Daniel Ricciardo, Toro Rosso, Shanghai, 2013

Pirelli swaps soft tyre for medium in Bahrain

2013 Bahrain Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by

Daniel Ricciardo, Toro Rosso, Shanghai, 2013Pirelli has revised its tyre allocation for the Bahrain Grand Prix.

Formula One’s official tyre supplier now says it will bring its hardest selection of tyres for this weekend’s race, the medium and hard compounds. It previously allocated the soft and hard compounds for this race.

The 2013 soft tyre was used for the first time in China last weekend. But drivers found the tyre degraded quickly and no one spent more than seven laps on it in the race.

Motorsport director Paul Hembery said the decision to change the allocation for Bahrain was made before last week’s race: “When we made the allocation choices for Bahrain in December of last year, we had not done one winter test, let alone a race.”

“Our initial choice for Bahrain was soft and hard, but once we had seen the new generation of our tyres run in Malaysia, a track similar to Bahrain, we decided that the combination medium and hard would be better suited for the Bahrain circuit.”

Despite the change to more conservative tyres, Pirelli predict another busy race in the pits: “We expect about three stops per car, although we?ll have to wait to get some running in on Friday before we can look at the data and make a more accurate prediction,” said Hembery.

The soft and medium compounds were used for last year’s Bahrain Grand Prix.

2013 Bahrain Grand Prix

Browse all 2013 Bahrain Grand Prix articles

Image ?? Pirelli/LAT

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.

Posted on Categories 2013 Bahrain Grand Prix, 2013 F1 season

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 83 comments on “Pirelli swaps soft tyre for medium in Bahrain”

    1. I hope this isnt Pirelli bowing to the teams. They were asked to make an exciting tyre, so they should deliver it. China was a completely different track where the front tyres get chewed up quicker than normal.

      1. I don’t think they’re bowing so much as realising the soft tyre probably needs a bit more work.

        1. Does it? The tyre is the same for every team. They’ve all tested it, so should know where they stand with it.

          God help us when the super soft is needed in Monaco…

          1. @jamesf1 the stress on those tyres is so much higher at China or Bahrain (specially with the heat) than at Monaco, tho.

          2. Well the Supersoft and Soft are the 2 to be used in Canada

          3. Ken (@myxomatosis)
            16th April 2013, 17:27

            Yes they’re the same for each team but they’re still crap. Like Keith said, no driver used it for more than 7 laps in the Chinese GP. SEVEN!

      2. I hope this is exactly Pirelli bowing to the teams. An exciting tyre does not equal a ridiculous, no more than 7-lap durable tyre. Bahrain is a completely different track as well, where the dust and sand on track degrade the tyre faster, so a more durable rubber is highly welcomed.

        1. (@andrewf1)

          I hope this is exactly Pirelli bowing to the teams. An exciting tyre does not equal a ridiculous, no more than 7-lap durable tyre.

          +1, was about to type almost exactly this myself. It’s good Pirelli have finally noticed that a tyre disintergrating is not in the best interests of racing.

          China’s softs would’ve been fine if they were to be used merely as quali tyres, but in the current formula they can’t, and things got utterly ridiculous last week.

        2. I hope this is exactly Pirelli bowing to the teams.

          Don’t hope for that. Individual teams will push for whatever tyre is best for them, and pretend that they’re doing it for the good of the sport.

        3. @andrewf1


          We don’t need an arrogant who ignore the opinion of other stakeholders like teams and drivers.

          I think they’re try to make it look that it as their own decision (arrogance) when it’s clear that their softs ruined the race and probably affected their brand negatively.

          I’m looking forward to Canada!

          1. +1

            I honestly think its better to have a tyre company who go “Alright, this isn’t working as well as we thought it would, we’ll re-shuffle the deck and come up with an alternative.”

            It’s not like Spa 2011 where Red Bull were just ignoring Pirelli’s advice, its been an issue across the teams. this way they can go back and have a look at the tyre construction for the soft before using it again.

