123 replies to this topic

[Ghostrider]

From autosport.com:
New Michelin grooves could be breaking the rules
http://www.autosport...=17999&series=5

Seems like the new Michelin uses asymmetrical grooves. Can't believe this, McLaren has turned Michelin into cheaters after just a couple of months partnership.

[Waylander]

Now we know who Ron was referring to when he said "Some teams are using illegal parts..."

[A3]

I believe the story is pure speculation, as the same thing (without naming Michelin specifically) was on several sites a week or 2 ago.

[Ghostrider]

Originally posted by Waylander
Now we know who Ron was referring to when he said "Some teams are using illegal parts..."

Serious though, if FIA bans those tyres Michelin might have wasted a lot of time and effort in vain.

[A3]

january testing:

http://www.medicofit...nl/C~000011.jpg

http://www.medicofit...nl/C~000009.jpg

http://www.medicofit...nl/C~000007.jpg

http://www.medicofit...nl/C~000003.jpg

[kanec]

Max Mosley quote from AtlasF1 14th Feb
"There is supposed to be a new tyre, with asymmetric grooves which is not allowed. The grooves have to be uniform, which we think means they have to be same whichever way you look at them. Some people think that if one of the shoulders slopes more than the other it will be alright and we don't think it will. That's just one example of thousands of things. I probably should never have mentioned it. "

great shots A3... first thing I thought was Formula 1 cars are just so cool!

It's hard to tell with the camber (and tired eyes) but it looks as though they are the suspect boots.

[ffiloseta]

Go Ron !

[Ghostrider]

I don't think it is just a rumour. However, those tyres may be some development tyres that were not supposed to be used in Australia anyway.

[Waylander]

Originally posted by Ghostrider

Serious though, if FIA bans those tyres Michelin might have wasted a lot of time and effort in vain.

Wasn't it just last year that Michelin questioned the specific rules about the groves on tyres and the FIA basically told them to get stuffed?

Anyways I'm sure Michelin have some sort of back-up plan just in case...

But if the FIA ban those tyres all we'll hear is Ron Blab on about how the FIA favour Ferrari

[JPMCrew]

Is there any reason for the grooves having to be symmetrical or is this just a rule for its own sake?

[Todd]

Originally posted by JPMCrew
Is there any reason for the grooves having to be symmetrical or is this just a rule for its own sake?

In the same sense that the grooves themselves are just a rule. The idea is to limit performance. That is why there are grooves. That is why the FIA wants to enforce rules preventing the manufacturers from minimizing the impact on performance from the grooves.

[MarkWRX]

Ghostrider - I totally agree! It's a shame it took Michelin several months after it partnered with McLaren to discover a way around the rules. That's total slacking. Ferrari usually get it done in just a few weeks.

A big question is, does Michelin have a back up plan and if so, how much does that effect the setup? Obviously, reverting to a tire with even shoulders would have a performance hit (why else would they use the stepped shoulders if it didn't provide improved performance) but you don't want to risk having half the field being disqualified on protest.

The main issue though is interpretation of the rules. The way it is written leaves it open to interpretation and the FIA and the tire manufactures need to work together to define them better.

[HP]

Originally posted by JPMCrew
Is there any reason for the grooves having to be symmetrical or is this just a rule for its own sake?

I'm not a tyre expert, but I do know that if grooves are not symmetrical you can enhance the stability of a tyre under cornering. Also, if they'd allow it, you could also build a tyre that works almost they same as a slick, with the right air pressure.

[goGoGene]

Ferrari pushed the tire rules by running grooves down to slicks by the end of Malasia 2000, but they were legal since they started the race with grooves. To say that a rule states the grooves must be "uniform" without completely defining what they meant by "uniform" obviously leaves the tire manufacturers a loophole, which if they don't try to use to thier advantage woud just be stupid.

But this is classic FIA rules wording, totally ambiguous, not in favor of Ferrari, but in favor of the FIA to reinterprit the "intent" of the rule midway thru the season to make sure the championship goes to the last race. I think they are concerned that if 1) the Michelin tire is dominant, and 2) either McL or Williams are not compeditive with eachother, that they can make Ferrari compeditive with the other dominant team to provide an entertaining championship.

