Pirelli wins control tyre / Michelin sues FIA

[Rally_Rocks]

Just heard that Pirelli have been awarded the control tyre deal for 2008.

I have to say it's a bit of a shock considering the current situation with BFGoodrich and manufacturer teams.

Great news for Gigi Galli fans though I guess!!!

Has anyone heard anymore detail?

[SubaruNorway]

Oh crap does this means the end of Subaru

http://www.autosport.com

[Captain VXR]

Oh crap, they might give Subaru worse tyres after being dumped :eek:

[SubaruNorway]

:laugh:

[turves]

http://www.crash.net/news_view~t~Pirelli-win-tyre-tender-for-2008-2010-~cid~4~id~143802.htm

From Crash.net

[MJW]

Pirelli should be a good choice. Remenber things were fairly even until Michelin brought out the "super tyre" mid way in 2004, (the one that they threatened legal action if a copy appeared after a tyre went missing in Japan)
Pirelli always made good robust tyres before Michelin pioneered the mousse system (ATS) and Pirelli had to follow with its own version of mousse called EMI. To answer SunaruNorway1 it doesn't matter about the end of Subaru, where they suffered was being the only manufacturer on (in the end) inferior tyres. If all manufactureres use the same tyre then its good for the sport, no-one needs to spend mega money on testing tyres, also if they make the tyres more durable it will heighten the spectacle and by reducing the number of tyres thereby saving costs maybe more rallies can be fitted into teh calendar for the same amount of money. 20 rally wrc calendar with single tyre or 16 round wrc with softer tyres changed more frequently and endless testing to get the edge? - I think sponsors would rather see cars out 20 times a year.

[Mihai]

I'm more concerned about this:


no tyres in the WRC will be permitted to use the run-flat mousse construction

This will certainly reduce sliding in favor of more accurate driving style.

[MJW]

Mousse was always scheduled to go in 2008. I am not so sure that it will stop sliding but should stop "suicidal cuts" I honestly think there will be more sliding with the 2008 "durable" non moussed tyre.

[GigiGalliNo1]

I say good to see Pirelli back and good for Gigi! :)

and and and..... i forgot, no mouse will bring back that days of retirements due to no tires and making life harder for drivers! :p

[DonJippo]

Great news for Gigi Galli fans though I guess!!!

Don't think so. Pirelli will get the publicity they need being the sole tyre supplier they don't need any certain drivers for that.

[imull]

dont care either way who won the deal and dont think Subaru will suffer. If anything they will prosper with the most recent tyre data on pirelli's.

Mousse to go, good. Its another obstacle to the 'clubmen' that have always suffered by not being able to take hte cuts that they have...

Biggest issue for me is that no mouse combined with the new rules regarding running with a missing tyre/wheel on public roads could mean a lot of forced retirements. However, it will also mean much tougher and durable (therefore harder compound) tyres which will mean MORE sliding :D :D :D

[SubaruNorway]

As that new rule about all the tyres being intact for the car to be alowed to do road sections does that include driving on the rim?

[DonJippo]

As that new rule about all the tyres being intact for the car to be alowed to do road sections does that include driving on the rim?


3.6 Competition Cars not on four wheels and tyres.



On a road section that is a public road, a competition car may only be driven on four wheels and tyres.


http://www.fia.com/resources/documents/1948515195__WRC_reg.pdf

[MJW]

Biggest issue for me is that no mouse combined with the new rules regarding running with a missing tyre/wheel on public roads could mean a lot of forced retirements. (therefore :D :D :D

Superally - or whatever version of that will be around in 2008.

[Patwrc]

So how many punctures will there be in every rally next season?

[N]

Looks like a good cotract for Pirelli, 08 to 2010.
I was watching TV last night and they were talking how Bridgestone got the contract to be the sole supplier for F1 at which point I tought to myself, wouldn't be great if Pirelli got the contract for WRC, then Michelin would be out of WRC and F1.
Hopefully, these tyres will be closer to road tyres than the current ones and they'll make them so they last longer and the drivers will have less to choose from.

But on the other hand, they killed competiton and competition helps us develop new technologies and make thing better. Also, the things manufacturers learn in motorsport are eventually carried to standard road cars. By having one tyre manufacturer, are we going down the road of one day everyone driving the same car and the WRC being a drivers only championship?

