact that racing circuits have to undergo many weeks of rigorous safety inspections for each change that is made to the circuit, without which the FIA and FOM are liable to facing multi million dollar safety related lawsuits if in case something went wrong on a circuit modified in haste (not to mention the obvious safety concerns)

The second glaringly obvious mistake in the article is the conditions of Michelin's withdrawal - Windsor mentions Indy 2005 and some allegations by Ferrari as the chief reason why Michelin left the sport, when in reality they left at the end of 2006 because the FIA decided to have a single tyre supplier from the 2008 season onwards. This was against Michelin's philosophy wherein it believed competition was vital for it to continue in F1 (which incidentally also changed when they considered a comeback in 2011 ) Michelin admits talks about F1 returnJames Allen on F1


So the very premise of the article - That we fans should be 'thankful' to Pirelli for whatever they are dishing out, since they too will walk out of the sport like Michelin and others, is in itself wrong. Its a case of tabloid journalism this one, sorry.

Even if any of these reasons (current economic situation, big names walking out) do have some bearing on F1, does it mean we have to simply accept mediocre tyres in the world's most advanced form of motorsport ?

What about this statement ?

"So you'd think, after the debacle that was Michelin's departure, or in the sad vacuum left by the big car companies, that F1 would for once have learned its lesson: which is (at the risk of stating the obvious) that F1 needs Pirelli much more than Pirelli needs F1. You'd think that all the teams would have the sense to keep any criticism that may damage Pirelli's public image behind closed doors. You'd think that there would be a common, carefully orchestrated, pro-Pirelli policy. "

What is Windsor hinting at ? That all teams and drivers muzzle their right to free speech just to appease a tyre manufacturer ? Why dont we just establish a China type censorship on the whole community ! We have an assortment of the world's best automobile engineers and the world's best racing drivers, many of them geniuses at their profession, in Formula 1. And Windor expects all of them to just shut it so that Pirelli stays happy.

Poor journalism is poor. Windsor has lost credibility in my eyes. Is he being paid by Pirelli I wonder ?

[Sn1p3r]

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

And Windor expects all of them to just shut it so that Pirelli stays happy.

Poor journalism is poor.

It's his 2 minutes of fame to go against the stream.
My contact in Europe tell me (they are a fanatic lot) that Mozarelli is being criticized by everyone and thus Pirelli is being hit in sales. No stats but the sentiment is negative.

[jraj]

Chill guys
3 guys with 10 WDC's between them have spokenup and if that is not enough to drive home the point,we lesser mortals never can

[Hatari]

Originally Posted by Sn1p3r

What a ridiculous one, I must say.
Hush hush teams lest Pirelli will leave and no tyres to run on next year

Amazing that he starts with a shout on Internet and he himself explains why no criticism should be levied.

Disjointed article at best. IMHO.

Originally Posted by PuntoMania

Even if any of these reasons (current economic situation, big names walking out) do have some bearing on F1, does it mean we have to simply accept mediocre tyres in the world's most advanced form of motorsport ?

What about this statement ?

"So you'd think, after the debacle that was Michelin's departure, or in the sad vacuum left by the big car companies, that F1 would for once have learned its lesson: which is (at the risk of stating the obvious) that F1 needs Pirelli much more than Pirelli needs F1. You'd think that all the teams would have the sense to keep any criticism that may damage Pirelli's public image behind closed doors. You'd think that there would be a common, carefully orchestrated, pro-Pirelli policy. "

What is Windsor hinting at ? That all teams and drivers muzzle their right to free speech just to appease a tyre manufacturer ? Why dont we just establish a China type censorship on the whole community ! We have an assortment of the world's best automobile engineers and the world's best racing drivers, many of them geniuses at their profession, in Formula 1. And Windor expects all of them to just shut it so that Pirelli stays happy.

Poor journalism is poor. Windsor has lost credibility in my eyes. Is he being paid by Pirelli I wonder ?

"Mediocre"?? The tires they have produced are a far greater challenge to make than durable tires. This is a fact.
How can you not understand that!?

Pirelli were told to produce a specific type of tire by the FIA. They followed the brief given to them to the core.
Blame the FIA, not Pirelli.

I have understood where you are coming from on performance/drivers/teams etc and even agree with you.
But you have been missing the bigger picture which justifies it all.

Originally Posted by Sn1p3r

It's his 2 minutes of fame to go against the stream.
My contact in Europe tell me (they are a fanatic lot) that Mozarelli is being criticized by everyone and thus Pirelli is being hit in sales. No stats but the sentiment is negative.

This is EXACTLY what Windsor is saying and very obvious.

Originally Posted by jraj

Chill guys
3 guys with 10 WDC's between them have spokenup and if that is not enough to drive home the point,we lesser mortals never can

Drivers and teams will always criticize what they do not understand and cannot master. Nothing new.
You will find Alonso being very careful about what he says. He remember's spending all those agonizing laps stuck behind Petrov watching Championship hopes disappear before his very eyes and nothing that he could do about it in a faster car