The Blame game: Is it fair to blame Bridgestone??

On account of Ferrari's somewhat stalled start to the season, there's been quite a bit of finger pointing, blame and fault being dished out. Yet none of it's really deserved on any one individual or entity; the fault if collective.

In the midst of all this emotional banter, it would be prudent, to look at the facts, and try and anylize the situation more of as a numerical problem and less like a soap opera discussion forum.

There are a few things right off the bat that one should point out; namely, Ferrari waited too long to bring out their new car, they believed they could continue on development into mid-season, gauging what everyone else's pace and adjusting according. That bit them in the ass, why, because they underestimated the pace of the other competitors, in light of the pre-season pace showing of Renault and Toyota.


Second, related to the first point, is the rushed introduction of the new car and its radical new gearbox; obviously, if you have to push the new car through, it's going to be rough around the edges, especially if you're bringing it in nearly 5 races ahead of schedule. The teething problems related to the gearbox also played out with Rubens' cracked block; the engine's a stressed member and the gearbox is bolted to the engine.

Thirdly, the development of the new gearbox also demanded the rework of the rear aero and body pkg., how has that played out? Did anyone see the Rubens' and Michael's rear tires? Bald. Suffering from lack of rear grip? Perhaps.

Which brings us to the tires... BS and Ferrari have enjoyed a fruitful run. And Ferrari has certainly reaped the spoils of having its own boutique tire maker; however, it now seems that this may been a poor managerial choice.

You've now got Sauber, McLaren, Williams, Toyota, BAR, Red Bull and Renault running Michelins v Ferrari, Jordan and who?

The sheer number of test miles that Michelin can get is impossible to attain from Ferrari. And why is this important ? Because Michelin can farm out say 3 different compounds per team and collect real-time data on 21 different tire compounds from a single series of tests - that's tremendously advantageous. And if you coordinate the teams ability to do race distance testing, qualifying testing, etc you can see that the amount of information Michelin can collect begins to grow at a metric rate. That's the proof in the pudding.


Finally, you've got Tifosi all up in arms around the world coming up with conspiracy theories, and this and that etc etc dreading the end of an era but what did you expect? Ferrari dominance ad infinitum? Sorry, it doesn't work that way... Ferrari really cleaned up their act in 99 and has had a tremendous showing these last 5 years but racing, like all things in life, is cyclic. Nothing lasts forever, not even dominance; even the alpha male grow old.

It seems that many fans can't accept that Renault, Toyota, McLaren and even Red Bull can build a competative race car; in the past, they couldn't but it only takes so long for something to come together if the resources are there. It's coming together for McLaren and it's certainly come together for Toyota.

Ferrari's run from '00 to '04 was genius but it couldn't last, it never does.
So who's to blame then? Who dropped the ball? If you take what I say above into consideration, it's a mixture of the circumstance catching up to them (tires, delaying the new car, getting caught napping using the old car) and the sheer reluctanct defiance by the others teams to keep getting beat.

In the end, you could say that Ferrari's management ignored the possibility of the other teams coming on so strong but that's not entirely fair. You could also say that it's time for change.

In my opinion, it's both.

 

Andreas,

What I cannot understand about the ambient temperature causing such a problem is that the tyres run FAR FAR hotter than that ... around 80 degrees I believe (could be wrong here). I know that I could never touch my tyres straight after a session.

I guess maybe the extra ambient temp might push them over the limit.

Anyway yes it appears to be the tyres but again if the car is not getting the right down force then the tyres would not be gripping and instead spinning thus increasing their temperature and wear. It is all connected.

What happened at Spain though was definitely tyre carcase (sp?) failure.
Pete

 

F1 is a team sport. Either the whole package wins or the whole package loses.

Show me one driver in the entire world who can drive a car without tires!?!!?!?

 

Amen!

And also show me a driver who can roll just tyres to the flag.
Pete

 

BINGO!! The above about sums it perfectly. And to bolster the point when BS did get it right in Imola Ferrari were almost 2 secs a lap quicker then the Renaults (too bad Kimi retired) and set the fastest race lap.

So how if they could do that in Imola, how could it be a design, engine or driving issue that accounts for their shakey start to 2005? It's down to the tires and BS is at an extreme disadvantage given the number of teams they supply. Although one could justifiably argue that the BS and Ferrari have made their own bed.

Kenny K.

 

This argument makes sense, however I'm trying to remember what has changed between 2004 and 2005: I know Sauber switched to Michelin, but who else? Does one team more or less make such a big difference? Can we blame Sauber in the end for Ferraris problems?

 

How about 1 set of tires for a race distance, 1 engine per 2 GP's and oh yes how bout qualifying ?

4 or 5 top teams (depending on your opinion) racking up test miles vs 1 top team. I pretty much agree with di Montezemolo's recent comments published on the web.

However, given the pace we've seen of the F2005 if anybody can turn it around and with number of races left Ferrari can.


Kenny K.

 

I know that part. What I'm asking is, who - aside from Sauber - has switched over from Bridgestone to Michelins over the winter that the tire testing balance was so drastically tipped? Tires were a key element in the past years as well and Ferrari was successful with its strategy.

 

Michael Schumacher!

 

I know ya knew, I was just being sarcastic It's not the shear number of teams although that doesn't hurt, but the number of top teams combined with drastically different rules for tires and the fact that Mich could adapt to those new rules quicker and better by having the teams they do I think accounts for the major difference between this year and years prior.