[WRC2006]

I'm more concerned about this:

This will certainly reduce sliding in favor of more accurate driving style.

reducing sliding = reducing the show

[Tomski]

No mousse=more puctures & damage= more "retirements"= more Super Rally

Discuss............

[WRC2006]

So how many punctures will there be in every rally next season?

Good question!!!!!

I can see the JWRC on the top of the podium because they are used with this?!!!

After 2 punctures, the rally is finished to the poor boy?!

[Rally_Rocks]

Don't think so. Pirelli will get the publicity they need being the sole tyre supplier they don't need any certain drivers for that.

I think Gigi will be delighted. Pirelli back Gigi because he is an Italian and they are an Italian comapny. It is very important for them to recieve favourable coverage in their home market, and as such, I expect to see Gigi in a competitive car next year with a decent programme.

[General Prim]

Citroen with Pirelli tyres....will be very strange. Michelin or BF Goodrich has supplied many, many team for years and years, and... ciao. As always the matter is money, money, money: $$$$....for FIA not Manufactures. Remember that Michelin or BF Goodrich is the FIRST manufacturer of road tyres in the WORLD!!!.

[COD]

I'm more concerned about this:



This will certainly reduce sliding in favor of more accurate driving style.


Not necessarely. they need to make the tyre harder so it won't puncture so easily. This means less grip and more slides. Also with no "tyre war", there will probably be less grip and more slides

[Corny]

Reduce sliding? Oh no, you think the guys will spare 2 tenths of a second in every corner not to make a puntcure? I don't think you can even see that..

[Viktory]

Interesting. The Swedish rally championship looks like it is going for a one tyre manufacturer in 2008 also, with Pirelli.

[White Sauron]

idiotism... Bridgestone was worse than Michelin, but FIA chose them. Now, Pirelli i obviously worse than BFGoodrich, and FIA still shoses them!!! What a farce!

[jonkka]

So how many punctures will there be in every rally next season?

Aye. Conventional wisdom would say that with control tyre the loss of mousse could be offset by making tyre more durable as there is no longer need to make tyre as fast as competitor's rubber. But that hasn't been so in JWRC, even with control tyre those battles have far too often been decided on punctures. And that if anything is frustrating and silly. Grr...

[jonkka]

idiotism... Bridgestone was worse than Michelin, but FIA chose them. Now, Pirelli i obviously worse than BFGoodrich, and FIA still shoses them!!! What a farce!

That is irrelevant. No matter who makes the control tyre, it's still level playing field. They could choose wagon pin-wheels if they like...

[turves]

They could choose wagon pin-wheels if they like...


Please dont put thoughts into their heads...

[animrallye]

FIA World Council press release :
http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press_Releases/FIA_Sport/2007/February/270207-01.html

[jonkka]

Please dont put thoughts into their heads...

Oh, I would think that such holish heads wouldn't keep imported thoughts...

[White Sauron]

That is irrelevant. No matter who makes the control tyre, it's still level playing field. They could choose wagon pin-wheels if they like...

Yes, I understand, but it's some kind unfair to BFGoodrich, who have better products and better technologies... Even though, I understand Michelin' marketologists too. I suppose they didn't try very hard too, cause, as F1 showed, they are not interested in winning in no competition conditions. And there I agree with them. And the same can confirm Mikko Hirvonen after rally Norway. The more competitors you beat, the more deserved your win is...

Duval, Australia 2005. No strong competition at all. Reactions: yeah, the guy won, but nothing special.
Hirvonen, Australia 2006. Only one strong competitor - Solberg. reactions: Wow!! Didn't expect that! but hey... There were neither Loeb no Gronholm. Doubt he'd had beaten them...
Hirvonen, Norway 2007. Great!!! he beat his strongest rivals fair and square!!! What a trully deserved win!

Michelin (BFGoodrich) want the same. Winning is just winning, but you can't win if you're competing alone, just with yourself. Michelin want the special icing on the cake: not only word "BFGoodrich" at the top of the standings, but talks for few weeks on the forums, in Media, etc, about HOW they beat their rivals... They want people to talk about them.

[[WRCRR]]

Yeah I think it is clear Michelin/ BFGoodrich don't want to play on level grounds, they want to showcase their technology is better than others. I really cant blame them for that.