            1. At the same time, we were faced with the same problem last year: the teams complained bitterly about the tyres. And yet, by the middle of the season, they understood the tyres so well that the complaints simply melted away. Did anybody protest the tyres after the German Grand Prix? I can’t recall a single complaint, much less a chorus of them. Even the drivers who were the most critical – Mark Webber and Michael Schumacher – quietened down before long. The tyres worked in 2012 once the teams and drivers understood them; it was just a matter of figuring them out.

              I think we need to take the teams’ complaints with a grain of salt as they will always lobby for what is best for them. Are they really struggling as much as they are making out, or are they just trying to get out of doing some work and maybe pick up an advantage along the way?

      3. I agree, I think Pirelli have done a good job and the story for me is how cars that concentrated on race setup over quali are coming to the fore. It evens up the field. Now there is a price to pay for trashing your tyres in quali even if you are on pole. Pole isn’t a given right to the win and Pirelli have reduced the dominance of aero, giving other options and strategies to more teams. The first 2 races had varying conditions but it is clear that some teams can make the tyres work well and they fact that they can still get it wrong only adds to the spectacle. No one wants to see a team run away with it anyway. Of course all the teams would have to agree to any changes made to the tyres and that is definately not going to happen. No one os going to hand dominance back to Red Bull who would arguably be the biggest winner in that scenario. Alonso’s race proved that there’s nothing wrong with the Pirelli’s.

        1. Whilst I also am happy that Vettel didn’t win I don’t want F1 ruined in order to prevent the fastest cars driving fast just to mix up the winners.

      4. @jamesf1, what’s exciting about a tyre that’s glued to the road, but only for 2-3 laps.

      5. They were asked to make an exciting tyre

        I doubt that very much. But if that is what they were asked to do then they failed dismally. The first three “races” of this season have been dismal spectacles consisting of drivers trying to mange their tyres from start to finish.

        1. I doubt that very much. But if that is what they were asked to do then they failed dismally. The first three “races” of this season have been dismal spectacles

          @jonsan – Disagree. I found the first three races to be very exciting spectacles.

      6. I think it is good that Pirelli have listened to the teams, as their struggles have made for less exciting racing for the fans. Although I do think there should be an element of tyre conservation, it shouldn’t be the dominant factor in races as then it just becomes slightly farcical.

        Hopefully we will see it being possible to make two stops realistically all-round with the harder compounds, as that means that although the tyres still have an influence, all genuine overtaking won’t be done in the pits and hopefully also the drivers are closer to 100% on the limit rather than 80%.

    2. Good call, I think. clearly the soft tyre needs some work done to it to make it a bit more race-efficient – it doesn’t seem suited to greener tracks at all. It might perform a bit better at somewhere like Silverstone or Catalunya – somewhere where the racings a bit more regular and theres more rubbere buildup.

      1. indeed. And the really hot weather at Bahrain surely would have made it even harder to keep everything working here

        1. I’m pretty sure they tyres would have melted into puddles very early – probably around the end of the pitlane!

          1. :) Anyway, i heard the teams count the soft tyre in term of corners instead of laps. Looking forward to GP this weekend to have a proper action-packed racing.

        2. Yes, and the sand always causes Bahrain’s track to be more abrasive than most. Good call.

    3. So, this theoretically means a car that’s fundamentally quick, but not so good on the tyres will be better? So possibly Mercedes and Red Bull have better race pace than before, but will Lotus and Ferrari maintain their performance.. Just seems that as this is the same tyre allocation of Malaysia, it could be that way.

      1. I don’t think so.
        The F138 (as well as the F2012) proved to have a rather poor pace on the soft tyres (remember Silverstone 2012), but seemed to have a more decent pace on the medium compound, while the other top teams looked superior on the soft tyre, especially Lotus. We saw the teams running every compound this year so far, excepting the super soft, so there shouldn’t be any surprises produces by the tyre selection, regarding performance.
        Also, don’t forget that in Malaysia, Alonso was pretty quick. If it wasn’t for that abandon he would’ve probably been on the podium…or maybe he would’ve won.
        It just seems unlikely, to me.

    4. Hm, was it yesterday when they mentioned that they would not be changing anything before Barcelona?

      In the end it means they will have the same compounds there that were used last year, even if they are now named differently.

