F1 and Motorsport Forums
bud wrote:the teams should pay Bridgestone for their tyres.
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît point. 
darwin dali wrote:well they are going to have to pay for tyres next year anyways and have been getting tyres free so they should pay and help Bridgestone out, i am Sure FOTA would allow the smaller budgeted teams to have lower fees too.bud wrote:the teams should pay Bridgestone for their tyres.
Maybe the rate of payment should reflect the standing so that smaller teams pay a bit less.
Teams fail to agree on 2011 tyresI'd like to know what these 'commercial terms' are that are supposedly making Pirelli the favourites at the moment.
Formula 1 teams failed to reach a final decision on tyres during Sunday's meeting to discuss 2011 rubber, meaning the matter will likely now drag on until the Turkish Grand Prix.
F1 team principals conducted a more detailed evaluation of the offers on the table from Pirelli, Michelin and Avon Cooper this morning, but the teams could not commit themselves to electing one route as their preferred option.
While Pirelli is believed to be favourite to get the contract, because of the commercial terms of the deal, Michelin is still attractive enough to not be totally discounted.
Further talks took place with F1 commercial boss Bernie Ecclestone following the get-together by the Formula One Teams' Association (FOTA), and more talks are now scheduled to take place over the next few weeks.
Williams CEO Adam Parr confirmed that no decision had been taken, which means F1 still does not know on what tyres the cars will run in 2011.
"We are making very good progress, but haven't made a final decision," Parr told AUTOSPORT. "We have a couple of good proposals on the table and each one has its own merits. There are a couple of details, but we have to make a decision soon."
When asked how far away he reckoned that decision would be, he said: "We are days rather than weeks. It is down to two or three options on the table and we are close to deciding which way we go."
Parr also made it clear that teams had rejected any move towards a tyre war in F1, because of the ramping up of costs that that would entail.
"Nobody in F1 wants that," he said. "I think one of them likes the idea that it is not hiding away behind a sole supplier relationship, and that it is open to competition. We would all recognise that that tyre supplier is more than capable of conducting a tyre war, but there is no appetite or potential for a tyre war now.
"It is not just about money, it is about the show. When we have a tyre war the pressure to increase testing will go up. You can also get it hugely wrong in a tyre war. If someone is given a two second per lap tyre advantage you would never see them. That would kill the sport."
scotty wrote:Sticking with 13 inch wheels and possibly a bit cheaper for each team.Teams fail to agree on 2011 tyresI'd like to know what these 'commercial terms' are that are supposedly making Pirelli the favourites at the moment.
Formula 1 teams failed to reach a final decision on tyres during Sunday's meeting to discuss 2011 rubber, meaning the matter will likely now drag on until the Turkish Grand Prix.
F1 team principals conducted a more detailed evaluation of the offers on the table from Pirelli, Michelin and Avon Cooper this morning, but the teams could not commit themselves to electing one route as their preferred option.
While Pirelli is believed to be favourite to get the contract, because of the commercial terms of the deal, Michelin is still attractive enough to not be totally discounted.
Further talks took place with F1 commercial boss Bernie Ecclestone following the get-together by the Formula One Teams' Association (FOTA), and more talks are now scheduled to take place over the next few weeks.
Williams CEO Adam Parr confirmed that no decision had been taken, which means F1 still does not know on what tyres the cars will run in 2011.
"We are making very good progress, but haven't made a final decision," Parr told AUTOSPORT. "We have a couple of good proposals on the table and each one has its own merits. There are a couple of details, but we have to make a decision soon."
When asked how far away he reckoned that decision would be, he said: "We are days rather than weeks. It is down to two or three options on the table and we are close to deciding which way we go."
Parr also made it clear that teams had rejected any move towards a tyre war in F1, because of the ramping up of costs that that would entail.
"Nobody in F1 wants that," he said. "I think one of them likes the idea that it is not hiding away behind a sole supplier relationship, and that it is open to competition. We would all recognise that that tyre supplier is more than capable of conducting a tyre war, but there is no appetite or potential for a tyre war now.
"It is not just about money, it is about the show. When we have a tyre war the pressure to increase testing will go up. You can also get it hugely wrong in a tyre war. If someone is given a two second per lap tyre advantage you would never see them. That would kill the sport."
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connaît point. bud wrote:In the Australian pre race coverage James Allen was saying Mercedes, Renault and McLaren favour Michelin while the rest Pirelli. He was also saying there are safety concerns that Pirelli can even make F1 rubber as they have never done it before.1950-1958, 1981-1986, 1989-1991..?
Denthúl wrote:think James Allen meant modern F1 car rubber though technology has changed alot since 91.bud wrote:In the Australian pre race coverage James Allen was saying Mercedes, Renault and McLaren favour Michelin while the rest Pirelli. He was also saying there are safety concerns that Pirelli can even make F1 rubber as they have never done it before.1950-1958, 1981-1986, 1989-1991..?
bud wrote:He was also saying there are safety concerns that Pirelli can even make F1 rubber as they have never done it before.
bud wrote:Hm, it's possible. The kind of loads the tyres go through would differ, I agree, but I think it would be within their capability. Remember, they do make tyres for other high-performance categories. It's not like they're going straight from the road to the racetrack. I do think that Michelin have the advantage there, though, having only been out of the sport for four years.Denthúl wrote:think James Allen meant modern F1 car rubber though technology has changed alot since 91.bud wrote:In the Australian pre race coverage James Allen was saying Mercedes, Renault and McLaren favour Michelin while the rest Pirelli. He was also saying there are safety concerns that Pirelli can even make F1 rubber as they have never done it before.1950-1958, 1981-1986, 1989-1991..?
myownalias wrote:Why don't we have the simple solution of letting each team choose their own tyre supplier... providing that the tyre meets FIA standards!Totaly agree the thought of having more than one tyre firm may also aid ovetaking,something we all want.To have different tyres better at different tracks.I can see nothing but positives from a fans point of view for doing this.
Start moving away from the spec series that F1 is slowly heading towards!
.texasmr2 wrote:Glad to see someone else is onboard with the idea of multiple tire suppliersIf the teams are going to be paying for their tires, why NOT have multiple suppliers??
McLaren Racing opened its new state-of-the-art Rac[…]
Swap-in out addons, use only what you really need!
- By hass25