[Corny]

Yes, I understand, but it's some kind unfair to BFGoodrich, who have better products and better technologies... Even though, I understand Michelin' marketologists too. I suppose they didn't try very hard too, cause, as F1 showed, they are not interested in winning in no competition conditions. And there I agree with them. And the same can confirm Mikko Hirvonen after rally Norway. The more competitors you beat, the more deserved your win is...

Duval, Australia 2005. No strong competition at all. Reactions: yeah, the guy won, but nothing special.
Hirvonen, Australia 2006. Only one strong competitor - Solberg. reactions: Wow!! Didn't expect that! but hey... There were neither Loeb no Gronholm. Doubt he'd had beaten them...
Hirvonen, Norway 2007. Great!!! he beat his strongest rivals fair and square!!! What a trully deserved win!

Michelin (BFGoodrich) want the same. Winning is just winning, but you can't win if you're competing alone, just with yourself. Michelin want the special icing on the cake: not only word "BFGoodrich" at the top of the standings, but talks for few weeks on the forums, in Media, etc, about HOW they beat their rivals... They want people to talk about them.

Good point there!

[MJW]

I wonder how long M Frequelin will keep Citroen in WRC on Pirelli or will he take his cars to play in the sand (again) with BFG? - There are some who think Michelin favour a Citroen / Loeb partnership. Or is it that Seb has mystical powers to be on the right tyre at all times, especially in Germany.

[SubaruNorway]

Something thats always bothered me is why Subaru don't hire a professional weather crue

[MJW]

Something thats always bothered me is why Subaru don't hire a professional weather crue

They do - last year it was very experienced co-driver Denis Giraduet, ex TTE and Didier Auriol co-driver. I dont know who does it no that Denis has gone to co-drive Daniel Carlsson.

[M5]

Pirelli won fare and squrare I guess, and had a cheaper deal than BFG. Does not matter if the tyres are as hockey-pucks, as long as everyone has the same pucks !!

And for Subaru, they have the newest data on Pirellis, so this deal should be to their advantage !!

[Roy]

I wonder how long M Frequelin will keep Citroen in WRC on Pirelli or will he take his cars to play in the sand (again) with BFG? - There are some who think Michelin favour a Citroen / Loeb partnership. Or is it that Seb has mystical powers to be on the right tyre at all times, especially in Germany.

I don't understand these things! And "this is the end of Subaru on Pirelli?" even so.

All teams drive on Pirelli. What will be the difference? They have the same shoe. The badest shoe, but there is no other, no better for three years. There is only one problem: No opponent = less development = less speed.

Subaru, Ford, Citroen, Suzuki, all of them can try beat the other.
By car and driver, not with tyre.

[SubaruNorway]

They do - last year it was very experienced co-driver Denis Giraduet, ex TTE and Didier Auriol co-driver. I dont know who does it no that Denis has gone to co-drive Daniel Carlsson.

I know but could he read the weather 4hours ahead? like a professional weather man like Citroen uses

[Roy]

Pirelli won fare and squrare I guess, and had a cheaper deal than BFG. Does not matter if the tyres are as hockey-pucks, as long as everyone has the same pucks !!

And for Subaru, they have the newest data on Pirellis, so this deal should be to their advantage !!

Suzuki can test with Pirelli's now. They has advantage too.... if they do.

[White Sauron]

Subaru, Ford, Citroen, Suzuki, all of them can try beat the other.
By car and driver, not with tyre.


Doubt so. Look at this year: all are running on the same tyres too. But Ford and Citroen dominate again.

Plus:
1. Subaru won't have an advantage. Pirelli said they will make a new range of tyres.

[MJW]

I know but could he read the weather 4hours ahead? like a professional weather man like Citroen uses
Reason - budget - cost of hiring meteo crews like Citroen have does not come cheap. I think its only Citroen who have professional weather forecasters, all the other teams rely on retired co-drivers in the stage. I understand Citroen bring a weather truck with lots of things sticking up in the sky and computers etc. People on this forum need to realise that there are WRC teams budget and Citroen's budget, - there is a difference!

[Roy]

Doubt so. Look at this year: all are running on the same tyres too. But Ford and Citroen dominate again.
....

So they dominate... why? By car... If Subaru have a good car, no problems.
Look at 2006. They have a bad car and bad tyre's. On this 3 events in 2007 only a slow car. The tyres are better, even the performance. They do it better now.

