LOGO
Reply to Thread New Thread
Old 05-13-2008, 08:54 PM   #1
BigMovies

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
459
Senior Member
Default Was it McLaren or was it Bridgestone?!
http://www.planetf1.com/story/0,1895...559034,00.html

According to reports, it was McLaren rather than Bridgestone that decreed that Lewis Hamilton should use a three-stop strategy during the Turkish GP. First the team says that they went for the 3 stopper because Bridgestone told them that the tires would not hold on Lewy's car.
Now it comes out that it was McLaren who went for it because in fact Lewy wasn't really able to cope with the softer tires.

Why is it that every time something strange happens at McLaren we get contradictory reports for a week?!
BigMovies is offline


Old 05-13-2008, 09:01 PM   #2
MpbY5dkR

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
403
Senior Member
Default
i'm inclined to think it was a team decision based on Bridgestones information that Lewis's tyres may struggle to hold up, and rather than compromise a 2 stopper it made sense to run 3.

i don't think Bridgestone forced them to do anything, but did suggest the problems.

the initial statement from Ron hinted at this, and it was Lewis who said it was because Bridgestone "MADE" them use a 3 stopper - in this case i think Ron was right (i didn't think i'd say that again for a while ), and that they made the call on Bridgestones advice.

Bridgestones statements seem to follow the same tack, that Lewis was putting increased load into the front right tyre compared with everyone else in turn 8 and was at risk of a failure if running like that for too long - rather than temper the pace and style they chose to work round the problem and adpat the startegy instead. the idea that Bridgestone enforced the strategy is rather misleading IMO.
MpbY5dkR is offline


Old 05-13-2008, 09:18 PM   #3
bactrimtab

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
557
Senior Member
Default
There's nothing contradictory. McLaren made a decision having taken into account the information Bridgetone gave them.

Bridgestone said: "We had the issue with Lewis last year at this race, brought about by turn eight specifically being anti-clockwise triple-apex with very high G-forces. He had a specific problem last year, most noticeably, but several other drivers we noticed had internal tyre problems. Based on that, we changed the construction and strengthened it over the winter period and then brought those tyres to all the races this year. In actual fact, nobody else has had a repetition of any of those problems this year, with the exception of Lewis. He is the one driver who perhaps with his style of driving has put higher forces onto his front right tyre."
bactrimtab is offline


Old 05-13-2008, 09:25 PM   #4
BigMovies

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
459
Senior Member
Default
LH in the post race press conference:

LH: The reason we went with a three stopper was due to Bridgestone being concerned as they thought the tyre was going to fail like it did last year. Therefore,they made us do a three stop as it was the safest route to go. Link: http://www.planetf1.com/story/0,1895...552095,00.html
BigMovies is offline


Old 05-13-2008, 09:37 PM   #5
itaspCatCriny

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
463
Senior Member
Default
I know I tried to put a negative spin on this in another thread.
Bottom line, it worked. It does kind of remind me of the (not so) old days
in the tire wars where Bridgestone was always accused of making tires that worked for Ferrari, and weren't as concerned with their other customers.
As long as Bridgestone is as open to solving the problems of every single driver that has wear problems I don’t see any problem with it! He’s still using the same tires as everyone else!
Cheers
itaspCatCriny is offline


Old 05-13-2008, 09:40 PM   #6
bactrimtab

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
557
Senior Member
Default
Hamilton heavier on right front tyre than other drivers. Concerns about a possible failure. Decision taken to race 3 stops.

Simple.
bactrimtab is offline


Old 05-13-2008, 11:44 PM   #7
BqTyG9eS

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
547
Senior Member
Default
Lewis is hard on the front tyres and consequently, has issues with the side wall.

Now, I'm not casting any aspersions on Bridgestone but it really is their responsibility to provide a tyre that can be used by all teams without failing under normal conditions shouldn't they? Just because Lewis drives it harder shouldn't penalise him. It's not lighting the rears up or anything but the tyre walls failing which shouldn't happen.

Anyway, end of story. McLaren were compromised slightly so I can't see what your moaning at ioan.
BqTyG9eS is offline


Old 05-14-2008, 02:42 AM   #8
Qxsumehj

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
427
Senior Member
Default
Lewis is hard on the front tyres and consequently, has issues with the side wall.

Now, I'm not casting any aspersions on Bridgestone but it really is their responsibility to provide a tyre that can be used by all teams without failing under normal conditions shouldn't they? Just because Lewis drives it harder shouldn't penalise him. It's not lighting the rears up or anything but the tyre walls failing which shouldn't happen.

