2013 Formula One Spanish Grand Prix

[albteman015]

The problem is that only 2 teams have done their homework on the tires and adjusting their cars to it; Lotus and Ferrari.

Red Bull are so obsessed with having Newey design the most aero-advanced car to show off with their downforce levels, and then seem to completely forget how those high levels of downforce impact tyre wear. But it's alright, they've won 3 constructor titles so if they make enough noise, they will surely be able to get what they want from Pirelli.

I also liked that post somewhere on the last page where someone showed the cars are still running faster laps than in previous years, despite the tyre wear. I guess some drivers always will want to blame someone for their lack of having the ability to adjust to certain situations.

It's sad Pirelli gave in in the end.

The fact that two or three teams have done their homework with these tires is not a problem at all. I think the championship would be a lot more interesting if the other teams caught up in development. Don't assume the teams don't know how to do it.

There are many factors to actually getting the best performance out of a tire. Both from an engineering perspective and a driving perspective. Tires usually have an operating window of heat where their maximum performance can be achieved. Some drivers are very tidy and inch perfect when it comes to the way they drive. Jenson Button comes to mind when we think of the current F1 drivers who are good to their tires. Drivers like Jenson know exactly how much input they have to give the car while cornering to get through efficiently. They usually never overdrive the car which is how the term "smooth" came into existence.

While racing, you can take a corner too aggressively from time to time. By this I mean the steering input is more then what it should be. This results in wear on the front tires if done too often. The tires will pass the proper heat window and start to degrade quickly. The reverse can also happen where a driver is not aggressive enough and the rubber drops out of its optimum temperature which also results in loss of grip. Button seems to be having this problem quite a lot with Pirelli rubber. He complained during the race that he was not able to properly warm up the tires on the warm up lap which resulted into him dropping like a stone. I did not hear of the drivers around him having that problem. I also remember that this happened to him quite a few times last year. So this specific issue has more to do with Jenson's driving rather than the rubber. Not having Pirelli data to look at, I can only make assumptions as to what is going on. It seems to me though that these tires have to be driven a bit aggressively to get the best out of them. The fact that they don't last very long shows that they cannot be cooled down enough to work properly after they go over the temp. window like you see happening in endurance racing. They need to be changed rather which is why we are getting so many pit stops.

This also could explains the issues Mercedes has since they are able to get so much heat so quickly. They probably go over the window which they counter by going slowly. That in itself could cause the other problems with tires that Jenson seems to have and further drops the pace which also explains Hamilton's radio. I recall in the past seeing the Benz on three wheels due to roll in the chassis to increase mechanical grip. If I remember correctly, the rears were taking the load and that is where Mercedes are having problems.

Let's imagine that Formula 1 was a spec series for a second (it is in more ways than it isn't). Some teams were able to set their their car up to be successful while most others were not. These teams were leading the championship while the others, while being extremely talented and resourcefully, are complaining about their situation. The loosing teams want the regs. to be changed to suit what they are most comfortable with. No series in their right mind would allow that to happen.

Now some of you might say that lotus and Ferrari got lucky. You could be right, but I doubt it. Sauber was very good on it's tires last year (more so than lotus I think). They attempted to do 1 stoppers quite a few times. Their car changed quite radically though, naturally, so did their performance. Why aren't Sauber attempting their radical strategies again? One would think that since they were so lucky to have good endurance last year that they would carry that one towards the next season. Sabuer came out with a much more aggressive design and are now paying the price. It seems to me that the lotus stayed relatively the same from last year. Their tire performance stayed the same too? How lucky of them!

As far as Red Bull goes, how is having too much downforce a problem? If anything this allows them to reduce drag on the car and gain pace on an area they were once very bad in. I'm speaking of straight line speed of course. Since their areo is so amazing, they can now spend all of their funding doing suspension work! (I know it's not that simple, I am being sarcastic.) This brings me to my final point. What these current tires have done, more than anything else, is that they have taken the focus off aerodynamics. Isn't that what many have been wanting for years? The cars ARE too areo dependent. It's nice that for once that the engineers have to use their incredible minds to develop something other than diffusers for the last 20 years. I love the current format we have, it is so refreshing and interesting.

