Tyre rules

[Taxi645]

Tyre rules and what can be improved


This thread is too brainstorm about the current dry tyre rules and what are their consequences and what can be approved.

The below list is not complete so feel free to add or correct.



1 The top ten starts on the tyre they putt in their fastest Q3 lap.

2 At least one pitstop is mandatory

3 In a dry race you have to at least use two different compounds

4 Pirelli dictates the compounds pre race.

5 Teams get a maximum number of tyres and have to select which a good deal before the weekend.

6?



1 One of the consequences of this rule is that the ten fastest cars almost always start on the softest compound. After that teams are free to choose and sometimes/often choose the 2nd softest compound. The result of this rule is that it makes the race more predictable at the front and furthermore the fastest car on average starts on faster compounds and thus the field will be pulled apart even faster so the race outcome is often already roughly visible at the 10 first laps.

Perhaps it would be better to let the teams just freely choose the compound to start on and just mandate Q3 cars to use their Q3 tyre somewhere in the race but not necessarily at the start. This makes the races less predictable, pulls the field less apart at the start and increases the chances of a faster car being a slower cars leading to more on track battles.


2 Would it be a good idea to let people try to finish the race without a pitstop. What would be the drawback of not making it manditory. Personally I reckon it could add tension to a race if you don't know if someone would try to surprise everyone to get to the finish without a pitstop. Again makes the race less predictable.


3 What does forcing to use at least two different compounds add to the race exitement? I'm not saying it doesn't, but I reckon it again leads to more predictable races. Current you know, people generally start on the softest available compound and then switch to one harder.



Other ideas?

[S griffin]

I loathe compulsory pitstops, as it dictates a race unfairly. Back in the day, underdogs got good results by running non stop. In my view that needs to go, as do the fact we're forced to use spec tyres. Bring back tyre competition

[Adam43]

1. Those that got through to Q3 start the race on the tyre they set their fastest Q2 time on. I think this was changed a year or two ago.

[JABWOA]

Mentioned elsewhere on 10-10th - use tyres with a bigger gap (2 steps between compounds at the race.) So it's hard and softs, not soft and softer. The teams that can run a longer race on harders can go for it but you have a super soft to make time if required.

(Think back to the 80's where a car behind due to an issue could pit for super quick tyres to bring them back into play. Not fool proof in the slightest but bettererish than now. Maybe.)

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by S griffin

I loathe compulsory pitstops, as it dictates a race unfairly. Back in the day, underdogs got good results by running non stop. In my view that needs to go,

Indeed, mostly doing one or more pitstops will be much faster, so in general people will pit (and I reckon they consider it adds to the show to have pitstops, which it does in my view). But you have the odd chance of someone trying to surprise everyone and go the full length.

Originally Posted by S griffin

as do the fact we're forced to use spec tyres. Bring back tyre competition

I can think of three drawbacks of tyre competition:

1 Top teams generally get preferred treatment, which I consider undesirable.
2 If one manufacturer is much more successful there is yet another reason why the field will be spread out.
3 It will cost more and costs need to be paid by someone

Originally Posted by Adam43

1. Those that got through to Q3 start the race on the tyre they set their fastest Q2 time on. I think this was changed a year or two ago.

You're right. So I then would make the rule: Those that got through to Q3 have to use in the race the tyre they set their fastest Q2 time on.

Originally Posted by JABWOA

Mentioned elsewhere on 10-10th - use tyres with a bigger gap (2 steps between compounds at the race.) So it's hard and softs, not soft and softer. The teams that can run a longer race on harders can go for it but you have a super soft to make time if required.

(Think back to the 80's where a car behind due to an issue could pit for super quick tyres to bring them back into play. Not fool proof in the slightest but bettererish than now. Maybe.)

It's difficult for me to imagine how having two quite different compounds would impact racing. Ross Brawn's proposed "test races" would be ideal to see how certain tyre regulations would work out.

