Pirelli reveal 18-inch tyre design ahead of test

2014 F1 season

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJZ3sLKsDIw

Pirelli have revealed how the 18-inch wheel and tyre they intend to test at Silverstone tomorrow will look.

Formula One cars currently run on 13-inch tyres, but Pirelli believe a switch to lower-profile rubber will make F1 tyre technology more relevant to road cars.

“The 13-inch tyre is no longer relevant to the everyday road user, because even an 18-inch tyre is used by standard vehicles these days.=,” said Pirelli motorsport director Paul Hembery.

“While 18-inch tyres would be a big step for Formula One, there are many other motorsport series that already use this size. So there’s scope to go even bigger than that in Formula One in years to come.”

2014 F1 season


Browse all 2014 F1 season articles

Image © Pirelli

Advert | Go Ad-free

134 comments on Pirelli reveal 18-inch tyre design ahead of test

1 2 3 4
  1. dragoll (@dragoll) said on 8th July 2014, 12:17

    Sex on wheels!

  2. Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 8th July 2014, 12:18

    Definitely looks better than the current 13-inch ones. Hope they’re also quicker.

  3. James (@iamjamm) said on 8th July 2014, 12:20

    I know it’s only a rendered image, but they look really nice

  4. Alex Ward said on 8th July 2014, 12:20

    Just like in other cars, this is about asthetics, not performance. And i dont like it personally. Its not F1 to me.

    • mattshaw85 (@mattshaw85) said on 8th July 2014, 12:25

      erm, no. It does have performance benefits too.

      • Ben (@dysthanasiac) said on 8th July 2014, 12:28

        Not really. A lot of the suspension compliance in current cars is derived from the tire. A lower profile tire will just make engineers adjust the suspension accordingly so that overall compliance will be the same as now.

        Looks good to me, though.

        • mattshaw85 (@mattshaw85) said on 8th July 2014, 12:40

          Surely the ‘give’ that you get from the sidewall when cornering wouldn’t be put back in with suspension adjustments? I would have thought you’d want as little sideways movement as possible.

          • Ben (@dysthanasiac) said on 8th July 2014, 12:49

            Think of it this way: sidewall deformation in cornering has an effect on how engineers determine camber settings (among other things). They already adjust those settings for maximum “grip” and durability results within the window of what tires will allow. Changing the profile of the tire just moves the window; it doesn’t change the net result.

            That said, a lack of deformation in cornering could have an effect on aero.

          • Ben (@dysthanasiac) said on 8th July 2014, 12:57

            Actually, ignore the above, because I mangled my response terribly.

            For any given tread width and compound, there’s a window for suspension settings like camber, caster, toe, etc, to get the most from a tire. Any change in profile just moves the window for those settings, as long as tread width and compound remain the same.

          • MazdaChris (@mazdachris) said on 8th July 2014, 13:11

            Its’ not so much about the lateral deformation of the tyres but rather the ‘squash’. When a car is going across the rumble strip for instance, at the moment the tyre is deforming over that surface while the suspension isn’t moving very much. On a car with low profile tyres, it’ll need to have a more pliant suspension setup with a greater range of movement – the tyre can’t deform and remain in contact wiht those kind of bumps, so the suspension needs to do the job instead.

            But this isn’t a drawback, it’s a benefit. Springs and dampers are a fairly precise science, and can be controlled to quite a fine degree. Whereas the squash of a tyre is dependent on a large number of factors – tyre pressure, heat, level of wear, and so on. The level of suash and deformation is not a constant; it shifts during the race (and is one of the reasons why different cars seem to work better at different points in the race and during stints). Whereas with a low profile tyre the performance level is pretty constant.

            You also do lose that lateral movement, which isn’t desirable since the frequency of the lateral movement isn’t the same as the frequency of the chassis, meaning you can get a sort of disharmony between how the chassis and the tyres load up during cornering. You can end up with a weird backlash against the tyre as the suspension is put under load, which can make the car really unstable and unpredictable while changing direction. Again, this isn’t a constant and it’s not something that’s easy to predict, so it’s pot luck whether or not a car really suffers from this. And again, a low profile minimises this effect, giving a more reliable reaction no matter the application.

          • BasCB (@bascb) said on 8th July 2014, 13:12

            I would say these tyres should be far easier to model around in simulation because they deform less.
            And the smaller deflection should als help with traction and efficiency.

