F.I.A. Instruct Bridgestone to engineer a greater difference
Discussion
I see there at it again, wait till the Cars are designed and launched and then move the Goalposts...I wonder if this has anything to do with Ferrari being traditionally easier on their tyres than McClaren, and Hamiltons style being harder on tyres?. Will the harder ones be harder or the softer ones softer?. Or maybe Max never mentioned how he wanted it done...?. When will they realise stabilty is cheaper than change?. New wheelbase McClaren?.
I don't understand the need for two tyre compounds, surely if they want to save money there would be a single control tyre compound per event designed to match expected ambients.
You could then have an emergency backup tyre available for no additional cost should the tyre engineers make a batch mistake or you get freak weather.
The two tyres per race thing adds nothing to the sport.
You could then have an emergency backup tyre available for no additional cost should the tyre engineers make a batch mistake or you get freak weather.
The two tyres per race thing adds nothing to the sport.
They should have one set that is hard to try and stop tyre breakup to stop marbling happening off-line. F1 is so single line racing and part of it's problem IMO is that you can;t take different attacking and defending lines though the corners. Clearling up all the crap, that you don't get is lesser forumla where tyres are expensive to them.
johnfelstead said:
I don't understand the need for two tyre compounds, surely if they want to save money there would be a single control tyre compound per event designed to match expected ambients.
You could then have an emergency backup tyre available for no additional cost should the tyre engineers make a batch mistake or you get freak weather.
The two tyres per race thing adds nothing to the sport.
Totally agree. It's just another idiotic FIA gimmick that gets in the way.You could then have an emergency backup tyre available for no additional cost should the tyre engineers make a batch mistake or you get freak weather.
The two tyres per race thing adds nothing to the sport.
tomTVR said:
I prefered it when there was two tyre manufacturers, a another variable between circuits was interesting. Different drivers, different engines, different chassis', different aero - why not tyres?
I think the single tyre manufacturer is a very good idea. I'm glad it is so. It had reached the point where the difference between the two manufacturers' products held far too much importance in deciding the results of races.SamHH said:
tomTVR said:
I prefered it when there was two tyre manufacturers, a another variable between circuits was interesting. Different drivers, different engines, different chassis', different aero - why not tyres?
I think the single tyre manufacturer is a very good idea. I'm glad it is so. It had reached the point where the difference between the two manufacturers' products held far too much importance in deciding the results of races.The cars themselves were designed a year ago, but even now, a few weeks before the opening race, Bridgestone have not settled on a final tyre spec.
Whatever spec they settle on, it stays for the season. If it suits your car or your drivers, you're in clover. If it doesn't suit them, your season is over before it's started. Doesn't that seem dumb?
If they had decided on a tyre spec a year ago, and given it to the teams so that the teams could have designed the cars around the tyre, fair enough. The way it is is too random.
When we had competing tyre makers, although in any given year one tyre might have been distinctly superior to the other, often it was a case of one tyre having been better in the wet, or over a single Q lap. Even when one tyre was better across the season, it had the effect of helping an underdog team, such as Honda or Renault, to compete with and sometimes defeat the best team on the other rubber.
Why shouldn't tyres be as much an object of technological competition as the rest of the car?
They should give the teams an open formula with a budget cap, and let them get on with it.
tomTVR said:
They should give the teams an open formula with a budget cap, and let them get on with it.
That would mean it would be less of an old boys club of power hungry politically corrupt greedy idiots with personal agendas.Yes I am cynical.
Edited by eddie1980 on Friday 30th January 13:10
flemke said:
But what do we have now?:
The cars themselves were designed a year ago, but even now, a few weeks before the opening race, Bridgestone have not settled on a final tyre spec.
Whatever spec they settle on, it stays for the season. If it suits your car or your drivers, you're in clover. If it doesn't suit them, your season is over before it's started. Doesn't that seem dumb?
If they had decided on a tyre spec a year ago, and given it to the teams so that the teams could have designed the cars around the tyre, fair enough. The way it is is too random.
I agree that this year's tyre spec should have been finalised before the cars were designed. However, the fact that the current system is bad isn't justification for using another system that is bad.The cars themselves were designed a year ago, but even now, a few weeks before the opening race, Bridgestone have not settled on a final tyre spec.
Whatever spec they settle on, it stays for the season. If it suits your car or your drivers, you're in clover. If it doesn't suit them, your season is over before it's started. Doesn't that seem dumb?
If they had decided on a tyre spec a year ago, and given it to the teams so that the teams could have designed the cars around the tyre, fair enough. The way it is is too random.
flemke said:
When we had competing tyre makers, although in any given year one tyre might have been distinctly superior to the other, often it was a case of one tyre having been better in the wet, or over a single Q lap. Even when one tyre was better across the season, it had the effect of helping an underdog team, such as Honda or Renault, to compete with and sometimes defeat the best team on the other rubber.
Why shouldn't tyres be as much an object of technological competition as the rest of the car?
As I wrote previously, the difference between the two manufactures' tyres had too great a bearing on the results of races. It became the case that no matter how good a car a team built, they were stymied if their tyre supplier had fallen behind. I don't think that made for good racing. The championship felt like it had been reduced to a battle between the tyre manufacturers.Why shouldn't tyres be as much an object of technological competition as the rest of the car?
Edited by SamHH on Friday 30th January 14:07
Forums | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff