2017 F1 Constructor technical info/developmentFormula 1 

FutureF1
I vote we move to three full time compounds. A soft(basically an ultra-ultra soft), a medium(a solid race tire), and a hard(great durability but next to no pace) and make teams choose between those three all season
Click to expand...
I agree so long as the 'Hard' tyre can do a full race distance at 100% & that the 'Medium' tyre is good for about half the race at 100%.
 
I would have loved to see a system where teams have access to 3-4 compounds, but they get to choose which two they're bringing to each track. This would allow slower teams to simply opt to run a one stop race using the medium/hard compounds to increase the likelihood of being competitive etc. Add to that a limited number of each compound for the season and you could have some really interesting results.
 
Pete05
Combine this with making fuel stops optional & we're getting somewhere.
Click to expand...

Too expensive and too difficult to police.

FutureF1
I vote we move to three full time compounds. A soft(basically an ultra-ultra soft), a medium(a solid race tire), and a hard(great durability but next to no pace) and make teams choose between those three all season
Click to expand...

We only have four now, don't we? Teams can already choose between those four all season, the nomination has to be made three-races-in-advance if my memory serves.

Pete05
The more the organisers open up the strategy book, the better IMO.
Click to expand...

The problem with that is that you have to start by working out the quickest mathematical way to cover the 200 miles with no other cars around, then add the other cars, then do predictions. Everybody will be making their variations around that first calculation and then a set of "what if" options for each lap of the race. Bold strategies often require luck - something you can Never bank on - which is why we normally see such strategies from drivers with little to lose.
 
TenEightyOne
Too expensive and too difficult to police.



We only have four now, don't we? Teams can already choose between those four all season, the nomination has to be made three-races-in-advance if my memory serves.



The problem with that is that you have to start by working out the quickest mathematical way to cover the 200 miles with no other cars around, then add the other cars, then do predictions. Everybody will be making their variations around that first calculation and then a set of "what if" options for each lap of the race. Bold strategies often require luck - something you can Never bank on - which is why we normally see such strategies from drivers with little to lose.
Click to expand...
And I don't see one little problem with that.
By opening up the many varying strategies to cover that 200 miles, some teams will get it right, some won't & some will luck into a result by taking a chance.

All good in my book compared to what is largely a predictable book post-qualifying these days.
 
ukfan758
I would just return to having a prime (hard) and option (soft) tire, the former being able to last the entire race.
Click to expand...

I agree, simply because there hasn't been any massive shake up with the rules where drivers have a choice in picking a compound. Everyone in the end is advised by their teams and all pick the same thing at the end of the day. Simply based off what Pirelli mandates as the two tire options months in advanced to begin with.

Going back to a simple set up of two tires would be just as fine and less reliant on so many compounds for one weekend.
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
Going back to a simple set up of two tires would be just as fine and less reliant on so many compounds for one weekend.
Click to expand...

But only having tyres that suit the roughest (in tyre terms) tracks of the year would really slow the cars down at some tracks, no?
 
TenEightyOne
But only having tyres that suit the roughest (in tyre terms) tracks of the year would really slow the cars down at some tracks, no?
Click to expand...

How so? Speeds can still be maintained by having a variation prime and option. Which would be the case like prior when it was two options, some track can't run softer others can, you adjust to the track surface and conditions. Speeds are maintained. I'm a bit confused by your questioning
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
How so? Speeds can still be maintained by having a variation prime and option. Which would be the case like prior when it was two options, some track can't run softer others can, you adjust to the track surface and conditions. Speeds are maintained. I'm a bit confused by your questioning
Click to expand...

Are you additionally proposing that teams no longer have to run both dry compounds in an eligible race? If they only have to run on one of the compounds then that makes more sense. Otherwise a tyre suitable for running over distance at Suzuka or Silverstone is never going to get near the Monaco operating window.
 
ukfan758
I would just return to having a prime (hard) and option (soft) tire, the former being able to last the entire race. There is no need to have a color wheel variety of tires for the whole season.
Click to expand...
Even when Bridgestone had only 2 compounds per race, the Prime and Option you got at Bahrain were different compounds than the Prime and Option you got at Monaco, for example. Depending on the track a certain compound could be either the prime or the option, though the fans never got info about that. As pointed out above, there's no such thing as a compound that will work at every track. Bridgestone also ran 4 or 5 compounds in a season, the only difference is that Pirelli have differentiated their compounds by colour while Bridgestone didn't.
 
TenEightyOne
Are you additionally proposing that teams no longer have to run both dry compounds in an eligible race? If they only have to run on one of the compounds then that makes more sense. Otherwise a tyre suitable for running over distance at Suzuka or Silverstone is never going to get near the Monaco operating window.
Click to expand...

No one ever said that, strange you'd bring it up as such. Also who said tyres for a harder track like Monza would be ideal for a track with a much softer surface and very different weather conditions like say Singapore? Let me say it again, it would be easier to go back and just run the simple option and prime set up rather than the current one. The current one has yet to provide the unpredictable shake up in strategy as it was pushed forward to do. For reason already given.