 

[zippy_the_cat]

I find myself barely discussing F1 at all these days, I think I've finally moved on from it and I'm more interested in sports cars and touring cars. For me it says it all when the WEC has been more entertaining to watch and easier to follow with strategy.

There's no question the WEC is the top end of motorsport these days. They just don't race often enough to really command mass attention.

 

[Mike Rotch]

Ferrari have responded to the tyre decision and calls of "it's too many pitstops" by pointing out Vettel won the 2011 Spanish Grand Prix with how many stops....that's right, four.

 

[Centura]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/107487

"Tyre specifications will be determined by the FIA no later than 1 September of the previous season. Once determined in this way, the specification of the tyres will not be changed during the championship season without the agreement of all competing teams."

However, the current specification of tyres was not determined in that way. As we all know, teams were allowed to test a prototype tyre (hard) for the 2013 season during Free Practice 1 at the Brazilian Grand Prix and that's later than 1 September and I'm sure I have read that Pirelli have said they have made small alterations between the Brazilian Grand Prix and winter testing.

So, since it was not determined in that way, Pirelli should be allowed to change the tyres, yes? Or am I completely retarded?

 

[Seismica]

If I had my own way I'd have a tyre made that had a decent level of grip, that last for the whole race. Just get rid of the tyre variable completely. I'm more interested in racing than pit strategy.

The Bridgestone tyres could do almost a full race distance with a little bit of managing. Due to this, everybody ran one-stops and the racing was often processional, even at tracks like Spa. The most overtaking we ever got in 2010 was when a driver decided to run a 2-stop strategy and come through the field at the end. Examples off the top of my head include Kobayashi at Suzuka and Valencia or Kubica at Singapore. With the Pirelli tyres so far this year (And 2012), we have got this with every single race.

They should keep the current tyres and take away the DRS. The DRS removes the element of strategy that involves where your driver comes out, the element of strategy that cost Alonso the 2010 championship. With the DRS, anybody can pit whenever they want because they know they will never get stuck behind traffic (Except at Monaco, see Button and Kovalainen there at 2012). Without the DRS, teams would have to manage the conflicting factors of time lost due to worn tyres and time lost due to being stuck behind slower cars.

 

[Strawman Andy]

My problem with the tyres is that the soft tyres only last around 6/7 laps.

I hear this thing of "Vettel did four in 2011" but can I ask what tyre compound where they? I thought it was SOFT and MEDIUM. This year it has been MEDIUM and HARD, I feel thats wrong.

I have nothing against a lot of pitstops but when the two hardest compound can only do 20 ish laps when drivers aren't going flat out is wrong. And frankly I have got bored of this "oh its unpredictable with tyres" no its not. You know people will only last a few laps on the softs and everyone will run the hardest compound every weekend.

I've started watching IndyCar since last year and actually I find it more exciting than F1. I never thought I would enjoy IndyCar.

 

[niky]

The 2011 tires were more durable, yet the winning race time was only several seconds shorter than this year's. The 2012 race was won by Maldonado on three pit stops, yet his winning time was only a few seconds shorter than Alonso's winning time this year. Even if Maldonado had not held Alonso up and Alonso had won, the total race time difference between last year and this year would be less than the time taken by Alonso to do that extra pit.

Ergo, the cars that have been built properly for the current tires really aren't "pussy-footing" around compared to last year. They're running a decent full race pace, despite tires that are more fragile than before. If we have anyone to blame for the pit-scramble fiasco, it's the other teams who've not prioritized tire temperature management in building their cars.

