Bridgestone quits F1 after 2010 | Page 2 | FerrariChat

Bridgestone quits F1 after 2010

Discussion in 'F1' started by jknight, Nov 1, 2009.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. Senna1994

    Senna1994 F1 World Champ

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    Messages:
    13,205
    Location:
    Orange County
    Full Name:
    Anthony T
    My bet is on Goodyear returning.
     
  2. 4rePhill

    4rePhill F1 Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Messages:
    8,281
    Location:
    Worcester, England
    Full Name:
    Phill J
    That would be the ideal solution for the FIA but they would have to come up with an incredible deal to entice Goodyear back. Think of the the negotiating power this gives to the tyre manufacturers!.
     
  3. maxay1

    maxay1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    7
    The only way Michelin will be back is if (a)they are allowed back into WRC, (b)they are not the only tire supplier, and (c)if the teams actually purchase (not lease) the tires. Not going to happen.

    The exit of Bridgestone presents an exciting opportunity in F1; fitting tires that are actually properly matched to the current cars. The Bridgestones are not, particularly with respect to lateral and vertical stiffness splits.

    My gut tells me that an Asian manufacturer will likely be the supplier: there are a couple with the marketing budget and the need for brand identity that F1 can provide.
     
  4. william

    william Two Time F1 World Champ

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Messages:
    27,965
    All these international championships that became 'specs series' by adopting single suppliers are slowly destroying their sport.

    F1, GP2, Superbikes, Moto GP, WRC, etc... each relies on one tyre supplier.

    Fine on principle, but the lucky winner of the contract soon find out that its participation in a sport without competition devalues its effort and become counter-productive from an image point of view.

    The research and development gradually slows down to the benefit of just specs tyres production, and motorsport become the antithesis of what it is supposed to be: a source of progress brought by competition.
     
  5. robert_c

    robert_c F1 Rookie

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,417
    Location:
    SoCal
    Full Name:
    Robert C
    Very nice first post. Thanks.

    What is a stiffness split, and why would you say the tires are not matched to the current cars? They didn't change the tire design when the cars changed last year?

    Next year the front tires will be more narrow per the rules. Will they design new tires all around?

    Thanks again for your insight.
     
  6. william

    william Two Time F1 World Champ

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Messages:
    27,965


    I think that this is essential for Michelin to return.

    Competition with other tyre suppliers was their only reason to be in F1 in the first place.

    Being sole supplier in a 'specs' series don't make sense to Michelin, nor fit the company's ethics.
     
  7. maxay1

    maxay1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    7
    A 'correct' stiffness split implies that the front and rear tires will deflect by the same amount under their respective loads. If our F1 car carries 60% of its weight over the rear axle, the stiffness split ratio should be .6/.4 = 1.5. This will ensure that the stiffness split is at the longitudinal position of the CG. Suspension force distribution depends upon the longitudinal CG position, so it would be good to have the tire stiffness split in the same position.

    The 2006 Renault F1 car carried 43% of its weight over the front axle, giving a rear/front split of 1.326. Oddly enough, the Michelin tires of that year had a split of 1.32.
    The Bridgestones from 2007 to present have a split of .91, equal to that of 2005 when tires had to last an entire race.
    Now go to your results from 2005. See how many wins and poles Ferrari earned that year....
     
  8. Senna1994

    Senna1994 F1 World Champ

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    Messages:
    13,205
    Location:
    Orange County
    Full Name:
    Anthony T
    Excellent information and thank you for the informative post.
     
  9. maxay1

    maxay1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    7
    GT/endurance racing fills the requirements for Michelin on a couple of different levels, I think, and therefore obviates their need to be involved in F1 (again).
    Tires are basically 'free' in terms of regulation in GT racing, and are raced on vehicles that are perhaps more relevant to the fan watching at home or trackside. Michelin does very well in these series, and for good reason. They construct tires that minimize load variation in the contact patch, and are well matched to the vehicles they're raced on. I know that folks at Dunlop (Goodyear) would like to know a secret or two from the French Man....
    I'd like to see Bridgestone involved in GT racing, I think it would be good competition for all involved, and possibly be more relevant to Bridgestones' future efforts. If they do, it will not be due to the Green-X challenge, I fear. The only challenge, from a fan perspective, is figuring out who's 'winning' the challenge and why. I've sat and watched every ALMS race with my TI92 in hand, pressed every button on the thing, and I can't pick the winner:
    Fan involvement in a competition you can't see will be minimal.

    Motorsport is under a great deal of pressure to be 'green', and I suspect much of it is self-imposed. One wonders if the fans that line up to get into and out of tonight's football game feel a similar responsibility. When I see the overhead shot of the stadium and parking lot, I have to laugh. Think of that number of vehicles starting up with (relatively) cold engines. And idling. And idling. Talk about unburned hydrocarbons.
    The FAA should consider a green challenge of its own, as jet emissions are curiously absent from any discussion of emissions output...
     
  10. jknight

    jknight F1 Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2004
    Messages:
    7,821
    Location:
    Central Texas
    In the aviation world, KLM is a step ahead with their program http://www.klm.com/travel/us_en/about/co2/index.htm

    Carol
     
  11. maxay1

    maxay1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    7
    Not sure that KLM is necessarily a step ahead, though they might be. From what I can gather on their website, they buy new aircraft with new engines, the same aircraft and engines that others buy, they maintain the engines (nice), and would like to see a single European airspace, offering more direct flight paths. The fact remains that burning kerosene like that results in a mess coming out the tailpipe, and I've yet to see crowds clamoring outside an airport screaming for reduced jet engine emissions.