Anyway, end of story. McLaren were compromised slightly so I can't see what your moaning at ioan..
your first statement contradicts your second, unless you are saying that Lewis Hamilton IS the team? Also, would it be fair to compromise the other drivers in order to make a tire for Hamilton?

Oh by the way, suprised Ioan or any of the other McLeran bashers didn't point out another BS comment by RD, but he said that Heikki had to wait till the race was green to change his tires because pit lane was closed... well here I thought you could pit while the pit lane was "closed" in order to make repairs without getting a penalty (penalty is for refueling while pit lane is closed)

Hamilton telling the world basically that Bridgestone ruined their race is a very serious matter. If I was them "Bridgestone" from here on out, I wouldn't be giving McLeran any technical support for the rest of the season "here are your tires... good luck."
Qxsumehj is offline


Old 05-14-2008, 02:56 AM   #9
adultcheee

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
517
Senior Member
Default
Oh by the way, suprised Ioan or any of the other McLeran bashers didn't point out another BS comment by RD, but he said that Heikki had to wait till the race was green to change his tires because pit lane was closed... well here I thought you could pit while the pit lane was "closed" in order to make repairs without getting a penalty (penalty is for refueling while pit lane is closed)
But could Kovalainen exit the pit when it's closed?
If not, he would have been lapped by cars going behind the safety car. That would have been even worse.
adultcheee is offline


Old 05-14-2008, 03:00 AM   #10
Aminkaoo

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
464
Senior Member
Default
LH: The reason we went with a three stopper was due to Bridgestone being concerned as they thought the tyre was going to fail like it did last year. Therefore,they made us do a three stop as it was the safest route to go. Of course Lewis(and any other F1 driver) is never going to admit that their driving style is harder on tyres than others' style...
Aminkaoo is offline


Old 05-14-2008, 06:29 AM   #11
BigMovies

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
459
Senior Member
Default
Oh by the way, suprised Ioan or any of the other McLeran bashers didn't point out another BS comment by RD, but he said that Heikki had to wait till the race was green to change his tires because pit lane was closed... well here I thought you could pit while the pit lane was "closed" in order to make repairs without getting a penalty (penalty is for refueling while pit lane is closed)
I missed that one!
I was however amuzed by RD's and MWithmarsh's comments how their drivers could have won the race! Well, Ronnie boy, even Super Aguri could have won the race if they would have started it!

Back to topic, you are right, repairing a damaged car is allowed when the pit lane is closed.

But could Kovalainen exit the pit when it's closed?
If not, he would have been lapped by cars going behind the safety car. That would have been even worse.
The red light at the exit is on only when the SC with the cars lined up behind it are going by the pit line exit, after that is green.
BigMovies is offline


Old 05-14-2008, 07:24 AM   #12
opdirorg

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
445
Senior Member
Default
Hamilton's comments in the press conference that Bridgestone made McLaren switch to a 3 stopper were disingenuous at best and down right deceitful at worst.

Bridgestone recommended that Hamilton, and Hamilton alone of the 20 drivers, do no more than 18 laps on the option tyre. That still left McLaren with the option of a 2 stop race. McLaren correctly decided on a 3 stopper because it absolutely minimised Hamilton's disadvantage on the option tyre.

Well done McLaren for making the kind of decision that wins championships. Hamilton, however, needs to look up the definition of "truth" in the dictionary because he struggles with it from time to time.
opdirorg is offline


Old 05-14-2008, 12:02 PM   #13
gechaheritt

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
450
Senior Member
Default
Nevermind the race, I think the most concerning part of this saga was that, on a 3-stop strategy, Hamilton couldn't make the front row and was outqualified by his 2-stopping team-mate.

Had Hamilton put the McMerc on pole he probably would have won the race assuming he lead into turn 1.
gechaheritt is offline


Old 05-14-2008, 03:41 PM   #14
BqTyG9eS

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
547
Senior Member
Default
your first statement contradicts your second, unless you are saying that Lewis Hamilton IS the team? Also, would it be fair to compromise the other drivers in order to make a tire for Hamilton?

Oh by the way, suprised Ioan or any of the other McLeran bashers didn't point out another BS comment by RD, but he said that Heikki had to wait till the race was green to change his tires because pit lane was closed... well here I thought you could pit while the pit lane was "closed" in order to make repairs without getting a penalty (penalty is for refueling while pit lane is closed)

Hamilton telling the world basically that Bridgestone ruined their race is a very serious matter. If I was them "Bridgestone" from here on out, I wouldn't be giving McLeran any technical support for the rest of the season "here are your tires... good luck."
There is no contradiction at all in my eyes?

1st statement

Lewis is hard on the front tyres and consequently, has issues with the side wall. This is admitted by McLaren, Bridgestone and anyone with half a brain.