          • Adam Hardwick (@fluxsource) said on 8th July 2014, 13:35

            @dysthanasiac @bascb The reduced tyre deformation should make the contact patch more consistent (and likewise the aero around the wheel), and also affect the amount of heat they can work into the tyre.

            The reduced mass of they tyre itself will also mean that it will probably lose heat quicker, although I’m unsure how this will interact with the now larger wheels and – I presume – brakes.

          • MazdaChris (@mazdachris) said on 8th July 2014, 13:42

            Another possible consequence might be that if they have to make the suspension more robust with a greater range of motion, you may start to see cars with a lower chassis, to keep the CoG as low as possible. It depends on whether the added weight of the suspension starts to overpower the aerodynamic benefit of having the front of the chassis high up.

          • Ben (@dysthanasiac) said on 8th July 2014, 13:57

            @fluxsource

            The increased size of the rim will actually increase unsprung mass, as F1 tire sidewalls are paper thin, and reducing them will have a negligible effect on weight. http://i.imgur.com/qLQSxX2.jpg

            As far as getting heat into the tires, its the act of deformation that causes tires to build heat. So, naturally, decreased deformation will tend to make it more difficult to build heat. It’s analogous to the difference between hard and soft compounds. (Pirelli will no doubt use a different compound tomorrow to offset this.)

            Again, without an increase in tread width or diameter, the contact won’t change; only the settings teams will use to make the most of it.

            I really don’t see a way around the reality that it’s a cosmetic change driven by current trends in consumer tire sales. Folks just tend to prefer buying low-profile tires, and that’s Pirelli’s “road relevance,” I suppose.

          • HoHum (@hohum) said on 8th July 2014, 14:35

            The smaller volume of air/nitrogen in the tyres should have less effect on tyre pressure rise with temperature.

          • Jimbo (@jimbo) said on 8th July 2014, 15:43

            @dysthanasiac – Low profile tyres will reduce unsprung weight which will improve handling.

            http://www.formula1-dictionary.net/unsprung_weight.html

          • Ben (@dysthanasiac) said on 8th July 2014, 16:49

            @jimbo

            I’m an infrequent commentor here, so my posts are being moderated. In any case, I’ve talked about unsprung mass; it just hasn’t show up yet.

            To take a bit of step back, because I initially posted without having my first cup of morning w̶h̶i̶s̶k̶e̶y̶ coffee, here’s what I think:

            A tire’s “grip” potential is defined by its compound, contact patch, and generally nothing else. A tire’s contact patch is defined by its tread width, diameter, and nothing else. Since the tire’s outer dimensions will not change with a switch to 18-inch tires, their “grip” potential cannot change without a corresponding change in compound. (This will happen, but I’ll get to that in a moment.)

            F1 tires are so thin that reducing the size of the sidewall will have a negligible effect on their weight ( http://i.imgur.com/qLQSxX2.jpg , and keep in mind dry tires are even thinner). But, rim weight will increase appreciably with a low-profile tire, because it will have to be larger. Thus, unsprung mass will actually increase.

            I’ve seen in mentioned that low-profile tires will make it easier to maintain tire pressure. While I think the difference is nominal, it’s nonetheless false. Tire pressure relates to gas volume and temperature inside the tire. As much as it will be easier to bring the tires up to pressure because of their reduced volume, it will be that much easier to lose pressure for the same reason. But, again, this won’t really matter so much.

            It’s been said that the decreased tire deformation that will result from stiffer sidewalls will make it easier to build heat into the tires. This also isn’t true. Tire deformation itself is what builds heat into tires. Less deformation will then make doing so more difficult. Think of the difference between hard and soft compounds.

            Speaking of compounds, and absent suspension settings, which is a rather large topic, if low-profile tires were made with current compounds, they wouldn’t work, because everything I’ve mentioned thus far, and more, has to be taken into account when constructing a tire. Pirelli will have to change compounds in order to successfully switch to low-profile tires.

            As we all know, “grip” levels are artificially manipulated by Pirelli according to the wishes of the FIA and others for the sake of dictating performance. I don’t expect that philosophy to change, so I don’t expect Pirelli to change the tire’s performance characteristics when changing construction to accommodate larger rims.

            Basically, the only thing I see changing if F1 goes to a low-profile tire is how the tires look, because teams will be left with the same contact patch and compound performance characteristics. They’ll just have to make use of them in a different way: (expensive) suspension changes.

