"Limited testing" BS by the Group of 9.

Michellin-equiped cars racked up 5,000km today at Barcelona, as oppose to Bridgestone-equiped cars at 555km. Someone please explain to me how much money is being saved again??

 

*L* To be honest with you, I never actually sat down to count how many teams are there in the field.

 

Michellin-shod cars: 4257km to Bridgestone-shod: 726km

Don't hide behind the banner of "Cost-cutting", just come out and say that you are trying to gain an advantage over Ferrari. Granted that it is Ferrari's choice of staying with Bridgestone, but at least let us be honest about the true intentions here.

Funny thing is, the teams that are really strapping for cash are the teams running on Bridgestone (Jordan and Minardi).

 

Once again, we disagree, I guess that is nothing new.

The fact is that tyres are a major force behind how a F1 car will perform. You may not like it, but that is a fact we can not denied. Another fact that we can not ignore is that distance = data, thus can result in better tyres. If you think that Michellin is really catering to all the teams individually, then I have a swampland in Florida that measures 3'x3' to sell you for a bargain price of $1,000,000.00. For the arguement's sake, let's say that Michellin IS catering to 7 different teams/cars individually, the bill for that must be enormous, and thus not exactly "cost cutting" either, is it?

The 7 Michellin-shod teams are sharing datas and thus have an advantage over Bridgestone-shod teams. Ferrari may gain in specific data collected but they are losing out on the general data, as in they will have take on all the tyre testing. Think about it this way, if for every 200km/1000km is needed for general data collection, 200km/7 = 28.4km per team for the Michellin users. And for in Bridgestone's case, 200km/3 = 66.7km per team. As you can see, for Ferrari, Jordan and Minardi to gain the same amount of data, they will have to spend more time and resources. And yes, by shear number, they will have more team-specific data to use, but for them to gain team-specific data, they will have to finish up collecting the general data first and then put in the extra resources and time to gain the team-specific data, no? And we all know, that in F1, time is money. right? And yes, you are right that it is Ferrari's own fault for staying with Bridgestone, because they are getting special treatment from them. But if you think that Renault, McLaren, Williams are not getting better treatment than Toyota, Sauber, Red-Bull and BAR, then again, my offer on the swampland still stands I think what Ferrari and Bridgestone did not expect was that Sauber's switch to Michellin this season.

For your information, I don't agree with what Ferrari was suggesting either on the "self-imposed" testing limite. I think that also gives Ferrari an advantage, since it is just an opposite extrem to what the Michellin teams wanted. A good solution for the tyre war would be, force each manufacture to supply 5 teams, no more and no less. If a third manufacture enters the tyre war, then 3 teams to each tyre company and the team that came in last the year before gets to choose which tyre company they want to go with. Follow the similar formula whenever a new manufacture enters or withdraws from F1.

Now, onto the part of unfair advantage by Ferrari by having their own track and a state of art facility etc. Didn't McLaren just opened up their multi-Zillion dollar complex in GB? Doesn't Honda, Toyota, McLaren, Renault and Williams all have their own private track to test? If they are willing to out their own money in, why shouldn't they be allow to use it? Think of it like this, if the Australian Olympic team have a state of art facility build and hired the world's best trainers to train their athletes but however, they are not allowed to use them because athletes from Antigua sees it all as an unfair advantage in training, how would you feel?

Fact is, Formula One racing is very expensive these days, major manufactures from all over the world see it as a great source of advertisement. Unfortunately, the cost of it all is that the privateer teams will go the ways of extinction because of it, that is the rule of natural selection, thus evolution. Anyway, my point is that the teams shouldn't hide behind the "cost-cutting" banner when it is obiviously not true and there is obiviously an advantage to be gained by them. At least Ferrari doesn't lie about wanting to find that edge, that little bit of competitive advantage over the other teams.

PS: One last fact, I hate to break this to you, but I don't think Jean Todt or Ross Brawn is loosing any sleep over either yours or my support for team Ferrari. In fact, I don't think the Ferrari forum would even know or care if neither one of us ever post on the forum ever again. I would however, miss the good debates/discussions I have had here on the forum.

 

To PSK,

1) You should remember this, both Ferrari and McLaren were running on Bridgestone at least until 2000. Remember that Ferrari stayed with Goodyear until the final year which I believe was 1998. Also, ironically, Bridgestone first entered, I believe it was actually McLaren that picked them up first. From what I remembered, Williams defected to Michellin first when they entered F1, then McLaren followed in either 2000 or 2001. I remember reading that it was McLaren and William's intention in joining and sharing tyre data in order beat Ferrari. So you see, it was McLaren and Williams that left Bridgestone and thus Ferrari became the only major team with Bridgestone.

2) At least we both agree on something this time. It would appear to me that you also suspect that Renault has special treatment from Michellin.

3) Dude, I don't know where you have been in the past six months. McLaren, Williams and Renault has openly attack Ferrari about not joining in on the limited testing issue, stating the cutting cost was the goal and the reason for it, which we both agree that the current state of F1, cost cutting is the furtherest thing from anyone of their minds. Go to any one of the F1 news sites and do a little research and read the news from the off-season.

4) If I recall correctly, McLaren and Williams all are located close to a track that can be considered as their own. Honda owns Suzuka and another track in Japan and Toyota owns at least two tracks in Japan (One of them is near Mt. Fuji, in fact, they are trying to take that Japan GP away from Suzuka once the contract is up.) In both Honda and Toyota's case, they are base in Europe, and it is their own fault and decision of not having a team based in Japan thus take advantage of the tracks. Also, Toyota F1 team is also close to a track in Germany that they can easily use whenever they want. Again, if the other teams choose not to use their own resources, who is to blame? Also, let's not forget, Ferrari has been in F1 longest, the tracks and the facilities are the modern interpertation of what it used to be. They have been testing on Fiorano track forever, and now Mugello, which they already owned and just re-modeled and modernized. You can't punish them for using what they have. Mercedes and BMW all have their own track that they test on, it is their own fault for not having McLaren and Williams use them.

 

I guess all of the team principles should just shut up and deal with the current situation, afterall, they all made the decision past and present based on the hope of finding that special edge over the others. I guess a fight between Ron Dennis and Jean Todt would definitely would be classified as a cat-fight.

My point of the thread is to show how the rest of the 9 teams on the F1 grid are saying that Ferrari is not co-operating with the un-official limited testing agreement during the season and hiding behind the reason of "Cost-saving".

You have a nice weekend too.