It's getting ridiculous!
freakray
09-19-2003, 12:19 PM
It appears that during private testing at Monza, Michelin engineers noticed that the front and rear Bridgestone tyres were wearing differently. According to them, this could mean that the compound on the front tyres and rear tyres are different, which is against the regulation (FIA Sporting regulation, article 76b).
http://f1.racing-live.com/en/headlines/news/detail/030919162717.shtml
I can't help but wonder about this whole situation....is this a case of Michelin trying to get back at BRIDGEstone, or is this a valid complaint.
I mean, haven't we noticed the same with Michelins under race conditions? Different wearing front and rear?
Didn't the teams leave the front tyres on longer because of this?
Apparently Bridgestone are confident there is nothing illegal to find, but Michelin was confident of the same thing when their tyres were called into question.
I can only wonder when this madness is going to stop. :disappoin
http://f1.racing-live.com/en/headlines/news/detail/030919162717.shtml
I can't help but wonder about this whole situation....is this a case of Michelin trying to get back at BRIDGEstone, or is this a valid complaint.
I mean, haven't we noticed the same with Michelins under race conditions? Different wearing front and rear?
Didn't the teams leave the front tyres on longer because of this?
Apparently Bridgestone are confident there is nothing illegal to find, but Michelin was confident of the same thing when their tyres were called into question.
I can only wonder when this madness is going to stop. :disappoin
RallyRaider
09-19-2003, 07:13 PM
The rumour of Brigestone running different componds has been around for a while. Came to a head at Monaco just before Ferraristone began their dip in performance. Entirely to be expected that Michelin will throw some mud back.
Also serves as a reminder to Brawn and Todt regarding their threat to contest all of this years races in the courtroom should they fail to win. Don't go looking for the skeletons in other's closets, when there are a few in your own.
The tone has been set and the gutter politics probably hasn't ended yet.
Also serves as a reminder to Brawn and Todt regarding their threat to contest all of this years races in the courtroom should they fail to win. Don't go looking for the skeletons in other's closets, when there are a few in your own.
The tone has been set and the gutter politics probably hasn't ended yet.
ales
09-19-2003, 08:52 PM
The rumour of Brigestone running different componds has been around for a while. Came to a head at Monaco just before Ferraristone began their dip in performance. Entirely to be expected that Michelin will throw some mud back.
Also serves as a reminder to Brawn and Todt regarding their threat to contest all of this years races in the courtroom should they fail to win. Don't go looking for the skeletons in other's closets, when there are a few in your own.
The tone has been set and the gutter politics probably hasn't ended yet.
About that rumour ... it was published in 1 (one) magazine, which had to publish an apology to Bridgestone afterwards. Now that's something to believe in. As for the Monza tyres, well, let them examine it and let's wait for the results. I'm sure if the tyres are illegal then I'm sure something will be done about it.
Of, and let me just say how ironic the groove thing is - those who've read the regs will know exactly what I mean :D
Also serves as a reminder to Brawn and Todt regarding their threat to contest all of this years races in the courtroom should they fail to win. Don't go looking for the skeletons in other's closets, when there are a few in your own.
The tone has been set and the gutter politics probably hasn't ended yet.
About that rumour ... it was published in 1 (one) magazine, which had to publish an apology to Bridgestone afterwards. Now that's something to believe in. As for the Monza tyres, well, let them examine it and let's wait for the results. I'm sure if the tyres are illegal then I'm sure something will be done about it.
Of, and let me just say how ironic the groove thing is - those who've read the regs will know exactly what I mean :D
RallyRaider
09-19-2003, 09:27 PM
About that rumour ... it was published in 1 (one) magazine, which had to publish an apology to Bridgestone afterwards. Now that's something to believe in. As for the Monza tyres, well, let them examine it and let's wait for the results. I'm sure if the tyres are illegal then I'm sure something will be done about it.
Who cares if it was published or not it was a rumour! One that is resurfacing again. Often the more verement the denial the closer it tends to be to the truth.
Of, and let me just say how ironic the groove thing is - those who've read the regs will know exactly what I mean :D
Don't know what you are refering to Alex. Is it Michelin's asymetrical grooves they tested a couple of years ago? The FIA forbade them to be raced, not sure if a bit of rule engineering was involved then too.
Who cares if it was published or not it was a rumour! One that is resurfacing again. Often the more verement the denial the closer it tends to be to the truth.
Of, and let me just say how ironic the groove thing is - those who've read the regs will know exactly what I mean :D
Don't know what you are refering to Alex. Is it Michelin's asymetrical grooves they tested a couple of years ago? The FIA forbade them to be raced, not sure if a bit of rule engineering was involved then too.
ales
09-20-2003, 12:52 AM
Don't know what you are refering to Alex. Is it Michelin's asymetrical grooves they tested a couple of years ago? The FIA forbade them to be raced, not sure if a bit of rule engineering was involved then too.