            Make sense?

          • Adam Hardwick (@fluxsource) said on 8th July 2014, 21:10

            @dysthanasiac

            I think a disagree with you to an extent regarding the contact patch. While the ideal contact patch will vary only by width and diameter, in reality this is effected by tire deformation as well. When cornering, the inside edge of the tire will “roll” over, increasing the contact, while on the outside edge the tire will tend to lift, reducing it. While these effects are small, they are not insignificant, and additionally play an important part in the pattern of damage through tire use.

            I’m not sure who suggested that a stiffer tire will be easier to heat – I just can’t see how someone can come to that conclusion. As to your comment regarding the thinness of the tires meaning the weight difference is negligible – I’ll take your word for it. My initial instinct would be that low profile tires, with lower mass in the tire, would be able to store less energy for a given temperature rise, making it more difficult to keep within the operating window; they’d more difficult to get heat into (as mentioned), but when you do it’s easy to put too much in and overheat them, and they are quicker to cool and drop out of the window. Whether or not this is true I don’t know – I’d need to know a lot more detail about the construction of both tires, and I simply don’t have that info.

            Another area that I haven’t seen considered, is punctures. If a car loses a tire, the weird crabbing effect of effectively losing a leg will be reduced, an this may result in differences in damage sustained.

          • Jimbo (@jimbo) said on 9th July 2014, 12:06

            @dysthanasiac

            A tyre’s contact patch is defined by more than diameter and tread width. When a tyre is pressurised it is not perfectly flat across the width and this is compounded when rotating at speed. The contact patch is generally more oval in shape. A lower profile tyre will reduce the effects of deformation due to weight of the car and centrifugal effects when rotating. The slip angle of a low profile tyre under cornering will also be reduced, again improving predictability and handling.

            The picture that you show whilst pretty says nothing about the weight of a tyre or the difference between the tread and the side wall. The weight of a tyre is ~9kg for a front and ~11kg for the rear with the hub ~2.5-3kg. Reducing the side wall size of the tyre by 5 inches could reduce weight by more than 2kg whilst increasing the hub size will add ~0.5kg.

            As for building heat in the tyre, it is the deformation of the tread that generates the heat required to keep the tyres in their operating window, not the sidewall. As mentioned before, the contact patch will remain more consistent for a lower profile tyre which will lead to more consistent heating across the tyre width reducing uneven wear and graining.

            As the tyre will behave more predictably and there will be less undamped elastic motion within the tyre, suspension will become easier to design and control.

        • Richard Howson said on 8th July 2014, 13:17

          There is a direct performance benefit due to more control of the cars suspension. The current Tyre sidewalls are effectively an un-dampened spring (not of the teams design) which the engineers can only tune directly by changing the Tyre pressure, which in turn has implications in terms of the contact patch for the Tyre. Given the option, any engineer would rather have smaller Tyre sidewalls and then have greater scope for suspension tuning directly via the suspension components which the teams design themselves. Curb riding ability will be much more controllable as will roll during quick changes of direction.

        • Jake (@jakehardyf1) said on 8th July 2014, 14:02

          Possible less rotational inertia from more magnesium alloy and less tyre rubber.

          As simple as it can be, 1/2 mv^2 can be applied to find the angular rotational moment of inertia (again, not the 100% correct way to calculate), but it is close enough.

          Anyway, it is weighted towards to angular velocity of the tyre, and with a larger diameter, that will play a role however I predict the reduction in weight will be great enough to compensate for more angular velocity, that in tern is applied to kinetic energy and momentum.

        • Ben (@dysthanasiac) said on 9th July 2014, 5:29

          @fluxsource

          I think a disagree with you to an extent regarding the contact patch. While the ideal contact patch will vary only by width and diameter, in reality this is effected by tire deformation as well. When cornering, the inside edge of the tire will “roll” over, increasing the contact, while on the outside edge the tire will tend to lift, reducing it. While these effects are small, they are not insignificant, and additionally play an important part in the pattern of damage through tire use.

          And this is where suspension settings come into place. It’s an enormous subject for which I’m not an expert, but I do know enough to know that settings like bound, rebound, jounce, heave, toe, camber, caster, etc affect the contact patch as it relates to wheel rate, roll rate/moment, slip angle, etc. Teams will simply adjust those settings, and redesign components, accordingly.

