“I got a Pirelli puncture from a Pirelli tyre” – Webber

2013 Korean Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by

Mark Webber says the fast-wearing nature of Pirelli’s tyres caused the failure seen on Sergio Perez’s car during the Korean Grand Prix.

Webber hit debris from Perez’s tyre shortly after coming out of the pits, forcing him to make an extra stop for tyres.

“I think I got a Pirelli puncture from a Pirelli tyre so… impressive,” said Webber after the race.

“Perez had a tyre explosion which, yeah, wasn’t nice, I just missed the debris from the tread of the tyre.

“I hear that he got a puncture because he locked up but we’re locking up because there’s no tread on the tyres. The tyres are wearing out that fast you can’t brake deep anyway.”

Tyre preservation was particularly during the race, Webber added: “There’s so much pace management going on, all the drivers are looking after the tyres.”

Perez said had done more than half the race distance on his set of medium tyres before his front-right failed as he accelerated towards turn three.

“I did 28 laps with that tyre,” said the McLaren driver. “Sometimes I was braking earlier sometimes later.”

He added there was no further indication what had caused the failure: “All of a sudden I have the lock-up and then after turn one the tyre just explode, broke the front wing and damaged some other parts of the car.”

2013 Korean Grand Prix

    Browse all 2013 South Korean Grand Prix articles

    Image © Red Bull/Getty

    Author information

    Keith Collantine
    Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

    Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

    104 comments on ““I got a Pirelli puncture from a Pirelli tyre” – Webber”

    1. The structure should be more rigid: the compound can wear, but you need hard rubber under that so it will stay rigid even after they’ve degraded.

      1. Are you asking for tires with 2 different rubber components? I don’t believe that’s allowed in the rules and will be a nightmare to get working.
        A better solution would be for Pirelli to make sure the rubber stays attached to the wheel even after deflation.

        1. @subbu basically it is what I was suggesting: have the compound of whatever grip levels and softness on top of a universal very hard but completely lacking in grip rubber compound underneath. That’d hopefully prevent failures, although I’m no expert in tyre manufacturing.

      2. @vettel1
        I think that was the concept of Bridgestone various compound of 2009-2010
        the tyre that can last a whole race, but only gave really good performance merely by 3-5 laps as long as remember (cmiiw)

      3. YEah, so bring back the steel carcas – oh, wait …

        1. @bascb HAha. They just need to up the technology and fear no manufacturing costs, in the end they do profit a small margin from Formula1, I don’t recall Bridgestone or Michelin doing that.

    2. sarcasm lvl 9000!!!

      1. Love that quote

        I got a Pirelli puncture from a Pirelli tyre

        1. I’m sorry, but after Hembery’s recent ill advised remark, this seems like instant karma.

    3. Vettel tops first six fastest laps of the race. Don’t dare to say Pirelli are crap tires! :P

      1. How is that in any way relevant? Who set the fastest lap doesn’t tell you anything about the quality of the tyres, as everyone uses the same tyres.

        The truth of it is that these super fragile tyres have made this year a farce. Even putting aside the number of sudden and dangerous failures, that tyre degradation is the main story at pretty much every race is boring. Far from making the racing more exciting, we now have a sport where words of encouragement are “look after the tyres”.

        And before I get the invetiable reply that “tyre management has always been part of the game” – true, but not 90% of it.

        It’s getting pretty boring now (as is the Red Bull/Vettel dominance, but at least that’s not down to absurd rules). I’m all for tyre compounds that open up a range of strategic options, but the current situation is pathetic.

        1. Absolutely well said! I think the rule of the mandatory tire usage is also a big mistake as there are much less strategic opportunities left open for teams.

          Pirelli would be okay if:
          Just remember that we wanted faster degrading tires in the Bridgestone era and if all the rules were stayed the same then now we would be very happy with the way it is. But the mix of KERS, DRS and these crap Pirelli tires it is just too much!

        2. Spot on

          1. Indeed – F1 is NOW a farce – Red Bull have just got a better handle on it.
            Statistics will be the down fall of Vettel – Until Red Bull threw money into the
            sport as cheap marketing, where were he? Did he succeed in lower/other formulas}
            NO Red bull hired the true MASTER – Newey. He did it at Williams, Mclaren now HE is doing it again

        3. You need to understand some sarcasm.

        4. Shreyas Mohanty (@)
          6th October 2013, 18:35

          @fluxsource I think @vjm’s comment was related to Paul Hembery’s retort to Alonso.

