Pirelli will take Bridgestone's place after 2010

[Dukeage]

The FIA do the tyre tendering, not FOM.

[WhiteBlue]

The FIA do the tyre tendering, not FOM.

It is an issue that will see a lot of input by FOM. Last time it was a straightforward tender by the FiA. Now practically no experienced supplier will apply. So they will rely on Bernie to pick up the hot potato and get out of it with the least cost.

[bill shoe]

This is a strange statement. To supply an outdated type of competition tyre which has to be developed completely separate from the sports car business that Michelin runs today would surely cost more money than having two very similar 18 inch wheel tyres for sports cars and F1 with basically the same design principles. Please explain where Michelin is wrong in their synergy expectations!

What's outdated about a 13" bead diameter race tire? Or tire in general? 13" or 15" tire.. 17" or 18".. fundamentally no different in concept. Couple beads, couple plies, couple belts. Same ---. In fact, I'd bet globally there are more 13" tires in service than 18".

Michelin at least already have a baseline for 13" F1 tires. I just don't see what "synergies" they expect if they go to 18". So what if they build 18" sportscar race tires? You're tailoring F1 constructions and compounds to a completely different platform. Different tracks, speeds, loads, you name it. Still going to require new molds, lots of building, testing, etc. There's certainly no less development work to build a 18" F1 tire compared to a 13". If anything, there's more.

Yea Jersey Tom, I agree. Going to 18-inch tires may be logical from Michelin's marketing point of view because this creates F1 tires that are similar in size and shape to typical high performance street car tires. Of course, street cars have those sizes largely for styling reasons. So then F1 would effectively get its tire sizes from road car stylists. From a functional/engineering point of view I don't see any significant synergy with Michelin's current 18-inch sports car slicks.

I have significant tire testing and development experience, but I fail WhiteBlue's 30%-of-my-pay-comes-from-whatever thing so apparently I don't actually know any of this .

[hecti]

can anyone photoshop some rims on that bitch?
lol
Seriously tho, im kinda useless with photoshop.

[Professor]

My thoughts are this: I support the larger wheel sizes. I think that in an atmosphere where a manufacturer has nothing to prove via competition vis a vis a "tire war," then tires that resemble their street performance tires makes sense to the bean counters.

Second, any way you measure costs, "steel" is cheaper. Makes sense to about 8/12 on the grid. Steel will stop the cars adequetly, definitely.

The overall dimensions of the "complete wheel" as defined by the tech rules would still be 660mm max, so it would not affect the "wheelwell" dimensions, but would re-define the suspension requirements, the corner weights,the spring rates and some other stuff.

I like changes that give the Nick Wirths and the Gascoynes of the F1 world a chance to design from a clean sheet rather than design against the Ferraris and Maccas that have a billion years of data.

I like rules than change the design parameters and force everyone to do some original thinking.

[WhiteBlue]

I have read the German report at Auto Motor und Sport.

The main facts are that the season costs Bridgestone 120 mil $ at the current contract. Apparently they demand 80 mil $ to continue the supply. Considering that some cost saving is build into that scenario we can assume that any experienced supplier like Michelin, Goodyear or Pirelli will be looking at similar figures. A tender like 2007 for a full cost control tyre supply would have ended with a total embarrassment and no bidder.

According to AMuS it is way too late now to make a deal with a new supplier like Kumho or Hankook because the time to build up development and manufacturing is much too short. The only alternative would be Bernie's company Avon which supplies tyres for historic GP racing. Those tyres would be hard, slow and even more expensive than Bridgestone.

So whatever they decide to do there will be a huge mountain of cost coming towards the teams which will hit new teams hardest. Tyres in 2011 are expected to cost more than an engine supply. If they decide to go back to competitive supply tyre testing cost will go up and tyres will get the head lines the team constructors want for themselves.

It appears to me that the best course of action would be going with Michelin for a new, modern 18 inch wheel low profile control tyre. The new format will enable future suppliers to write down much of the cost for marketing as the F1 tyre will look more like their high performance road car tyre.

Another more creative option should be looking at a tyre war with that new format but with ridgid testing rules for minimum testing and rotating tyre suppliers. The teams would be devided in two equally strong groups A and B and the tyre supplier would be rotated by every event. That way the tyre suppliers could achieve competition but the team performance would not be greatly affected.

[rjs]

I have read the German report at Auto Motor und Sport.

Thanks for the translation/summary.

It appears to me that the best course of action would be going with Michelin for a new, modern 18 inch wheel low profile control tyre. The new format will enable future suppliers to write down much of the cost for marketing as the F1 tyre will look more like their high performance road car tyre.

I guess there is that too, although surely the cost of retooling is higher than the benefit?

Another more creative option should be looking at a tyre war with that new format but with ridgid testing rules for minimum testing and rotating tyre suppliers. The teams would be devided in two equally strong groups A and B and the tyre supplier would be rotated by every event. That way the tyre suppliers could achieve competition but the team performance would not be greatly affected.