    5. Wow, that’s a last-minute change! I expect the soft tyres are already on their way to Bahrain, or perhaps even already there. At least it’s not the other end of the world from Pirelli’s production bases.

      If this is a case of Pirelli buckling under the pressure from Christian Horner et al., then I’m really surprised, but perhaps Pirelli feared that the soft tyre would fall apart in Bahrain, in which case there is something wrong with the compound.

      I actually quite liked the strategic implications of the soft tyre in China though, and although it was not a proper race tyre, the medium was just fine so it was interesting to see how teams handled their soft-tyre stint.

      Regarding the medium-hard combination, in Malaysia the hard tyre did not seem any more durable, but certainly slower, so it will be interesting to see whether the medium will once again be the race tyre of choice. If again the medium proves the tyre of choice, then this will be similar to the tyre situation in 2011, where the softest compound was usually the preferred race tyre, and the harder only used for the final stint.

      1. The strategic implications weren’t so much the problem.

        It was more the fact no one was allowed to defend in fear of their tyres falling apart.

        Good move, Pirelli!

    6. Just a quick note: according to Paul Hembery, this decision was already taken and communicated to the teams before the Chinese GP.

      I have been very critical of Pirelli’s policy of announcing the tyre allocation a few weeks before the actual race, because things like this will happen: Pirelli looks at how the tyres behave during race weekends and base future tyre allocations on their findings. I think this is a very unfair procedure, because decisions like the one mentioned in the article ultimately favor som teams more than others. I honestly believe Pirelli tries to be as objective as possible on this matter, but I still think it’s a flawed procedure.

      What they should do is announce the tyre allocations for the entire season somewhere around the final pre-season test, to ensure no team will be ‘favored’ (indirectly, but still) by Pirelli. And if they can judge that their initial tyre allocation is ‘wrong’, then they may change it under the condition that every single team agrees with that. In my opinion, this is a much fairer procedure and I don’t understand why this isn’t the standard already.

      1. … and please get rid off the colour markings: just give the weekend’s softest tyre a white rim or whatever, to distinguish it from the hardest. In the Bridgestone era, I suspect decisions like the one in the article were common as well, but because they aren’t a bunch of media enthusiasts, they just said nothing – exactly the way a tyre supplier should behave, imo.

        1. @andae23

          Regarding color marks, like they say in Spain “para gustos hay colores”


        2. @andae23 – you can’t really blame Pirelli for wanting as much publisiscity as possible: it boosts their brand, even if it’s not exactly positive!

          1. @vettel1 I guess you’re right, but I can still get annoyed by it! Every time I read “Pirelli will be bringing the yellow soft and white medium tyre…” I just want to break something :P

            1. @andae23 – I personally quite like the colours: they liven the tyres up a bit! Fair enough though :P

      2. What they should do is announce the tyre allocations for the entire season somewhere around the final pre-season test, to ensure no team will be ‘favored’ (indirectly, but still) by Pirelli.

        That itself will “favor” some teams over others. But then, the reason the tyres are changed each season is in fact to favor some teams over others.

    7. Why doesn’t Formula 1 simply have a race tyre (hardest) and a qualifying tyre (softest)…

      1. You mean, like they had for years and years of great racing?

      2. That wouldn’t work. Drivers would not even be able to keep the harder tyre up to temperature on a track like Monaco. And the super-soft would probably last until about the second sector in a place like malaysia or indeed china.
        That is the reason why they have 4 compounds. The trick is choosing tyres that are both fast for qualifying and reasonably durable for the race, with also allowing for alternate strategies.

        1. @bascb, I think @gatekiller means a hard tyre for racing only and a soft tyre for qualifying only, as if I remember rightly was the case in the early 70’s.

          1. Yes, but you would still need to bring different tyres to different races, doing a race on hards that would suit Bahrain, or India in Monaco would mean struggling with horribly handling cars with hardly any grip and graining tyres because the tyres would just not work there @hohum

      3. Thank god someone feels the same way as i do, F1 tyre conservation championship not F1 drivers championship.

    8. Well I hope you enjoy your Vettel lights to flag procession. Send your thanks to @PaulHembery on twitter. Utterly spineless.

