POLL: Is Single Tire Supplier Good For F1?

Having two tire manufactors made the Hungarian F1 race so much more exciting. Its not like they share the same chassis' or engines either.
Can make a vaild argument either way. F1 has been boring at times, yesterdays race certainly was not.

 

Good, for an additional reason:

It is the fastest way to slow down the cars. If you have to interfere with the freedom of design, the tires are the least painful way. One tire manufacturer will bring down cornering speeds without the need for additional chicanes or drastic rule changes on engine and aeros.

 

I thought it was a very entertaining race yesterday, but I hate how incredibly dependent the cars are on tire performance. I mean, the Red Bull cars were passing Massa when it was wet, Schumi was helpless. It would NOT have been very entertaining if it had stayed wet all day. I'm all for equalizing the tires.

Gary

 

I voted bad for F1. I can see the same case being made for all cars having the same engine and aero package. Where does it stop? Renault clearly has the best launch control. Good for them, I would hate for the FIA to mandate everyone should have the same one. I would rather see the cars race without wings (although I am an aerospace engineer and love wings

 

I voted bad.
I am for more difference between cars/teams, not less.

FIA is obsessed with regulations and wants to level F1 to the lowest common denominator. Same tyres, same ECU, what's next?

 

I agree, it give the FIA more control over the speed and cuts down testing cost. It simply gives Bernie more control over his sport. Hungary was by far the best race in terms of passing in years and whatever it takes to make passing an every race thing I support.

 

I voted good, but it tends to always turn into one team getting favored by the supplier for marketing ($$$) reasons. ie, they favor the team that makes them look best, as was the case with Ferrari and Bstone (which caused Michelin to enter in the first place).

 

Do we know if that will get rid of marbeling problem and will allow people to go "off-line" for passing ?

 

Good for me. Just look at the Superbike championship with Pirelli as sole supplier: great improvement!
Ciao
Eugenio

 

I like it. While I'm averse to anything "spec", I think a control tyre allows the competition to focus on the cars and drivers. I don't like something like a tyre to determine competitive advantage.

 

good for me. i prefer man VS man, machine VS machine. not damn tyres vs tyres. makes no sense. 1 tyre manufacturer can do well in 1 race, next race they can totally lose it and struggle...makes no sense.

 

oh yea...i forgot...been a while since all 2 podium finishers had blue hats on hungary gp was certainly one of the best in years

 

I loved the tire wars I'm sorry to see it go.

 

A spec tire would be good much like the spec Cosworth engine run in the '70's. I know the economics of mordern F1 will never allow spec engines again but tire wars tend to push the level of risk tire makers are willing to take with compounds. No better example of the risk than the old 1 set for 1 race rule. F1 was lucky no one got killed.

 

I'm torn on this one.

A "spec" tire would possibly be safer for F1 and might allow the manufacturers to focus on chassis design and aero.

But then, what's the point?

Weird wings? Ban 'em. Mass dampers? Ban those too.

There are already plenty of "spec" programs out there. F1 is supposed to be something different.

But we've got an off-the-shelf used Jordan running as an "Aguri", the engine freeze looks like it's going to happen, and innovations are banned at random intervals. (So when are they going to decide the "viking horns" are illegal?)

Frankly, the only thing that can save F1 is getting it away from FIA, Mad Max, and Bernie and letting the makers innovate.

And the tire wars may not have made F1 more entertaining, but they made driving my own Ferrari more entertaining: look at the improvement in street tires in the last 10 years.

(On the other hand, VRs 20 years ago were at least usable in cold weather. Now my Ferrari sits out the winter because it's too cold for the S03s.)

 

Technically, it was on display in some airport

 

I voted pro single tire supplier... but I'm still on the fence. As other have said, I don't like to limit anything. I would like "moveable aerodynamic devices" to be allowed. why not adjust the wings during the corners/straights...


Back to tires...

We seem to be in a phase of dramatic tire development currently, so the tires seem to play a HUGE role at every race. perhaps this rapid development will plateau soon... maybe not. Until then, I would prefer a race (an last year I believe an entire season) not to be decided mostly due to tires. Therefore I am pro single tire (for today).

 

IMO Formula One is about the technology and the drivers. I hate to see anything stand in the way of the technological development of the cars. If you want to watch 25 of the same cars race each other go watch nascar. I know its just the tires, but to me it just feels like the FIA is trying to stop development or at least slow it down dramatically. Just my two cents.
----------------------------------
http://Ferrari-Chat.blogspot.com

 

The thing about NASCAR is that there are probably 10 passes going on at any given moment in a race (under the green flag). NASCAR may be boring to some, but the racing is second to none.

 

Having a single tire will reduce some of the uncertainty to a degree as the tire variability will be taken out of the equation. Thus it will transfer more responsibility on the driver and team to get the most of the package. From that angle it is good as the tire is excessively important today.

Also it will mean that more drivers could potentially compete for a win. If Bridgestone is dominant today it would mean that Ferrari has a near lock on the win and second place. McLaren and Renault dont get a look in. Williams is really weakened and is not quite the force it was in the past. The other Bridgestone teams are still either useless or on a slow climb upwards (Toyota). Last year it was a ding dong battle between McLaren and Renault with Ferrari not even in the same league due to Michelin superiority.

At least with a spec tire, you could have McLaren, Ferrari and Renault regularly locking horns every race with Red Bull and Toyota knocking on the door.

But by the same coin, uncertainty adds to the fun as today we don't really know whether Bridgestone or Michelin will dominate. The tires are extremely temp sensitive and their performance may change during the race based on the race conditions. After the last three runaway wins everyone thought that Ferrari would dominate at Hungary but the tires seemed to deal badly with damp conditions while being superb in dry conditions.

So basically I really cant say which is the better option 2 tire manufs or spec tires...

 

A spec tire is good for keeping costs down, but not good for the tech side of F1.

I hope it helps passing as there isn't enough of it.

 

I wanted to vote for this option:

- What the hell do we know? We're just a bunch of F1 bench racers and none of us actually work in F1.

 

But the whole point to F1 is that it's a manufacturers' series: The tech side is part of the R&D budget.

Ideologically: I'm opposed to banning anything in F1 that is applicable to production cars.

It's not what you spend.

It's what you get for the money.


Good (R&D): Semi-auto gearboxes. Improved tires. Non-fade brakes. Innovative valves. Crashworthiness. Cleaner emissions. Mass dampers?
Wasted development: Pop-off valves. Intake restrictors. Anti-traction tires.