1978: Patrick Depailler fearlessly drives in wet weather.

[Ole Marius Myrvold]

Or at least, as all the articles except one, states after Suzuka, that the monsoon tyres would ideally have a depth of over 10mm, however, if that means the tyres have 10mm more rubber, or not is not stated anywhere.

And Martin Brundle has constantly talked about that plank making it hard to drive on rain.

 

[Ho3n3r]

Why were monsoon tyres removed to begin with? Seems a bit the wrong way around - especially with a view to have F1 link more closely to the normal car market, as these are the types of tyres mostly used on our cars.

Any good reasons? Because honestly, it doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Hampus Andersson]

Or at least, as all the articles except one, states after Suzuka, that the monsoon tyres would ideally have a depth of over 10mm, however, if that means the tyres have 10mm more rubber, or not is not stated anywhere.

And Martin Brundle has constantly talked about that plank making it hard to drive on rain.

There are alot of other races that would benefit even though they weren´t cancelled as well.
They are designed to lift the car up slightly and give it a larger tread depth to be even more effective against the rain.
In order to lift the plank up slightly, otherwise they would be just as bad as regular full wets.

Dewald, i don´t know, they were used in the tire war, i know Bridgestone had them but i think they dissappeared when Bridgestone became the sole supplier of tires. Could be a money issue as they are very rarely used.

 

[Ho3n3r]

I searched a bit, and yes, money seems to be the main issue, as the transportation and research costs were becoming too much. Makes sense really, but it's still sad that we can't see a Barcelona 1996, or Spa 1998 again.

 

[James Chant]

The tyres are indeed designed to lift the car up.

The wet tyres are larger in diameter than the slicks - for his reason.

Slightly OT, but here's a video about Pirelli wets