41 replies to this topic

[The Mourning Anchor]

Hi all.

As usual, someone else here beat me to the punch, but I am interested in what you here think the McLaren switch to Michelin for 2002 will mean.

A couple of things occur to me:

• WilliamsBMW can no longer have a monopoly as lead tester for Michelin tires.
• That, together with Geoff Willis' departure to BAR, could have a significant affect on whether Williams can continue their progress back to the front of the grid.
• Will McLaren need a year or so to 'bed in' with Michelin tires?
• Michelin and Bridgestone appear to go at F1 (in fact, all major motorsports) tire design differently.
• Tubby's Kids appear to opt for compound and chemical composition as the lead factor in making their tires work (which probably explains why they tend to be more competitive on a hotter track surface.)
• On the other hand, Bridgestone (and, ISTM, their Firestone cousins over here in the States), appear to give priority to tread and tread-wall construction
• Will this difference in design emphasis by Tubby's Kids pose design challenges that Adrian Newey has not had to consider before now? And, if they do, can Adrian surmount them in the time left before the 2002 cars have to roll out?
• Meanwhile, back at the ranch in Maranello, doesn't this give Ferrari an even clearer track at the front of the grid, at least for 2002?
• So, mightn't this provide an opportunity for, say, Jordan or perhaps even Sauber to get more test and development consideration from Bridgestone for next season?
• Perhaps most importantly in the long-term, what does this do for Goodyear's much-talked-about return to F1? Presumably each of the two Michelin front-runners will want - or want to keep -their Queen Bee status with their tire supplier.
• If Goodyear can make a credible argument that they can re-enter F1 and be at least as competitive in their first year back as Michelin were in 2001, wouldn't that tempt either Williams or McLaren to move on Akron? And, in so doing, make it even more likely that Goodyear would - or would want to - return?

McLaren switch to Michelin tyres

McLaren-Mercedes has announced that it will switch from Bridgestone to Michelin tyres for 2002.

The deal, predicted in AUTOSPORT magazine (September 6), means that the French company has boosted its level of competitiveness with a second top team to join Williams-BMW, which won four Grands Prix on Michelins this year.

McLaren's decision to make the switch could prove a challenge to Michelin. When teams signed up for a supply from the company for its return to Formula 1 this year, Benetton boss Flavio Briatore said that he expected those that committed for 2001 should get preferential treatment if any others should switch after the first year.

With McLaren finishing ahead of Williams in this year's constructors' championship, the team could argue that it should be chosen to develop any new compounds. But it is thought that Williams, which was the most competitive team on Michelins this year, will continue to have the priority on any developments. . . .


Michelin boss Pierre Dupasquier expressed his delight at joining forces with McLaren. "It is great that McLaren and DaimlerChrysler have rejoined the Michelin family. Whilst we are very pleased with what we have achieved this year in F1, and are very optimistic for next year, the involvement of a team with the record and skills of McLaren can only increase our optimism."

McLaren last ran on the rubber in the 1980s, claiming 17 race wins and the 1984 Formula 1 constructors' and drivers' world championships. That year, Niki Lauda pipped team mate Alain Prost to the title by just half a point.



So. What do you think?

The Faithless Elector
Washington DC
;) Montoya Trophy Case Design Services;)[/font]

[berge]

I think it just got MORE DIFFICULT for McLaren or Williams to win WDC or WCC next year

[Punisher6]

I don't think Michelin is what stopped Williams from being a strong #2 team this year, it was more the chassis and engine keeping them back. They also have a complete data base on the circuits, no suprises next year. I am not real happy about the McLaren deal, but I don't think it will affect much, if anything McLaren and Williams are going to have an advantage when Michelin has the better tire, which I bet will be often enough. Down with Ferrari!!!!

[Ricardo F1]

I think it makes little or no difference - Bridgestone will be better in certain conditions and Michelin in others. It's probably a good thing to get away from Bridgestone though who were more than likely focusing more accutely on Ferrari than McLaren.

[tim]

I agree. McLaren haven't been able to beat Ferrari for the last two years on Bridgestones, so they may as well try Michelins. Ron and Frank are quite friendly (so far as they can be) - Ron prefers losing to Williams than Ferrari, anyway... Perhaps Ron just thinks it's more likely that Michelin will get it right most of the time than Bridgestone.

It could work in a positive way: now that they have two "A"-grade teams, Michelin should be able to develop their tyres more, instead of having a situation with one top team and the remainder being at the bad end of the grid...