      1. If you want to stop Vettel running away with it let’s get rid of 2.04 second pit stops as well, a super hard tyre (same for everybody) will reduce ultimate corner speed and do away with pit-teams losing or winning races.

      2. Last year Vettel was on pole, Grosjean started 7th and Raikkonen started 11th.
        At the finish Vettel was just 3.3 sec ahead of Raikkonen and 10sec ahead of Grosjean!
        Lights to flag procession? maybe, but don’t rule out the possibility of a good race for the Lotus team!

      3. @spawnite – I’ve they’ve built the fastest car I don’t see what the problem is honestly! Be it Ferrari, Mercedes, Lotus or Red Bull…

    9. I think it isn’t Pirelli cavin to RBR and Merc but realizing that the soft needs more work.

    10. Did they really cave in to the teams though? All I’ve heard this week is about how the tyres were rubbish at China and how it makes a mockery of the sport etc. If anything, they’ve caved in to what the fans wanted! The tyres are the same for everyone so it doesn’t make much difference to the teams in relation to each other.

    11. They really need to go back to last years tyres. the competition was still great but they didn’t have to pit a million times.

    12. So, people were complaining about the soft compound all during the Chinese Grand Prix weekend, and now Pirelli have ditched it for Bahrain, they’re complaining about that too??

      There’s no pleasing some people.

      1. Yep there’s a common denominator in fan forums and comment sections like this (and even parts of the media). Lots of complaining and very few compliments.

      2. The Tifosi are happy with the status quo, for now.

      3. @iamjamm Thank you, precisely what I’ve been thinking as I read through the articles about this.

        I personally have no issues with the tyres. They are the same for each team. Each team has designed their car seperately and has had the tyres since February testing. The only difference between all of the teams is the design of the cars. If they design a car that doesn’t work with the tyres, then that’s not Pirelli’s fault, it’s RedBull/Mercedes/McLaren/Ferrari/Lotus/Insertanyotherteamhere’s fault.
        Instead of moping about the tyres, why don’t we congratulate those teams that have made the best out of the situation that all teams have been given. Raikkonen drove a great race in Australia by making the most out of the pace of his car and the nature of the tyres. Alonso drove a brilliant race and qualifying in China, making the best use out of tyres that many teams struggled with.
        Anyone who says that Formula 1 shouldn’t be about tyres obviously doesn’t pay attention. Each car only has 4 contact points with the ground, these contact points are required to make the car move forward (and sometimes, although less frequently, backward).

      4. That’s not correct at all, am I reading the same comments? The ones complaining above are the ones who celebrated the super softs and what Pirelli were doing.

        We all have different opinions. If it make you feel any better, I’m very happy with this news :)

    13. Does this means a redbull dominated weekend in Bahrain? since their car is too hard on the tyres, this will help them the most. or am i read it wrong?

      1. The more G’s you generate the faster your lap, the more G’s you generate the greater the tyre wear, so you might be right, but that is the whole point of F1 the fastest car is supposed to win.

        1. (@hohum)

          the whole point of F1 the fastest car is supposed to win.

          Call me old fashioned, but isn’t the fastest driver supposed to win?

          1. @sgt-pepper, actually yes and no, F1 is different from most other race series in that it embraces engineering excellence, that is why we have a CONSTRUCTORS championship as well as a drivers championship. Enzo Ferarri would not have been interested in a one-design formula and neither would Colin Chapman, Enzo because he wanted to build the best engines, Chapman because he wanted to build the best chassis. With it’s current regulations F1 would never have got of the ground.

          2. Yes, the fastest driver is supposed to win. But part of being fastest, is also being in an adequate car, preferrably the fastest. That means that the “fastest car” will win, as in – the fastest single car is the one having the fastest combination of driver and car.

      2. It might help them the most, but Its more to do with Pirelli having found out that in general the cars eat the tyres more than expected, no doubt Mercedes will also be revieved about it and going on the Chinese race, there won’t be many people who will not be fine with it.

        After all, many were horrified with the softs only lasting until the 3rd sector in china already (or until the 4th lap in the race for Vettel), it would only be worse in Bahrain

    14. Hopefully other F1 innovations will now become prominent, as tyre influence is relegated to the back.

    15. good news for Mercedes this is. bad news for lotus

      1. @sato113 What tyre did Lotus excelled in Australia? What I can sense is Ferrari and Lotus struggling to qualify as well as they did in China.

