2013 Random F1 Discussion

micha · PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 9:16 am

aerogi wrote:

next season all engine suppliers start from scratch with the new turbo engine

During the first year the engine suppliers will learn a whole lot, and the engines for 2015 will have all the potential problems sorted out.

And then Honda will enter with their engine? When the others will be on 'full modus' after one full year of learning the new engine rules.

To me that seems not the best timing. But I remember their timing for quitting F1 wasn't that particular good either...

I still can see a Marrussia Mugen or Caterham Mugen coming in 2014......

phil1993 · PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 9:33 am

Notice in the press release how there's no reference to it being an exclusive deal.

That would suggest Honda has other teams lined up.

But which ones? And out of the available teams at the moment, who can get a one year deal with a rival? Perhaps Honda can have it ready by 2014 and get a deal with Marussia..? After all Honda has been working on the engine since last October at least. Marussia has a technical deal with McLaren and currently no engine supplier for 2014. Plus they'll want to save costs everywhere and Honda may supply them at a low rate.

I'm talking myself into this Marussia-Mugen lark now.

micha · PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 9:51 am

phil1993 wrote:

Notice in the press release how there's no reference to it being an exclusive deal.

That would suggest Honda has other teams lined up.

But which ones? And out of the available teams at the moment, who can get a one year deal with a rival? Perhaps Honda can have it ready by 2014 and get a deal with Marussia..? After all Honda has been working on the engine since last October at least. Marussia has a technical deal with McLaren and currently no engine supplier for 2014. Plus they'll want to save costs everywhere and Honda may supply them at a low rate.

I'm talking myself into this Marussia-Mugen lark now.

you know it makes sense.

starting in 2015 will ensure Honda is well behind the rest.
Marrussia has a deal with McLaren as you say as well.
Mugen is part of Honda.
Mugen has been in F1 before.

/edit: Cosworth pulls out at the end of 2013 and none of the other brands are too keen on supplying an extra team. Unless a 5th party enters F1, they might be screwed. Either no-one will supply them or they will overcharge or lack in support.

Running as Mugens with Marrussia in 2014 limits possible negative exposure to Honda while gaining much needed tech info for 2015 when they enter as Honda with McLaren.

phil1993 · PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 10:09 am

It does make sense.

Cosworth isn't taking part in 2014. Mercedes is already supplying 3 teams. Renault is already supplying 3 teams, plus maybe Lotus. Williams wants a switch to Mercedes because Renault is too expensive. So if it's too expensive for Williams, it'll be too expensive for Marussia.

Ferrari? Well they have Bianchi there but what do Ferrari gain from giving engines to Marussia? Especially as Luca di M repeatedly slags off the bottom teams.

micha · PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 10:13 am

As long as Marrussia works with Mclaren, I can't see any Ferrari engines going that way. While that deal can easily be ended Marrussia is still somewhat a competitor to Ferrari in the roadcar business. Not a big one (yet) but still...

The plot is thickening

phil1993 · PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 10:17 am

I'm still intrigued by the Bianchi-Marussia deal.

Marussia must be getting money from that, or else Rodolfo Gonzalez would be in the seat already.

RtN · PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 11:36 am

Yes, the TV money they get for finishing in 10th, which they couldn't hope to get without Bianchi there.

---------------------

I look forward to Honda continuing where they left off whilst McLaren continue to slide down to Honda's level.

VirtuaIceMan · PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 12:25 pm

Goodbye Ecclestone maybe?

http://jalopnik.com/why-f1-supremo-bern ... -506638945

kals · PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 1:04 pm

highgroove wrote:

RtN wrote:

The Dutch have nothing. Just some islands. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands_Antilles

Might be some oil there, I dunno.

Or they could dredge the North Sea for us.

They have a few things, depends what your priorities are

Well, looking at your avatar, I know where Holland's main priority is

Fabs · PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 1:53 pm

If Monaco was this weekend, it would have been drenched.

Mika Kimi · PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 1:59 pm

McLaren has a lot of work to do then. Trying to get the current car up to speed, getting ready for the new regulations next year and already getting ready with Honda for 2015.

