F1technical.net

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/74697

So once again the teams shot themselves in the foot by not accepting the smaller tyres for 2009. It is funny how these stories repeat themselves.

I dont think it was the team as such

its the lead time of these things
kers was known about as where the wing regs but
then it was suggested to narrow the tyres

it seems to be to be the lack of a Concorde agreement
that it causing these well know about stupidities

but yes F1 is become associated with foot shooting

I fail to see the connection to a concord agreement. This is a purely technical issue. As always change is opposed by the leading teams because it shakes up the order as we have seen. Unfortunately for them the change arrived big time due to their proposals in the OWG and they lost out in the diffusor issue. So we now enjoy a lively championship.

the Concorde has some provision for lead time to regulation changes
unless max deemed them 'safety' issues

I think (and am prepared to be corrected on this one)
that now its only 2 weeks before the start of the season or similar

or at least thats what stopped the 'gold medals' stupidity
for this year at least

In 2008, we proposed a smaller front tyre for 2009 but everybody refused it because they had already designed their cars, even though we commented on the oversteer tendency.

The fact they they don't want the rules changed after a large part of the design work has been done is not surprising at all. You never know what a can of worms you are going to open up.

twoshots wrote:You never know what a can of worms you are going to open up.

or how you open it

use a shot gun and steady said can with your foot...

take aim

you are now an FIA deligate

How will the lower profile of the 2010 new front tires effect them? obviously a different construction with probly a stiffer spring rate.

different shaped tyres will affect airflow, levels of drag, need different tyre warming characteristics from the front suspension, change the balance of the cars.. i'm sure much much more, that's just form the top of my head.

will the track be narrowed, or will suspension arms need to be lengthened?

So 2010 will be really a very different design again. With the ban of refuelling the fuel tank will be twice as big as it is today and the weight distribution will radically change. The average weight of the car will be something like 60 kg heavier. So with the different tyre dimensions and potentially more technical freedom for budget capped teams we could be looking once again at a new performance order.

Article wrote:Hamashima ruled out the possibility of keeping the front tyres the same and widening the rears on cost grounds.

"A wider rear tyre is much more expensive because we have to revise the machinery and other things. We had narrower fronts in 1997, so we have the machines already."

Awww.. now that is just annoying.
I bet if there had been more than one tyre manufacturer, we would end up seeing wider rears instead.

woohoo wrote:

Article wrote:Hamashima ruled out the possibility of keeping the front tyres the same and widening the rears on cost grounds.

"A wider rear tyre is much more expensive because we have to revise the machinery and other things. We had narrower fronts in 1997, so we have the machines already."

Awww.. now that is just annoying.
I bet if there had been more than one tyre manufacturer, we would end up seeing wider rears instead.

Not with the current cornering speeds... and with a tire war we'd see a much wider gap in the field, much more marbles off line and because of that much less passing opportunities.

ISLAMATRON wrote:

woohoo wrote:

Article wrote:Hamashima ruled out the possibility of keeping the front tyres the same and widening the rears on cost grounds.

"A wider rear tyre is much more expensive because we have to revise the machinery and other things. We had narrower fronts in 1997, so we have the machines already."

Awww.. now that is just annoying.
I bet if there had been more than one tyre manufacturer, we would end up seeing wider rears instead.

Not with the current cornering speeds... and with a tire war we'd see a much wider gap in the field, much more marbles off line and because of that much less passing opportunities.

How do you figure ?

woohoo wrote:

ISLAMATRON wrote:Not with the current cornering speeds... and with a tire war we'd see a much wider gap in the field, much more marbles off line and because of that much less passing opportunities.

How do you figure ?

Past experience... that is just how it has been when tire wars are in place

ISLAMATRON wrote:

woohoo wrote:

ISLAMATRON wrote:Not with the current cornering speeds... and with a tire war we'd see a much wider gap in the field, much more marbles off line and because of that much less passing opportunities.

How do you figure ?

Past experience... that is just how it has been when tire wars are in place

So, you dont think there were any over takings and close fights back in the 70s and 80s ? and indeed even the 90s ?

I would say that only a part of the resistance comes from alterations to the pecking order.

What I would think is: "how much money does it cost, in terms of new development? What do they want? A new car every year? C'mon."

If you want ideas like this to prosper, you need a forum where to discuss them, instead of public declarations to newspapers about FIA intentions.

If you want my opinion, here it is: those declarations should be made after there is an agreement. In the "soup of our lives", consensus is the "chicken breast"...