[jso1985]

If the speed of the current WRC cars was a concern to the FIA, this will certainly slow them down :p :

Now seriously, never liked much "tyre wars", it make the sport unnecessarly more expensive and in cases like in F1 the tyres were starting to be more important than anything else.

[cut the b.s.]

idiotism... Bridgestone was worse than Michelin, but FIA chose them. Now, Pirelli i obviously worse than BFGoodrich, and FIA still shoses them!!! What a farce!


How does the FIA make this choice? Surely it is a contract that is tendered for rather than a 'choice' that someone makes? Does anyone on here know?

Also what value can be put on success for a manufacturer when you are the only manufacturer? Your comments about Duval and Mikko in Auz are spot on, surely a victory is only as good as the reputation of those you beat?

Would be interesting Pirelli were the only tyre this year, Kumho would certainly be looking at a podium in Ireland in that case :-)

[DonJippo]

How does the FIA make this choice? Surely it is a contract that is tendered for rather than a 'choice' that someone makes? Does anyone on here know?

Some answers can be found from here...


Single suppliers and tendering: Frequently asked questions

http://www.fia.com/resources/documents/149876533__invitation_tender_faqs.pdf

[White Sauron]

BFGoodrich said it was an unsporting behavior from FIA side. Not a sport-related decision.

[Tomi]

Reason - budget - cost of hiring meteo crews like Citroen have does not come cheap. I think its only Citroen who have professional weather forecasters, all the other teams rely on retired co-drivers in the stage. I understand Citroen bring a weather truck with lots of things sticking up in the sky and computers etc. People on this forum need to realise that there are WRC teams budget and Citroen's budget, - there is a difference!

Maybe subaru should hire one weatherman incsae if the new car is crap too, now they cant blame on the tyres anymore, crap weatherman would be a good excuse.

[MJW]

Also what value can be put on success for a manufacturer when you are the only manufacturer? Your comments about Duval and Mikko in Auz are spot on, surely a victory is only as good as the reputation of those you beat?-)

It may have missed the fact that it will be BFG win on every rally this year. There are more positives than negatives about this. I am convinced that this will a) cut costs, you will not need truck loads of tyres for testing weeks before an event, b) improve the spectacle, c) slow the speeds, d) appear more environmentally friendly, e) have an even playing field for all manufacturers.

[Daniel]

:laugh:

I predict Michelin's to be the control tyre part way through the season due to the fact that PIRELLI DO NOT KNOW HOW TO MAKE A TYRE THAT WORKS IN VARYING CONDITIONS.

[MJW]

I have a sneaky feeling that if Michelin were the tenderer maybe things would have been a bit different. BFG are Michelin's budget brand, maybe it was a factor.

[White Sauron]

c) slow the speeds


Don't think we need this...

[MJW]

Don't think we need this...
slower speed does not necessarily mean less spectacle. If you dont control overall speed we will end up in situations of more serious accidents and maybe fatalitys.
I am old enough to have bben involved in wrc since the 1980's speeds were slower then with Group B supercars than with latest WRCars. Many people in UK still remember and enjoy the days of the Rothmas Escorts with Ari and Pentti - they were not as quick as todays cars.
It would be interesting to hear Pentti's views on this tyre deal.

[bt52b]

slower speed does not necessarily mean less spectacle. If you dont control overall speed we will end up in situations of more serious accidents and maybe fatalitys.
I am old enough to have bben involved in wrc since the 1980's speeds were slower then with Group B supercars than with latest WRCars. Many people in UK still remember and enjoy the days of the Rothmas Escorts with Ari and Pentti - they were not as quick as todays cars.
It would be interesting to hear Pentti's views on this tyre deal.

Should only be allowed to gear for about 180km/h, anything else is a waste of resources. Whats the point of doing 240km/h on a stage?

Having the control tyre should help control the average speed through the stage, which can only be a good thing from a safety point of view.

Gabriel

[JAM]

I have the feeling that after F1 GP USA 2005 the people from FIA never saw Michelin brands with the same eyes... just a feeling.

[koko0703]

Whether Pirellli or BFGoodrich wins the bid for being a solo supplier for WRC, it will be level field either way, but I'm surprized to see FIA picked Pirelli over BFGoodrich. I mean BFGoodrich already supplies all works teams, so why not continue??? But on the other hand, Pirelli has a trandition of rallying and may well be a excellent tire supplier although they are struggling against Michelin/BFG in recent years. In fact the outcome might have been different if it was Michelin instead of BFGoodrich.....