        5. the tongue pokey outey thing at the end of his comment should have been the giveaway lol,

        6. Tread destination is hazardous. Perelli has always had an awful reputation I’m the States. We call them “slip-er-ellis. Looks like the F1 guys are agreeing. The higher average spees and greater weights of the Nascar and Indy Cars should place much higher demands on the tires than the much lighter F1 cars. Before you start slamming, there is much more to tire comparisons than that. What works for a heavier car won’t work for a lighter and higher performing tire. The compounding must be different. The solution is for the tire engineers to work out.

          It is interesting that Dunlop offered to provide tires to the F1 teams but the offer was declined by the FIA .

          The tire rowe isn’t good for the sport. FIA should act now not in a few years. The current tires will be destroyed by the high torque engines and KERS forecast for next year. From a driving perspective, the pilot next year will have a total, new driving experience. A much flater torque curve, tougher to keep from roasting the rear tires off out of the corners, and skitish cars – it should be great from a fan’s viewpoint.

          The tire thing is good for no one, not the drivers, the team’s, the FIA or the manufacturer.

      2. The tyres have grip they are just mushy over ripe black grapes.

    4. In 2005 tyres had to last whole race. At Nurburgring Kimi locked up his front right tyre massively with 30 laps to go. It lasted, but vibration from the tyre damaged suspension and caused crash.

      8 years later and Perez locked up his front right tyre massively, which was 20 laps old. Instead of just causing huge flatspot, it delaminated almost immediately.

      Surely that’s not right? Mistakes should be punished, but what happened today is unacceptable.

      1. It is crazy and dangerous. Especially when you have cars suddenly stopping on the middle of a street to spray up tyre carcasses and various sharp pieces of carbon fibre. Imagine if Kimi had been behind Perez at the time and the danger he would have been subjected to. Pirelli really need to rethink these tyres for next year.

      2. I just wanted to write about the same situation. Michelin tire broke suspension and sustained flat spot until retirement.

    5. Well done mark I see what you did there . Kudos for the sarcasm.

    6. Kimi Raikkonen had several massive lock-ups at Nurburgring in 2005 & the Michelin tyres of the time were structurally strong enough that the tyre never failed (Vibration broke the suspension, Tyre remained inflated).

      Been a few instances in the Pirelli-Era of lock-ups causing the tyres to fail so there seems to be far less rubber to wear through.

      Quotes in this article were from Sky I believe, He was even more scathing on the BBC radio-

      1. Yea..like in USGP 2005.

        1. USA 05 was a totally different reason.

    7. I just want to see the look on Paul Hembery’s face !!!!!!!! Sergio accident today was as sever as what we have seen in Silverstone.I want also to hear Christian Horner opinion about this because he has been so concerned about safety with the old tyres !!!!!! Wait Vettel has already won !!!!!!!!!!!!
      I just want to be wrong but this is another proof that the current tyres are not safe either !!!!!! Why change from unsafe spec tyres to another one ?????

      1. @tifoso1989 – so just like Alonso was fine with it while he won and now the tires are rubbish from his pov.
        It’s true that RBR raised the safety concern for selfish reasons but don’t single them out because everybody is looking after himself first.

        But I think the case is made – this years tires went overboard and Pirelli should take it down a notch and start delivering more conservative and safer tires for next year.

        1. @tmf42
          My point was “If the tyres are badly made why the change should be in favor of one team” ???
          I mean RBR were moaning about this year’s tyres and were pushing for the 2012 tyres which were proved to be unsafe

          1. @tifoso1989 – because with the original 2013 specs they wouldn’t have survived Spa, Suzuka and struggled everywhere else. It was absolutely necessary that’s why Ferrari, Lotus and Force India gave up opposing a change.

            1. @tmf42
              I’m not against the change, safety is above anything, the change has to be made but why the return to the 2012 tyres ?? Why not build a new compounds unknown for everybody but safe enough,

            2. @tifoso1989 – because developing a completely new tire takes months and they needed a fast solution. 2012 specs was the compromise to get somehow to the end of the season.

            3. @tifoso1989
              The problem is, by making up something completely new, they could have run into other problems.
              They had to change it to something that they KNEW would work. And they had to do it fast. It would simply have been impossible to make up a new tyre in the given time frame.