2nd statement

Now, I'm not casting any aspersions on Bridgestone but it really is their responsibility to provide a tyre that can be used by all teams without failing under normal conditions shouldn't they? Team McLaren has two cars serviced by a hoard of personnel including mechanics, drivers, engineers, tea ladies etc facilitating the performance of those 2 cars. Connecting that whole team (2 cars) to the track is the tyres so they are a pretty f*cking fundemental part of the equation.

The fact that the tyre manufacturer couldn't supply a tyre that could be used in normal opperating conditions by 50% of that team would suggest it compromised them slightly, doesn't it?

Your second question was would it be fair to produce a tyre that compromised all the other drivers. This is really below you PS and you know it.

BS should produce a suitable tyre to last a 2 stopper in normal conditions. LH is not going around lighting the rears up in huge slides but is just driving to the max. Shouldn't that be what all drivers do or do we want an endurance race with drivers at 90%.

This is not the tyre wearing out you know. It is damage being experienced on the side wall by driving it hard.
BqTyG9eS is offline


Old 05-14-2008, 04:00 PM   #15
BqTyG9eS

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
547
Senior Member
Default
Hamilton telling the world basically that Bridgestone ruined their race is a very serious matter. If I was them "Bridgestone" from here on out, I wouldn't be giving McLeran any technical support for the rest of the season "here are your tires... good luck."
They were not having a pop at BS IMHO and NEVER claimed BS ruined their race but were just saying it as it is. Some people like company "yes" men but I like straight talking without F1 spin.

BS said that the tyre was unsuitable for a 2 stop strategy and this made McLaren change to a 3 stopper on Lewis's car. Did BS's advise make McLaren change to a 3 stopper. Well, I'll leave that to you.

However, your statement is totally false.
BqTyG9eS is offline


Old 05-14-2008, 04:05 PM   #16
BqTyG9eS

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
547
Senior Member
Default
Hamilton's comments in the press conference that Bridgestone made McLaren switch to a 3 stopper were disingenuous at best and down right deceitful at worst.

Bridgestone recommended that Hamilton, and Hamilton alone of the 20 drivers, do no more than 18 laps on the option tyre. That still left McLaren with the option of a 2 stop race. McLaren correctly decided on a 3 stopper because it absolutely minimised Hamilton's disadvantage on the option tyre.

Well done McLaren for making the kind of decision that wins championships. Hamilton, however, needs to look up the definition of "truth" in the dictionary because he struggles with it from time to time.
Sorry Hawk but that is BS and you know it.

They would have had to put 18 laps of fuel on the soft tyre at the start and then have a massive pit after 18 laps and run a tyre for 50 laps. They wont last 50 laps and I'm pretty sure the fuel tank is not big enough in any case.

Tell me how the hell they could have done a 2 stopper unless they completely disregarded both their tyre supplier and their drivers safety?

Read my post above.
BqTyG9eS is offline


Old 05-14-2008, 04:07 PM   #17
BqTyG9eS

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
547
Senior Member
Default
Of course Lewis(and any other F1 driver) is never going to admit that their driving style is harder on tyres than others' style...
I think they have already. More anti-Lewis BS

If you watch his style, you will see that he drives the car in a similar vein to MS especially earlier in his career. Very hard and fast both chucking it in a braking into corners.

It's called racing.

Well, thats every post that needs answering done
BqTyG9eS is offline


Old 05-14-2008, 04:08 PM   #18
petrarkaponye

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
485
Senior Member
Default
Why is it that every time something strange happens at McLaren we get contradictory reports for a week?!
There is nothing contradictory if you don't read the tabloids.

Of course McLaren chose the strategy. The team always in the end has the final say in the strategy. They said that they chose this strategy, based on information presented to them by Bridgestone.

I fail to see the contradiction.
petrarkaponye is offline


Old 05-14-2008, 04:12 PM   #19
petrarkaponye

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
485
Senior Member
Default
Nevermind the race, I think the most concerning part of this saga was that, on a 3-stop strategy, Hamilton couldn't make the front row and was outqualified by his 2-stopping team-mate.
On the prime tyre, yes.

He didn't have a good quali though, and even he admitted it himself.
petrarkaponye is offline


Old 05-14-2008, 04:51 PM   #20
Immampdah

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
744
Senior Member
Default
I don't think that Bridgestone should make special tyres for Hamilton. Many drivers, including Quck Nick, have problems with tyres. It's up to them to fix their driving, not to Bridgestone.
Immampdah is offline



Reply to Thread New Thread

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 5 (0 members and 5 guests)
 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:35 PM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity