China Tyres, confused.

gfm · 1 Oct 2006, 17:31 (Ref:1724559)

And there was I after qualifying, thinking that somehow Bridgstone single handedly were making a complete mess of MS's title push, how could Ferrari put up with that? - when suddenly in the race, MS made up a whole bundle of time and Bridgstone was the only tyre to have.
I am easily confused.

ralf fan · 1 Oct 2006, 17:40 (Ref:1724565)

The BS tyres work well when the track is drying...while the Michelins are good when the track is wet..... Schumacher was simply brilliant in the opening part of the race to keep up with the Honda's who were on the Michelins during their optimum performance time

**Adam43** · 1 Oct 2006, 17:42 (Ref:1724567)

I don't think that Bridgestone was the only tyre to have. Michael just made the most of it. He was only the pace straight away, at the start, in the changing conditions, after the stops and especially so when he changed to slicks. Compare that to Fisichella out of the pits and tip toeing around.

The Toyotas and Massa didn't look like they were on the tyres to have. Williams did OK, but then so did BMW and McLaren.

**Adam43** · 1 Oct 2006, 17:44 (Ref:1724569)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ralf fan

Schumacher was simply brilliant in the opening part of the race to keep up with the Honda's who were on the Michelins during their optimum performance time

I agree the key to the race was staying in touch during this period.

Piglet · 1 Oct 2006, 18:05 (Ref:1724588)

Have the FIA made any comment during the season about the use of inters that become (real) slicks on a drying track?

I know it was discussed earlier in the year that there was potentially an issue. I wondered if we might see a Renault complaint about TGF driving away with the race on "slicks"?

**Adam43** · 1 Oct 2006, 18:08 (Ref:1724592)

Renault did the same. As did most (all?) of the Michelin runners.

Hopefully sense will prevail and practicalities of racing will be considered. Once the track was dry slicks were quicker than used inters.

Have we seen any of their tyres after the race?

Marbot · 1 Oct 2006, 18:12 (Ref:1724596)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piglet

I wondered if we might see a Renault complaint about TGF driving away with the race on "slicks"?

I think that you'd pretty much have to disqualify everyone for using tyres that turned to slicks during that race!

So long as there is no performance gain when the tyre goes slick,then all is fair.

gfm · 1 Oct 2006, 18:35 (Ref:1724608)

Well there was Martyn wasn't there? It's why MS went well and FS went backwards.
A world champioonship decided by the weather, I knew it. Or a wheel nut.

Marbot · 1 Oct 2006, 18:45 (Ref:1724615)

Quote:

Originally Posted by gfm

A world champioonship decided by the weather, I knew it. Or a wheel nut.

Wouldn't be the first time.

Piglet · 1 Oct 2006, 18:50 (Ref:1724619)

Quote:

Originally Posted by gfm

Well there was Martyn wasn't there? It's why MS went well and FS went backwards.

Exactly my point - Fernando changed his worn inters and seemed to be disadvantaged. So Renault would have to sacrifice Fisi as well but perhaps it might be worth it?

They could all have changed tyres once the tread starting disappearing but it's in their interests not to...

**Adam43** · 1 Oct 2006, 19:25 (Ref:1724640)

There would only be an issue when the inters are better than the drys on a dry track. That was not the case today. Overall the lack of tread beinging a performance advantage is a grooved tyre concern. There is no rule about performance gains by losing the tread on wet weather tyres IIRC.

Interestingly Button was one of the first to pit, refuel and not change inters (back in Spa last year). It worked for him and it has now become common place. However this race he had no choice but to change because he has ruined his inters.

Similarly Alonso only changed his fronts - because he had to from a performance issue. He left the rears alone.

**Adam43** · 1 Oct 2006, 20:40 (Ref:1724681)

Which tyre was the one to have?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pat Symonds, Renault press release

We are making no excuses today. This is a race we should have won, because the Renault and its Michelin tyres were dominant in all conditions. The fact we did not do so is intensely frustrating for the entire team.
...
The Michelin tyres were superior in the wet and the dry today, and it was easy to get the best out of the car in the changing conditions.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/54830

pole2pole · 1 Oct 2006, 21:08 (Ref:1724697)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Piglet

Have the FIA made any comment during the season about the use of inters that become (real) slicks on a drying track?

I know it was discussed earlier in the year that there was potentially an issue. I wondered if we might see a Renault complaint about TGF driving away with the race on "slicks"?

