[Maky]

Originally Posted by vikram_d

A quick technical explanation if I may.

Lower front end and higher rear end is called the rake angle of the car. The simple of rule of aerodynamics is that the closer the wing is to the ground the more down force it will produce.

This is the reason Red Bull run their cars with more rake than the others. But this rake is very detrimental to the floor of the car and to it's diffuser. If I remember correctly is the diffuser and the floor combined are what generate the most down force on any F1 car and this is more than both the front and rear wings combined.

As the rear end of the car goes higher the diffuser efficiency reduces and hence all the modern attempts at sealing the diffuser sides. Sealing the sides of the diffuser with exhaust gases, prevent the air flow below the diffuser from leaking out the sides and increases it's efficiency.

Absolutely, Your explanation is in line with what I kind of remember from said article and gives reason to RBRs superiority around the corners.
Thanks.

[anachronix]

Originally Posted by Maky

No. It is not as simple as High-Downforce = Tyres dead and Less-Downforce = Tyres live.

Thanks, I think I will stop debating further and look forward to another snooze fest in Monaco this weekend

[anachronix]

MW trolling Mercedes

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/107558

[deetjohn]

No thread for Monaco yet? Don't forget, the free practice starts tomorrow!

[asr245]

Not really a 2013 season specific item but didn't know where else to post. Quite interesting. Though I still couldn't understand the need for 2 clutch paddles.

F1 Insight - How to do the perfect grand prix start

[Maky]

Originally Posted by deetjohn

No thread for Monaco yet? Don't forget, the free practice starts tomorrow!

I would but I'm new around here and I think you guys have a tradition of one person always making those race specific threads : )

Originally Posted by asr245

Not really a 2013 season specific item but didn't know where else to post. Quite interesting. Though I still couldn't understand the need for 2 clutch paddles.

F1 Insight - How to do the perfect grand prix start

I was always under the impression it was an anti-stall measure along with clutch bite point for launches. I shall quote.

Having two paddles means the driver can use one to find the biting point and hold it there before the start. The second paddle is held fully open, this overrides the first paddle.
The lights go out, the second paddle is released, but the first paddle is still being held at the biting point, so the clutch closes as far as the biting point, then the driver gradually lets that out to avoid too much wheelspin. The advantage is that the diver can select the biting point before the lights go out.

Now, as I understand it there is no nodge or marking allowed to guide the driver for finding optimal bite point. The rules state so officially.
It comes down to instinct, Which is why some drivers(ALO) are usually very good in their starts than others.

[Hatari]

I think one important factor we have overlooked is that Pirelli dont have a car to test their tires on! They are using a modified 2010 car.
All these years Bridgestone and Michelin have tested thousands of kms with the latest spec cars feeding them incredible amount of data

Considering this I dont think anyone should feel they have done anything short of a brilliant job.

[imidnightmare]

Originally Posted by Hatari

I think one important factor we have overlooked is that Pirelli dont have a car to test their tires on! They are using a modified 2010 car.
All these years Bridgestone and Michelin have tested thousands of kms with the latest spec cars feeding them incredible amount of data

Considering this I dont think anyone should feel they have done anything short of a brilliant job.

I don't think testing miles or the lack thereof have anything to do with the durability of the Pirellis. Hembery has been at pains to explain several times about how Pirelli have deliberately made tyres that "go off the cliff" after a while to ensure that teams are forced into making stops.

Bridgestone and Michelin had come up with tyres that were so durable they could go the whole race distance without significant degradation in lap-time. Hence, you had races where a driver would go the distance on the faster rubber and duck in for the mandatory stop 4-5 laps from the end.

This scenario, the FIA felt, was ruining the spectacle (strategy was not really paramount any more) and was also negating the intent of the mandatory tyre stop rule. So they asked Pirelli for tyres that would force teams to make multiple stops. In combination with the different degradation curves and optimum lap-times, this would make for multiple strategies and more focus on overtaking (which was enabled through the DRS rule).

At the same time therefore, Bernie also asked Pirelli to ensure that the compounds were significantly different in terms of outright speed as well as degradation.

In summation, these are the factors that have caused the present tyre scenario. Testing miles therefore have little, if anything, to do with it.

Cheers!
M

[vikram_d]

Originally Posted by imidnightmare

I don't think testing miles or the lack thereof have anything to do with the durability of the Pirellis. Hembery has been at pains to explain several times about how Pirelli have deliberately made tyres that "go off the cliff" after a while to ensure that teams are forced into making stops.

Bridgestone and Michelin had come up with tyres that were so durable they could go the whole race distance without significant degradation in lap-time. Hence, you had races where a driver would go the distance on the faster rubber and duck in for the mandatory stop 4-5 laps from the end.

This scenario, the FIA felt, was ruining the spectacle (strategy was not really paramount any more) and was also negating the intent of the mandatory tyre stop rule. So they asked Pirelli for tyres that would force teams to make multiple stops. In combination with the different degradation curves and optimum lap-times, this would make for multiple strategies and more focus on overtaking (which was enabled through the DRS rule).

At the same time therefore, Bernie also asked Pirelli to ensure that the compounds were significantly different in terms of outright speed as well as degradation.

In summation, these are the factors that have caused the present tyre scenario. Testing miles therefore have little, if anything, to do with it.

Cheers!
M

I completely agree with you. Once upon a time strategies involved both fuel and tyres. Now all the talk has just shifted to tyres and this is solely because the FIA has asked Pirelli to make crappy tyres to improve the show.

It used to be so much fun trying to guess how much fuel a driver is starting with based on his lap times and qualifying position.