[bauble]

I ask in all seriousness, does Chase Cary follow Ten-Tenths?

We have seen 'Fan Surveys' that give people a chance to state a view, or opinions, however, I believe that here we have the more 'expert' enthusiasts (as opposed to TV 'Fans'), whose ideas are more relevant, and considered.

How can we ensure that our voices are heard where decisions are made?

[ScotsBrutesFan]

Radical suggestion ...

Chewing gum soft qually tyres

3 compounds of race tyre...

A... Gives performance for 1 stop strategy

B... Gives performance for 2 stop strategy

C... Gives performance for 3 stop strategy. (Selected tracks only)

Pirelli allocate A&B or B&C for event.

Teams given 2 sets of each for both FP 1 & 2 plus 2 sets of qually tyres for "Friday"

1 set of each plus 2 sets of qually tyres for FP 3.

Revised Qually format 3 sets.

Teams inform FIA/Pirelli confidentially of Choice of Race tyre.

FIA publish 1 hour before Race start.

New Race tyres 2/3/4 sets per type.

Overall might be more tyres but cuts out complaints about running different compound that aren't different enough. Also means no longer hearing race radio messages about looking after tyres in Qualifying because they are starting on them.

[chillibowl]

difficult to predict the unintended consequences of any proposed change.

but that said, i would like to see a change to parc ferme rules.

if the main problem is aero then allowing teams to make more race day changes to set ups so they can actually prepare for their race day starting spot which then gives more choice for race day tires usage and pit stops, take advantage of day to day changes in weather and track temps etc etc and that may in some fashion limit the aero issue.

no doubt the teams will use quali and race trims but i think the money/resource issue could be mitigated by restricting the new parc ferme rules only to the cars who didnt make it out of Q1 and Q2 (sort like what they did with tires).

but for Q2 and below, a greater variety of set ups (including wings that allow for better race day running) may just allow for closer racing within the mid field and on occasion may also allow some mid field runners to make a move towards the front.

[Taxi645]

Originally Posted by Taxi645

3 In a dry race you have to at least use two different compounds

3 What does forcing to use at least two different compounds add to the race exitement? I'm not saying it doesn't, but I reckon it again leads to more predictable races. Current you know, people generally start on the softest available compound and then switch to one harder.

Anyone see an upside to this rule? I only see downsides.

[S griffin]

I have to agree with you there. You hit the nail on the head when you say it leads to predictability. It would be much more fun if you didn’t know whether they are going to pit or not. And also we could see the odd shock result if a team decides to bank on staying out. Also we should see less out of sequence drivers after they’ve pitted

Also it’s got rid of some of the art of setup. In the past teams and drivers would decide which tyres would be best suited for them, now it’s decided for them. For me it’s not right the teams should be told how to run their race by the rules.

[chillibowl]

i also dont like having to start the race with the tires you set your fastest Q2 time with.

but at the same time i suspect that even if given free choice, the teams would ultimately coverage on the same tire use philosophy. we may see the odd driver try an alternative strategy but perhaps no more then we do now?

either way, i would like to see how freedom of choice plays out. ideas like this need to be played out/tested in actual races before an informed decision can be made...so i go back to some races having different formats.

[Tourer]

I think that the "start on the same tyre you qualify on" approach came in prior to the current parc ferme rules (but happy to be corrected if I'm mis-remembering). With the parc ferme rules now in play, there's probably less of a need to start on the same tyres IMHO.

I do like the idea of teams essentially having the choice between a supersoft and a hard tyre for racing and then letting the teams get on with it - anything from zero stops to multiple stops. Not having the "middle" soft tyre enables different approaches to be taken that have a larger impact on how a team runs the race.

We heard the radio calls from engineers re Lewis at the 2nd Silverstone race - they all knew that he'd need to stop again, so they were holding their drivers back, knowing that he'd have to stop. Once it looked like he might not, the pace was upped.