@aarror just highlighted my point in response to @ukfan758. What I seemingly don't understand is how you could extrapolate this idea that some how people are asking for a constant basis tire for every track. Simply the idea of this vibrant outline colored tires of six different degrees of compound, isn't necessary nor is the current rule outline of two mandatory compounds and driver choice with the obvious and necessary mandate of wet and intermediates. Just go back to prime/option and the understandable need of wets/intermediates. How hard is that to understand from the initial dialogue?
 
The three tyres that each team brings to the race has been the best tyre regulation since Pirelli came in. Why should we lose that?
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
No one ever said that, strange you'd bring it up as such.
Click to expand...

I was trying to understand your proposal.

LMSCorvetteGT2
Also who said tyres for a harder track like Monza would be ideal for a track with a much softer surface and very different weather conditions like say Singapore?
Click to expand...

You seemed to imply that just two compounds would be expected to cover the performance requirements of every track on the calendar when you said

LMSCorvetteGT2
Going back to a simple set up of two tires would be just as fine and less reliant on so many compounds for one weekend.
Click to expand...

So to clarify: did you mean two tires for the season or a wider range of compounds with two compounds selected from that annual set for each race? I presumed you couldn't be proposing the latter because that's what we have now, just with three compounds selected for each event.
 
I would prefer if every tyre was available at every race, it should also make races really intresting when the softest tyres are not good for a certain track but they need to use them to qualify well.

As long as Pirelli warns the teams when a compound is useless durability wise in the race I don't see too much problem.
 
TenEightyOne
I was trying to understand your proposal.



You seemed to imply that just two compounds would be expected to cover the performance requirements of every track on the calendar when you said



So to clarify: did you mean two tires for the season or a wider range of compounds with two compounds selected from that annual set for each race? I presumed you couldn't be proposing the latter because that's what we have now, just with three compounds selected for each event.
Click to expand...

The proposal as I said in the previous post is simple, a prime and option that is spec'd for the track teams are going to for the GP. Along with (and really doesn't need to be said) wet weather tires. I'd rather have a driver decision tire, not team decision as it has become that is only done based on the tires Pirelli designates months in advance, with teams opting for the closest compound to the two already mandated.

I actually like the choice @mustafur put up, because it allows for the chance of a more random set of strategy.
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
The proposal as I said in the previous post is simple, a prime and option that is spec'd for the track teams are going to for the GP.
Click to expand...

I see what you mean now. Are the five compounds we have now enough or should Pirelli make more/fewer? Who should make the choice for the track - Pirelli or the teams?
 
TenEightyOne
I see what you mean now. Are the five compounds we have now enough or should Pirelli make more/fewer? Who should make the choice for the track - Pirelli or the teams?
Click to expand...

Pirelli should always have the guiding light on what their tires are capable of for each track, but you'd have to imagine, that if every compound was allowed at every track, it'd be less mandatory, and more suggestive. So in reality any of the tires would be fine to race on, but there would be obvious advantages between them which would open up strategy. If I want to run a hard compound because I think I can last 50 laps only to pit for the softest option with 11 laps to go to run down anyone who potentially leap frogged my car while pitting so be it.

However the current rules has less incentive of this. Sure teams could option a third tire and do what I've just said, but are less likely because it's easier to pick the third best compound Pirelli didn't mandate and copy everyone else. However when there is little gain to be made on new softs vs new super softs, the strategy shake up in the rule change is hard to be seen so far.
 
Soooo, what you're suggesting is the 2010 rules, where there are 4 compounds, the tyre company bring 2 tyres and paint the softer ones green.

The current situation with the colours where you know which ones are what softness are great. The tyre choice rules are not in need of changing - there are a lot of other things that are more crucial.
 
I don't care how many compounds Pirelli produce, as long as the tyres have more of a performance difference than the current options. We keep seeing 3 compounds next to each other on the chart, and in 2017 we have even lost the hard tyre from the picture completely. They should stop bringing the "ultra soft - super soft - soft" or "super soft - soft - medium" combos and either give them "ultra soft - soft - hard" or "super soft - medium - super hard". That's how they make 6 compounds work....
 
Jimlaad43
Soooo, what you're suggesting is the 2010 rules, where there are 4 compounds, the tyre company bring 2 tyres and paint the softer ones green.

The current situation with the colours where you know which ones are what softness are great. The tyre choice rules are not in need of changing - there are a lot of other things that are more crucial.
Click to expand...

Crucial, such as? Because while tire construction has improved the racing from the rule change hasn't as @Pezzarinho17 puts it exactly how me others are trying to explain. No one needs to know softness through a color marker and I'd say the group of people who care isn't large. It's a nice interactive gimmick for the fans but as I said prior the compounds brought are so like for like the differences are quite small.

2010 rules weren't all that bad I don't recall a mass of people hating it either considering the racing produced was pretty good.
 

Latest Posts

Back