Whats the deal with groove tyres

[Irv the Swerve]

do they actully make f1 cars slower?

[Selcouth_Feline]

In short, yes.

If you have a smooth surface, the more rubber you have against the surface, the more traction you will have. By cutting grooves in the tyres, you lose some surface area meaning you lose some traction. An interview with Bridgestone's Hisao Suganuma a while back quoted him as saying that a slick tyre may well be 2 seconds a lap quicker than a grooved tyre under the same set of conditions. The tarmac has to be smooth - not like our roads - so as to get the most traction. If you have conditions such as mud, obviously tread will give you an advantage as it will 'bite' into the road giving you better traction.

However, that isn't the full story. The longer answer is, it depends on the track and the car

Any time you put a groove or a sipe into a tyre, the wear on the tyre will accelerate. The trick is to find a balance between grip and wear. You can sipe a tyre to prevent the tread surface from glazing over and becoming a slick tyre.

Soft and hard tyres will obviously also make a difference. Grooved soft tyres are normally best for qualifying or in short stints in the wet. They are best used when the track is moist and there isn't a lot of friction. This is because they wear at a much faster rate than hard tyres, so you want to minimise the wear on them. Grooves in soft tyres help to clear away dirt and rain (hence also why wet tyres have deeper grooves in them than dry tyres).

Hard tyres withstand grooving much better than soft tyres. On asphalt and similar surfaces, it is easy to run with no grooves at all. However, you can groove the shoulders of a tyre to help clean away loose dirt and moisture. You can also sipe the shoulders on hard tyres to help cars running lower tyre pressures on slick tracks. The sipes help to stop glazing and help reduce traction loss.

There are three main groove shapes which are used - square, V-shaped and sipe. Square grooves are the same width and depth all the way around. V-shaped grooves start out wide at the top and taper down to nothing. Sipes are thin slips cut by installing the blade upside down and using ends of the blade to cut slices in the tyre.

V-shaped grooves are often used where the track is expected to need more tread contact later in the race because as the tyre wears down, the grooves begin to shrink and then to disappear. Square tyres are almost the same, except that they are better on a more abrasive track. Sipes are used to make the tread more pliable. They also help to maintain a more consistent wear that helps keep the tyre uniform.

If a track gets hot, tyres may start to blister, or even melt. Grooving can help to control this by moving air across the tyres to keep the tread temps down. Grooving also increases the surface area by which heat can transfer away from the tyre. However, there is a fine balance between heat dissipation, and wear and tear on the tyre. The best balance is to groove in the centre of the tyre instead of cutting all the way across it to limit the weakening effect of the grooves. This is best because it means you have as few grooves as possible (for speed purposes) but gives a good cooling effect.

[Irv the Swerve]

thank you that answered my question

[Irv the Swerve]

The A1 World Cup of Motorsport started last week, They dont use grooved tyres. Is it only to be used in f1??

[bud]

youre not serious are you

[Irv the Swerve]

Look dont get smart with me im just asking a question, i found this on the A1 website

''The slick Cooper A1 Tyres give very progressive levels of grip and feedback that lack in treaded or grooved tyres''.

Is that the reason they wont use it?

[Selcouth_Feline]

''The slick Cooper A1 Tyres give very progressive levels of grip and feedback that lack in treaded or grooved tyres''.

Non-grooved tyres mean there's more surface area on the tyre in contact with the ground hence more grip and traction so a non-grooved tyre will generally be the tyre of choice in the dry.

I think there's a rule in F1 that doesn't allow non-grooved tyres any more which is why you'll see F1 cars with grooved tyres, even though they produce less grip.

[Irv the Swerve]

But since its safer in f1 and a1 cars have almost the same power as a f1 car how come they wont use the grooved tyre safety wise.

[Smokestoomuch]

The only reason that F1 uses grooved tyres is to reduce the available grip by reducing the surface area in contact with track.

In the past the regulations simply governed the size of the tyres and controlled grip level and therefore, the speed of the cars, in this way.

When the FIA decided to try reduce cornering speeds this time round the option of making the tyres narrower would have meant changing the design of the cars entirely (because it would affect the flow of air over the entire car). The easier (and therefore cheaper) solution was to reduce the contact area.

No other motor sport does it because it is a compromise unique to the FIA.

Considering you seem to know so little about F1, how is that you've been happy to argue that the Monza penalty against Alonso was justified?

[Irv the Swerve]

Im learning all the time about f1 so dont be patrinising me.
In my own opinion i feel it was correct, i saw the video again on youtube and while he is at parrabolica i just feel massa wouldnt make that kind of mistake but i suppose you are going to correct me on this

[Smokestoomuch]

What is patronising about asking a question?

On the other hand telling people to "stop moaning" is both patronising and rude.

You've seen a few seconds of Monza qualifying on you tube and this gives you some understanding of what occurred?

The reality is that you know nothing about F1, you're support of Schumacher is based entirely on your desire to associate yourself with a winner and as such you are unable produce any cohesive argument.

Maybe it would be better if you stuck to asking questions about things you don't understand rather than making trying to make statements you can't support.

[darwin dali]

Now, now, you guys - chill out!

[Stephen]

Considering you seem to know so little about F1, how is that you've been happy to argue that the Monza penalty against Alonso was justified?

The reality is that you know nothing about F1, you're support of Schumacher is based entirely on your desire to associate yourself with a winner and as such you are unable produce any cohesive argument.

Maybe it would be better if you stuck to asking questions about things you don't understand rather than making trying to make statements you can't support.

Sorry mate but that's out of order, I value everyones contribution to this forum. No one here knows everything there is to know about F1, and if we did, we wouldn't be here discussing a variety of topics. Can we keep to constructive arguments please, with no more personal attacks.

So question to the floor, how did tyre construction change in the wake of the 1998 regulations?

[darwin dali]

I found it interesting that the tires became more square in their profile - a contribution by Michelin. Bridgestone initially went the route of round tires with more camber, but once they started to lose against Michelin on a regular basis, they recently adopted the same 'square' approach to increase grip.

[bud]

just a side note Ferrari tested GP2 slicks recently (probably already know) they were 2 seconds faster than on grooves!

smokestoomuch has a point, spitz was declaring that Alonso blocked Massa, he put himself out there on the limb and now he is getting drilled for it! i dont see the problem. if you want to blindly follow something and try and defend it when you have no knowledge to back yourself up then you deserve it!

spitz how did Alonso affect Massa to stuff his gearing up at parabolica? driver error plain and simple, Ferrari and their dirty tactition Todt used it to cheat. Massa is just a lil kid like Flav has said! no character just do what your boss says no matter if its right or wrong