            4. But hot to chance the Tyres, if FIA and the temas don’t letra Pirelli to test and improve them?

      2. @tifoso1989 Christian Horner is a prophet who foretold that 2013 spec tyres are a safety concern so he was knocked down by Paul Hembery with 2012 spec tyres and he still remains unconscious! :-P

      3. What one must also understand is that Pirelli retained the 2013 compounds to try and keep the tyres as similar as was possible to the original 2013 tyres.

    8. The fans are to blame – Montreal 10 was perceived as an exciting race and then the FIA picked up the idea to do this every race.
      Imo, they could do away with DRS – make lasting tires like in the Bridgestone era – allow everybody to choose the compound they wanna start with and keep the 2 compound rule. And we still would see good races.

      1. Pirelli haven’t even ever come close to matching Montreal 2010.

        The thing that made Montreal 2010 interesting was that while the tyres were wearing the performance drop-off was gradual & the gap between fresh/worn tyres wasn’t really that big which meant a driver on worn tyres was still able to put up a decent defense against drivers on fresh tyres.
        Also the drivers were still able to push hard, There was not much tyre management going on.

        All this meant that while we got more pit stops due to increased wear we also got some good hard fought, competitive racing with drivers actually racing hard & battling hard.

        Pirelli have created tyres that are completely the opposite of this. The performance drop-off is sudden & often unpredictable, Gap between worn/new tyres is often really big so we see no decent fight between cars on differing strategies as the car on fresh rubber has such a large advantage he’s straght past. And we see stupid amounts of tyre management which has a negative impact on the races.

        Montreal 2010 was purely down to circumstance, Pirelli are artificially trying to create the same circumstances & it shows & becomes more & more obvious the harder they try to force the issue.

        1. Actually, that race was a result of the surface. The city and the St. Lawrence River freeze in the winter. This is a problem because the water trickles down through the minuscule gaps in the tarmac that are used for drainage. When it freezes, it expands. This damages the surface of the circuit. The solution was to make a surface that was less porous than usual. This meant less seepage, which means less water trickling down, which in turn caused less damage when it froze and expanded. An unintended byproduct of this was that the circuit has a unique surface.

          Perhaps that is the solution: keep the tyre compounds the same, but alter the composition of the tarmac used around the circuit.

    9. I think that they should bring Paul Hembrey to the podium so that he can be booed, especially after his reply to Alonso yesterday.

      1. He should ask Hirohide Hamashima how to make a decent tyres

        1. If you put back that durable bridgestone, we will have 1 tire set for each weekend, not fun.

          1. Rubbish. There are no tyre changes in BTCC, and it invariably leads to fantastic racing.

            1. You can’t really compare touring car racing with formula racing, though.

            2. @aseixas – You can, insofar as how the tyres affect the quality of the racing.

            3. I don’t think you can, because there are more substantial differences between the two than the tyre rules to account for the differences in quality of racing.

      2. Haha very true.

        Looks like his jab at Alonso came back to bit him in the backside. First Raikkonen, then Alonso and now Webber can be added to the list of drivers who could’ve been injured by flying Pirelli rubber.

    10. when pirelli came into f1 I was quite keen of what they were going to do, tyres that force some strategy i thought sounded interesting.

      but have to say that after 3 years im not liking the effect the tyres have had on things. i dont like the level of tyre management we see now, i don’t like how drivers are told how to drive because there tyres are heating too much, how they should not race the cars around them etc…

      we hear talk about tyres all far too much now, there the big taking pint pre race, through the weekend & post race, we seem to discuss tyres more than just about anything else now & surely that is not correct.

      we also seem to have had most of the drivers complain of the same thing now so there is clearly an issue there as far as too much tyre management been required.

      scale back for 2014, lets see the drivers racing once again with tyre management & tyre talk in general taking a back seat.

    11. So Perez locks up, damages his tyre and it explodes. Driver error. Then Mark Webber hits the remains of Perez’s tyre and gets a puncture. Again, a driver error – if Webber was immediately behind Perez, he would have seen it and reacted; after all, Raikkonen did and he was the first driver through. If Webber was several corners away, he would have seen the yellow flags and the debris and should have missed it, since everyone else did.

      So we have two driver errors that have directly led to two punctures … and somehow this is Pirelli’s fault? Why doesn’t Webber blame Pirelli for his retirement as well? After all, Adrian Sutil was using Pirelli tyres when he spun and hit Webber. Webber’s car then caught on fire and he retired. Ergo, Pirelli did it.