Far better if we had that each race - they all need to go for it (you know, actually race) if they want to achieve a good result.

Definitely worth trying I reckon - may well be unintended consequences but on the face of it, sounds good.

[Casper]

Here is a novel idea, no monopoly on the tyre supplier and let the teams work out their own arrangements. The only likely reason that a single tyre supplier was introduced was Bernie saw a way to get a cut of the action.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by Casper

Here is a novel idea, no monopoly on the tyre supplier and let the teams work out their own arrangements. The only likely reason that a single tyre supplier was introduced was Bernie saw a way to get a cut of the action.

Nope - nothing to stop him getting a cut of the action earlier.

There is a single tyre supplier because other tyre suppliers specifically walked away, saying that the development costs made it too expensive compared to the benefits.

My recollection is that Bernie had to work hard to convince Pirelli to do it but I may be mixing up a couple of different situations there.

[Taxi645]

I thought about it some more but I think getting rid of the only the requirement two have at least two different compounds wouldn't work because in this case it would lead to Mercedes just choosing the medium and do two medium stints. So maybe if the two compounds rule were abandoned you would have to add another rule:

At the evening before the race, teams must let the FIA know which tyre they start on but the compound may not be harder than the one they set their Q2 time on. Once determined they have to start on that compound and the FIA will announce their choice just before the race.

It may sound a bit artificial, but the requirement two use at least two different compounds is artificial as well. Replacing the two compound requirement with the above rule keeps the total amount of tyre rules the same but ads unpredictability in two ways:

1 Teams (and fans, extra element of surprise) won't know of each other on what tyre they will start the race, till just before the start.

2 Teams (and fans, extra element of surprise) will have less certainty about which tyre strategy their competitors are going to do during the race.


Might be worth a try.

Originally Posted by chillibowl

i also dont like having to start the race with the tires you set your fastest Q2 time with.

but at the same time i suspect that even if given free choice, the teams would ultimately coverage on the same tire use philosophy. we may see the odd driver try an alternative strategy but perhaps no more then we do now?

I would not be too afraid of that, because it depends on the tyre wearing characteristics of the car.

either way, i would like to see how freedom of choice plays out. ideas like this need to be played out/tested in actual races before an informed decision can be made...so i go back to some races having different formats.

Yes, it's quite easy to experiment with tyre rules without large cost. Try it for three races and see what gives.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Tourer

I think that the "start on the same tyre you qualify on" approach came in prior to the current parc ferme rules (but happy to be corrected if I'm mis-remembering). With the parc ferme rules now in play, there's probably less of a need to start on the same tyres IMHO.

From the start of the Pirelli supply, the initial years were based on teams returning sets of tyres after sessions were completed. This was also the first time that teams had to start the race on used tyres. The top ten qualifiers had to use the tyres from Q3 that they had set their fastest lap on.
The next few seasons saw every top ten qualifier typically start on the softest compound - race to 1/4 distance then stick on the harder compound.

This was modified in 2014 to make Q3 drivers use their fastest set from Q2 to start the race. The result of this was that some teams didn't bother running in Q3 because they would be using a set of tyres for no real benefit.

2016 saw the range of compounds at an event increase from two to three.
Pirelli nominated two mandatory sets of tyres for each car during the race, with a third set of the softest compound, that teams had to use in Q3. Teams had free choice over use of the other ten sets available to them, but had to return sets at certain points:
- One set after the first 40 minutes of FP1
- One set at the end of FP1
- Two sets at the end of FP2
- Two sets at the end of FP3

The two mandatory sets nominated by Pirelli cannot be given back during practice and must be available for use in the race. At least one of these two sets must be used during the race - but the teams can decide which one.

Drivers who did not make it to Q3 were able to use the super-softs that had been allocated for Q3 during the race.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by Tourer

Nope - nothing to stop him getting a cut of the action earlier.