They can't allow themselves to drop even further back than they already are, so this will be a hard task for them.

RtN · PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 2:06 pm

Does anyone know if Kimiya Sato is a Honda dev. driver?

StefMeister · PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 7:03 pm

Unsurprisingly Lotus are not happy about the tyre changes:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/107453

Im actually kind of split on this as while I agree that changing things Mid-season isn’t good & that perhaps it isn’t fair on the 2 teams that got the tyres right, However on the other side I havn't really enjoyed any of the races so far in 2013 & a big part of that is because of the effect the tyres have had on the ‘racing’ so I am glad to see them changed.

The problem for me in Spain wasn’t so much the fact we saw a 4-stop strategy, It was the fact that they were having to do a 4-stop strategy on the hardest 2 compounds & still having to conserve the tyres as much as they were.
Yes we had 4-stops in the past but the difference between 4-stops in 2013 & the 4-stops of 2011/2012 is that in 2011/2012 there was nowhere near the same level of tyre management & you still saw drivers able to push hard & race the cars around them.

While I would actually prefer as few pit stops as possible (The 1-stoppers of late 2011/2012 were pretty good afterall), I don’t mind 2/3 or even 4-stop races as long as you see drivers pushing hard & racing one another. What we have seen in every race this year is drivers been told to slow down, To hit a pre-determined lap delta, To not race the cars around them & as Button pointed out there lapping slower than GP2 cars & are only a few seconds faster than the GP3 cars for big portions of the race. Thats the absurd part of F1 2013 so far in my view.

The thing which pi**es me off about the way Pirelli go on about the tyres is that they say there's 2 options, The extreme deg we have now or so called boring 1-stoppers in which Red Bull win.
Why not mention the ground in between, Tyres which allow drivers to push but which still suffer from a sensible level of wear?

I also think that talking as if anything other than the current tyres would see Red Bull win amounts to nothing more than trying to scare or at least concern fans who don’t want to see Red Bull/Vettel win a 4th championship into supporting the current tyres. Its pure PR nonsense.

Also why is it acceptable that the sole tyre supplier can even suggest that they have the power to determine who wins & who loses? Pirelli should not be thinking in terms of who fans do or don’t want to see win, They should be thinking about whats best for F1 as a sport.
If they are making decisions based around fans not wanting Red Bull to win then they should not be in F1.

codename_47 · PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 10:10 pm

They're not actually serious about affecting the championship (otherwise they'd have a "special relationship" with one team over the others like certain other tyre manufacturers) they're just rattling the saber a bit and saying "be careful what you wish for", when everyone is making demands about them changing the tyres it's important they fully think through the implications of what they're asking them to do.

I still feel we're lucky to have a company like Pirelli involved.
They were brought in to spice up the racing, 2011/2012: MISSION ACCOMPLISHED

Now in 2013 they admit they've been pushing things a bit too far (and F1 is all about finding out where the limits are for team, drivers and even tyre companies) and are being transparent about it as they attempt to reign themselves back in and give us more of what we, the fans, demand.

They could instead tell us to shove our demands up our arses and the tyres are the same for all the teams so they have to lump what they've got. But no, they're coming across as a company that actually listens and responds to fan interests.

It's certainly a refreshing in the world of F1 to have such a fan-friendly organisation and complete sea change to the "our way or we throw our toys out of the pram and leave" attitude of the previous tyre company.

RtN · PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2013 10:30 pm

StefMeister wrote:

The thing which pi**es me off about the way Pirelli go on about the tyres is that they say there's 2 options, The extreme deg we have now or so called boring 1-stoppers in which Red Bull win.
Why not mention the ground in between, Tyres which allow drivers to push but which still suffer from a sensible level of wear?

I also think that talking as if anything other than the current tyres would see Red Bull win amounts to nothing more than trying to scare or at least concern fans who don’t want to see Red Bull/Vettel win a 4th championship into supporting the current tyres. Its pure PR nonsense.

Also why is it acceptable that the sole tyre supplier can even suggest that they have the power to determine who wins & who loses? Pirelli should not be thinking in terms of who fans do or don’t want to see win, They should be thinking about whats best for F1 as a sport.
If they are making decisions based around fans not wanting Red Bull to win then they should not be in F1.

