2022 Australian Grand Prix - Melbourne, April 08 - 10

[Artur Craft]

Pirelli has no right to continue in F1. Nobody knows which compounds work and which doesn't and which tyre is faster. Bridgestone and Michelin should come back as two suppliers. 12 years is too long to be talking about one single aspect of racing, tyres. Its because of this farce, we see cars slowing down on their warm up laps, causing chaos, either at last corner before starting fast lap or through the warm up lap. The car should come out of the pits with new tyres and should simply go at race speed to start the fast lap without having to worry about baby sitting the tyres.

Very strongly agree with this. I will also add that one of the reasons that the current F1 cars looks so slow on tighter corners is because Pirelli tyres are not good enough.

Formula E is heavy too(so is Indy, for that matter) and runs on very narrow, grooved tyres and they look quite spicy, even on those crappy street tarmacs. I remember comparing WEC´s LMP1s onboard telemetries to F1´s, back in 2015/2016, and despite weighting almost 1000kg and having tyres far more durable, the LMP1s still had higher cornering speeds(even on some random race laps) than the F1´s poles, on the slow corners of Spa, Interlagos, Mexico...

Bridgestone and Michelin would deliver significantly faster tyres to "fix" the problem. Pirelli is only here because they are official partners/sponsors and fill FOM´s pockets full of money.

But, to give Pirelli some credit, at least their Hard tyre (C4) worked great this time around, in terms of wear

[mrluke]

Pirelli has no right to continue in F1. Nobody knows which compounds work and which doesn't and which tyre is faster. Bridgestone and Michelin should come back as two suppliers. 12 years is too long to be talking about one single aspect of racing, tyres. Its because of this farce, we see cars slowing down on their warm up laps, causing chaos, either at last corner before starting fast lap or through the warm up lap. The car should come out of the pits with new tyres and should simply go at race speed to start the fast lap without having to worry about baby sitting the tyres.

Very strongly agree with this. I will also add that one of the reasons that the current F1 cars looks so slow on tighter corners is because Pirelli tyres are not good enough.

Formula E is heavy too(so is Indy, for that matter) and runs on very narrow, grooved tyres and they look quite spicy, even on those crappy street tarmacs. I remember comparing WEC´s LMP1s onboard telemetries to F1´s, back in 2015/2016, and despite weighting almost 1000kg and having tyres far more durable, the LMP1s still had higher cornering speeds(even on some random race laps) than the F1´s poles, on the slow corners of Spa, Interlagos, Mexico...

Bridgestone and Michelin would deliver significantly faster tyres to "fix" the problem. Pirelli is only here because they are official partners/sponsors and fill FOM´s pockets full of money.

But, to give Pirelli some credit, at least their Hard tyre (C4) worked great this time around, in terms of wear

Pirelli are here because they were the only supplier prepared to make 13" tyres and to make the high deg tyres to "improve the show" at the cost of their reputation.

[SmallSoldier]

Pirelli has no right to continue in F1. Nobody knows which compounds work and which doesn't and which tyre is faster. Bridgestone and Michelin should come back as two suppliers. 12 years is too long to be talking about one single aspect of racing, tyres. Its because of this farce, we see cars slowing down on their warm up laps, causing chaos, either at last corner before starting fast lap or through the warm up lap. The car should come out of the pits with new tyres and should simply go at race speed to start the fast lap without having to worry about baby sitting the tyres.

Very strongly agree with this. I will also add that one of the reasons that the current F1 cars looks so slow on tighter corners is because Pirelli tyres are not good enough.

Formula E is heavy too(so is Indy, for that matter) and runs on very narrow, grooved tyres and they look quite spicy, even on those crappy street tarmacs. I remember comparing WEC´s LMP1s onboard telemetries to F1´s, back in 2015/2016, and despite weighting almost 1000kg and having tyres far more durable, the LMP1s still had higher cornering speeds(even on some random race laps) than the F1´s poles, on the slow corners of Spa, Interlagos, Mexico...

Bridgestone and Michelin would deliver significantly faster tyres to "fix" the problem. Pirelli is only here because they are official partners/sponsors and fill FOM´s pockets full of money.