And that's true, Suzuki can start with Pirelli this year to gain more experience/data on the tyre-car combination.

[GigiGalliNo1]

Weren't Pirelli's good in the rain? Panizzi-206WRC?

[jparker]

I oppose and strongly disagree with FIA's decision. If we follow this logic of action, why do we have different cars then? Why WRC event should be decided by car brand? Why not only driver?
If there are any concerns about tire giving unfair advantage of one driver over another, let's make some kind of brand rotation per team, or random selection of tire brand before each event? This way we can see the real story about who makes better tires, otherwise (as a consumer) how do I know who makes better tires if there is no competition?

Also, I have a question. Does anyone know how the tires are currently delivered to each team? What insures that all tires are the same for all teams?

[WRCfan]

Unfortunately our beloved sport is controlled by monkey's. This is the reason we see bu!!$hit where co-drivers names are removed from cars, control tyres, no night stages, and all the other stupid little things that have been brought in by the toy poodle we know as Max Mosley and his fluffy friends.

[Erki]

Let's just be happy that Goodyear didn't win. :)

[DonJippo]

I have the feeling that after F1 GP USA 2005 the people from FIA never saw Michelin brands with the same eyes... just a feeling.

I know the feeling.... :rolleyes:

[janneppi]

I know the feeling.... :rolleyes:
Is it a loving feeling? :p :

I don't mind a control tyre, less tyre developement costs, perhaps less testing, harder compounds, etc...
It could give privateers more chances if they don't need as many tyres per rally. Big teams benefit too, they can hire several pairs PR boobies for the money previously spent on silly rubber thingies.

I just hope Pirelli doesn't copy Bridgestones red tyre idea, "Mister Grönholm, you must drive at least one stage in Norway with slicks", it's good for business.

[Daniel]

Weren't Pirelli's good in the rain? Panizzi-206WRC?
Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

[GigiGalliNo1]

Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

something rather

[Daniel]

Peugeot only ever ran Michelin's on the 206 in it's works career.

[animrallye]

Weren't Pirelli's good in the rain? Panizzi-206WRC?
:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:

[GigiGalliNo1]

my mistake! just this once :p

[Daniel]

my mistake! just this once :p
And what about the last 1,175 times that you've posted incorrect information? :confused:

[Tomski]

It'll be interesting to see how much effect this decision has on this years WRC.

Will Michelin / BF Goodrich take their bat & ball home and loose interest?

How much development work, if any will they now be doing?

[animrallye]

Official press release from BF Goodrich

The FIA, in the tire supply bidding process for 2008, 2009 and 2010 WRC seasons, did not choose the BFGoodrich brand proposals and selected Pirelli as to supply the control tyre from next year.

"We demonstrated during the 2006 championship that the BFGoodrich tires were the best," stated BFGoodrich Rally Competition Director Mr. F. Henry-Biabaud. "Two World Champion titles crowned these successes. In 2007, not a single competitor in the tire industry wished to officially oppose the BFGoodrich brand."

"The financial and technical efforts we deployed for the past two seasons have therefore not been acknowledged, which is all the more regrettable since we know that today's and tomorrow's WRC car manufacturers unanimously supported our proposal."

"The BFGoodrich brand was therefore eliminated on the basis of criteria unknown to us but obviously unrelated to sports. For the time being, we take note of this decision."

[Daniel]

Good work Michelin :up:

I hate it when companies/teams just lay down and take it. Michelin has shown their thoughts on the matter at least. I suspect Michelin will have their revenge in the end in some way anyway. I hope Michelin ruin the next event by not showing up with tyre trucks. That would totally **** the FIA over.

[N]

They have a contract and it would be stupid not to show up on the next event.

I think a lot of people have missed the point. They aren't gonna run the same tyres as they have up until now. The whole point is to come out with a new range of tyres which won't perform as well, but will last longer.

Pirelli won the contract cause it was cheaper. Manufacturers always complain about costs and now they can save money. I do realize that teams might initally have to do a lot of testing, but hey, it's not hard and in the end, everyone will be on the same tyres, so I don't see what the big fuss is about.