        1. @peartree yes lotus are fine on any tyre but my point is that if they want their rivals to struggle, the tyre allocation needs to be a soft as possible.

          1. @sato113 Sounds logical but my point is that their rivals have already struggled and more importantly the Sakhir circuit is very abrasive, I only question if the lotus and ferrari will behave as well as they did in this past weekend at a track that is rear tyre bias.

    16. This means that Pirelli will run pretty much the same grade of tyres they did last time in Bahrain.

    17. Do we really want cars circulating around the track doing their own thing. Last race was a lot of “Please and thank you”, enough already. There can be different strategies but not at the expense of racing.

      Good decision by Pirelli. I would rather see only Red Bull and Alonso race for victory, because atleast it will generate a lot of racing behind them. In fact I am looking forward to Webber and Vettel slugging it out, it might be quite awesome.

    18. Chris (@tophercheese21)
      16th April 2013, 15:01

      Good! *Grumpy Cat*

    19. It is quite a royal farce. Why can’t they bring all the three and let the teams decide on their strategy?!

      1. Because it wouldn’t work, if you give the teams that kind of choice than only 3 or 4 teams would bnefit. F1 is about presenting a technical and driver challenge and keeping a balance between the two. Let the teams decide something as important as tyre choice and you give too much advantage to the ones with the most resource. Red Bull have had an aero advantage through AN and previously the rest of the components have taken a back seat. Now the aero advantage has a price, just as the over use of every component has a price and thats a good thing because now a fast car has to combine all the components to gain the overall advantage and thats the pure chalenge of F1.

    20. Sensible decision. It’s clear that Soft and Supersoft tyres are too extreme right now.

    21. OmarR-Pepper (@)
      16th April 2013, 18:50

      Probably now all the teams can go not at 80% but at least 90 % of a flat out

      1. That’s what I’m hoping for: if we managed to find a balance where 100% would mean two stop and 90% one stop that would be fine by me!

    22. Any change to tyre compounds against what has been decided and published is open to interpretation as favouritism.
      The teams have had these tyres for the same amount of time; just like they have other false “regulations” with relation to wings, exhausts, engine, fuel allowance etc. Wheather you agree or disagree with the regulations and their impact on racing, they should not be changed at a weeks notice from the plan because it will disadvantage some who has been striving to perform within those regulations and this is obviously unfair.

      1. @warfieldf1 – yes, but if a large percentage (rightfully) express concern that the tyres simply will not last more than a few laps, I think it’s justified. Really, did you actually think the softs were a good tyre judging from last weekend?

        1. I ran three teams during the tyre-war era of the late 1990s and early 2000s, which some are saying was a time when drivers could push right to the limit all the time. But that’s a fallacy. They could never go 100% all the time. – Gary Anderson
          Read his full article for a complete review of the tyre situation. I especially agree with him regarding DRS, it should be ditched.

    23. RBR like this.

    24. Just another decision that will likely produce a Red Bull stinkfest. Its nice to see someone else winning but sadly its probably at an end now.

      1. I think this decision will benefit Mercedes more than RBR. The Merc is undoubtedly the fastest at the moment when it comes to qualifying,but they’re miles off the pace in the race. However,fewer stops and less degradation may allow them to protect their gird positions on raceday more effectively….

    25. Instead of Pirelli picking 2 compounds for each race why not have each team nominate which compounds they want to use so that every team gets the best tyres for there package on each track?

      If Lotus want to run the soft’s then let them, If Red Bull want the hard’s then give them the hard’s.

      I think its frankly ridiculous that a tyre supplier can effectively determine the running order based solely on which tyres they take to a specific track.

      I also think its a sad state of affairs that there are many fans out there who seem to think that any teams performance (Red Bull in this case) needs to be capped with tyres or by things been banned just to stop them winning.
      Im no fan of Red Bull or Vettel but think its ridiculous that you can have the best driver in the best car get vilified for doing a better job & winning more races/championships.