          I know it seems counterintuitive to think that a move from 13-inch to 18-inch tires will have an inconsequential impact on performance, but that’s the case nonetheless. It’s why teams have historically been hesitant to make to change; there’s nothing to gain from it.

          Marketing exposure for Pirelli, on the other hand, will change, because people like the way low-profile tires look, and, for whatever reason, they seem to think they work better. Maybe it’s the aggressive appearance.

          I really like the way they look, too.

        • Ben (@dysthanasiac) said on 9th July 2014, 13:00

          @jimbo

          With all due respect, and I mean that, what you appear to find intuitive about a potential change from 13-inch to 18-inch tires/rims is in conflict with reality. You seem to be thinking of things in static terms, I guess, when they’re just not.

          I recommend this, or something like it, if you’re really interested in the subject: http://books.google.com/books?id=JCHDuED3WIkC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Tyre+and+Vehicle+Dynamics&hl=en&sa=X&ei=JS-9U-GsA8nf8gGr7YDoCg&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Tyre%20and%20Vehicle%20Dynamics&f=false

          Sorry I wasn’t more helpful.

          • Jimbo (@jimbo) said on 9th July 2014, 13:37

            @dysthanasiac

            I was clearly referencing dynamic terms. If you think that changing from 13″ to 18″ rims will have no noticeable difference on tyre dynamics such as contact patch which makes them more resistant to deforming under lateral load resulting in a more predictable and stable contact patch,
            then maybe you are the one who need to read the book. Essentially you can get to a higher lateral load before reaching the peak slip angle with lower profile tyres, and that is before getting onto the other subjects of weight savings and more predictable behaviour due to lower rotating mass and more restricted movement of that mass.

          • Ben (@dysthanasiac) said on 9th July 2014, 14:05

            @jimbo

            We must be talking past each other, because I’ve not said that tire dynamics won’t change. What I’ve said, or at least have been trying to say, is that the difference in “grip” between a properly tuned suspension with 13-inch tires and a properly tuned suspension with 18-inch tires will be zero. In other words, the variables will change, but the outcome of the equation will be the same.

            Correct me where I go wrong, but I’m getting the impression that you’re asserting there will, in fact, be a difference in “grip,” no?

          • Jimbo (@jimbo) said on 9th July 2014, 14:29

            @dysthanasiac

            Yes, there will be a difference in dynamic levels of “grip” that is unrelated to suspension. Would you agree that under a lateral load a lower profile tyre will deform less? Would you also agree that this will lead to a more consistent contact patch?

          • Ben (@dysthanasiac) said on 9th July 2014, 15:06

            @jimbo

            Yes, I agree that a low-profile tire will deform less under lateral load. But, that won’t result in more “grip,” because, generally speaking, a suspension tuned properly for that tire, versus one tuned properly for a relatively high-profile tire of the same tread width and diameter, will have decreased wheel rate, roll rate, and camber stiffness in order to avoid overloading the tire and breaking traction. You can only ask so much of a contact path, regardless of its consistency, which, incidentally, should more or less remain the same if the engineer in charge of setup is worth his or her salt. Ignoring those factors will result in substantially less “grip” as well as dramatically increased wear and degradation.

            Make sense?

          • Jimbo (@jimbo) said on 9th July 2014, 15:21

            @dysthanasiac

            Suspension settings cannot correct for a deformed contact patch. A more stable contact patch will allow you to get closer to peak slip angles under lateral load. Camber, caster, toe etc can only do so much and is always a trade off to the ideal. Low profile tyres will give one less variable to correct for. If we can’t agree on this then we will have to agree to disagree.

          • Ben (@dysthanasiac) said on 9th July 2014, 15:38

            @jimbo

            There’s no such thing as a “deformed contact patch.” This is where your intuition is failing you spectacularly, and you don’t seem to realize it.

            And I’m sorry I’ve been unable to help.

            Again, check out Pacejka, as he quite literally wrote the book on modern tire design. His theories form the basis from which virtually all tires are now constructed. Until then, yes, let’s agree to disagree.

          • Jimbo (@jimbo) said on 9th July 2014, 16:14

            There’s no such thing as a “deformed contact patch.”