How was he going to get a cut from individual contract between team and supplier? Everything done in that era had a single goal, get more money for BE and CVC. Call me cynical but BE did not become wealthy by not doing deals but by putting his hand out at every opportunity.

Let them choose their own supplier and give the series some unpredictability.

[bella]

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

Chewing gum soft qually tyres

honestly think this would make a huge difference. everyone on the same page, let 'em at it. but then i quite like the idea of two races and two quali sessions per weekend a la formula renault - one shot quali in the morning, race in the afternoon, same format saturday and sunday.

Originally Posted by Tourer

There is a single tyre supplier because other tyre suppliers specifically walked away, saying that the development costs made it too expensive compared to the benefits.

this is why there's currently only two candidates for the job - pirelli and hankook. nobody else could afford it. hankook have been developing the relevant tyres for f1 but in the series they have the rights to currently, their reputation isn't fantastic in terms of product support.

[Mike Harte]

A decision was made by the FIA to move to a single tyre supplier in order to to stop the escalating costs incurred by the tyre manufacturers in order to be competitive. Since it was introduced, the contract to supply has always gone out to tender, and so far, only Pirelli has both met the criteria and agreed to manufacture and supply the tyres to the teams.

And they do so now on a strictly commercial basis, and charge each team for the supply of tyres, unlike previously when some teams received their supply for free or were paid fees to test the tyres. Which led, for example, to Ferrari pounding around their circuits on an almost daily basis in a development race to produce better rubber.

As far as I am aware, Mr E was never directly involved (if at all) in the tyre contract negotiations; they were strictly between the FIA and the tyre manufacturers.

[S griffin]

To be fair, a tyre war would be less expensive now due to the lack of in season testing. You don’t see them pounding round the circuits in the weeks between races anymore. Of course there are risks with tyre wars, but it would definitely spice things up. Hill in an Arrows at Hungary springs to mind of what can happen

[Tanker62M]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

A decision was made by the FIA to move to a single tyre supplier in order to to stop the escalating costs incurred by the tyre manufacturers in order to be competitive. Since it was introduced, the contract to supply has always gone out to tender, and so far, only Pirelli has both met the criteria and agreed to manufacture and supply the tyres to the teams.

And they do so now on a strictly commercial basis, and charge each team for the supply of tyres, unlike previously when some teams received their supply for free or were paid fees to test the tyres. Which led, for example, to Ferrari pounding around their circuits on an almost daily basis in a development race to produce better rubber.

As far as I am aware, Mr E was never directly involved (if at all) in the tyre contract negotiations; they were strictly between the FIA and the tyre manufacturers.

I think that going for a single manufacturer is a pretty good idea as long as Pirelli doesn't use this position to price gouge and inflate the prices artificially; it'll provide all vehicles with similar performances, and that allows the races to be decided by 1) the technical prowess of the engineers making the cars and 2) the pilot's skills.

[S griffin]

I’m sure price isn’t a problem when it comes to Pirelli, I haven’t heard anything to say they are overcharging.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Tanker62M

I think that going for a single manufacturer is a pretty good idea as long as Pirelli doesn't use this position to price gouge and inflate the prices artificially; it'll provide all vehicles with similar performances, and that allows the races to be decided by 1) the technical prowess of the engineers making the cars and 2) the pilot's skills.

Chassis and engine too?

[S griffin]

Yeah, that's the problem, where do you draw the line? Obviously a standard ECU won't make too much difference, but if everyone had the same engine, it wouldn't be the same. So from that I don't see a problem having different tyre manufacturers

[wolfhound]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Yeah, that's the problem, where do you draw the line? Obviously a standard ECU won't make too much difference, but if everyone had the same engine, it wouldn't be the same. So from that I don't see a problem having different tyre manufacturers

In the 1970's there were years when there were effectively only 2 engines Ferrari and Cosworth DFVs. I know there were a few others in the early 70's such as BRM but it was only in the latter part of the decade when a few others won a few GP's like Renault, Alfa and Matra.