FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Hammer278]

Pirelli have not made them dangerous! They have made exactly what they were told to make by their customer.

I question myself for even responding, but here goes. The FIA are customers see. Pirelli is a manufacturer of tires. As such they have the expertise the engineers and the production capability, therefore they are fully responsible for that product. If I ask an architect to built me a home with an outlandish feature that is potentially unsafe and cannot realistically be achieved, it is the architect's responsibility to advise me against it and if I insist, the architect would say he cannot design it safely and reject me as a customer. If he goes ahead and builds it, he's liable under the law... See that's how the law works. It's not based on your opinion.

Pirelli have agreed to build an unsafe tire, that's fact. You're free to your own fallacy but it doesn't make it real.

Exactly.

[myownalias]

Pirelli have agreed to build an unsafe tire, that's fact. You're free to your own fallacy but it doesn't make it real.

Pirelli's Paul Hembury said over the Spanish GP weekend that the problem is they have is that they are not allowed to test with modern F1 technology, so when they create a tyre, they don't know the effect a 2013 spec F1 car will have on the tyres. The 2008 Toyota which I believe Pirelli still use for testing may well run 50 laps on the medium compound, Pirelli don't know the real performance and liabilities until it gets put on a 2013 spec F1 car, if in-season testing was allowed, these issues could be avoided.

I still don't like the fast degrading tyres, just playing devils advocate here!

[What's Burning?]

Pirelli I'm pretty certain bought the 2010 or 2011 Lotus to do testing with. I remember reading something to that effect. It was to have a more closer approximation of today's cars since the Toyota was very long in the tooth now. I agree with the limited testing being ridiculous, but it still doesn't excuse Pirelli from saying we don't have enough data to make the tire you're asking us to build, properly.

[myownalias]

The problem is that there are massive differences between F1 cars, that's just the 2013 spec cars, imagine how different in driving/handling characteristics between a 2011 car and 2013 car.

I wouldn't say that the Pirelli tyres are dangerous either; their design actually is less destructive than older tyres when they delaminate!

[andrew]

It's a case of driving within the limitiations of the equipment which isn't really conducive to decent racing but it is what was wanted to increase overtaking.

[What's Burning?]

The problem is that there are massive differences between F1 cars, that's just the 2013 spec cars, imagine how different in driving/handling characteristics between a 2011 car and 2013 car.

I wouldn't say that the Pirelli tyres are dangerous either; their design actually is less destructive than older tyres when they delaminate!

Until someone gets hurt. A delaminating tire on Lewis' car cost him a transmission and a five grid penalty. I agree the testing restrictions for Pirelli were ludicruis yet, if that was the case, it's again, Pirelli's failing for agreeing to produce a product with their name, design and engineering behind it.

[vaptin]

Pirelli, were asked to make fast wearing tyres, not de-laminating ones.

[andrew]

Tyre delamination is nothing new and not just restricted to Pirelli rubber.

[vaptin]

Tyre delamination is nothing new and not just restricted to Pirelli rubber.

No, but it appears to be more common this year.

[andrew]

That is down to the tyres being pushed beyond their limitations.

[Hammer278]

That is down to the tyres being pushed beyond their limitations.

<Edited WB>? Or do you just contradict facts for absolutely no reason? Don't you think Pirelli would POINT this out if it were the case? their excuse for Lewis' delamination was DEBRIS. Why would they try to cover it up when it isn't their fault? And for Di Resta's issue they dont even have an answer to it. It's bloody common sense, use it!

[andrew]

Great way to carry a conversation. Accuse someone of being high. Bravo, you've convinced me that I am in the wrong.

Why would they point it out? It make their product look even more unsuitable! Think about it.

[Hammer278]

Oh right! So instead, they lie and say something else caused it.

Why would their product look unsuitable if 1 or 2 teams out of 10 are doing something wrong with the tyres? Some logic.

[andrew]

All teams are suffering to varying degrees with the tyres.

[Hammer278]

Yeah but we are talking about DELAMINATIONS here. Not 'varying degrees of problems'. Stay on the point.