      Conclusion: drivers are being far too quick to blame Pirelli for every problem they encounter.

    12. Five more years of this… :(

        1. It’s not about delaminations, it’s about turning up with tyres which are absolutely not fit for purpose. Not able to cope with the forces generated by an F1 car. This is Pirelli’s third go this year at creating a tyre which can hold together and for the third time they’ve failed. Paul Hembery bangs on and on about teams/fans/FOM, etc etc, asking them to create tyres which improved the show. That’s not what these tyres do. They ruin it

          It’s one thing to have a rare circumstance where something goes wrong, but that’s not the case here. It seems increasingly like Pirelli actually can’t make a proper F1 tyre.

          1. The tyre was heavily damaged during a lock-up. It’s also been the only failure since Silverstone that wasn’t due to a puncture. Unless you replace pneumatic tyres with solid rubber, there will always be the chance of failure. Since Silverstone, Pirelli have changed the construction and gone more conservative on compound. What more do you want from them?

            1. Damaged by a lock up which occurred as a result of a degraded tyre with very little rubber left on it. Yes, only one complete failure, but the tyres in this race were absolutely dreadful. A lap which can’t be pushed for one lap without suffering massive performance dropoff is not a tyre which is suitable for a Grand Prix. Pirelli were meant to have sorted this out, but clearly they haven’t. All it takes is a slight change in track conditions and all of a sudden the tyres completely give up. It’s simply not good enough.

            2. @mazdachris – Lotus have adapted to the tyres. Red Bull have adapted to the tyres. McLaren haven’t. Why blame Pirelli for McLaren’s failures?

            3. None of the teams you mentioned there were pushing today. All were nursing the tyres around. Not suffering failures doesn’t mean the tyres were working. Everyone was struggling.

            4. I want them to leave F1! That’s not much to ask.

            5. @raceprouk

              “It’s also been the only failure since Silverstone that wasn’t due to a puncture”

              How thick are you??

              thats only because drivers are nursing them around every lap of every race…

            6. @tvm Hey that’s no way to make your point. If you disagree, explain why. I don’t think calling someone thick is a great way to articulate yourself.

            7. Explain why?

              Its pretty obvious that these tires are a disgrace to F1 and to Pirrelli (who agreed to deliberately not doing their best). Drivers need to ask permission before they defend their position for crying out loud.

              Then defending those pieces of rubbish rubber that several actual F1 drivers has openly criticized.

              Sorry don’t know what else to call it.

            8. @tvm – Defending doesn’t wear out the tyres any faster than normal racing. And there’s nothing stopping drivers doing what Alonso did in Spain – push all rave and pit when the tyres wear out. Remember, he won the race doing that, while Red Bull moaned endlessly about not being able to push.

            9. @raceprouk

              1st sorry for the remark b4.

              2nd That doesn’t change the fact that:
              – Drivers has asked for permission to defend
              – Drivers are told to drive to a delta

              Which sound like endurance to me, if I want to watch that then Le Man does it much better anyway.

              But you are fine with f1 being a chess game that could be played out with tire cards in advance without actually racing?

      1. Pirelli are going to make more rigid tyres for next season, they’ve said so themselves. So they should be fine, as long as the FIA actually allows them time to test (which I believe they are doing with Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bull’s tests).

    13. Pirelli=game killer, f1 ist what it use to be…just my 2 cents

    14. First thing people need to note, is that Pirelli have already agreed to more conservative tyres next year, because there will be enough changes with the engines and new regulations.

      Secondly, I am really sick of Webber at the moment. If he’s not making sarcastic comments and whining about what’s going on, then he’s not speaking at all. He was broken after 2010, and never recovered from it. He has been sub-par since then, and would prefer him to just leave, so that someone who is grateful of the opportunity to both be in F1, and in a great team can drive the car.

      Honestly, now I just laugh every time something happens to his car now, because I know some pathetic excuse or conspiracy theory is soon to follow. Just leave already.

      1. @jamiefranklinf1 I am afraid that their conservative tyres next year might be equivalent to prime tyres this year and the team end up cooking them faster than what pirelli expect them —> leads to protests ——> leads to change——>leads to one team benefiting . Note that this vicious cycle starts with Pirelli’s inability and FIA’s inability to introduce a suitable testing method to help Pirelli.