This is what I dislike about midseason "corrections". One team gets it right. Be it Brawn with the double-diffuser, Red Bull with (take your pick), now Ferrari with tire management, and there are moves to handicap them for closer racing. Sure... handicap them after the season's over. Don't change the rules mid-season! The punishment for success should not be very specific changes meant to counter that success!

Just like last year, teams should finally be on top of these tires before the end of the season.

 

[Samus]

I don't really care about the absolute specifics of the tyres and what they can do, I'm just sick and tired (puntastic) of them being the ONLY thing we hear about all weekend. Yes tyres are an important part of F1 and always have been but they shouldn't be the only thing we're talking about all weekend. All we hear about each weekend is "Who can make their tyres last" to win and it's frankly getting really annoying.

 

[Seismica]

My problem with the tyres is that the soft tyres only last around 6/7 laps.

I hear this thing of "Vettel did four in 2011" but can I ask what tyre compound where they? I thought it was SOFT and MEDIUM. This year it has been MEDIUM and HARD, I feel thats wrong.

That is because they changed the durability of the compounds over time, due to the lack of variation in strategy. This years medium and hard are roughly the same as 2011s soft and medium in terms of durability. Pirelli don't just pick the tyres at random, they select them based on historical data they have gathered from the circuit. They deemed that the 2011 race here was good, so they selected the closest tyres to the ones used in that race. Varying strategies allowed a close battle between Vettel and Hamilton towards the finish. Spain 2012 was a bit of a procession, with Alonso and Maldonado starting and finishing in 1st and 2nd.

I have nothing against a lot of pitstops but when the two hardest compound can only do 20 ish laps when drivers aren't going flat out is wrong. And frankly I have got bored of this "oh its unpredictable with tyres" no its not. You know people will only last a few laps on the softs and everyone will run the hardest compound every weekend.

Actually, I think they have found a good balance. Last year, nobody wanted to touch the hard compound tyres in the race until the last 5 laps, as they were over a second slower and not really any more durable. This year, the hard/prime tyre is the preferred race tyre because it has more durability than the soft/option, but a short stint on the softs/options can be more beneficial.

The other benefit of the harder/prime tyres being the better race tyre is that we are actually seeing cars go out in qualifying. Last year, we would have 4 or 5 cars not settings laps in Q3 because the option tyres were so valuable in the race.

You say it isn't unpredictable because the tyres will only last a few laps, but so far this year we have seen a variety of strategies which have made the racing more interesting. Some strategies work for some drivers/cars, and some strategies work for others. You can no longer just match the strategy of the leader to follow him through the race, you have to run a strategy which matches your car because they are much more sensitive to different setups. Who could have predicted Kimi's win in Australia? It wasn't truly apparent how good a position he was in until the 3rd round of pit stops. People were expecting Vettel to walk away with it from pole. The same with China; the varying strategies in that race led to very good racing.

I just wish they would take away the DRS so that the guys who are doing more stints can't just breeze past the guys choosing to conserve their tyres. This is where you end up getting the 'don't fight XXXX for position', because they will just breeze past in the DRS zone anyway, even if they fought in other parts of the lap.

I don't really care about the absolute specifics of the tyres and what they can do, I'm just sick and tired (puntastic) of them being the ONLY thing we hear about all weekend. Yes tyres are an important part of F1 and always have been but they shouldn't be the only thing we're talking about all weekend. All we hear about each weekend is "Who can make their tyres last" to win and it's frankly getting really annoying.

You have a good point here. I think the problem is caused by the fact Pirelli keep changing and developing the tyres. Some teams can't keep up and if they don't, they complain. This brings them (Pirelli) into the media spotlight. If they would stop changing the compounds for say, two whole seasons, everybody would forget about Pirelli and just get on with it.

But then, Pirelli get less publicity, which is what they want. It's all a mess.