However, I would have liked to have seen Mclaren on Goodyears (just to make it more interesting). Williams have historically been very close to Goodyear: perhaps they will switch when/if Akron comes back...

[Toyoter]

Having to design the 2002 McLaren challenger around a new set of tires may actually give Newey some motivation again. Then again, maybe it won't.

[TAB666]

All this talk about Newey, he only responsible for the aero of the car. That is not the only thing that is important when we talk about tires. Think about steering geometry and stuff like that.
That is where the tires come in, for example if the tires are made for larg chamber you have to adjust the steering and shockabsorbers geomerty. Nothing aero about that.

[raceday]

McLaren is obviously a top team. But as all teams they have cycles. In my opinion they are still on their way down, or possibly at the bottom waiting/working to turn the curve upwards and that is likely not good enough to win the championship next year. What makes me think this is the following:

1. Mercedes are developing a new engine, as I understood it it’s not just an evolution. That probably means it will not be very reliable next year.

2. They have hired an unproven driver. I know he has shown great potential but nevertheless, he is unproven as a championship level driver. And DC, I don’t mean to bash him, but I really don’t think he’s got it in him to win the WDC.

3. The Paragon is being built and they are supposed to finish it in August (?) or at least at the end of next year. This is bound to take resources from the organisation, not least from Ron.

4. Can’t help to think that since Newey apparently looked for another job, I think he might be less than happy about the situation? The level of the 2001 car also indicates that that might be the case?

5. The switch to new rubber with the limited testing possibilities before the season starts and the lack of knowledge they have of Michelin is not an ideal situation for the design of the new car. This will likely have an effect on at least the beginning of next season.

To me this adds up to a “stepping stone” season for McLaren in 2002. Of course they will do well anyway but I doubt they will win any championships next year. 2003 is an entirely different matter!

[The Voice of Reason]

Damn, more bad news for Williams. It's not a disaster but it will probably make it more difficult for them to take the challenge to Ferrari next year.

When the Bridgestones have an advantage then Ferrari will walk it but when the Michelins have an advantage Williams will still have to beat McLaren. I suspect they will beat them more often than not but McLaren will still take points away from them.

On Ferrari's side, I don't think being the only top Bridgestone runner will give them a boost as they received preferential treatment last year anyway. On a couple of occasions they made good judgements based on testing data that McLaren didn't have...

So why were Ferrari given the tyres to test instead of giving them to both teams? You won't often find me defending Ron but the man is right to be paranoid - Ferrari has shafted his team quite a few times over the last few years. Getting it from Bridgestone too must have been eye watering. Especially as he was the one to take the risk of running on their tyres when they first came to F1.

Like I said, Damn! What next for Williams...

[Darrenj]

posted by raceday
1. Mercedes are developing a new engine, as I understood it it’s not just an evolution. That probably means it will not be very reliable next year.

2. They have hired an unproven driver. I know he has shown great potential but nevertheless, he is unproven as a championship level driver. And DC, I don’t mean to bash him, but I really don’t think he’s got it in him to win the WDC.

While I agree with you on some aspects of your contribution, I think that NO the new Mercedes engine will not be an evolution but judging from engine performance this year, it SHOULD be more relaible next year. I think that is the aim of Mercedes and they will achieve it.
As for Kimi, well that speaks for itself, when the chips are down and you have nothing to loose you take chances. I think Kimi is a very good chance...'
After Mxlaren's crap season Kimi might just be what the docter ordered

[raceday]

Darrenj,

Regarding Kimi, I also think that he will turn out good. But not as a WDC next year. I think he need to add some more experience first. Like I said in the previous post, 2003 is a different matter...

Regarding the engine, I think they were down both on power and reliability this year. As I understood it they will redesign. when they were on their way up the last time in 97, they went for speed first and reliability later. My guess is that it might be the same this time?

[Darrenj]

mmmmmmmmmm...
interesting......

[raceday]

Darrenj,

The swap to Michelin and the other points I mentioned was part of the reason why i think McLaren will have a "stepping stone" year next year. You questioned two of the points, I gave you an explanation for my reasoning behind the two points. If you don't agree with it it would be way more constructive to explane why.

If you find the whole thing boring, dont bring it up then.

[Darrenj]

mmmmmmmm..........
interesting

[goodbuddy]

I'm glad McLaren will be using
Michelin. And I hope it does bring
Goodyear back into Formula-1.
More competition will make the
sport better.