But, to give Pirelli some credit, at least their Hard tyre (C4) worked great this time around, in terms of wear

Didn’t LMP1’s in 2015/2016 had not only 4 wheel drive, but also traction control? No wonder they would be faster in slow corners… Formula E looks fast in slow corners because they have instant torque from electrical engines and they are going way slower during the rest of the lap, making them look faster in the “slower” sections.

[notsomahsoom]

Pirelli has no right to continue in F1. Nobody knows which compounds work and which doesn't and which tyre is faster. Bridgestone and Michelin should come back as two suppliers. 12 years is too long to be talking about one single aspect of racing, tyres. Its because of this farce, we see cars slowing down on their warm up laps, causing chaos, either at last corner before starting fast lap or through the warm up lap. The car should come out of the pits with new tyres and should simply go at race speed to start the fast lap without having to worry about baby sitting the tyres.

Very strongly agree with this. I will also add that one of the reasons that the current F1 cars looks so slow on tighter corners is because Pirelli tyres are not good enough.

Formula E is heavy too(so is Indy, for that matter) and runs on very narrow, grooved tyres and they look quite spicy, even on those crappy street tarmacs. I remember comparing WEC´s LMP1s onboard telemetries to F1´s, back in 2015/2016, and despite weighting almost 1000kg and having tyres far more durable, the LMP1s still had higher cornering speeds(even on some random race laps) than the F1´s poles, on the slow corners of Spa, Interlagos, Mexico...

Bridgestone and Michelin would deliver significantly faster tyres to "fix" the problem. Pirelli is only here because they are official partners/sponsors and fill FOM´s pockets full of money.

But, to give Pirelli some credit, at least their Hard tyre (C4) worked great this time around, in terms of wear

Pirelli are here because they were the only supplier prepared to make 13" tyres and to make the high deg tyres to "improve the show" at the cost of their reputation.

This. Pirelli also make tyres with a similar philosophy for the GT World Challenge, while Michellin tyres are simultaneously fast and durable. although, they introduced a new compound this year (DHF). I'm not sure if the high wear characteristics have changed.

Something to add, even if we improved following significantly, in the absence of tyre deltas, it would still be incredibly difficult to pass. You can see this in particularly any series once downforce comes into play. Approximately from GT3 and upwards.

[dialtone]

PU Elements used after the AUS GP.

EDIT: Apparently Fabrega has a document where Tsunoda and Alonso have a 3rd PU and Norris a 2nd, but the documents on the FIA website about PU elements used don't report that... oh well.

[CHT]

Ferrari's pace and reliability coupled with a clear dominant no.1 driver at the moment will put them in a very good position to win the WDC and WCC this season.

[JordanMugen]

Pirelli are here because they were the only supplier prepared to make 13" tyres and to make the high deg tyres to "improve the show" at the cost of their reputation.

Hankook also were prepared to make those tyres and also put in a tender for 2020-on. [One season intended to be with 13", of course it ended up being two, the rest with 18".]

Hankook's tender was rejected for whatever reason.

I don't think the Hankook Ventus name has quite the recognition of the Pirelli P Zero name (despite Ventus tyres now being OEM fit on many performance vehicles, including from Germany), so it would have been a coup for Hankook. A shame, really.

It seems that the (apparently) tier-one Korean tyre brand was, however, successful at winning the tender for Formula E: https://www.autosport.com/formula-e/new ... 1/4981561/

[CHT]

Pirelli are here because they were the only supplier prepared to make 13" tyres and to make the high deg tyres to "improve the show" at the cost of their reputation.

Hankook also were prepared to make those tyres and also put in a tender for 2020-on. [One season intended to be with 13", of course it ended up being two, the rest with 18".]

Hankook's tender was rejected for whatever reason.

I don't think the Hankook Ventus name has quite the recognition of the Pirelli P Zero name (despite Ventus tyres now being OEM fit on many performance vehicles, including from Germany), so it would have been a coup for Hankook. A shame, really.

It seems that the (apparently) tier-one Korean tyre brand was, however, successful at winning the tender for Formula E: https://www.autosport.com/formula-e/new ... 1/4981561/

F1 being the pinnacle of motorsports is closely associated with super and hypercars manufacturers who are already working closely with the likes of Michelin and Perilli to customize high-performance tires. Hankook getting into F1 will be an excellent marketing and branding campaign for the Korean brand, but it will not be a sustainable one.

So for the sake of the sports and its long term stability, rejecting Hankook's bid is certainly the right one as we do not want F1 to compromise performance or its brand image over sponsorships money.