Codename's right, Pirelli aren't saying that they will switch to making Bridgestones in disguise, they're saying that they could if they were asked to, as a response to the dullards who seem to think that they are only capable of making the current type of tyre.

Whatever tyres they choose to make, it will decide who wins the title. There's nothing they can do about that. If they keep the current tyre, it favours Lotus and Ferrari because they both made cars that were very easy on the tyres. If they change it to something more durable, then it will be Red Bull and Mercedes at the front (see: Malaysia).

I'm personally quite glad that they have been upfront about that fact. I think it's helped a few people in the paddock to see exactly what the ramifications are of changing a tyre's compound and construction mid-season.

Artur Craft · PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2013 12:32 am

StefMeister wrote:

Im actually kind of split on this as while I agree that changing things Mid-season isn’t good & that perhaps it isn’t fair on the 2 teams that got the tyres right, However on the other side I havn't really enjoyed any of the races so far in 2013 & a big part of that is because of the effect the tyres have had on the ‘racing’ so I am glad to see them changed.

The problem for me in Spain wasn’t so much the fact we saw a 4-stop strategy, It was the fact that they were having to do a 4-stop strategy on the hardest 2 compounds & still having to conserve the tyres as much as they were.
Yes we had 4-stops in the past but the difference between 4-stops in 2013 & the 4-stops of 2011/2012 is that in 2011/2012 there was nowhere near the same level of tyre management & you still saw drivers able to push hard & race the cars around them.

While I would actually prefer as few pit stops as possible (The 1-stoppers of late 2011/2012 were pretty good afterall), I don’t mind 2/3 or even 4-stop races as long as you see drivers pushing hard & racing one another. What we have seen in every race this year is drivers been told to slow down, To hit a pre-determined lap delta, To not race the cars around them & as Button pointed out there lapping slower than GP2 cars & are only a few seconds faster than the GP3 cars for big portions of the race. Thats the absurd part of F1 2013 so far in my view.

I also think that talking as if anything other than the current tyres would see Red Bull win amounts to nothing more than trying to scare or at least concern fans who don’t want to see Red Bull/Vettel win a 4th championship into supporting the current tyres. Its pure PR nonsense.

Also why is it acceptable that the sole tyre supplier can even suggest that they have the power to determine who wins & who loses? Pirelli should not be thinking in terms of who fans do or don’t want to see win, They should be thinking about whats best for F1 as a sport.
If they are making decisions based around fans not wanting Red Bull to win then they should not be in F1.

I couldn't have said it any better, so thanks very much for this!

kals · PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2013 3:17 am

I'll just quote myself from another forum...

kals wrote:

I find it hard to give blame on Pirelli for the situation. For a start, they are required to produce a range of tyres to cover all different circuits on the calendar without having access to a contemporary F1 car (they are using a 2010 Renault, per-blown diffuser), without inseason testing, without testing at GP circuits before the season, testing pre-season in the cold climates of europe and under some pretty stringent cost restrictions thanks to the teams.

They will get it wrong from time to time, but that doesn't mean the tyres are junk or that you cannot race on them. Each season since they rejoined has followed a similar flow...

...early season races are typically unpredictable and with lots of pit stops while teams understand the tyre. Then mid-season onwards the teams understand how to utilize the tyres and there is less moaning. 2013 is no different.

Add to the above that Pirelli have put multiple proposals forward which would help each team with tyre usage and understanding the rubber... but the teams keep rejecting these plans.

If there is a problem then it is F1's and the team's fault. Not Pirelli's.

phil1993 · PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2013 8:49 am

Got to love the Horse Whisperer
http://formula1.ferrari.com/news/horse- ... -emotional

OS · PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2013 9:24 am

Whilst clearly biased to Ferrari's "we won, therefore this is ok" agenda, it's only as bad as others "we lost, therefore this is a problem" agenda ...

SBan83 · PostPosted: Fri May 17, 2013 11:42 am

F1 needs more dictatorship imo. "Oh, you don't like the tyres? Feel free to go to Indycar."

TBK-Light.com

2013 Random F1 Discussion

Who is online