[HSJ]

Well, with my meager analytical abilities I think the situation is this: Michelin benefits, Bstone the opposite. Michelin will have two hard-working top teams for tyre development, and also two candidates for the titles. Bstone only one. In 02 it could go either way, but in the long run Michelin might well crush Bstone. After all, Ferrari is unlikely to be able to hold on to their #1 status for much longer (1-2 years maximum IMO, zero I hope!), Williams is on the upward slope, McL should get on the upward slope any time.

[HSJ]

mmmmmm.........
Interesting

[MortenF1]

I believe McLarens switch to Michelin is good. Two very strong teams will improve and develop the tyre quicker than has been the case this season, with Williams being the only front-runner team on Michelin. Regarding the Merc'-engine, I have no doubts it will be powerful, what bothers me is that it might be even more unreliable than this years.....
But, Ferrari-fans may have reason to fear too, a radically different car might suffer teething problems....

[coyoteBR]

... Soon on the Readers Comments: Frans explains why Bridgestones are illegal...

[tom]

it's just another **** decision after another for ron, what a loser.

does he know anything ?

this will give ferrari an even bigger advantage.

it's almost as if ron wants schumacher to win every race, going by the dicisions he makes, wether it's pitstop strategy's or tyre chioces, the guys got no brains.

[Punisher6]

Originally posted by tom
it's just another **** decision after another for ron, what a loser.

does he know anything ?

this will give ferrari an even bigger advantage.

it's almost as if ron wants schumacher to win every race, going by the dicisions he makes, wether it's pitstop strategy's or tyre chioces, the guys got no brains.

Man, must be nice to be such a smart guy, what aren't you running a F1 team?

[Chrissy Boy]

Originally posted by race addicted
I believe McLarens switch to Michelin is good. Two very strong teams will improve and develop the tyre quicker than has been the case this season, with Williams being the only front-runner team on Michelin. Regarding the Merc'-engine, I have no doubts it will be powerful, what bothers me is that it might be even more unreliable than this years.....
But, Ferrari-fans may have reason to fear too, a radically different car might suffer teething problems....

Agreed:up:

[black magic]

its simply a tacit acknowledgement from Ron that ferrari have gained a tecnological gap on maclaren which was unlikely to be bridged by next year. hence the need to go with new tire to try to bridge the gap by hopefully having a tire that is faster. can't see them winning as will take season to learn how to maximise set up etc with the new tire.

sorry but unless michelins are way faster or williams reliability improves it looks like another ferrari year tempered only by ferrari going with fairly radical design change for next year.

[tom]

punisher 6,
i sound a tad mean ?

to bad it's the truth though isn't it.

just look at the strategy ron gave mika at barcelona this year, if schumi didn't have that trouble, mika would've never been able to leaop frog ms, cleatr and simple, always carrying more fuel than ms while they're meant to make the most of fresh tyres.

and remember all the times it's started to rain, and ron's made the wrong call.
and remember at the start of melbourne 2000, in free practice both mclarens suffered mechanical problems, after which ron stated "i'm sure we've found the problem, and can assure you they won't happen during the race"

WELL LOOK WHAT HAPPENED RON !!!!!!

[HP]

Originally posted by tom


WELL LOOK WHAT HAPPENED RON !!!!!!

In general if Ron says they have sorted their reliability problems, expect disaster ;) This year it happened too. I think it was at Hockenheim when Ron announced they have gotten over their reliability problems, just to have both McL break down at that race.

[Punisher6]

Originally posted by tom
punisher 6,
i sound a tad mean ?

No, you just sound simplistic. It's all so easy, even you know more than Ron, any idiot can figure this stuff out, right? The thing about Austrailia is rather childish, how old are you?

[bleakuzs]

I imagine next year the championship will be a bit tighter. Ferrari won't be in a position to pick up a win when Michelin is on it's game and the both cars crap out as with Williams.

[MacFan]

Originally posted by TAB666
All this talk about Newey, he only responsible for the aero of the car. That is not the only thing that is important when we talk about tires. Think about steering geometry and stuff like that.
That is where the tires come in, for example if the tires are made for larg chamber you have to adjust the steering and shockabsorbers geomerty. Nothing aero about that.

Not so, Newey is McLaren's technical director, and therefore has overall responsibility for the design of the car. He trained as an aerodynamicist, and I'm sure that is still his area of specialist knowledge, but he also knows a thing or two about mechanical design.