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slip_angle

            “If a side-slip velocity u is introduced, the contact patch will be deformed.”

            http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=eoy19aWAjBgC&pg=PA367#v=onepage&q&f=false

            Section 13.6 covers tyre and contact patch deformation.

            http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=NSlSJtEy-NIC&pg=PA54#v=onepage&q&f=false

            Section 2.2.1 details some of the physics grip associated with contact patch and how it changes depending on deformation due to slip angle and other forces.

            But no, there is not such thing as “deformed contact patch”.

            And I’m sorry I’ve been unable to help.

            Thank you for your condescending comment.

          • Ben (@dysthanasiac) said on 9th July 2014, 16:59

            @jimbo

            I genuinely didn’t mean that condescendingly. I’m sorry it came off that way.

            But, I’m glad you’ve glanced through excerpts of the book. A more thorough reading will put things into proper context, and you’ll see that the shape of a tire’s contact patch is largely immaterial as long as it remains the same size. If you could somehow conjure up a contact patch that looks like a five-point star, it would have no impact on “grip” compared to any other contact patch of equal area. (Given the same compound, naturally.)

            Think about it: what’s the difference in surface area between a 10m2 square and a 10m2 rectangle? Nothing. (Sorta like: which weighs more, ten pounds of hammers or ten pounds of feathers?)

            Bottom line: managing the contact patch of a low-profile tire is no easier or more difficult than doing so with a high-profile tire; it’s just different, but modifying suspension design to accommodate it is expensive. With no reward to be gained in terms of performance, teams have historically balked at making the change.

    • chris (@9chris9) said on 8th July 2014, 14:15

      +1
      i don’t like it, its not f1, its road cars, i can watch btcc for low profile tyres. The high profile acts as suspension and is integral to the performance of the vehicle. I enjoy watching the wheels bounce and wobble when they go over the curbs, they are the one of the only visible working components of the car.

      • MattDS said on 8th July 2014, 14:36

        But why on earth would you want tyres to act as suspension? Surely the suspension to play it’s role fully and tyres that play less of this role is beneficial to performance.

        I like it, a lot.

      • Banburyhammer (@banburyhammer) said on 8th July 2014, 15:18

        Low profile tyres do provide a net performance benefit however – its why all performance cars and road cars have moved to the huge rims.

        The biggest reason being that low profile tyres reduce rolling resistance, and hence improve acceleration and top speed. Essentially the engine will have to do less to power the car and more power is released to further improve performance in both efficiency and ultimate laptime.

        The only real issue is the redesign and recalibration of the suspension members, but seeing as the teams have already been through an albeit less radical change from pushrod to pullrod suspension of their own accord, any bleating they do about this is in my opinion farcical. Plus imagine if Michelin decides to come back!

        • anon said on 8th July 2014, 18:53

          It is not always the case that an increase in tyre diameter yields an improvement in performance – the Top Gear magazine recently carried out a test with the latest generation VW Golf GTi on standard rims and the optional larger rims to assess the impact of the larger rims.

          In that instance, they found that the increased compliance of the higher profile tyres not only improved the ride quality, the handling of the car was better on the Top Gear circuit too (to the tune of about a second a lap faster on the standard tyres rather than the larger low profile tyres).
          It is about striking a balance on the compliance of the tyres and the effect that has on factors such as the suspension set up – it does not necessarily follow that a larger tyre will automatically improve performance.

          In the case of road cars there is an additional incentive in providing larger rims, which is the ability to fit larger brake disks for improved braking performance – after all, if you are tuning a car up to be faster, you generally want to be able to slow it down more quickly as well…

        • anon said on 8th July 2014, 18:53

          It is not always the case that an increase in tyre diameter yields an improvement in performance – the Top Gear magazine recently carried out a test with the latest generation VW Golf GTi on standard rims and the optional larger rims to assess the impact of the larger rims.

          In that instance, they found that the increased compliance of the higher profile tyres not only improved the ride quality, the handling of the car was better on the Top Gear circuit too (to the tune of about a second a lap faster on the standard tyres rather than the larger low profile tyres).
          It is about striking a balance on the compliance of the tyres and the effect that has on factors such as the suspension set up – it does not necessarily follow that a larger tyre will automatically improve performance.

