Tyres are the biggest limiting factor in how well modern formula 1 cars run. In the days of the tyre war between Michelin and Bridgestone they defined which races were won by Renault (06) / McLaren (03) / Williams (03) and which were won by Ferrari. Indeed, you could argue that Ferrari had an advantage when F1 moved to a single tyre supplier in 2007 as they were already up to speed with how the Bridgestone tyres worked (funny how then Ferrari driver Kimi Raikkonen won that year's championship). It is ALWAYS the case that the car/driver package which works the tyres in a way most suited to that compound goes fastest.
2009 saw a return to slick tyres for the first time for nearly a decade. Unlike the grooved tyres that they replaced, slicks give much more instant performance. The reason for this is that slicks give a bigger contact area with the tarmac thus 'gluing' the car to the road more effectively (and therefore giving more mechanical grip). This has two effects on performance. The first is that the cars now oversteer less; if the car is better 'stuck' to the track then it is less likely to slide - despite Lewis Hamilton's best efforts. Secondly, the tyres are effectively softer; they don't need to generate as much heat to generate grip. This means that they are more prone to overheating and wearing out. This is why the Brawn was so good; it was so kind to its tyres that it could make them perform at their optimum for the longest during the races. It is also why Jenson's smooth driving style where he never jabs at the throttle but applies it progressively (minimising wheel spin and maximising traction) saw him perform the best over a whole stint between pitstops and thus always race better than he qualified.

No comments:
Post a Comment