By and large tires can reflect more of difference in performance than the chassis, engines or drivers and I think Imola was a very clear case of that.

Kenny

 

Agreed. It is still hard to believe that having Sauber on board or not would make such a difference in data collection of the Bridgestones. Didn't one of the "Japanese" teams (either BAR or Toyota) also switch to Michelins?

I just can't believe that having Massa driving the Sauber would have such a huge impact on the mighty Ferrari team.


On a related note: What ever happened to Burti and Gene testing for Ferrari? All I ever read is the race team and Badoer testing. If it is about data gathering, I would think they could be running five cars at Fiorano. But they're not doing that, so there must be more to the picture than the lack of data.

 

Toyota switched from Bridgestone to Michelin.

The problem is not data gathering. The problem is limitated development of the F2005 with the new Bridgestone tires.

Fiorano and Scuderia Ferrari do not have the rsources to run 5 cars at the same time and gather information that will help development.

 

The F2005 is an Italian suit that needs is a nice pair of Italian shoes...PIRELLI SHOES

 

Let me quote myself and make some additional remarks...

There have been atleast four test days (that I know of) that have resulted in valuable data from tire and setup testing because of the number of F2005 and F2004M running at the same time.

The best strategy is have one or two cars running such that the proper technical staff and engineers working on the cars.

 

If these photos do not proove that Michelin thinks out of the box and possibly why they are the shoe to wear right now, then maybe nothing does:
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Whoa! Are these for real?

"White knuckle driving was invented by somebody with white knuckles."

 

YESSIR.......if there is any doubt, CHECK OUT THESE:
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

When it comes to a redesign of the tires and or compounds then apparently it does make a difference. If the tires this year were just an evolution of last years then perhaps we'd see results similar to last year. Again, Imola clearly shows what happens when you get the tires right. Imagine where Ferrari would be if testing limits were a rule and not a 'gentlemen's agreement'.

Burti has been dropped by Ferrari in favor of Gene who does test but not nearly as much as Badoer seems to . I do seem to recall that Burti was called upon earlier in the year for mileage when Ferrari were really pushing to get the F2005 race ready.

Kenny

 

I do not know where you guys get your wise thoughts from... I respect all of you but sometimes it confuses me why you guys do not think before jumping the boat....

If Ferrari decide to dump Bridgestone today and switch to Pirelli or Michelin then the following things happen:
1) An entire decade of partnership with Bridgestone is all thrown down the. drain.
2) Ferrari start from scratch with a new technical partner to develop tires.
3) Bridgestone start to support another team with capital and technical resources. (Do you really want McLaren Mercedes with 100% Bridgestone backing?)

Stop and think:
1) Bridgestone and Ferrari have to solve this problem together.
2) The F2005 could be the problem and the tires could be just fine.
3) The tires could be suited for some tracks or setups.

The fact of the matter is Bridgestone are not going to sit hand in hand and take this. Remeber 2003... Bridgestone and Ferrari will fix their act soon.

 

One thing we should also remember is it took Bridgestone a long time to equal and the surpass Goodyear.

Thus my point is Bridgestone may not be radical or a laterial thinking company and thus as we have a new playing field for the tyres thanks to the tyres must last a whole race distance ... well maybe it will just take Bridgestone a couple of years to work it out.

Remember they only had to refine their designs before and even then we had some ropie (sp?) years, like 2003.

Japanese engineers are not known for laterial thinking, more refining perfectly somebody elses idea.

Pete
ps: A before somebody jumps on me for being a racist, I am just noting a well known thread about the automotive industry. Japanese cars are now the best transportation because they have refined the concepts perfectly ... the English instead looked for short cuts, Italians romanced and ignored the details and the Germans continue to play with show off technology.

 

Yeah you are probably right, but lets look at the hybrid technology.

- The Japanese did not invent the 4 cycle petrol engine.
- The Japanese did not invent the electric motor.
- All they have done is stick them together ... clever yes, but a process of refinement.

Now compare that to the weird Michelin tyre earlier in this thread. The French are actually INVENTING something completely different here.

I believe it is a cultural thing and ofcourse as cultures change this will change, but a true Japanese worker sets out to do their job as best they can (and I admire that) and exactly how they were shown it, but a European/Australasian worker will set out to do the same job as easy/efficiently as they can, this in itself causes new processes to be created ... so we can continue to slack off and go to the beach, party, etc. Thus our self centred lazy culture forces the laterial thinking process.

Pete
ps: And ofcourse Ford and GM are talking to Toyota, etc. because they (just like the rest of us) are lazy and realise that it would be cheaper to buy the technology that the Japanese have worked all the bugs out over the years of refinement, than to do it themselves.

 

No ... but there is nothing special or earth shattering about the hybrid car.
We have had petrol engined cars for ages and also electric powered cars ... the only thing clever (and it is clever) is getting them to work together.

Hardly as clever as inventing something new or even a new application for an existing idea.

Now the TV, microwave, pneumatic tyre, etc. are inventions.

Anyway we are getting off track. My point was Bridgestone have shown themselves to be slow at change in the past, hence the new rules have given them a shock ... I could be wrong and in the next race Bridgestone blow them all away
Pete

 

With the way the season has gone so far, I think you could blame anything or anyone & have a valid arguement....