FIA keeping its options open.

ggg

[Scudetto]

Originally posted by goGoGene
Ferrari pushed the tire rules by running grooves down to slicks by the end of Malasia 2000, but they were legal since they started the race with grooves. To say that a rule states the grooves must be "uniform" without completely defining what they meant by "uniform" obviously leaves the tire manufacturers a loophole, which if they don't try to use to thier advantage woud just be stupid.

But this is classic FIA rules wording, totally ambiguous, not in favor of Ferrari, but in favor of the FIA to reinterprit the "intent" of the rule midway thru the season to make sure the championship goes to the last race. I think they are concerned that if 1) the Michelin tire is dominant, and 2) either McL or Williams are not compeditive with eachother, that they can make Ferrari compeditive with the other dominant team to provide an entertaining championship.

FIA keeping its options open.
ggg

Renault (nee Benetton) did more recently with Fisi's Michelins at Spa. By not changing his front tyres for the entire race, there wasn't a discernable groove left on those. Neither Fisi nor Benetton was penalized.

How does this fit in with your FIA conspiracy theory?

[SeanValen]

Michelin likely looking at all sorts of things to throw at the rules, some naturally won't be allowed.
How they organise their time around this, I do not know, but Bridgestone will be pilling on the pressure, and Michelin, every competitor wants to go beyond the limit in Senna like mystical fast lap time style, but when there are rules, there are rules, no way around them, justice needs implementation, and in this reality it's the FIA and legendary groved tyre hero Max Mosely

Excellent

[goGoGene]

I don't think that conspiracy is the right word. Since I really don't think that they conspire with the teams per se. I just think that the FIA has a vested interest in keeping the championship alive to the end of the season. Allowing or not allowing Benneton to do well doesn't really count, seeing that they weren't in contention for either championship. Though I suppose that the Benneton case could be seen as a precedent in allowing worn grooves, to what end this precedent could have been used...I don't know.

ggg

[Garagiste]

Has anybody managed to find the actual regulation in question?
I lookd at the FIA site and the article headed "wheels and Tyres" doesn't mention the boots at all.

[bobchild]

This is what F1 is about - pushing technical limits - up those limits set by the FIA rules. Might be loopholes, might be different interpretations, but the good thing is that we have TWO tyre companies really pushing the limit...

[Scudetto]

Originally posted by Garagiste
Has anybody managed to find the actual regulation in question?
I lookd at the FIA site and the article headed "wheels and Tyres" doesn't mention the boots at all.

2002 FIA Forumula 1 Sporting Regulations:
79) Quantity and type of tyres :
a) During the Event no driver may use more than forty dry-weather tyres and twenty eight wet-weathertyres. From the forty dry-weather tyres each driver will be allocated twelve (six front and six rear) for use on thefirst day of practice, these tyres may not be used at any other time during the Event. No more than eight (fourfront and four rear) of the twelve tyres allocated for the first day of practice may be of one specification.Before qualifying practice begins each driver must nominate which specification of tyre he will use for theremainder of the Event.
b) All dry-weather tyres must incorporate circumferential grooves square to the wheel axis and aroundthe entire circumference of the contact surface of each tyre.
c)Each front dry-weather tyre, when new, must incorporate 4 grooves which are :
- arranged symmetrically about the centre of the tyre tread ;
- at least 14mm wide at the contact surface and which taper uniformly to a minimum of 10mm at the
lower surface ;
- at least 2.5mm deep across the whole lower surface ;
- 50mm (+/- 1.0mm) between centres.
Furthermore, the tread width of the front tyres must not exceed 270mm.
d) Each rear dry-weather tyre, when new, must incorporate 4 grooves which are:
- arranged symmetrically about the centre of the tyre tread ;
MàJ 14.12.2001
- at least 14mm wide at the contact surface and which taper uniformly to a minimum of 10mm at the
lower surface ;
- at least 2.5mm deep across the whole lower surface ;
- 50mm (+/- 1.0mm) between centres.
The measurements referred to in c) and d) above will be taken when the tyre is fitted to a wheel and inflated to1.4 bar.