No no. Well, almost. It's said that Michelin wanted to check the symmetricity of Bridgestone grooves (of course, I don't know how much truth there is in this), as they think they might wear down assymetrically (won't be surprised considering how much camber bridgestone teams are using). Anyway, it's the checking of symmetricity of grooves on used tyres that cracks me up :D
No no. Well, almost. It's said that Michelin wanted to check the symmetricity of Bridgestone grooves (of course, I don't know how much truth there is in this), as they think they might wear down assymetrically (won't be surprised considering how much camber bridgestone teams are using). Anyway, it's the checking of symmetricity of grooves on used tyres that cracks me up :D
freakray
09-20-2003, 09:23 AM
No no. Well, almost. It's said that Michelin wanted to check the symmetricity of Bridgestone grooves (of course, I don't know how much truth there is in this), as they think they might wear down assymetrically (won't be surprised considering how much camber bridgestone teams are using). Anyway, it's the checking of symmetricity of grooves on used tyres that cracks me up :D
But that doesn't sound any different to the whole thing about Michelin tyres being legal width when new and illegal when worn.
It sounds like Michelin are doing to Bridgestone exactly what Bridgestone did to Michelin.
Some of the Michelin teams also run huge cambers in some races, this will effect the wear too.....not to mention the contact patch and the like.
It's just a big pissing match if you ask me. :shakehead
But that doesn't sound any different to the whole thing about Michelin tyres being legal width when new and illegal when worn.
It sounds like Michelin are doing to Bridgestone exactly what Bridgestone did to Michelin.
Some of the Michelin teams also run huge cambers in some races, this will effect the wear too.....not to mention the contact patch and the like.
It's just a big pissing match if you ask me. :shakehead
ales
09-21-2003, 01:27 AM
But that doesn't sound any different to the whole thing about Michelin tyres being legal width when new and illegal when worn.
Oh come on Ray! You have to see the difference here!
Oh come on Ray! You have to see the difference here!
RallyRaider
09-21-2003, 06:24 AM
Oh come on Ray! You have to see the difference here!
Your right Alex, it would take a rule change or re-interpretation to make that one stick... :sly:
The bloody hide of Michelin, imagining they can waltz in and demand the FIA change the rules. Who do they think they are? Ferrari or something? :cwm27:
Your right Alex, it would take a rule change or re-interpretation to make that one stick... :sly:
The bloody hide of Michelin, imagining they can waltz in and demand the FIA change the rules. Who do they think they are? Ferrari or something? :cwm27:
freakray
09-21-2003, 09:00 AM
Oh come on Ray! You have to see the difference here!
Oh come on Alex! You have to see the similarities here!
If the grooves are illegal after the tyre is raced upon, that is NO different to the tyre width being illegal after the tyre is raced upon.
The pot called the kettle black, now that the kettle has pointed out that the pot is black too, the pot's supporters are all screaming "not a chance!"
Oh come on Alex! You have to see the similarities here!
If the grooves are illegal after the tyre is raced upon, that is NO different to the tyre width being illegal after the tyre is raced upon.
The pot called the kettle black, now that the kettle has pointed out that the pot is black too, the pot's supporters are all screaming "not a chance!"
ales
09-21-2003, 09:26 AM
Have you read the rules, Ray? The groove size and symmetricity is clearly written to apply only to new (edited - my bad!) tyres. It cannot get any clearer than that! While the contact patch is almost as clearly (and I'm the first to admit that there could be some ambiguity at first glance, while after rereading the part in question I honestly don't get how it can be interpreted to apply to new tyres only) doesn't state that. Just read it.
freakray
09-21-2003, 09:45 AM
Have you read the rules, Ray? The groove size and symmetricity is clearly written to apply only to used tyres. It cannot get any clearer than that! While the contact patch is almost as clearly (and I'm the first to admit that there could be some ambiguity at first glance, while after rereading the part in question I honestly don't get how it can be interpreted to apply to new tyres only) doesn't state that. Just read it.
So then you're admitting that if the Bridgestones wear down assymetrically, they are illegal, since as you pointed out, they have to be symmetrical even when worn.
So then you're admitting that if the Bridgestones wear down assymetrically, they are illegal, since as you pointed out, they have to be symmetrical even when worn.
ales
09-21-2003, 10:01 AM
So then you're admitting that if the Bridgestones wear down assymetrically, they are illegal, since as you pointed out, they have to be symmetrical even when worn.
Where did I say they have to be symmetrical when worn? :confused: It can't be any clearer - grooves have to be symmetrical only on new tyres.
Edit: sorry, I made a mistake in the previous post :screwy:
The only way I can see grooves making the worn tyres illegal is if one or more are not present at the end of the race. But if I were any of the tyre companies I'd lower my eyes and be pretty quiet about that point.
Where did I say they have to be symmetrical when worn? :confused: It can't be any clearer - grooves have to be symmetrical only on new tyres.
Edit: sorry, I made a mistake in the previous post :screwy:
The only way I can see grooves making the worn tyres illegal is if one or more are not present at the end of the race. But if I were any of the tyre companies I'd lower my eyes and be pretty quiet about that point.
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2026