Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by RaceDepartment, Jun 6, 2013.
View the Post on the Blog
Hankook tire also ruled out that.
Please, anyone but Pirelli! lol
To me Pirelli have only done what the FIA wanted them to do. Increase the frequency of pit stops (for the excitement) and try to encourage different race strategies. The FIA removed one of the best things about pit stops, refuelling.
I am sure Pirelli can make tyres to any specification, including lasting the whole race.
I just don't see why Pirelli should take the blame for this.
Unless the FIA are going to change the requirements for the tires there will come a time that the F1 will have no more supplier at all.
Pirelli are getting a bad name because of all this nonsense while they make fabulous road and racing tires normally but are just doing as they've been told.
I'm not critisising them for that. I think that they have over stepped the mark slightly, and races aren't as interesting anymore. The FIA Should also change things as well.
Also, I like the idea of a Tyre Battle, so I wouldn't mind seeing more than 1 Tyre supplier next season.
to me, i can't think of any other situation where a company are paid/asked to model and therefore advertise, an inferior product than what they would usually make. inferior in the sense that it shows durability problems.
Pirelli were requested to make the tyre to these sorts of specs they after no refueling was introducted. Its a shame really because Pirelli are taking the rap for it all now.
With no refueling, the FIA had to make a handicap elsewhere.... Alas these dodgy tyres.
yes this is pretty clear.but it must be a cleverly calculated decision (financially) for pirelli to agree to a deal which could make them appear to have less durable tyres (to people who aren't in the know). imagine if porsche were asked to produce less reliable cars to make the porsche racing series more entertaining.
My parents were asked to produce something inferior to my brother, hence I was born