As to measurement of the grooves, the Regulations provide thus:
81) Wear of tyres :
The Championship will be contested on grooved tyres. The FIA reserve the right to introduce at any time amethod of measuring remaining groove depth if performance appears to be enhanced by high wear or by the useof tyres which are worn so that the grooves are no longer visible.

[Louis Mr. F1]

come on guys, what Michelin doing must be within the FIA's tolerance level if you look at their tires from a 37c degree angle and with half you eye shut.
it'll be fine, don't worry!

or would they wait until after the first race, if Michelin has a distinct advantage, FIA will start acting (eg 98 Brazil Mclaren brake).

[Williams]

Originally posted by goGoGene
I don't think that conspiracy is the right word. Since I really don't think that they conspire with the teams per se. I just think that the FIA has a vested interest in keeping the championship alive to the end of the season. Allowing or not allowing Benneton to do well doesn't really count, seeing that they weren't in contention for either championship. Though I suppose that the Benneton case could be seen as a precedent in allowing worn grooves, to what end this precedent could have been used...I don't know.

ggg

I don't believe the issue is parity or keeping the championship alive. Grooved tyres are the method chosen by the FIA (and the teams) to keep speeds under control. Attacking the aero has proved to be futile and the engine formula can't be touched until 2007. As Max puts it, the cars can generate all the power they want, but if they are virutal bicycle tires, they can't put the power on the ground, and so this is considered an effective, and the only, way to limit speeds. Therefore Max is going defend grooved tyres against technical advances quite vociferously.

On the issue of worn grooves, the FIA has basically reserved the right to take action if they feel that wearing the grooves away is causing an increase in performance. In Benetton's case, if there was no dramatic decrease in lap times traceable to worn tyres, then no action would be taken. This threat is proabably enough to keep the tyre companies honest, since they don't want to trigger FIA action in midseason which would force them the revamp their tyre formulae.

The FIA doesn't really have a firm rule on this, more a rule of thumb which states that at least one groove should be visible about the entire tyre circumference. If a thoroughly worn tyre is not giving the performance of a slick, then chances are that no action will to be taken on this rule of thumb. Also, a tyre worn down during the last few laps of a race if going to give nobdy a big advantage, even if the tyre is slightly faster, and I suspect the FIA considers that as well.

[Mrv]

Originally posted by Waylander
Now we know who Ron was referring to when he said "Some teams are using illegal parts..."

[berge]

what's the difference. by the end of the race, michelin's don't have any grooves left on them anyways. so who cares whether they're assymetrical or diammetrical or obstituteratectrical.

[DEVO]

From A3 pictures, they look fine to me. I can't see if the groove is deeper on one side without having a cross section of the tire to see

[Smooth]

Originally posted by DEVO
From A3 pictures, they look fine to me. I can't see if the groove is deeper on one side without having a cross section of the tire to see

One problem with the boots on the Jag in those pics is the arrangement of the grooves, ie. they leave a wide shoulder on the outside of the tire by moving the grooves towards the inside, or am I misunderstanding? I took it as Max saying, in theory, that the tires could be mounted either way.

[DEVO]

smooth,

OK I see that, but I could have sworn that Michelin tires were like that last year. They had a more "square" look to them. I guess the reason for the rules is to prevent a team from putting all the grooves in a row on one side of the tire, thus leaving a nice slick on the other half.

[RichyH]

Hi all,

Each front dry-weather tyre, when new, must incorporate 4 grooves which are :
- arranged symmetrically about the centre of the tyre tread ;
- at least 14mm wide at the contact surface and which taper uniformly to a minimum of 10mm at the lower surface

How can a 'groove' have a CONTACT surface and a LOWER surface? Surely a groove is a groove is a groove?

regards,

RichyH

[umma gumma]

it's saying the groove has to be at least 14mm wide at the top and 11mm wide at the bottom.

[DEVO]

The LOWER surface is the "groove" part of the tire and the CONTACT surface is what touches the tarmac.

[Lister of Smeg]

They had a more "square" look to them.

I noticed exactly the same thing! I almost looked like The Michelins had a bigger contact area than what Bridgestone had, and as DEVO said, they looked allot more square.

Anyone know more about this?

[baddog]

Originally posted by Lister of Smeg


I noticed exactly the same thing! I almost looked like The Michelins had a bigger contact area than what Bridgestone had, and as DEVO said, they looked allot more square.

Anyone know more about this?

last year f1racing had a (for once) good article on the two tyres, including side by side shots. the michelin definitely was a lot more 'square shoudlered' than the bridgestone, though there are flipsides to that choice also (in the wall strength etc I think)

Shaun

[BlackGhost]

Don't believe Michelin would be so silly as to use tires which aren't within the rules?

I mean its though to hide your tyres under the car or something?


Wouldn't it be funny if Ron's car where caught with illegal tyres!!!

[baddog]

blackghost it is rather a case of them 'interpreting' the rules in a way that advantages them and that they think they can get away with. there is definitely going to be a huge shitfight over this one between the FIA and michelin if they persist with assymetric tyres

Shaun

[Mr. Bean]

Originally posted by BlackGhost
Wouldn't it be funny if Ron's car where caught with illegal tyres!!!

Somehow I don't see it being perceived that way. It would be seen as another case of the FIA colluding with Ferrari to unfairly reduce any competitive advantage Mclaren might have through their ingenious design efforts.

Bean

[BlackGhost]

Originally posted by baddog
blackghost it is rather a case of them 'interpreting' the rules in a way that advantages them and that they think they can get away with. there is definitely going to be a huge shitfight over this one between the FIA and michelin if they persist with assymetric tyres

Shaun

Maybe what is revealing about this situation, if what you say is in fact what is going on, is that perhaps Michelin feel they can't produce a good tyre without bending the rules a bit.


Let's face it the pressure is on Michelin and they must produce.

Also I don't believe that with all the experience that Bridgestone have that they can be behind Michelin.

The Japanese are fierce competitors with the ressources to boot.


So maybe Michelin is panicking!

[baddog]

Originally posted by BlackGhost


Maybe what is revealing about this situation, if what you say is in fact what is going on, is that perhaps Michelin feel they can't produce a good tyre without bending the rules a bit.


Let's face it the pressure is on Michelin and they must produce.

Also I don't believe that with all the experience that Bridgestone have that they can be behind Michelin.

The Japanese are fierce competitors with the ressources to boot.


So maybe Michelin is panicking!

I dont agree.

Michelin is right up there with the best, and they have superb development teams in williams (and now mac) and they have a huge commitment too. What ALL companies will do is try and find an 'edge'.. its just that this particular edge is going to bring them into conflict with the FIA. All that remains to be seen is whether Michelin will back down and look elsewhere for the edge, or decide to try their luck. Bridgestone will also be trying many things on the borders of the rules

Shaun

[BlackGhost]

Originally posted by baddog


I dont agree.

Michelin is right up there with the best, and they have superb development teams in williams (and now mac) and they have a huge commitment too. What ALL companies will do is try and find an 'edge'.. its just that this particular edge is going to bring them into conflict with the FIA. All that remains to be seen is whether Michelin will back down and look elsewhere for the edge, or decide to try their luck. Bridgestone will also be trying many things on the borders of the rules

Shaun

Don't know what the size of Michelin tyres is in relation to Bridgestone. Size is directly related to amount of money invested in R and D.

From the sound of the previous posts, it seems Michelin is looking for a fight and to me that indicates a sense of desperation. Also, would they be really wasting time testing illegal tyres?

Sounds all fishy to me.

Then again most of F1 is fishy...at times...

[Scoop]

i think michelin is trying to get some media attention.... they're reported unhappy about spending millions and no one talking abt their tyres..

[BlackGhost]

Originally posted by Scoop
i think michelin is trying to get some media attention.... they're reported unhappy about spending millions and no one talking abt their tyres..

Interesting comments, I'm not an expert on tyres sales but it seems to me that most luxury cars are all fitted with Pirelli's!

This winter when I fitted my Saab with winter tyres the equivalent Michelin tyre was 20.00$ a tyre more than a Pirelli. I'd pay 20 bucks a tyre more for a Pirelli but not the other way around!!!

[Nikolas Garth]

Originally posted by Ghostrider
Seems like the new Michelin uses asymmetrical grooves. Can't believe this, McLaren has turned Michelin into cheaters after just a couple of months partnership.