      2. @jamiefranklinf1 It’s good to know I’m not the only one who finds Webber’s comments annoying at sometimes even insulting to F1. Vettel’s every comment, even where he decides to accelerate when driving, is put under scrutiny by the ‘armchair experts’, yet Webber appears to get away with openly disobeying team orders or complaining whenever something doesn’t go his way.

        It was a puncture from some debris. Any tyre could get a puncture from debris, the implication of his comment is what really gets me. It’s like he’s deliberately trying to slag the sport off whilst acting completely innocent.

        1. Michael Brown (@)
          6th October 2013, 15:44

          Indeed, even Kimi can get away with being mad on the radio and swearing, but when Vettel does it, suddenly he’s not worthy to be a world champion

        2. It was a puncture from some debris. Any tyre could get a puncture from debris,

          True, However there have been far more damaged tyres the past 3 years than I ever remember seeing in F1 before suggesting that the pirelli tyres are far more prone to suffering damage than the Bridgestones & Michelins seen in F1 previously.

          I’ve been following F1 since the early 70s & I honestly cannot remember ever seeing as many tyre failures in F1 than what we have seen the past 3 years. Its pathetic really.

          Just look over at Indycar, Scott Dixon ran over a massive piece of debris yesterday which had a sharp bit sticking up & there was zero damage to his tyres although it did damage the tyre sensors.

        3. Let’s put how fragile the tyres are aside for a second… Why was there Pirelli Debris to begin with? Or even better: why is there Pirelli Debris still?

        4. if by debris you mean carbon fibre then yes, if on the other hand you mean bits of tyre then NO. You are aware that there is a difference? I can’t remember anyone ever getting a puncture from bits of tyre before so Webber was quite justified in making his comment

    15. Dont you think that pirelli should get a reprimand from stewards like never coming back in f1. Pirelli have spoilt racing.

    16. Pirelliception

    17. Dear Paul Hembery, Should we now ask 21 drivers on the grid to go and ask the soon-to-be-four-times-champion how does the Pirelli tyres work for him?

      An F1F

      1. “It’s quite easy” responded Vettel. “You first have to make sure you have a car that is few seconds per lap faster than any other, but only if it were mounted on a last year’s tire. Then, you moan and moan until they give you the tire you are faster at, despite sabotaging many other teams that actually made cars fast on this year’s tire. Then, when they screw up everyone by bringing you the tires that you like better, you can afford to reap the fruits of your failure, because your inability to make the car suit current tires suddenly becomes advantage, since the last year’s tires are a perfect fit for you, while at the same time a handicap for those who were actually maximizing the current tires. After that, when you have 4 seconds per lap advantage, you can afford to back off and cruise at around 2 seconds per lap faster than anyone else, and not stress the tires too much.
        And that’s how you win in F1.”
        “It’s all down to driver” said Vettel proudly, while hanging his balls in a pool.

        1. moan until they give you the tyre you are faster [on]

          I see a lot of people repeating this mantra in the hope it will make more people believe it is true when it isn’t.

          Before Silverstone Pirelli wanted to avoid making changes to the tyres precisely because it would be seen as helping Red Bull:

          Pirelli keen to avoid claim of Red Bull favouritism

          After Silverstone they were changed on safety grounds:

          Kevlar belt tyres for Germany, new tyres for Hungary

          Given the tyre explosions seen at Silverstone I don’t think it’s unreasonable the tyres were changed. Even teams like Lotus who stood to lose out from the change welcomed the move because it was the reasonable thing to do under the circumstances.

          Not to mention you ignore the fact that Vettel was leading the championship even before the tyres were changed.

          1. What is wrong with Pirelli? Last year Pirelli went too conservative towards the final phase of the championship stating they did not want to interfere in the championship. Yet they went too aggressive with the 2013 tyres be it the compounds or the construction. The contradiction between these two logics brings to the fore the inconsistency in their vision.

            When the tyres were exploding in Silverstone, the teams agreed to change the tyres on safety grounds and it was assumed everything was fine since no more delaminations / explosions were experienced until today. And when Fernando criticized the current tyres, Hembery advises him to take tips from the-soon-to-be-four-times-champion and all of the world is presented with another delamination which again causes another puncture (‘rubber hitting rubber and causing puncture’ as Webber says). And this happens especially after all the tyre test Pirelli had with Ferrari, Mercedes and Redbull and at the YDT!!! They can’t blame the old Lotus or insufficient testing with a proper car representative of current year car.