    Anyway, it is curious that Ferrari won no races or poles in 2005, save Indy, the 2007 Ferrari saw a wheelbase increase of 6.5 inches, and Renault saw the significant change of fortune from 2006 to 2007.
    So to answer an earlier question, no they might not redesign the tires, but you can bet the car will be altered to suit the tire. Suspension forces are reacted through the tire, these forces are a function of the masses they support, thus the need for the CG location and tire stiffness ratio to be coincident along the longitudinal axis of the car.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2009
  12. robert_c

    robert_c F1 Rookie

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,417
    Location:
    SoCal
    Full Name:
    Robert C
    MS had pole at Hungary.

    Please continue to post here at Ferrarichat. Your knowledge is appreciated to neophyte fans like myself.
     
  13. maxay1

    maxay1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    7
    Thank you for the correction Robert, my apologies for having missed that. Thank you as well for the welcome. My contributions, using a pretty broad definition of the term, will likely be limited to topics concerning vehicle dynamics. It's an area that fascinates me, and one that I try to continuously learn about. I am amazed very day at how little I know. It's staggering. But I enjoy it for that reason, I guess.

    Thanks again.
     
  14. Senna1994

    Senna1994 F1 World Champ

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    Messages:
    13,205
    Location:
    Orange County
    Full Name:
    Anthony T
    Just please keep it up, thank you in advance.

    Best,
    Tony
     
  15. PCA Hack

    PCA Hack Formula Junior

    Joined:
    May 9, 2008
    Messages:
    610
    Location:
    Rancho Santa Fe, CA
    I work on the financial side of motorsports for a number of teams in different series. I've been in Singapore & Japan for the last week looking for F1 dollars, so I'm probably closer to this than most - Here's what I found out from a couple of different people close to the situation:

    The word among those in the know is that Bridgestone is just posturing for better terms. As was already stated, Pirelli is out for sure, Michelin most likely won't make a run and F1 has not even made an effort to contact Goodyear - which strengthens my premise. In any event, Goodyear has no interest in F1 - this is a fact, you can make book on that.

    The cost to play is *$90 million* & you need to sell a $hitload of rubber to recoup an investment of that size. How many manufacturers can justify $90 million in this market?

    So, if we can say with 100% certainty that Pirelli & Goodyear are out (and we can) & that Michelin will likely continue to use their stranglehold on sportscar racing to develop their product, who's left? Kumho & Hankook? I think not. It IS nearly impossible for those companies to develop 2 tires for every track which they have no experience running on & no historical data from which to start - and I don't think Bridgestone, Michelin or Goodyear will be parting with their data.

    I know from first hand experience dealing with ALMS teams who ran Kumho tires just how bad they are. The things the drivers would say as they stepped out of the car were nothing short of comical. It's not just their tire that's bad, but the infrastructure & engineers they assigned to the ALMS project. What the drivers asked for was consistently lost in translation from the at-track engineers by the time it got to the factory & Kumho never made a remotely decent tire. They were so bad that two privateer teams (who are starved for funds) actually gave Kumho six-figures back just to run Dunlop at their expense. If they can't make a passable tire for a LMP car, do you really think they have the ability to jump to F1 in 90 days? Long story short, the Korean manufacturers are not in any position to tackle F1.

    Moreover, what do they (or anyone new) have to gain by being lambasted on a global stage week in and week out for not making a good tire?

    As for competition in F1 or any other series, don't kid yourself, the manufacturers don't want it. At this level it costs too much to play if you're the loser - the name of the game is exclusivity. For that matter, its still a dangerous game as an exclusive supplier. Case in point; what do you think Goodyear gained from their $20 million yearly NASCAR investment in incidents like when Denny Hamlin publicly slammed them? I have it on good authority that they were rather pissed off & put an end to those types of driver comments in short order.


    When you look at the landscape of the situation, Bridgestone is the most logical & likely supplier for 2010.
     
  16. Peloton25

    Peloton25 F1 Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2004
    Messages:
    7,646
    Location:
    California, USA
    Full Name:
    Erik
    Thanks for the insight, but as a point of clarification it is 2011 and beyond that is in question. Bridgestone are under contract until the end of 2010 already and have chosen not to renew their commitment.

    >8^)
    ER
     
  17. maxay1

    maxay1 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Messages:
    7
    Yes, it's 90 days...and while Bridgestone certainly has the infrastructure and engineering, we shouldn't forget that Bridgestone missed the vertical stiffness split issue, while Ferrari vehicle dynamics people most certainly did not.

    Bridgestone has been appealed to by a number of people in F1 engineering and racing teams to change the construction to make them more suitable to the current car.
     
  18. 4rePhill

    4rePhill F1 Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Messages:
    8,281
    Location:
    Worcester, England
    Full Name:
    Phill J
    I'm surprised that this situation hasn't recieved a much bigger response from those involved in running F1 to be honest (okay, there's no telling what negotiations are going on behind the scenes to be fair and it is over a year away, but still!).

    This has the potential to become a major crisis for the future of F1!.

    Could We possibly see teams having to buy their own tyres rather than be supplied free?. That could encourage some of the smaller tyre manufacturers in, as budgets would be less of an issue, but then you'd be back to giving the richer teams an advantage as they could afford the best/most tyres.

    As I say, this could have major ramifications!.
     

Share This Page