[tom]

punisher 6,
what i said about melbourne is childish ?

look what ron's let happen, year after year, he hands ma a 20 point present, 99 melbourne and brazil both mclarens blow, or suffer atleast some type of mechanical trouble.
2000, melbourne both mclarens blow up after looking strong, brazil , ummm i forgot what happened......... oh that's mika's mclaren blew up while he was looking good for the win, and david's mclaren only had a couple of gears.
then it happens again in 2001.

he's childish for letting that stuff happen.
he know's if they're not reliable in the 1st couple of races that ms will win whatever races they fail in.

if it happens again at melbourne 2002 will you reason with me?

and hp, i remember too, at hockenhiem i told a friend of mine, who's often asking if i've got a pick for him to bet on, i told him "don't be on a mclaren, they'll blow for sure"

mechanical failures **** races up bigtime i reckon.

[Frans]

Friday October 26th, 2001

Michelin boss Pierre Dupasquier has questioned Ferrari's Bridgestone tyres in the final two races of the season, suggesting the Japanese manufacturer improved the performance of their tyres by using chemical products.

"How else can you explain Schumacher's incredible early laps (in the USA and Japan)?" Dupasquier was quoted as saying by German magazine SportAutoMoto.

"From the Indianapolis race there has been a particular smell from Ferrari's tyres. Everyone knows that certain products used to speed up performances generate this."

French manufacturer Michelin, who returned to Formula One after an absence of more than fifteen years, will opt to use the same strategy in the future, according to Dupasquier.

"Seeing as nobody has complained about it, we will adapt our approach accordingly," the Frenchman added.

Already in the Japanese Grand Prix paddock there were rumours of an expected tyre row concerning the possible performance advantage gained by the Michelin scrubbed-in tyres, and some of the Bridgestone teams were believed to be ready to complain if the French tyres would have won the race.

Both the United States and Japanese Grands Prix were won by Bridgestone-shod cars.

YES, illegal tires...... but I guess that's old news...

[Williams]

... assuming it's illegal to use tyre-performance-enhancing chemicals. Doesn't sound like it is illegal to me, considering that nobody has complained about it and both tyre manufacturers will be doing it next year.

[Frans]

that's because nobody complained..... if they'll do that, things will stir up.

it stinks!

[Williams]

... but in the meantime nobody's done anything wrong ...

[Al.]

Originally posted by tom
it's just another **** decision after another for ron, what a loser.

does he know anything ?

this will give ferrari an even bigger advantage.

it's almost as if ron wants schumacher to win every race, going by the dicisions he makes, wether it's pitstop strategy's or tyre chioces, the guys got no brains.

Errr, Schumacher won most of them this year on the same tyres as McLaren.
If McLaren see Ferrari as tougher rivals to beat than Williams then different tyres are the key. At the start of 1998 Ferrari were nearly 2 seconds off the McLaren pace at Australia. At Round 3, in Argentina Schui beat the McLarens in a straight fight. The main gain came from the Goodyear tyres. This is why lap times tumble from year to year with a tyre war.

[HSJ]

Originally posted by tom
it's just another **** decision after another for ron, what a loser.

does he know anything ?

this will give ferrari an even bigger advantage.

it's almost as if ron wants schumacher to win every race, going by the dicisions he makes, wether it's pitstop strategy's or tyre chioces, the guys got no brains.

You forgot to bash his driver choices, you ****!

;)

Won't it be fun when you notice you're actually wrong about Ron's choices?

[RaggedEdge]

Originally posted by Al.


Errr, Schumacher won most of them this year on the same tyres as McLaren.
If McLaren see Ferrari as tougher rivals to beat than Williams then different tyres are the key. At the start of 1998 Ferrari were nearly 2 seconds off the McLaren pace at Australia. At Round 3, in Argentina Schui beat the McLarens in a straight fight. The main gain came from the Goodyear tyres. This is why lap times tumble from year to year with a tyre war.

It is true that Goodyear foolishly started the two first races of 1998 with narrow front tyres, which gave Bridgestone some advantage to begin with:

Starting grid in Australia 1998:

1 8 Mika Hakkinen McLaren/Mercedes 1'30.010 - -
2 7 David Coulthard McLaren/Mercedes 1'30.053 0.043 0.048
3 3 M.Schumacher Ferrari 1'30.767 0.757 0.841

Thre is little differnce with the starting grid of Australia 2001:

1 1 M.Schumacher Ferrari 1'26.892 - -
2 2 R.Barrichello Ferrari 1'27.263 0.371 0.427
3 3 Mika Hakkinen McLaren/Mercedes 1'27.461 0.569 0.655

[berge]

Originally posted by Al.
At the start of 1998 Ferrari were nearly 2 seconds off the McLaren pace at Australia. At Round 3, in Argentina Schui beat the McLarens in a straight fight. The main gain came from the Goodyear tyres.