Wouldn't the leading tyre supplier want to be with the strongest teams? Since any tyre manufacturers thinking of entering F1 at the moment would seem to pretty much be able to dictate their terms (witness the 18" rims suggestion), I can't really imagine how anyone would be able to pull off anything that isn't going to be obviously good for the tyre manufacturer.

[WhiteBlue]

I don't think that Michelin would suggest an important step like the low profile tyre without clear benefits from synergy in development, manufacturing and marketing. They would have to re tool anyway. So that isn't a big deal.

It is my impression that competition and the newsworthiness of competition results would be more important for tyre suppliers than the association with leading F1 brands. This is why F1 should use the opportunity to rotate tyre suppliers and eliminate the cost associated with tuning the cars intensely to the tyre development of one supplier. If the teams have to use both or three suppliers the tyres are closer to the same for all. It would avoid the full consequences of a tyre war and give the suppliers what they demand with highest priority. Of course the rims would have to be standardized but going to 18 inch wheels is the perfect opportunity for that.

[lebesset]

I find it hard to believe that pirelli would consider coming back ;I know that they are one of the traditional F1 suppliers , but some years back they made a strategic decision to invest in the areas where joe customer is willing to pay the price for the best product and hence are the most profitable , sporting cars and motorcycles ...would you risk your neck by not getting the best you could for your porsche or honda fireblade? so plenty of pirelli presence in sports car racing and bike racing.... in series related to road use

and what would the cost to the teams be of the suspension changes required ?

this is just the beginning of a negotiation by michelin , we will find out what they will really settle for in due course

[WhiteBlue]

... and what would the cost to the teams be of the suspension changes required ?

That would be the same for all and comparable to a change of aerodynamic rules. It is an opportunity for the smaller teams to catch up or do a better job. Teams change their suspension components almost 100% from year to year.

[mx_tifoso]

Bridgestone have a contract for MotoGP until the end of 2011, and have said that they might renew for one more year.

Although the interesting part is that their development director also wants to continue in F1 despite that if they left they would have more money to spend on other series.

"Obviously we'd have more money to spend, because the F1 budget is very high, but in my opinion we should stay in F1 too, because our image would lose a lot otherwise," Yamada said to 'motosprint' magazine.

[WhiteBlue]

Yeah, Bridgestone have asked to be paid 80 mil $ to reduce their 120 mil $ budget. If they can cut two thirds of the F1 cost they would be in a win win situation.

[WhiteBlue]

Press conference Shanghai 2010 with TEAM PRINCIPALS: Eric Boullier (Renault), Colin Kolles (HRT), Adam Parr (Williams), Peter Sauber (BMW Sauber)

Q: (Joe Saward – Grand Prix Special) Regarding the tyre supply next year, it seems like there’s a choice between having a big brand or cheap tyres. Which would you like to have?
CK: Tyres for free.
PS: Yeah, for sure, tyres for free, it’s possible but I think more importantly is that we have only one tyre supplier.
EB: First we need to have tyres, if possible for free and it doesn’t matter if it’s a big brand or not, there’s obviously a safety issue as well, to have proper tyres. Then, as part of the show, we need to decide if it’s only one tyre spec or not. But we need tyres.
AP: I think there are at least half a dozen companies in the world who could provide us with good quality tyres, that would give a good show and be perfectly safe. I think they are all good companies with good brand names and I think it’s absolutely essential that we do a good deal, which means free tyre supply for the teams. Secondly, it must be the same for everybody in all aspects because if it’s a standard tyre, it’s simply not on to have a two tier or a different approach for one team rather than another. So I think we’ve got a bit of work to do there. Fortunately, we have Bernie (Ecclestone) who has been asked by the F1 Commission to negotiate and find that supply and nobody’s better equipped to do it than him, so I’m sure we will get what we need.

The teams seem want free tyres with no tyre war and have passed the negotiating to Bernie. I think they will not get it all. The 18 inch question does not seem to be an issue here.

[WhiteBlue]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/82982?

Autosport reports that Avon has now officially entered a bid to supply F1 tyres in 2011. According to German AMuS Avon is controlled by Bernie Ecclestone. So this looks pretty much like a negotiating tool to get Michelin to more favourable conditions. Bernie is essentially bidding with himself as he has been commissioned by the F1 Commission to do the negotiations.

The teams have apparently set a dead line for Barcelona to know what the tyre situation will be in 2011. But we know about deadlines in F1 negotiations. It's a pity that we do not know which of the Michelin conditions are most controversial. My guess is that the tyre war condition will cause the highest total cost because testing inevitably will go up by a massive factor.

So in my view Bernie will have to balance his price in such a way that Michelin are induced to agree to a control tyre without too much cost and the teams will have to agree to a lower pay out from FOM in order to compensate Michelin.

[lebesset]

avon decided to divest itself of the tyre division back in the 90's , and it was purchased by cooper tire of the USA

don't know where bernie comes into this