 

[Strawman Andy]

That is because they changed the durability of the compounds over time, due to the lack of variation in strategy. This years medium and hard are roughly the same as 2011s soft and medium in terms of durability. Pirelli don't just pick the tyres at random, they select them based on historical data they have gathered from the circuit. They deemed that the 2011 race here was good, so they selected the closest tyres to the ones used in that race. Varying strategies allowed a close battle between Vettel and Hamilton towards the finish. Spain 2012 was a bit of a procession, with Alonso and Maldonado starting and finishing in 1st and 2nd.

Yeah it works well for that, but now we go to Monaco and how many laps will people get from the super soft? I bet it will be 8-10 laps. So the medium/hard is 2012 soft/medium then that means the super soft will be like the super-super-soft of 2012. We will probably not see the super-soft again (until they change the tyres by Canada I guess)

Actually, I think they have found a good balance. Last year, nobody wanted to touch the hard compound tyres in the race until the last 5 laps, as they were over a second slower and not really any more durable. This year, the hard/prime tyre is the preferred race tyre because it has more durability than the soft/option, but a short stint on the softs/options can be more beneficial.

The other benefit of the harder/prime tyres being the better race tyre is that we are actually seeing cars go out in qualifying. Last year, we would have 4 or 5 cars not settings laps in Q3 because the option tyres were so valuable in the race.

You say it isn't unpredictable because the tyres will only last a few laps, but so far this year we have seen a variety of strategies which have made the racing more interesting. Some strategies work for some drivers/cars, and some strategies work for others. You can no longer just match the strategy of the leader to follow him through the race, you have to run a strategy which matches your car because they are much more sensitive to different setups. Who could have predicted Kimi's win in Australia? It wasn't truly apparent how good a position he was in until the 3rd round of pit stops. People were expecting Vettel to walk away with it from pole. The same with China; the varying strategies in that race led to very good racing.

I just wish they would take away the DRS so that the guys who are doing more stints can't just breeze past the guys choosing to conserve their tyres. This is where you end up getting the 'don't fight XXXX for position', because they will just breeze past in the DRS zone anyway, even if they fought in other parts of the lap.

I like strategies and like it when people do one less stop. But the pitstops are the only reason why we have had multiple different leaders, we don't see much overtaking for the lead compared to last year. That's what bug me is that the teams are now using strategies to pass people because its more beneficial to look after tyres and then get them by under-cutting. You just know if someone pits in a lap earlier they will get the jump, Alonso has done it many times, same for Kimi. I just want to see racing battles. DRS I understand it is a pain when people do just use it, and Bahrain was pretty much DRS only. But I think if F1 wants more racing like 2012 you have to have tyres which will last longer. I don't care if it's only two stops, towards the end of 2012 we saw some fantastic races with only one pit stops (Brazil) so I don't agree with the logic: more pitstops=better racing.

 

[niky]

Last year, Alonso was stuck behind Maldonado because despite the differing strategies, Pastor could keep the Ferrari behind him, even with a slower car, thanks to tires that could survive that little bit longer.

This year, Alonso overtook people on the track and through putting in hard laps to get the overlap when his opponents pitted, to secure the lead he needed to make his strategy work. He wasn't overtaking for first place during the overtakes, but the people ahead of him after the overtakes didn't matter. You could look at any dry race with no yellows over the past few seasons and say that we never got any leader changes except due to pitting. That's just the way it is when one car is obviously faster than the others and starts up front. This season, the fastest car just happens to be a freak on tire usage, which means we DO get to see overtaking for the lead on track.

When the teams got a handle on the tires in the last half of the 2012 season, things got a little too predictable. Durable tires =/= more racing. As long as tires don't last the whole race, it's always a question of who's got the better pit strategy. If you want more racing, force teams to use just one set of tires per race. Then you'll get a whole lot of overtaking at the start, as aggressive drivers cut through the tire savers, and then a lot of nice, slow-motion overtakes near the end of the race, when everyone is slip-slip-sliding around.