Bridgestone - cheating?

[cos]

There's an interesting article on page 27 of the latest F1 Racing magazine; in short it says that Bridgestone could get away with supplying narrow tyres (compared to Michelin) because the fronts were of a harder compound than the rears. Engineers from the Michelin teams were suspicious of this, and, while they didn't launch an official complaint, it appears as though the FIA had a quiet word with Bridgestone after Thursday practice... hence the lack of pace of the Bridgestone teams during final qualifying and the race...

[twig]

what i have been trying to figure out is how on earth there can be an advantage having a rounder, "thinner" tyre compared to the broad Michelin.

But if Bridgestone managed to get away with the hard compound, surely that would be to their disadvantage if they couldnt really run a softer tyre.

So of that article, why are they not allowed to have the setup of a narrower harder tyre?

[shiny side up!]

Is the advantage of the thinner tyre aerodynamic?? Doesn't really make much sense to me based on the little bit cos has written...

[cos]

The thinner the front tyre, the more of an aerodynamic advantage there is. With a smaller tyre, there is less rubber to disrupt the airflow.

[Glen]

I don't see where the cheating is. You could put tyres half the width on if you wanted to, surely?

[Adam43]

I thought that the rule was just a maximum width?

[cos]

The 'cheating' was not the width of the tyre - it was that the fronts were allegedly of a different compound to the rears.

[Glen]

The rears have a different construction and compound to the fronts anyway - at least I'm pretty sure they do.

Bridgestone's poor showing on Saturday and Sunday, compared to Thursday, can be explained if the rumours about them using super sticky qualifying tyres on Thursday are to be believed.

[cos]

No - fronts and rear tyres must be of the same compound.

[twig]

although the rubber compounds are supposed to be the same throughout the whole tyre, and all of the tyres on one car, apparently, Bridgestone have been putting something on the tyres, some sort of mixture, to soften up a little layer on the top, to make them stickier and soft for qualifying, and hard for a race. Against the rules.

This has been mentioned before, but is this what they are talking about?

[williamsf1]

its an old karting trick! you can buy the stuff at any drag racing speed shop..... hmmmm.... burnout anyone?


Did you all see how much heat TGF was trying to put in the rears? (compared to others???)....another thing to think about!

[MrSal]

This was the most interesting thing I've read in a long time. If its true (and it all fits together) then Bridgestone are going to have big problems keeping up now they have been rumbelled.

[avsfan733]

wow a rumor wow....boring stuff as its most likely not true. I can't see anything like this being kept so quiet over the course of a weekend, especially at Monaco which is probably the most known race and probably gets the most press. I can't see there being much of an aero advantage either at the low speeds on the track

[KC]

I think their is a rule on the cross section size and a range that it must fall into. That would limit the size of the tires max and minimum.

[Mike Wazowski]

It would have made no sense to have thin tyres on the front at Monaco as, although they would provide less aerodynamic drag (more speed down the straights), they would also give less turn in on the bends. In Monaco you would benefit more from a good handling car than a fast one, due to the tighness of the track. As for the tyre softner; the best method is to spray from the inside a couple days in advance, allowing the softener to work through. If timed right, the tyre should still seem normal at the start of the race, only coming into effect once the tyre is scrubbed. So I've heard...

[shiny side up!]

Yeah, I've "heard" of that approach, too, Mike, but in this case it won't have the desired effect. They would rather have the soft rubber early, for qualifying, and a harder rubber underneath for longevity in the race...

[steve nielsen]

remember that Michelin is'nt that clean as well, you still see Michelin teams coming into the pits and only changing the rear wheels.

[twig]

yes, but isnt that because Michelin have good and bad periods, where they are really slow, then really quick, then go off again for another couple of laps.

Surely they don't change their fronts because it is better not to have to go from green to proper racing speed.

[Gt_R]

It's quite strange why Bridgestone would go for a "narrower" tyre of a harder compound than the rear. Both would reduce front end grip, and Monaco is one race where aerodynamics take a back seat. Doesn't quite make much sense to me. The loss in grip and hence lost in time would more than lose any advantage they gain in aero due to a narrower tyres.

[twig]

Maybe they dont want to keep on changing their tyres from wide in Monaco, to thin in Montreal, as people would really then start really asking questions

[Champ69]

Originally posted by cos
The 'cheating' was not the width of the tyre - it was that the fronts were allegedly of a different compound to the rears.

What about the mich wets in Australia, The rear treads where of a who;e differant design to the fronts, the cheating ass's

[pole2pole]

How long has this been going on I wonder?

[twig]

the treads are allowed to be different, but the rubber compounds apparently cannot.

The Michelins do the whole tread thing far more obviously, bringing attention to it is far easier, so they are not cheating