Talk:Formula One tyres
|WikiProject Formula One||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
Bridgestone 2008 onwards
I believe that Bridgestone's "wins" that they have "achieved" in 2008 should not count towards the records below. With F1's unfortunate move to being an official single-tyre series, I move that these wins have not been earned fairly (in contrast to 2007 when F1 was still officially open tyre but Michelin withdrew a year early voluntarily). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 15:58, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
- There is a column on the records section entitled 'Sole supplier' to show how many races suppliers have won when they are not competing against other suppliers. Maybe this can be added to, to take into account your suggestion? Schumi555 (talk) 16:26, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
- Article is wrong in saying that Michelin withdrew. FIA ruled that 2007 onwards there would be only one supplier. Michelin either wasn't interested or didn't have a realistic chance of getting the deal after 2005 Indy farce, so they didn't even apply.126.96.36.199 (talk) 13:41, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Why the British spelling of "tires"??
I think that it would be much better if we used the American version without the Y Elakhna 22:07, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- British spelling is the de facto standard within Formula One articles, primarily because of the sport's European heritage. DH85868993 (talk) 22:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
What's going on with the text in the References section? To me, the text for references 9-12 appears as:
9. ^ Goodyear was sole tyre supplier in F1 from Formula One-2009 and Formula One car-tyres.
10. ^ Bridgestone provided tyres in a limited capacity at the history of Formula One and Formula One, then for the full season from 1997 onwards
11. ^ Bridgestone was sole tyre supplier in F1 from 2005-2005 United States Grand Prix and in slick tyre-Bridgestone
12. ^ Firestone was sole tyre supplier at the Michelin races from 2007 European Grand Prix-Safety Car.
Does everyone else see that too? Or am I going crazy? DH85868993 (talk) 01:35, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- That's not what I see. Mine looks OK, rational even. I really have no idea why yours would show up like that, though it is fairly amusing, particularly the last one. For the record, here's what it should look like:
- 9. ^ Goodyear was sole tyre supplier in F1 from 1987-1988 and 1992-1996.
- 10. ^ Bridgestone provided tyres in a limited capacity at the 1976 and 1977 Japanese Grand Prix, then for the full season from 1997 onwards
- 11. ^ Bridgestone was sole tyre supplier in F1 from 1999-2000 and in 2007-2008
- 12. ^ Firestone was sole tyre supplier at the Indianapolis 500 races from 1950-1960.
- 9. ^ Goodyear was sole tyre supplier in F1 from 1987-1988 and 1992-1996.
- ... with the links, which is the only thing I could think of that could be causing the problem. Have you tried purging? Apterygial 01:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Done a bit of searching on the web, but couldn't find any info about the qualifying tyres that were used in F1 until the early '90s(?) - tyres that were basically good for two laps and started to fall apart on the in-lap. Anyone recall any details about them, or better still got some references? AlexJ (talk) 23:42, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
The link for Avon points to Avon Rubber which does not make tyres. It appears that the link should point to Avon Tyres, which itself is a redirect to Cooper Tire & Rubber Company. Cooper purchased the tyre business from Avon Rubber in 1997. BTW, Avon Rubber has several hundred links, many of them are F1 articles.--The Three Headed Knight (talk) 04:27, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
- On the other hand, Avon tyres were only used in F1 in the 1950s and the early 1980s, when the tyre business was still owned by Avon Rubber. And both articles mention the tyre business, so I think it's arguable which is the better article to link to. DH85868993 (talk) 02:41, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
Current Qualifying Rules, and splitting up History
With the knock-out qualifying rules currently in place, the drivers that make it to Q3 are required to start on their qualifying tyres, whereas knocked out drivers from Q1 and Q2 do not. This also allows the knocked out drivers to have one or two extra sets of unused tyres that can be used in the race. While this was not an issue with the durable Bridgestone tyres, with the current design of Pirelli tyres that are less durable to increase overtaking and differing strategies, the extra sets of tires available to lower qualifiers has introduced a significant advantage.
My question is whether or not all or part of this should be included somewhere in the article, perhaps in a section about tyre rules. Another comment, a little off topic, perhaps, is that the History section should be split up. Perhaps a new section is warranted regarding tyre markings, given the detail about Bridgestone's coloured grooves and the current system in place with Pirelli's differently coloured logos and new stripes. This could actually also be a sub-heading under rules, since it is in place purely because of the mandatory two-compound rule (which should also be mentioned).
Profile of F1 tyres
Does anyone know anything about the reasons for the profile of F1 tyres, who could add something to the article? Normally, racers and boy-racers have very low-profile 'gumball' tyres, but F1 cars have very high profile tyres: why? Some things I've seen in other contexts are that increased air-volume allows better heat-retention, and that high-profile tyres are used in higher-pressure situations - although that surely isn't the case here. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 22:21, 5 September 2011 (UTC) Dave
- Formula One tires appear to be about a 50 or 55 series tire (sidewall height is 55 percent of tread width) and this is hardly what I would call a “very high profile” tire. After all, in the early 70’s most street cars were still running 70 or 80 series tires and race car tires were 50’s or 60’s. The only reason you think these are high profile tires is because they seem high in comparison to the ridiculously low profile tires that everyone is using on street cars these days - which by the way is mostly about looks and not performance. There is a big difference in handling between a 70 series tire and a 50 but there is not much difference at all between a 50 and a 30. Furthermore, increasing the diameter of the wheel by 2 inches adds more weight to the wheel than is lost in the tire by reducing the sidewall height by one inch. And as we all know, increasing a cars unsprung weight is bad for handling. Also, in my opinion, anything less than a 3.5 inch sidewall height on a street car is ridiculous. The first time you hit a pot hole with a 35 series tire you are going to ruin one of your expensive rims. Back to F1 cars though, one of the reasons the tires appear to be high profile is because F1 wheels are a very small diameter for their width. This gives the illusion that the aspect ratio is higher than it actually is. I should also point out that while generally speaking the reduced sidewall flex of lower profile tires is better for handling, some flex is necessary and in fact a completely stiff tire would handle terribly. In any case the aspect ratio of open wheel racing car tires is pretty much the same from racing Karts all the way up to F1 cars so there must be a good reason for it. Slobeachboy (talk) 21:50, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
Right now, the overall positions of the manufacturers are decided by wins, but I think it would really make more sense to order it by constructors' championships, mostly since each season has a different number of races. Wins could still be a tiebreaker. –Ugncreative Usergname (talk) 05:36, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Not much of a history
I’m sorry but what kind of F-1 tire “history” only goes back 15 years. F-1 tires (or “tyres” if you prefer British English) have changed a lot in the past 60 years and most of the major advances in tire technology occurred prior to the 1980's. In fact, it might be interesting to point out that radial tires were not used on F-1 cars until the 1980’s, long after they were standard equipment on street cars. Part of the reason for this is that the advantages of radials are much less pronounced in racing tires. For example when using a 70 or 80 series cross-ply tire on a narrow rim (typical in the 60’s and early 70’s on street cars) parts of the tread would lift slightly in hard cornering and this would reduce overall grip. In a low profile racing tire mounted on a rim which is wider than the tread width however (typical of racing tires) there is virtually no difference in grip between cross-ply tires and radial tires. Anyway, early attempts to make radial F1 tires that could perform as well as the existing cross-ply tires were not successful. I can’t remember who made the first radial F1 tires to actually be used but I think it may have been Bridgestone. Slobeachboy (talk) 22:04, 26 April 2014 (UTC)