            There are two possible conclusions to this viz. either Pirelli do not know how to make a proper tyre or they are trying to fool everyone of us. The first one is that they have poor system of quality control and get a handful percentage of their output as substandard, which result in explosion / delaminations (obviously not everyone has had it). The second is that they are pretending to be neutral while they tend to side with some/one team. Going by the way Hembery and Pirelli have been reacting it is very suspicious they are doing anything good and just. And I feel their claim that they wanted to avoid being considered as favouring Red Bull is just hogwash. Does the FIA check the quality of the tyres or the construction, compounds etc. of it, every race? If not, they could even have altered the tyres (or the process of manufacturing them) for Silverstone to ultimately favour Red Bull without being considered to be doing so. Who knows? In that case it is immaterial as to who led the championship at that time, isn’t it @keithcollantine

            1. @seahorse

              If not, they could even have altered the tyres (or the process of manufacturing them) for Silverstone to ultimately favour Red Bull without being considered to be doing so.

              Let’s think about this a but more carefully, shall we:

              First, you need to think about why is Pirelli in the sport to begin with, besides the money of the deal: publicity. Do you think exploding tyres make for a good company image? Pirelli was the subject of ridicule for weeks after the incident. Do seriously think they would put themselves in such a situation to benefit Red Bull? It’s a very illogical thing to say.

              Secondly, F1 teams are not filled by hobby mechanics, but by some of the very best engineers in the world. Do you honestly thing they didn’t investigate the tyres after the explosions? Do you honestly thing they wouldn’t have found out if something was amiss?

              Third: You do realize that exploding tyres could have had very serious (even fatal) consequences, right? So you’re accusing Pirelli of intentionally putting lives in danger. Think carefully about the implications that that has.

              Fourth: Assuming Pirelli did all that, why would they choose to benefit Red Bull, of all teams? They have HUGE deals outside F1 with McLaren, Ferrari and Mercedes, why would they side with the less suitable for them?

              So, according to you, Pirelli intentionally put lives in danger, made themselves the laughing stock of the people they try to market themselves to, no team even noticed, just for Red Bull to win a championship they were alreading leading.

              I think you need to think this a bit more carefully.

          2. Even teams like Lotus who stood to lose out from the change welcomed the move because it was the reasonable thing to do under the circumstances.

            Pedro de la Rosa comments the races on sunday in spanish TV. When the main commenter complained about the tyre change (because, according to him, it has fatally hurt Alonso’s chances to be WDC), he asked DLR’s opinion. Pedro first said that he didn’t want to comment, but when pushed, he answered “After Silverstone, those tyres (old 2013’s with steel belt) just had to go”.

    18. F1 is a complete joke. The drivers have been turned into the world’s highest payed babysitters, looking after the stupid tires lap after lap, week after week. This is not racing. And next year, the idiots in control think V6 turbos rated at 600 hp are the way to go. This sport becomes more unwatchable every week. I love motorsport, so I’m not sure if I will ever stop watching completely, but I find I get absolutely no enjoyment from watching these Formula 1 races anymore. The drivers are rendered impotent by the technical regulations. Time to get rid of the bozos in charge and re-introduce engineering innovation to F1.

    19. Is everyone so obtuse? Pirelli is simply making the tire that they were asked to make. This isn’t a Pirelli issue, its an FIA/FOM issue. Get your criticism directed at the culprit instead of the scapegoat.

      1. This. Many times this.

        1. Butr Pirelli are the one’s making the tyres, There designing the compound & the construction.

          The FIA or whoever asked Pirelli to design tyres that wore to create varied strategy & in 2011 the did this & did a decent job of it
          In 2012 it was Pirelli & Pirelli alone that decided to make more knife edge tyres which had a smaller operating window & for 2013 it was Pirelli & solely Pirelli that added steel belts, changed the construction & decided they wanted more thermal degredation.

          Bernie said not long ago that Pirelli were not doing what they were asked to do-
          “The tyres are wrong, not what we intended when we asked Pirelli to produce something which did a half race ,” he told the Daily Express.”