[Big Tea]

So, what penalty would Albon have picked up if he didn't change tires at the end of the race? Didn't use two different compounds? Would he, after penalty, have placed higher than the P10 he got by complying?

Anything from a telling off via a time penalty to disqualification. Probably closer to the sharp end.

I think it would fall foul of both sets of rules as the car would not finish in 'legal condition', that is, having a different grade of tyre to that on starting, and car and driver had not complied with the rule that more than one tyre must be used.
Probably a good thing it was not tested as I think it would have been a DSQ. Even a time penalty of equivalent to a pit visit and a little for being naughty would have put him way down the road to everyone else. It was good thinking to get a point though.

[Artur Craft]

I don't think the Hankook Ventus name has quite the recognition of the Pirelli P Zero name (despite Ventus tyres now being OEM fit on many performance vehicles, including from Germany), so it would have been a coup for Hankook. A shame, really.

Hankook provided excelent tyres for DTM and Euro F3(much better than Pirelli´s GP3 ones, for my taste)

Anyway, I hate spec tyres. As F1 is not an spec series, unlike Indycar and their spec Firestones/Bridgestones, I think F1 should always have regulation open for tyre war. So sad it´s not like that anymore

[Zynerji]

I don't think the Hankook Ventus name has quite the recognition of the Pirelli P Zero name (despite Ventus tyres now being OEM fit on many performance vehicles, including from Germany), so it would have been a coup for Hankook. A shame, really.

Hankook provided excelent tyres for DTM and Euro F3(much better than Pirelli´s GP3 ones, for my taste)

Anyway, I hate spec tyres. As F1 is not an spec series, unlike Indycar and their spec Firestones/Bridgestones, I think F1 should always have regulation open for tyre war. So sad it´s not like that anymore

Meh. If you go that far, have the teams design their own tyres, and have a manufacturer build to their spec...

It's awful when a team loses performance from a 3rd party part..(IE: tyre war)

[JordanMugen]

It's awful when a team loses performance from a 3rd party part..(IE: tyre war)

As much as backmarkers like Minardi lose laptime by using outdated tyres, surplus stock etc, don't the leaders gain laptime by having tyres carefully crafted to their requirements?

F1 being the pinnacle of motorsports is closely associated with super and hypercars manufacturers who are already working closely with the likes of Michelin and Perilli to customize high-performance tires. Hankook getting into F1 will be an excellent marketing and branding campaign for the Korean brand, but it will not be a sustainable one.

Hankook claim their Ventus Evo Z is every bit the match for a ContiSportContact 7 or Potenza Sport. It is OEM fitment on the Porsche Panamera and Mini Cooper JCW.

Mind you, the ContiSportContact 7 knocked the competition out of the park in Jonathon Benson's latest tyre test: https://youtu.be/t10y-87oiD4?t=1 It had an incredible level of dominance -- in wet conditions, the ContiSportContact 7 was 5s/lap faster than the Potenza Sport, 7.5s/lap faster than the Pilot Sport 4S and 10s/lap faster than the Eagle F1 SuperSport. Sadly Hankook didn't supply a set of Ventus Evo Z for the test.

Not to say that road tyre excellence translates to racing tyre excellence, but Continental's historical absence from Grand Prix racing is certainly curious! Continental as a F1 tyre supplier would be most welcome.

[SiLo]

Why is everyone complaining about tyres? They were fine this weekend. Maybe Hards lasted too long but it gave us some interesting strategies.

[Big Tea]

Why is everyone complaining about tyres? They were fine this weekend. Maybe Hards lasted too long but it gave us some interesting strategies.

I would like to se the option of one tyre start to finish allowed in every GP. It is good for the lower teams to have a pot luck chance to have a good finish, and an option of high starters taking a chance on running for it.

They said it was due to having to transport hundreds of tyres that they brought the choice rule it, but one set of hards for each car would be trivial.

[NicoS]

Why is everyone complaining about tyres? They were fine this weekend. Maybe Hards lasted too long but it gave us some interesting strategies.

yes. 1 stop is interesting. it's when you only stop once per race in order to change compound as stipulated by the rules.
only variability is that not everyone stops on the same lap. but FIA will soon fix this on safety grounds and stipulate two mandatory 5 lap pit "windows"