          In the case of road cars there is an additional incentive in providing larger rims, which is the ability to fit larger brake disks for improved braking performance – after all, if you are tuning a car up to be faster, you generally want to be able to slow it down more quickly as well…

    • 6Speed (@6speed) said on 8th July 2014, 15:04

      +1 yet another change for show rather than go, the suspension changes needed to make these work will be $$$

    • Jimbo (@jimbo) said on 8th July 2014, 15:40

      No, it is a performance enhancement too. You want to reduce unsprung weight which these tyres will allow:

      http://www.formula1-dictionary.net/unsprung_weight.html

      • NFR said on 8th July 2014, 16:40

        This won’t reduce unsprung weight, as anyone who tracks cars occasionally will tell you that larger wheels actually increase unsprung weight. You are increasing the wheel diameter drastically, which will increase the amount of material it takes to construct the wheel, and therefor increasing weight. Unless they drastically change the composition of the wheel no way that the unsprung weight gets lighter. And F1 wheels are already composed of a magnesium alloy, you really can’t get lighter than that.

        From your own link supporting what I wrote “Reducing unsprung weight is the key to improving handling… Note that as the wheel diameter or width increases, the weight of the overall wheel and tire package increases, thereby INCREASING unsprung weight.” May need to reread your source.

      • Crom said on 8th July 2014, 18:07

        Coulthard commented that the current large sidewall exacerbated Kimi’s accident at the British GP

    • Pennyroyal tea (@peartree) said on 9th July 2014, 4:22

      It makes it look very cheap. Like a boy racer’s car. I guess people that like these new wheels also like angel eye specs and listen to listen to van halen whislt tryng to do the split and adjust their make-up.

  5. mateuss (@mateuss) said on 8th July 2014, 12:23

    Yes, to more mechanical grip.

  6. Aqib (@aqibqadeer) said on 8th July 2014, 12:24

    F1 might look beautiful again..these tyres look great

  7. Lewis McMurray (@celicadion23) said on 8th July 2014, 12:25

    Wow, didn’t quite know what to expect but they look pretty damn good to me! The deep dish rears are just plain sexy!

  8. Milky White said on 8th July 2014, 12:27

    The lower profile tyre gives the visual impression that that wheels are wider, even though they are not. It makes it look more 1990’s tyre widths but maintaining the same width they have now.

  9. Slava (@slava) said on 8th July 2014, 12:27

    I really like much more than 13″. Expect that FIA will accept these new iteration of wheel.

  10. matt90 (@matt90) said on 8th July 2014, 12:31

    Quite frankly I don’t care about road car relevance unless it’s really in the interests of the sport. It made sense with the engines to avoid a load of manufacturers pulling out (although that wouldn’t have been too big a disaster if there were smaller engine companies ready to step in, and Mercedes and Renault leaving didn’t mean the collapse of several teams due to funding). I’m not convinced that this will make anybody care about F1 more than they do already. So I’d rather they did whatever’s best for performance. If it’s this, so be it. If keeping the current tyres- which have a somewhat iconic feel- is better due to their more significant role as a suspension component, then that’s fine too.

    I fear that Pirelli want to do this so that they can make their involvement in F1 more marketable by being better related to the tyres they sell us. If that’s the only reason then it is a poor one, as they clearly will keep supplying F1 regardless and I’m sure that plenty of other companies would take over if not.

  11. Osvaldas31 (@osvaldas31) said on 8th July 2014, 12:31

    It looks good, as I’ve expected and those tyres should be introduced as soon as possible. FIA and teams always talk about relevance to road cars but anyone rarely mentions bigger wheels, which aestethically is the first thing, that viewers can see and understand. Kudos to Pirelli, which by showing how 18 inch wheels look on F1 cars indirectly urge FIA to change them.

  12. greg-c (@greg-c) said on 8th July 2014, 12:32

    I really like the look of those wheels.

    +1 to Pirelli for having the kiwis to try this

  13. greg-c (@greg-c) said on 8th July 2014, 12:33

    Uhm,

    where are the real pics?

    Got anything @keithcollantine ?

  14. BS (@bs) said on 8th July 2014, 12:40

    I’ve always really liked the beefy look of 13″ tires, especially since many other racing classes have already made the switch, it made F1 look more unique. They look very plain to me, and don’t work as well aesthetically on an open wheel design.

    Not really that big a deal either way, but I’m surprised to see such unanimous affection for the 18″ones.

  15. ob1 (@ob1) said on 8th July 2014, 12:40

    Are they going to chrome the hub caps too, maybe put spinners on. It all seems a bit pimp my ride

1 2 3 4

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.