I reckon that the FIA will introduce yet another regulation to prevent teams wearing the enters down to slicks during a wet/dry race.

alfasud · 1 Oct 2006, 23:20 (Ref:1724780)

Quote:

Originally Posted by pole2pole

I reckon that the FIA will introduce yet another regulation to prevent teams wearing the enters down to slicks during a wet/dry race.

Why would F1 need a rule like that?

The reason for the grooved tyre rule was to help reduce cornering speeds.
Were the cornering speeds on worn intermediates faster than grooved (dry) tyres in dry conditions?

No - Therefore no need for yet more rules.

Gt_R · 2 Oct 2006, 02:28 (Ref:1724841)

People seem to assume that a worn inters "slick" is the same as a dry slick tyres, and think it gives some intentional speed advantage over a groove tyres in the dry.

Fernando was forced to change to groove earlier than Michael and Fisi to compensate for his error of killing his front, then rear inters. On a drying track, there is a window of a couple of laps where groove and used intermediates deliver similar lap times due to the characteristics of circuit surface. When Fernando was on grooves, he was quick after getting his grooves into pace. This showed that inters are not quicker than grooves.

Many drivers chose not to change their inters during their first round of pitstops because their original set is already performing, unlike a new set which may require additional laps to get it up to performance ( esp BS ). On a drying track teams are also not expecting to use their tyres much more, and a new set may risk being blistered on a drying and warm track.

**Adam43** · 2 Oct 2006, 08:34 (Ref:1725012)

Quote:

Originally Posted by alfasud

Why would F1 need a rule like that?

The fans will demand it.

pole2pole · 2 Oct 2006, 11:55 (Ref:1725199)

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

The fans will demand it.

I totally agree. Ferrari are simply brilliant at finding these advantages and also brilliant at using them to fantastic effect. The fact of the matter is that Ferrari created themselves a window of about 3 or 4 laps during the race where they where way way quicker than there rivals. That's where the race was won and lost. Yet again it was strategy that won the race and not a wheel to wheel battle. It also proved that tyres will be the deciding factor for the outcome of the championship.

**Adam43** · 2 Oct 2006, 12:01 (Ref:1725208)

Other teams did this too. Ferrari was not the latest to stop. The difference is that they made it work, because they (TGF?) was better that day.

Fisi went longer and got an initial advantage from that and then Michael overtook him on the track.

Tyres will play a part in the championship, as will the rest of the car and so will luck. Always has done. However yesterday what we saw was someone win despite their tyres. It was great.

Gt_R · 2 Oct 2006, 12:47 (Ref:1725272)

So it's down to strategy, down to finding loopholes?

Every team INCLUDING Renault ran their grooves until they are slick like, not just Michael or Ferrari. In fact, Alonso manage to wear his enough to force a change.

And i do remember that the change of lead occurred at Turn One, not in the pits, when Michael made a brave and decisive attempt down the inside of Fisichella and was partly forced up the curb and grass. But like a champion, he accepted the challenge and pulled it through without fuss.

In fact, from 6th, i believe Michael did actually at least overtake Barrichello, Alonso and Fisichella on-track.

gfm · 2 Oct 2006, 17:15 (Ref:1725457)

I thought MS very 'efficient' in China.

Smokey 6 litre · 4 Oct 2006, 14:54 (Ref:1727733)

i thought a couple of years ago the Bridgestones were mighty in the wet, or is that just some confused memory?

Sodemo · 4 Oct 2006, 16:04 (Ref:1727795)

In 2001, 2002, the Michelin wet range was awful, or was the Bridgestone just superb?

Since 2003, the two tyre companies have become more even in terms of wet weather performance.

Marbot · 4 Oct 2006, 19:01 (Ref:1727951)

I think it's down to driving styles.Alonso has a very harsh initial turn in,which if you simulate in your own road car will see the outer edges of your front tyres disappear before your very eyes.

**Adam43** · 5 Oct 2006, 13:11 (Ref:1728774)

Further to this: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/54932

Bridgestone are saying that their wets will be better suited to Suzuka.

Marbot · 5 Oct 2006, 19:20 (Ref:1729181)

Quote:

Originally Posted by AdamAshmore

Further to this: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/54932

Bridgestone are saying that their wets will be better suited to Suzuka.

Well they probably wouldn't say that they'll be completely useless.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Mexico City Attendance Projections Confused	indycool	ChampCar World Series	14	7 Nov 2005 22:21
New and confused?????	z2252314	Formula One	21	29 Aug 2001 16:44