Although Goodyear did introduce wider fronts for Argentina, I think the difference was MS, not the tires. Argentina is the sort of track where a car can be...."hustled", shall we say. And he hustled it allright. I have never seen MS driving at Argentina where he wasn't coming out of one corner or the other sideways!!
If you want to see the art of an early apexer throwing the car into the corner and then applying perfect power on oversteer at the exit, watch Michael Schumacher at Argentina. Any year. It really is a marvel to watch. Argentina 96 particularly exciting.

This is another reason why I despise the fact that TC is legal. Those who have it perfected better always look like they are out on rails out for a sunday drive.

[Breadmaster]

It's a shame I had hopes that Mac's would wait and switch to Goodyear, top three teams on three different tyres.....what could have been...

[Williams]

I don't think Ron wanted to hang around another year sharing his tyres with Ferrari.

[Darrenj]

Michelins are faster than the bridges later on in the race, they clearly have the advantage on warmer tracks... Is Bridg doing something about this over the next few months, or will Ferrari have a lot more to consider than just Williams with Michelins.??

[The Mourning Anchor]

Absolutely first-rate exchange guys. Thanks, especially for staying on-point.

The hot rumour over here, at the moment anyway, in the States is that Goodyear are tentatively settling on going into - or is it after - CART, or perhaps even IRL, before trying to tackle F1.

(Bridgestone have again implied that, if the world-wide economic downturn worsens, they may 'reassess' - their word, not mine - their marketing and research commitments. Which their top 'suits' in Japan define as largely their involvement in motorsports. So that could mean that Firestone might either drop or be ordered by Bridgestone to drop some or even all of their supply commitments here in the States. That might become necessary just to free up enough working capital to allow the parent company to remain in - and on top of - F1, although Bridgestone claim that isn't an issue. At the moment. . .)

Anyway.

I suspect this CARTIRL rumour about Goodyear, if it is true, is cropping up now because - with Big Ron's decision to go to France - Akron's Kids have no front-grid team to lead their T&D effort.

I also agree that it would have been great to see one leading team for each of three tire manufacturers and something like that still might happen. But, I fear, first one of the Top Three will have to fall out with their present tire supplier first. And, for no really hard and objective reasons, I somehow suspect that disaffected team may well be WilliamsBMW and not Big Mac.

While Tubby's Kids clearly benefit by being able to double up on data collection and T&D with four or even six front-grid cars out their testing their rubber, one or the other of their top customers is bound to start feeling as McLaren apparently did this past season working with Bridgestone.

Tire manufacturers are no different than the engine suppliers. As time goes on and Team X clearly steps - or even inches - out ahead of Team Y, there is an inevitable 'pull' toward the most competitive teams, or drivers.

And that has been true - back to the Michelin, Pirelli and Continental 'tire wars' of the 1930s - no matter how much the tire supplier claim - cross their temperature gauges and hope to die - that they really do supply equal tires to all their teams.

So, by mid-2001, it was patently clear to Bridgestone that, if they were to keep up with (never mind ahead of) Michelin, they had to work - damn hard - to make sure Red Reign, rather than Slipping Silver, stayed out ahead of Sir Frank's Kids and their French toys.

I certainly hope Goodyear opt to return to F1 anyway, as have BMW, Honda, Renault and, at least indirectly, MercedesBenz. But, with the world economy souring, they may well opt to do something less ambitious first. Or they may opt to stay on the beach for the time being.

Anyway, as I said: first-rate exchange guys. Everybody have a good one this weekend.

The Faithless Elector
Washington DC[/color]

[man from martinlaakso]

I think, that McLaren made a right choice when it changed to Michelin. In 2001 the Bridgestone tyres were better on some tracks and some conditions, but Michelin had an upper hand on power tracks and hot conditions. I assume, that Michelin will be the best overall tyre in the 2002 season, but the margin to Bridgestone will be relatively small. Because McLaren is a top team, I don't think, that Michelin will favour Williams, although Williiams has been a customer for a longer time. Michelin probably will stay neutral, until the firm will see, whether Wiiliams or McLaren is THE CAR. After that Michelin will favour that team.