FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Jensonb]

Avon would be cool. I'd also like to see Cooper

[stonemonkey]

Is this about a Montoya comeback or the rubber? :p

Why did the FIA want a single supplier?

[Jensonb]

Is this about a Montoya comeback or the rubber? :p

Why did the FIA want a single supplier?

Some about improving the show. The tyre war was really fake or some nonsense like that

[stonemonkey]

Is this about a Montoya comeback or the rubber? :p

Why did the FIA want a single supplier?

Some about improving the show. The tyre war was really fake or some nonsense like that

I always felt there was something odd about the Indy fiasco, that someone screwed Michelin on that. Not so much as in what could've been done to remedy the situation as the ideas put forward and rejected were really just clutching at straws, but more in what caused it in the first place as surely the tyre manufacturers would have to go through the FIA with their tyre choices/specs for each event and there would've been some irregularity between Michelin and Bridgestone with Bridgestone knowing about the changes to the track surface.

Maybe I'm just reading too much into it but I've never really understood it.

[Jensonb]

Is this about a Montoya comeback or the rubber? :p

Why did the FIA want a single supplier?

Some about improving the show. The tyre war was really fake or some nonsense like that

I always felt there was something odd about the Indy fiasco, that someone screwed Michelin on that. Not so much as in what could've been done to remedy the situation as the ideas put forward and rejected were really just clutching at straws, but more in what caused it in the first place as surely the tyre manufacturers would have to go through the FIA with their tyre choices/specs for each event and there would've been some irregularity between Michelin and Bridgestone with Bridgestone knowing about the changes to the track surface.

Maybe I'm just reading too much into it but I've never really understood it.

No, I think you make a fair point. I always wondered how it was that the FiA let Indianapolis change the surface without Michelin being able to modify their tyres and check them as safe to run beforehand. Clearly Michelin would never make such a mistake unless something odd was afoot, the PR was a nightmare so they'd want to ensure their tyres were always safe to run. With that said therefore, one has to assume something was kept from them. I did always wonder what exactly the Indianapolis crowd thought they were playing at using a surface which was frequently described as have razor sharp ridges in it.

[headless]

Tyre wars are good fun
Michelin and Goodyear/Dunlop i'd like to see

[deMuRe]

I agree. But I don't agree that F1 should only have a control tyre. Two tyre makers is necessary and I think a tyre war is essential in F1 now that tyres are going to be the only major factor in terms of strategy.

The one thing I don't like about the tyre war is the pendulum of advantage, it's too much, you end up with tracks that suit one tyre over the other and some of the races become farcical.

[deMuRe]

Is this about a Montoya comeback or the rubber? :p

Why did the FIA want a single supplier?

Some about improving the show. The tyre war was really fake or some nonsense like that

I always felt there was something odd about the Indy fiasco, that someone screwed Michelin on that. Not so much as in what could've been done to remedy the situation as the ideas put forward and rejected were really just clutching at straws, but more in what caused it in the first place as surely the tyre manufacturers would have to go through the FIA with their tyre choices/specs for each event and there would've been some irregularity between Michelin and Bridgestone with Bridgestone knowing about the changes to the track surface.

Maybe I'm just reading too much into it but I've never really understood it.

No, I think you make a fair point. I always wondered how it was that the FiA let Indianapolis change the surface without Michelin being able to modify their tyres and check them as safe to run beforehand. Clearly Michelin would never make such a mistake unless something odd was afoot, the PR was a nightmare so they'd want to ensure their tyres were always safe to run. With that said therefore, one has to assume something was kept from them. I did always wonder what exactly the Indianapolis crowd thought they were playing at using a surface which was frequently described as have razor sharp ridges in it.

It smelt of a publicity stunt to me.

[Jensonb]

I agree. But I don't agree that F1 should only have a control tyre. Two tyre makers is necessary and I think a tyre war is essential in F1 now that tyres are going to be the only major factor in terms of strategy.

The one thing I don't like about the tyre war is the pendulum of advantage, it's too much, you end up with tracks that suit one tyre over the other and some of the races become farcical.

That's why there should be more than two. I say any manufacturer capable of producing a tyre to F1 standards should be able to do so and teams should be free to buy them.

[deMuRe]

I agree. But I don't agree that F1 should only have a control tyre. Two tyre makers is necessary and I think a tyre war is essential in F1 now that tyres are going to be the only major factor in terms of strategy.

The one thing I don't like about the tyre war is the pendulum of advantage, it's too much, you end up with tracks that suit one tyre over the other and some of the races become farcical.

That's why there should be more than two. I say any manufacturer capable of producing a tyre to F1 standards should be able to do so and teams should be free to buy them.

I like that idea much better, and teams can have any tyre for any race, throw it wide open.

[texasmr2]

I agree. But I don't agree that F1 should only have a control tyre. Two tyre makers is necessary and I think a tyre war is essential in F1 now that tyres are going to be the only major factor in terms of strategy.

The one thing I don't like about the tyre war is the pendulum of advantage, it's too much, you end up with tracks that suit one tyre over the other and some of the races become farcical.

That's why there should be more than two. I say any manufacturer capable of producing a tyre to F1 standards should be able to do so and teams should be free to buy them.

I like that idea much better, and teams can have any tyre for any race, throw it wide open.

If there is only one manufacturer available to all the teams and the manufacturer brings a crappy tire to the race all the teams suffer in one way or another. I would like to see three tire manufacturers available to every team at every race, that to me would be awesome.

[bud]

one tyre for everyone is fairer, leaves the results to team vs team!

[NateDawg80126]

one tyre for everyone is fairer, leaves the results to team vs team!

I agree that having all the teams racing one tire would make for more fair racing, but I am also totally against forcing any standard components or designs in F1 (tires included). I honestly don't think any other tire manufacturer is going to provide a better tire for F1 then Bridgestone, so if that is no longer an option, I say let em use whatever they want, the more competition the better.

Or put more simply, TIRE WARS!

[racechick]

one tyre for everyone is fairer, leaves the results to team vs team!

But that heads done the route of control everything- same tyres, same engine, same chassis. Thats not what F! is all about, its about innovation-innovation not restricted to certain parts of the car only.

[bud]

one tyre for everyone is fairer, leaves the results to team vs team!

But that heads done the route of control everything- same tyres, same engine, same chassis. Thats not what F! is all about, its about innovation-innovation not restricted to certain parts of the car only.

not really, when it comes to racing the tyre is the most important part of any car.
Each team has to make a car for a certain tyre, that tyre being the same for everyone means the separation of the pecking order is down to teams vs teams. If you throw in multiple tyres then you come to a point where one team may have the fastest chassis but cannot win because its tyre supplier is inferior to another. SO who is doing the better job, the team or the tyre? id rather see the best team win not the team on the best tyre, as we saw in 05. The Ferrari was not a crap chassis at all just the Michelin tyre was just superior to the Bridgestone.