      This is supposed to be the pinnacle of open wheel racing not some computer racing game with ‘Dynamic game difficulty balancing’ slowing down the lead car to give others a chance to catch up.

      If 1 team build a dominant car, They deserve to dominate as they have clearly done a better job than anyone else, If you think thats boring then F1 isn’t for you & maybe you should look at watching Nascar instead.

      1. They only deserve to dominate if it works on all tracks. The tyres were changed previously to end Schumachers dominence so it’s not a new thing in F1. I also question your view that Vettel is the best driver, there are better on the grid IMHO. The Red Bull was a great qualli car and they used pole position to their advantage but here are better race cars and its called motor racing not motor qualifying. The way the Red Bull behaves in traffic suggests that it’s not that great a race car probaly due to the fact that it was designed to get pole and run and hide. Now they have been caught out. Boo Hoo! The tyre is doing exactly what they were asked to do and F1 cars never ran at 100% for a whole race because thats not what F1 is about. It is about taking technolgy and the driver to the limit in a complex sport that some dont seem to understand. In my view the majority of complaints are from people who support teams that haven’t done a good job this year. Red Bull scored a 1-2 and they are stiill moaning and trying to get Pirelli to change the tyre so that they can dominate some more. Martin Whitmarsh is under severe pressure from the numerous mistakes the team are making, building a crap car, losing Lewis and replacing him with a driver whos wasn’t ready so anytime he points the finger it is part excuse and partly to deflect criticism and I take his comments with a pinch of salt. I have beeen watching F1 since I first saw Jim Clark on the telly in the 60’s and I am enjoying the racing at the moment and I hope Pirelli continue in F1 after this year, The only change I would make would be to ditch Kers which is an abomination and I am continually horrified that a sport that bans moveable aero devices then introduces one as a solution.

        1. I also question your view that Vettel is the best driver

          I never meant to say that he was, I meant the phrase Best car/driver in a general term.

          F1 cars never ran at 100% for a whole race

          Then why did Hakkinen & Schumacher talk about doing flat out qualifying laps on every lap during the 2000 race at suzuka among other races?

          Anyway back to my comments about using tyres or whatever to cap team performance to prevent dominance.
          I stick by what i said.

          the only reason f1 has been constantly messed with the past decade is because everyone whined when schumacher/ferrari won everything, I always thought that it should have been left to the other teams to catch up rather than have rules brought in to hinder ferrari. if others were unable to catch up, tough.
          if the fans kept whining about ferrari winning, don’t watch.

          even when a team or driver dominated who i didn’t like, i still hated it when people started talking about changing things to reel them in, thats the sort of things nascar does & also touring cars with there silly success weight penalty system, its artificial.

          if a team comes up with something which gives them an advantage & its legal, it should not be banned just to hurt there advantage & give others a chance & I hate it when so called fans rally the fia to ban things (Like the double diffusers & blown diffusers) just because they don’t like 1 team winning.

          back in 78 i saw lotus come up with ground effects & gain an advantage that allowed them to win both championships fairly easily, in 1988 i saw mclaren win 15/16 races & i watched williams dominate in 92/93 thanks to there superior car design & electronic systems.
          not once did i ever think things should be banned or changed so these teams lost there advantage & so that others could catch up. each time i applauded there superior designs & the job there drivers had done & waited to see if others could catch up.

          the whole thing is getting absurd that the fans don’t appreciate someone doing a better job & just whine everytime someone ‘dominates’ (see 2011) & that they applaud things been banned or capped in order to hurt said teams performance. even sadder that the fia usually actually go along with it ‘for the show’.

          tyres, bans or reg changes should never be used for the sole purpose of hindering a team or drivers advantage, they should be changed only for genuine safety concerns.

          1. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22147074 Have a read of Gary Andersons views on tyres and also note that Kimi doen’t understand what the fuss about the tyre’s is either. Who cares if the tyres only last for a few laps on some tracks. it’s a new compound and is designed to challenge the teams and just because it doesn’t suit some cars is no reason to panic or change them. F1 requires all the teams to agree to a change and thats not going to happen. Ditch DRS instead.
            This video might interest you. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22147074

    Comments are closed.