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

2013 Korean Grand Prix

Mark Webber, Red Bull, Korea International Circuit, 2013Mark 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 Korean Grand Prix articles

Image ?? Red Bull/Getty

Advert | Go Ad-free


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.

  2. kcarrey (@kcarrey) said on 6th October 2013, 10:34

    sarcasm lvl 9000!!!

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

    • Adam Hardwick (@fluxsource) said on 6th October 2013, 10:54

      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.

      • 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!

      • graham228221 (@graham228221) said on 6th October 2013, 12:46

        Spot on

        • 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

      • iAltair (@ialtair) said on 6th October 2013, 14:11

        You need to understand some sarcasm.

      • Shreyas Mohanty (@) said on 6th October 2013, 18:35

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

      • bobulon said on 8th October 2013, 21:54

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

      • FunkyC said on 9th October 2013, 19:59

        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.

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

  4. Armchair Expert (@armchairexpert) said on 6th October 2013, 10:43

    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.

    • Abnash (@abnash) said on 6th October 2013, 11:05

      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.

    • Boomerang said on 6th October 2013, 18:25

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

  5. Hamilfan (@hamilfan) said on 6th October 2013, 10:46

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

  6. Dizzy said on 6th October 2013, 10:47

    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-

  7. Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 6th October 2013, 10:48

    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 ?????

    • TMF (@tmf42) said on 6th October 2013, 11:00

      @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.

      • Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 6th October 2013, 11:16

        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

        • TMF (@tmf42) said on 6th October 2013, 11:23

          @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.

          • Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989) said on 6th October 2013, 11:28

            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,

          • TMF (@tmf42) said on 6th October 2013, 11:31

            @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.

          • Mads (@mads) said on 6th October 2013, 12:28

            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.

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

    • SeaHorse (@seahorse) said on 6th October 2013, 15:21

      @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

    • 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. TMF (@tmf42) said on 6th October 2013, 10:51

    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.

    • Dizzy said on 6th October 2013, 11:09

      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.

      • Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 6th October 2013, 11:41

        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. DC (@dujedcv) said on 6th October 2013, 11:10

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

  10. James.G said on 6th October 2013, 11:22

    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. Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 6th October 2013, 11:31

    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. MazdaChris (@mazdachris) said on 6th October 2013, 11:33

    Five more years of this… :(

      • MazdaChris (@mazdachris) said on 6th October 2013, 17:49

        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.

        • Dave (@raceprouk) said on 6th October 2013, 17:53

          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?

          • MazdaChris (@mazdachris) said on 6th October 2013, 18:07

            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.

          • Dave (@raceprouk) said on 6th October 2013, 18:21

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

          • MazdaChris (@mazdachris) said on 6th October 2013, 18:26

            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.

          • Boomerang said on 6th October 2013, 18:35

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

          • tvm (@) said on 6th October 2013, 18:47


            “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…

          • MazdaChris (@mazdachris) said on 6th October 2013, 18:58

            @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.

          • tvm (@) said on 6th October 2013, 19:24

            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.

          • Dave (@raceprouk) said on 6th October 2013, 19:35

            @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.

          • tvm (@) said on 6th October 2013, 19:50


            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?

    • 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. Serby said on 6th October 2013, 12:33

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

  14. JamieFranklinF1 (@jamiefranklinf1) said on 6th October 2013, 13:03

    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.

    • Hamilfan (@hamilfan) said on 6th October 2013, 13:57

      @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.

    • KeeleyObsessed (@keeleyobsessed) said on 6th October 2013, 15:02

      @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.

      • Michael Brown (@) said on 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

      • Dizzy said on 6th October 2013, 18:21

        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.

      • Breno (@austus) said on 6th October 2013, 23:38

        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?

      • bobulon said on 8th October 2013, 21:58

        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

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.

Skip to toolbar