OK it wasnt only the tires, it was just mostly the tires.... It didnt rain in Austrailia this year, or in China, but it did in Monaco, Germany, Silverstone & Spa, So I gues it wasnt only the rain, but it was mostly... but werent they all on the same rain tires? So that means the driver must have been the difference, cuz Kovi didnt win any in the rain.andartop wrote:No, I insist, the Bridgestones were better in some tracks in 2005. It just so happened that F1 did not visit those tracks in 2005!
Point is, you can't just discredit a driver who won the WDC fair and square by saying it was ONLY the tires. If you do, would you say as well for example that Hamilton won this year's WDC ONLY because of the rain? And justify this by the fact McLaren this year was obviously the car to be in in the wet?
Yes driver plays more of a part when it rains, but when you talk about the really good drivers like Raikkonen, Alonso, they drive at the limit in the wet so they pretty much bring it down to the car, and everyone knows that the Mclaren is much easier to drive in the wet than the Ferrari.ISLAMATRON wrote:OK it wasnt only the tires, it was just mostly the tires.... It didnt rain in Austrailia this year, or in China, but it did in Monaco, Germany, Silverstone & Spa, So I gues it wasnt only the rain, but it was mostly... but werent they all on the same rain tires? So that means the driver must have been the difference, cuz Kovi didnt win any in the rain.andartop wrote:No, I insist, the Bridgestones were better in some tracks in 2005. It just so happened that F1 did not visit those tracks in 2005!
Point is, you can't just discredit a driver who won the WDC fair and square by saying it was ONLY the tires. If you do, would you say as well for example that Hamilton won this year's WDC ONLY because of the rain? And justify this by the fact McLaren this year was obviously the car to be in in the wet?
I actually agree with you that the McLaren is one of the best cars in the wet, along with the Toro Rosso, whereas the Ferrari is amongst the worst.ernos5 wrote:Yes driver plays more of a part when it rains, but when you talk about the really good drivers like Raikkonen, Alonso, they drive at the limit in the wet so they pretty much bring it down to the car, and everyone knows that the Mclaren is much easier to drive in the wet than the Ferrari.
If Bridgestone was so bad, why did the other teams use it? Didn't they have the option to change the tyres. So if say Alonso won it cause of tyres, yes Renault bribed Michelin to give them better tyres the way Mclaren bribed Glock.ISLAMATRON wrote:
In 2005 Bridgestone won a total of 1 GP's... you might remember it... USGP... 6 cars finished. 2005 was the no tire change year and Michilin clearly dominated. The Renault was more reliable than KIMI's McLaren so he took the Michelin driver's Title. In 2006 they changed the rules and Michilin won 7 of the first 9 races and then Bridgestone finally found some speed and in turn won 7 of the last 9 GP's. No you couldnt have beat Fisi in the renault but It was clear that the car was built to suit Alonso more, Remeber Alonso had been ther 3 years already and was already well integrated into the team.
Go to racing underground and download the 2005-2006 seasons if you dont remember how much Michilin dominated the racing back then. Thats partly the reason why we only have 1 tire supplier these days. Tires back then far outweighed aero, engiine or driver... example... the Renault team stayed with the V-keel while most other teams migrated to the zero keel concept. Why? becuz it allowed them to maximize usage of the tires... even if it had an aero drawback... and thats mainly why they have struggled the last couple years... they took longer than most of the top teams to get to grips with the aero flow of a zero keel chassis.
You are forgetting set up... if you have a Monaco Set up in wet Brazil, you will obviously do better than if you have a Monza set up.... but in the dry it would be the complete opposite. You will lose more time with a wet set-up in the dry than a dry set-up in the wet, that is why the McLaren team went for the conservative ultra-dry set up in Brazilernos5 wrote:Yes driver plays more of a part when it rains, but when you talk about the really good drivers like Raikkonen, Alonso, they drive at the limit in the wet so they pretty much bring it down to the car, and everyone knows that the Mclaren is much easier to drive in the wet than the Ferrari.
McLaren took a lot of wing off their cars to increase their straight line speeds on the two straights at Brazil. This compromised their ultimate dry setup and lap time, but would have made them virtually un-passable if it had not rained. When it rained they struggled with their low downforce package - skinny wings and firm springs and dampers.myurr wrote:ernos5 wrote: But if it was as clear cut as that then why did Heikki struggle so much in the wet? Why was Hamilton struggling in the wet in Brasil?
Well, I guess there's multiple reason. For a last two years, they had a rookie within a team and on both occasions they were not all that impressive (of course Heikki seemed a bit more capable, but he was not compared to Alonso in the same car), however towards the end of the season they showed some signs of improvement. There's a good reason not to pick another unproven driver and settle with this pairing, and of course Alonso is comfortable being clear #1.Ciro Pabón wrote:I do not understand either why Piquet is gaining another year at Renault. Any reason for that?
Renault were desperate to hang on the Alonso, and Alonso doesn't like strong team mates. QED.Ciro Pabón wrote:Yeah, sure. You mean Piquet got the contract because McLaren ran a flat wing at Brazil? What about the Michilin tyris?
Now, back to you.
(Just shoot me!)
Yes, yes. I am a big jerk because I don't spend 3 hours carefully wording my posts so there is no way to misinterperet what I am saying, and I fire back when misinterperetation happens anyways.ISLAMATRON wrote:Wow it seems conceptual is an imbecile no matter what thread you read" I wanted to check that post about KERS and there he is ranting & raving again, calling people names... incredible.