Its all about the tyres!
- Thread starter Skeeter
- Start date
https://hardcards.indycar.com/Resources/pdfs/2013_IICS_Rulebook.pdf
A total of eight sets of tyres for road\street course events (nine for St Petersburg). An extra set is allowed specifically for first practice in some cases. Ovals generally have more (Fontana is fifteen sets). Two green flag laps on each compound during the race is the minimum requirement in the rules. The two compound rule is waived if wet weather occurs (a maximum of five sets of wet weather tyres are available for a single road\street course event).
Sounds similar to F1. How many sets of each do they usually go into a road circuit race with? And it what condition?
I assume pit stops are fuel limited rather than tyre limited though? And thats where F1s problems come in. Nobody is going to make a scheduled stop on a set of tyres with plenty of life left in them. They run them until they run out, and try to make as few stops as possible.
I assume pit stops are fuel limited rather than tyre limited though? And thats where F1s problems come in. Nobody is going to make a scheduled stop on a set of tyres with plenty of life left in them. They run them until they run out, and try to make as few stops as possible.
Soldato
Don't recall off-hand but I'd imagine they'd want to save at least 2-3 unused sets.
Usually, as the fuel tank is smaller than an F1 car (and no fuel tank will last on a 500 mile oval run). You can also start light deliberately. That said, there is still a drop off in pace on the soft compound, so you run the risk of losing speed just as other cars have gotten lighter towards the end of a stint. Sato almost made the long stint work on a street circuit, but he had to block very aggressively in the closing laps, and was outsmarted in the end. If the race is on a track like Barber and uninterrupted then you'll go backwards very quickly if you stay out too long on soft Bridgestones.
Depends if you're talking the 2010-spec Bridgestone tyres. Sure, they were a bit too durable given the team tactics to minimise stops. Still, Kobayashi and co could still make a late stop for soft tyres work. I think part of the problem is pit stops in Indycar don't cost as much time as in F1 because of pitlane configuration differences (and even with fuel, a stop will be just as quick as it was in 1990s F1).
Last edited:
The Bridgestones could last a whole race. The teams only changed because they had to.
But the 1 stop races that creates aren't a solution, as nobody is going to make lunges and risk locking up if their tyres need to last 50 laps.
Something else is needed to make people stop and also push. Without refueling, it needs to be a reward of pace. Its why I think a few more sets of tyres would help. If teams went into races with 4 new sets they could go hammer and tong and take the extra stops.
As Will Buxton said, its consumption vs conservation. Both strategies need to be viable to all teams to make a good show. At the moment with teams going into races with minimal tyres all already worn, consumption in exchange for speed is simply not an option. Especially when the best performance has already been taken out of the set they start on.
Is qualifying and the race linked in any way in IndyCar?
But the 1 stop races that creates aren't a solution, as nobody is going to make lunges and risk locking up if their tyres need to last 50 laps.
Something else is needed to make people stop and also push. Without refueling, it needs to be a reward of pace. Its why I think a few more sets of tyres would help. If teams went into races with 4 new sets they could go hammer and tong and take the extra stops.
As Will Buxton said, its consumption vs conservation. Both strategies need to be viable to all teams to make a good show. At the moment with teams going into races with minimal tyres all already worn, consumption in exchange for speed is simply not an option. Especially when the best performance has already been taken out of the set they start on.
Is qualifying and the race linked in any way in IndyCar?
Qualifying is important, but not the be-all end-all that it can be in F1. If you're Justin Wilson (and the car isn't complete junk like the Lotus engine was) then a combination of aggressive passing and an optimal strategy will get you to the front. Obviously in oval races qualifying is less relevant, although it does still provide an indication of the pecking order on that track. There is an incentive to take pole position with the bonus point, and Indy\Iowa qualifying award extra points due to their unique format.
Parc ferme doesn't exist if that's what you meant. You just specify your choice of tyres at least 30 minutes before the start.
FOM can still boast 500 million viewers or whatever the number is this year, so until that dips substantially I foresee no big changes.
Apart from the massive change to new engines next year
This thread isn't about engines
and I'm familiar with that after the change to V6s in Indycar.
Soldato
People who are winning ridiculing those who aren't winning for complaining is as one sided and worthless as those who aren't winning complaining in the first place.
Theres plenty of articles from Ferrari over the years complaining about X when they aren't winning. Just as there are as many from people saying X isn't a problem when they are winning.
As MB summed up nicely in the care commentary, F1 teams are not qualified to make reasoned decisions. They are only concerned with their own interests, and rightly so. Its like the Bretheren Court in Pirates of the Caribbean
But ultimately it means they should not be the decision makers for things like this. The tyres shouldn't be changed just because a few teams (who aren't winning) moan, but likewise they shouldn't just be left as they are just because a few teams (who are winning) say they are fine.
Theres plenty of articles from Ferrari over the years complaining about X when they aren't winning. Just as there are as many from people saying X isn't a problem when they are winning.
As MB summed up nicely in the care commentary, F1 teams are not qualified to make reasoned decisions. They are only concerned with their own interests, and rightly so. Its like the Bretheren Court in Pirates of the Caribbean
But ultimately it means they should not be the decision makers for things like this. The tyres shouldn't be changed just because a few teams (who aren't winning) moan, but likewise they shouldn't just be left as they are just because a few teams (who are winning) say they are fine.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
F1 at the moment isn't random. The best driver in the best cars are winning and getting podiums.
I'll say it again.
The tyres are the same for everyone.
Drivers and teams have always had to manage something to get the cars to finish.
I'll say it again.
The tyres are the same for everyone.
Drivers and teams have always had to manage something to get the cars to finish.
Links?
Ferrari even let the Blown Diffuser remain even though they won the race it was banned at. Luca Di has for a long time said F1 is too much aero, he was right.
Not sure on the specifics, pretty sure Hamilton isn't the 12th best driver on the grid, or that Massa is better than Vettel, but I see your point.
However, its about the show too. Watching races run at 8/10th with a constant unabaiting barrage of discussion about tyres tyres tyres isn't good for F1 as a whole.
Banning footballers from running and making them walk everywhere wouldn't affect the fairness of the game, and the best teams would still win, but would people want to watch it?
The issue is bigger than individual teams and their views. Its about 'Formula 1' - the commercial and entertainment entity as a whole, and the tyre situation is not good for it.
However, its about the show too. Watching races run at 8/10th with a constant unabaiting barrage of discussion about tyres tyres tyres isn't good for F1 as a whole.
Banning footballers from running and making them walk everywhere wouldn't affect the fairness of the game, and the best teams would still win, but would people want to watch it?
The issue is bigger than individual teams and their views. Its about 'Formula 1' - the commercial and entertainment entity as a whole, and the tyre situation is not good for it.
Soldato
Why do you always quote Skeeters posts? IIRC he can't see them anyway lol.
Don't care if he can see them or not that is his choice. Problem is Skeeter posts a lot of what he thinks is true without any sort of foundation just to furnish his current opinion.
If he wants to say Ferrari have complained about X when not winning, then post some links of them doing so.
Here is an article when Ferrari and Sauber agreed to let RB etc use the blown diffuser despite Ferrari winning Silverstone when the FIA banned it - http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/93016 yet Skeeter tells us Ferrari are always moaning when not winning.
Last edited: