dry weather tyres

[rumpelstulskin]

Hey I wanted to know something about tyres if anyone has any knowledge in that department. The point of downforce is, I believe, to get more grip on the road and hence get better speeds. In which case the better dry weather tyres would be expected to last longer and not weather and loase threads and grip. In which case how is michelin's dry tyres a better deal than bridgestone's since they visibly do disintegrate faster. Is Michelin's advantage in width or texture?

bridgestone:

michelin:

[West]

Hey I wanted to know something about tyres if anyone has any knowledge in that department. The point of downforce is, I believe, to get more grip on the road and hence get better speeds. In which case the better dry weather tyres would be expected to last longer and not weather and loase threads and grip. In which case how is michelin's dry tyres a better deal than bridgestone's since they visibly do disintegrate faster. Is Michelin's advantage in width or texture?

I'm no tire expert, but it could be both. There's always talk about having different type of compounds.

Last year Bridgestones were created in a much more narrower profile and emphasized a bigger negative camber than Michelins. The narrower profile helped in reducing drag but for a loss in grip. The negative camber could add to the blistering problems because it puts much more force on the tire (on the inner parts at least, but still it would be much more if there was no camber at all). It could be that this narrower tire also has bigger problems disappating heat (if that is the term) than a bigger tire like Michelin's.

[Irvingthien]

Isn't that the tyre on the Ferrari on the 1st pic a wet weather tyre? Well, Bridestone's wet tyre is definitly better than Michelin's and probably will be because a Michelin director said that they will be concentrating more on dry tyres than wet tyres.

[scarbs]

The trait you are trying to understand is 'degradation' which is the tyres performance over its life. Michelin have a different compund, construction and size of tyre to bridgestone. They also demand different suspension, weight distribution and traction control settings.

Michelins typical trait is to start of with lower grip, then go through a long period of stable performance, even to the end of the tyres life. Bridgestones tend to start off better, then degrade towards the end of their life. We cant pin point this specifically to compound or construction, as its the overall Michelin tyre design philosophy that results in the final tyre characteristics.

The point you make about downforce is only partly related. The less downforce or for whatever reason the amount the car slides on (or spins) its tyres affects the wear. Dry weather tyres are designed to last only the length of the expected stint in the race, they should be only just starting to lose grip as the pitstop is called, by this stage the tread block can be expected to be ripped and worn.

Adding more downforce may improve tyre degredation but at the cost of laptimes. Trading downforce for tyre wear is one of the problems put to the teams last year with the parc ferme rules stopping the teams changing wing settings between the qualifying and the race.

[mx_tifoso]

The trait you are trying to understand is 'degradation' which is the tyres performance over its life. Michelin have a different compund, construction and size of tyre to bridgestone. They also demand different suspension, weight distribution and traction control settings.

So this basically explains why Renault had a difficult time adapting to the single supplier rules in '07 right. Their setup and development was still focused and concentrated on how the Michelins "worked", even though they are now on Bridgestones. Did Honda have the same adverse effects by the switch to BS? As we have seen all of their aero and weight distribution problems this season.

The less downforce or for whatever reason the amount the car slides on (or spins) its tyres affects the wear. Dry weather tyres are designed to last only the length of the expected stint in the race, they should be only just starting to lose grip as the pitstop is called, by this stage the tread block can be expected to be ripped and worn

The '08 season will have a drastic effect on tire wear and strategy then, because tires will be more prone to earlier degredation due to the fact that Traction Control will not be reducing slipping and sliding.

Will tires wear out eariler, or will the drivers attempt to "take care" of his tires exempt that assumption?

[joseff]

The '08 season will have a drastic effect on tire wear and strategy then, because tires will be more prone to earlier degredation due to the fact that Traction Control will not be reducing slipping and sliding.

When TC was reintroduced in 2001, Michelin engineers actually assumed that tyres would wear faster because TC allows the rear tyres to be used more "on the edge", so to speak. In other words, TC allows more slip without skidding, not less.

[Ray]

I've heard that with certain teams TC settings they actually want the tire to be going slightly faster than the car is going. Does anyone know if this id true, and does is cause accelerated wear?

[Steven]

The '08 season will have a drastic effect on tire wear and strategy then, because tires will be more prone to earlier degredation due to the fact that Traction Control will not be reducing slipping and sliding.

When TC was reintroduced in 2001, Michelin engineers actually assumed that tyres would wear faster because TC allows the rear tyres to be used more "on the edge", so to speak. In other words, TC allows more slip without skidding, not less.

Correct. In fact traction control at Renault for instance was configured as such that TC would try to operate the tyre in a 2% slip ratio since that proved to be the optimum.