[Makebelieve]

I guess the fight is on... From ITV-F1:

Michelin are on collision course with the FIA after their new tyres were deemed illegal.

The French manufacturer is threatening to take its new tyres to the season-opening Australian Grand Prix – even though the FIA have ruled they are not legal.

Michelin’s new rubber has assymmetrical grooves. This effectively means that the grooves slope more on one side than they do on the other. The company believes this is within the letter of the law, which simply states that the grooves "must taper uniformly."

FIA President Max Mosley says that Michelin have been told the new tyres are illegal.

He told Autosport magazine: "We have told the people concerned it’s illegal and I hope they won’t turn up with it in Melbourne."

Michelin’s rivals Bridgestone are also unhappy with the new tyres.

Technical manager Hisao Suganuma said: "The key phrase is that the grooves must be ‘uniformly tapered’. Our understanding is that this means a symmetrical groove."

But defiant Michelin boss Pierre Dupasquier remains convinced the company have done nothing wrong.

He said: "We will see what happens. Everything is possible.

"It is up to the scrutineers as to what happens but what can I do because the regulations only state that the groove must taper uniformly. It does not say that they must be symmetrical."

[BlackGhost]

This is confirming what I think.

Michelin is behind Bridgestone and this is only normal considering the length of time Bridgestone has been in F1.

Time is experience and I don't see how Michelin could make it up so fast.

Michelin may be forced to play with the rules to make up for their lack of performance ????

Also let's not forget the amount of pressure on these guys, now supplying Ron Dennis and BMW!

They will have to perform otherwise Ron will destroy them!

[Mrv]

Thanks Max. For saving Ferrari, FIA(T) comes through again. Ferrari 1 & 2.

[FW11B]

This sort of thing will be the death of F1...If companies continue to invest vast ammounts of money into designing parts that are then deemed illegal on an interpretation of the rules then they will just give up. F1 desperately needs the return of freedom to design not the continued restrictions of the rules.

Yes there are rules that are essential, tub tests etc but things are now going too far.

[BlackGhost]

Originally posted by FW11B
This sort of thing will be the death of F1...If companies continue to invest vast ammounts of money into designing parts that are then deemed illegal on an interpretation of the rules then they will just give up. F1 desperately needs the return of freedom to design not the continued restrictions of the rules.

Yes there are rules that are essential, tub tests etc but things are now going too far.

Rules are good, problem is the people trying to circumvent them so they can get an edge.

It is obvious Michelin are not as formidable as they are trying to make out to be.

[DEVO]

Go to slicks.... therefore there isn't any "interpretation of rules."

[Scudetto]

Originally posted by FW11B
This sort of thing will be the death of F1...If companies continue to invest vast ammounts of money into designing parts that are then deemed illegal on an interpretation of the rules then they will just give up. F1 desperately needs the return of freedom to design not the continued restrictions of the rules.

Yes there are rules that are essential, tub tests etc but things are now going too far.

I completely agree on the issue of returning to engineering and design freedom.

However, the cold truth remains that these regulations are in place and must be adhered to. If Michelin's tire is deemed illegal by the stewards come Australia, Michelin only has themselves to blame for what I see to be a quite liberal interpretation of the Sporting Regulations. Seems to me that Michelin interpreted "taper uniformly" to mean it's ok if each groove itself has an asymetric taper, so long as the tapering is uniform across all four grooves - as opposed to each groove's taper be uniform.

It would seem to me that this sort of innovation could have been clearly ruled upon by the FIA if Michelin had posed the idea to them. Proceeding into development without the FIA rubber stamp is a risk Michelin shouldered on their own.

[Garagiste]

I think you're right on the money there Scudetto, and thanks for posting the reg, BTW.

[Scudetto]

Originally posted by Garagiste
I think you're right on the money there Scudetto, and thanks for posting the reg, BTW.

Always a pleasure.

BTW, whenever I post a provision from the Sporting Regulations, I usually follow up with the observation that they make very interesting reading and really clarify things you see leading up to and during the races. You can find them at the FIA site here. You need Adobe Acrobat 5.0 to view it.