          Pirelli & Pirelli alone are to blame for the rubbish tyres they create which do nothing but force drivers to run tyre management races.
          Pirelli should be embarrassed & ashamed at how much of a joke there tyres have been in 2012/13 & to be frank I hope they lose the tyre tender when its opened up again next year, They deserve to be forced out of the sport for good!

          1. You can’t ask for high-degrading tyres, which is what Ecclestone did, and not expect things to go out of control when you have such a restrictive and limited test policy, as the FIA/FOM currently have.

            Make no mistake, engineering is some magic lamp to which you make a list of what you want and it happens. If Ecclestone wants very specific things, then he should allow Pirelli to test the tyres as much as they want/need to.

          2. Michael Brown (@)
            6th October 2013, 23:41

            I agree the 2011 tires were the best tires Pirelli produced for F1 in their three years. I don’t like it when the drivers have to save the tires all the time

    20. Shreyas Mohanty (@)
      6th October 2013, 18:47

      I see many people bashing Webber for his comments. He is right though, Pirelli have properly messed their tyres up. And I wonder why Vettel wasn’t criticised for his comment that was an absolute disrespect for other team’s staff and efforts. Yeah, your team gave you a brilliant car as usual ( kudos to RBR’s brilliance for that), now why don’t you just keep silent and win without a challenge?

      1. @shreyasf1fan – Rosberg practically tripped over himself to respond to Vettel, assuming that it was his balls that were referenced, too.

        1. Shreyas Mohanty (@)
          6th October 2013, 19:11

          @david-a Hahaha ;) But it wasn’t the paddock I was talking about, I meant the F1F members!

      2. Why then other teams didn’t keep silent and try to improve their cars instead of accusing RB of using traction control.

        1. Not one team even hinted they suspected RBR of using traction control. There have been no complaints filed with the FIA, and not one investigation has been launched.

          1. Not officially but lot of people hinted to it.

    21. Shreyas Mohanty (@)
      6th October 2013, 18:52

      And am I the only one who thinks Hembery is getting a bit too big for his shoes – insulting one of the best and one of the most experienced drivers on the grid?

    22. Using the Hembrey school of responding to criticism, perhaps Webber should ask his soon-to-4-time-world-champion team mate for advice on how to not get a puncture.

    23. Recipe for better racing:

      1. Produce Bridgestone 2010-esque durable tyres
      2. Get rid of the “use 2 compounds per-race” rule, eliminating mandatory pitstops
      3. Get rid of the “top 10 start on qualifying tyres” rule
      4. Bring hard, medium, soft and super-soft tyres to each weekend, for greater variance in tyre strategy
      5. Get rid of DRS

      1. This. Even if we get less “spectacular” races, drivers would be pushing to the max, teams would be free to create actual strategies and we’d see fewer but actual skill-based passes.

    24. I think that the criticism to Pirelli’s tyres is a bit unfair at the moment. I agree that the tyres degrade too fast, but that’s what Pirelli was asked to do, it’s not their fault.
      The two punctures we saw today were nothing unusual, in my opinion. Perez had a huge lock up in turn 1, the tyres were old, it was too much for his front right. It’s true what Webber says, the drivers lock up because there’s no tread left on the tyre, but it’s the consequence of the extreme approach on tyre degradation.
      Webber had a puncture because there were a lot of debris, it’s normal to have a puncture in such situations.

      1. but that’s what Pirelli was asked to do, it’s not their fault.

        by all accounts they were not asked to go anywhere near as extreme as they have gone since 2012.

        In 2011 the tyres were not so bad, They didn’t get many complaints because of it.
        In 2012 & again in 2013 Pirelli decided to change everything about the tyres & its this which has caused all the problems.
        The 2012 tyres turned the season early on into a lottery & the 2013 tyres have been pathetic & turned f1 into ‘formula pirelli tyre manage championships’.

    25. Webber shows some brand-loyalty!

    26. Pirelli has already responded to Sergio Perez’s delamination as expected. Here is part of what they had to say. Absolutely priceless!
      “We’re obviously on exactly the same construction as we raced here last year, so there’s no underlying problem, while flat spots or punctures have just always been an integral part of racing.”.

      1. haha!
        No surprise, I’m surprised at Silverstone they didn’t say it was the curbs that were not legal or within FIA standards. Soon they will say the tarmac is the problem.

        1. Don’t be ridiculous – no-one ever claimed the Silverstone kerbs were the problem, apart from a few know-nothing hacks and ignorant fans.

    Comments are closed.