[deetjohn]

Merc is in a private testing row. It seems the team conducted a private 1000 kM tyre test at Barcelona after the last race.

It is understood that Mercedes was requested by Pirelli to help work through the issues that the Italian tyre manufacturer has experienced in the last few races.

Read more here: autosport

[anachronix]

Its pathetic!

Horner: “We found out secondhand last night, .... What’s disappointing is that it’s been done in not a transparent manner. A three-day test has taken place running a current car on tyres that are going to be used in the next Grand Prix. Irrelevant what you call it, that’s testing."

[nipcarlover]

Toro Rosso switching from Ferrari to Renault engine next year!
Now going to be almost completely a Red Bull junior team.
Link:
Toro Rosso switching to Renault Engines

[AbelAFC]

That is a massive mistake on Pirelli's part, if they meant it unintentionally of course.
It wouldn't have been so hard to invite another top team for testing.

[mayankk]

Originally Posted by AbelAFC

That is a massive mistake on Pirelli's part, if they meant it unintentionally of course.
It wouldn't have been so hard to invite another top team for testing.

Who said they didn't?

http://www.crash.net/f1/news/191619/...was_legit.html

Pirelli motorsport director Paul Hembery has responded to the controversy over the Mercedes team helping with a three-day test in Barcelona by claiming that everything was within the letter of the law.

Raceday in Monaco sparked into life with the revelation that both Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg had been on track immediately after the Spanish Grand Prix, as Pirelli racked up 1000km of evaluation on tyres largely destined for 2014, but also including those the company plans to introduce, on safety grounds, in Montreal next month.

Red Bull team boss Christian Horner claimed that no-one else had been aware of the test until now [ see separate story], and the secrecy appears to have caused as much anger as the test itself, with no mention of the test having been made by team, drivers or tyre supplier despite excessive degradation being the biggest issue facing Mercedes at present, and therefore being the subject of much media interest.

Hembery, however, insists that there was nothing underhand about the session, with the option to run having been extended to teams other than Mercedes.

"It's completely regular in that we are allowed to do a 1000km tyre test with any team," he told journalists in the Principality, "In the World Rally Championship contract, it's exactly the same. We can do it with a representative car. We've done it before with another team, and we've asked another team to do some work as well."

Moreover, Hembery insisted that Mercedes would have gleaned very little useful information from the test, with the decision to throw the Canadian GP tyres into the mix having been taken at the last minute following ongoing problems with the 2013 rubber in Spain.

"In reality, we were looking at next year's solutions and trying a variety of different things, so Mercedes haven't a clue what on earth we were testing," he claimed, "Ninety per cent [of what was tested] was for 2014."

In a separate interview with veteran journalist Adam Cooper, Hembery confirmed that Mercedes had only been involved because they were among the minority to take up the offer to help Pirelli with its development programme, and the fact that it had had a nightmare with its tyres in Barcelona was merely a coincidence.

"Last year, we wrote to the teams saying [Pirelli was allowed to do 1000km of testing] and inviting teams to say yes or no, whether they were willing to do it," he explained, "Some teams said yes, and some didn't reply. They were one of the teams that said they would do it. It's really that. We were in discussions to do some other testing with another team in the future."

[polopm]

Originally Posted by mayankk

Who said they didn't?

http://www.crash.net/f1/news/191619/...was_legit.html

Pirelli motorsport director Paul Hembery has responded to the controversy over the Mercedes team helping with a three-day test in Barcelona by claiming that everything was within the letter of the law.

Raceday in Monaco sparked into life with the revelation that both Lewis Hamilton and Nico Rosberg had been on track immediately after the Spanish Grand Prix, as Pirelli racked up 1000km of evaluation on tyres largely destined for 2014, but also including those the company plans to introduce, on safety grounds, in Montreal next month.

Red Bull team boss Christian Horner claimed that no-one else had been aware of the test until now [ see separate story], and the secrecy appears to have caused as much anger as the test itself, with no mention of the test having been made by team, drivers or tyre supplier despite excessive degradation being the biggest issue facing Mercedes at present, and therefore being the subject of much media interest.

Hembery, however, insists that there was nothing underhand about the session, with the option to run having been extended to teams other than Mercedes.

"It's completely regular in that we are allowed to do a 1000km tyre test with any team," he told journalists in the Principality, "In the World Rally Championship contract, it's exactly the same. We can do it with a representative car. We've done it before with another team, and we've asked another team to do some work as well."

Moreover, Hembery insisted that Mercedes would have gleaned very little useful information from the test, with the decision to throw the Canadian GP tyres into the mix having been taken at the last minute following ongoing problems with the 2013 rubber in Spain.

"In reality, we were looking at next year's solutions and trying a variety of different things, so Mercedes haven't a clue what on earth we were testing," he claimed, "Ninety per cent [of what was tested] was for 2014."

In a separate interview with veteran journalist Adam Cooper, Hembery confirmed that Mercedes had only been involved because they were among the minority to take up the offer to help Pirelli with its development programme, and the fact that it had had a nightmare with its tyres in Barcelona was merely a coincidence.

"Last year, we wrote to the teams saying [Pirelli was allowed to do 1000km of testing] and inviting teams to say yes or no, whether they were willing to do it," he explained, "Some teams said yes, and some didn't reply. They were one of the teams that said they would do it. It's really that. We were in discussions to do some other testing with another team in the future."

Hankook seems to be the choice of FIA - so floats the rumour.
Pirelli seems to fall out of favour of the FIA (like it's tyres). Not in the correct operating window, Mr.Hembrey ???