this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2023
44 points (100.0% liked)
Formula 1
5565 readers
5 users here now
c/formula1
Welcome to c/formula1.
Rules
Please keep discussions civil, respect other's opinions, and keep it friendly. Please read our rules before posting in our community.
Rules TLDR
- No spoilers in post titles please. Use of spoiler tags is considered a courtesy for now.
- No piracy discussion.
- Keep it on topic.
- No memes.
Resources
These sites are a good place to start finding out about Formula 1, aside from right here of course!
Formula1.com - the official Formula 1 website.
Formula 1 Youtube - the official F1 youtube channel.
Liquipedia Overview - what's happening now and next in a nice dashboard.
F1Calendar.com - never miss a session again!
F1Countdown.com - for those of you who like countdowns!
Sister Communities
!Motorsports - for the love of racing outside of Formula 1.
[email protected] - because you love memes.
[email protected] - let's race!
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If the world's most elite drivers can't handle cold tyres, then perhaps they're not the world's most elite drivers.
Guess all those moto gp riders should also ditch them, and all the other motor sports that use them. If they improve safety through improved grip from the start why ban them? Cold tyres will introduce chaos which could be good for entertainment, but would it be good for the sport?
Bit of a false dichotomy comparing Moto GP and F1 really.
WEC has banned warmers, there have been complaints about it, but they're largely getting on with it. WRC prohibits them.
We should have a season long test without tyre blankets to determine the impact of the rule change.
I don't necessarily think that cold tyres will bring chaos either. I think it just changes the strategy during a race. Whether that turns out to be good for the sport I can't say.
I suppose the real question is what can Pirelli do to give grip at low temperatures.
I just wanna know why they push for it.
Environmental reasons apparently.
Which is PR bullshit
false equivalence, not false dichotomy.
F1 drivers and spectators will complain about anything. But when a change happens, a few years pass and people stop complaining. Remember the whole engine mumbo jumbo, how everyone didn't like the lack of reliability/lack of noise/ or whatever else was their favourite thing to bring up. Nobody complains about engines nowadays though, and they are in one of the most reliable places in F1 history.
IDK, IndyCar handles it just fine, but I guess some might say their drivers aren't as "elite" as in F1.
always remember that they stop driving most of the time if there's genuine rain
Pisses me off no end that too. We have wet tyres, as long as there is enough visibility let them race.
Well most of the time there isn't any visibility. When it rains, its not problem that it is dangerous and drivers are scared to drive because it is slippery, but that visibility is 0, just look at onboards.
The lack of visibility comes from how well the extreme wets disperse water. So it's like a catch 22 either make worse tires for better visibility or better ties but drivers behind can't see.
Worse tyres = slicks, you realise that, right?
So then... Another in between Intermediate tyre? Like I get you are saying but you do realise that wet tyres are not much different from other tyres with the only exception being their pattern? I think at some point the differences become marginal.
that can't be true. it if were they could just go back to the old wet tire designs where it wasn't a problem.
I think it's more to do with the extreme aero on modern cars.
I'm no professional, but I've been watching F1 for most of my life and the water dispersion is definitely more than it was in the past.
I agree, I just don't think it's only because of the tire design.
Damn, there goes the George Russell AMA we had lined up for next week!