Maybe BF Goodrich can get contract for JWRC?

[jonkka]

I oppose and strongly disagree with FIA's decision. If we follow this logic of action, why do we have different cars then? Why WRC event should be decided by car brand? Why not only driver?

Note that this decision is just logical conclusion, the original decision to move to control tyre was taken already last year. Nevertheless, I do share your feelings, I think this removes one factor of competition. By continuing that, what competition will there be left soon?

Admittedly, there are good things too, less testing and thus lower costs being the most obvious one.


Also, I have a question. (snip) What insures that all tires are the same for all teams?

Absolutely nothing. In theory, it is entirely possible that BFG produces slightly better tyres for Citroen team, for example. I don't say that it is so, only that there is no rule that such behaviour would break. In fact, if you think that Prodrive-manufactured 4WD system on Skoda was as good as the one they used Impreza, think again.

[MikeD]

Good work Michelin :up:

I hate it when companies/teams just lay down and take it. Michelin has shown their thoughts on the matter at least. I suspect Michelin will have their revenge in the end in some way anyway. I hope Michelin ruin the next event by not showing up with tyre trucks. That would totally **** the FIA over.

Do you really mean that? Are you aware of the image consequenses that Michelin suffered after thier pathetic way of handeling the F1 race at Indianapolis? If they showed up without trucks they would be thrown out of every FIA championship immediately. That would prevent Michelin from entering a FIA championship ever again. And do you think such an action would go unnoticed at FIM and other motorsport organisers? They will not keep or welcome a tyre supplier with a tendency to act like rebels.

In the link below Michelin says that the reason for BF Goodrich to be replaced must be political. I don't know if they are right, but I am more than happy to see them out of every motorsport championship after what they did at Indy in 2005!

Welcome back Pirelli!

http://www.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/070228101121.shtml

[MikeD]

idiotism... Bridgestone was worse than Michelin, but FIA chose them. Now, Pirelli i obviously worse than BFGoodrich, and FIA still shoses them!!! What a farce!

Not true,

From 2001 to 2006 when both tyre brands were in F1, Bridgestone won 4 constructor championships and 4 driver championships. Michelin won 2 each!

[Daniel]

They have a contract and it would be stupid not to show up on the next event.

I think a lot of people have missed the point. They aren't gonna run the same tyres as they have up until now. The whole point is to come out with a new range of tyres which won't perform as well, but will last longer.

Pirelli won the contract cause it was cheaper. Manufacturers always complain about costs and now they can save money. I do realize that teams might initally have to do a lot of testing, but hey, it's not hard and in the end, everyone will be on the same tyres, so I don't see what the big fuss is about.

Maybe BF Goodrich can get contract for JWRC?
Michelin are big enough not to give two hoots about a contract. The teams and everyone else are smart enough to know what's going on and who's causing problems here.....

[Daniel]

Do you really mean that? Are you aware of the image consequenses that Michelin suffered after thier pathetic way of handeling the F1 race at Indianapolis? If they showed up without trucks they would be thrown out of every FIA championship immediately. That would prevent Michelin from entering a FIA championship ever again. And do you think such an action would go unnoticed at FIM and other motorsport organisers? They will not keep or welcome a tyre supplier with a tendency to act like rebels.

In the link below Michelin says that the reason for BF Goodrich to be replaced must be political. I don't know if they are right, but I am more than happy to see them out of every motorsport championship after what they did at Indy in 2005!

Welcome back Pirelli!

http://www.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/070228101121.shtml
You think in this day and age with the EU as it is the FIA would be allowed to do that? Think again!

[Daniel]

P.S I think having dead drivers due to defective tyres would have been far worse for Michelin than what happened.

[MikeD]

You think in this day and age with the EU as it is the FIA would be allowed to do that? Think again!

Hmmmm and you don't think that EU would have a problem with a breach of contract from Michelin (by not showing up). You think again ;)

PS: "Dead drivers" was not the only alternative for Michelin at Indy in 2005!

[WRC2006]

Do you really mean that? Are you aware of the image consequenses that Michelin suffered after thier pathetic way of handeling the F1 race at Indianapolis? ......... but I am more than happy to see them out of every motorsport championship after what they did at Indy in 2005!




I do understand your point. For you the life of the drivers doesn't matter to you.

If Michelin accepted his mistake, in saying that they are sorry the tyres they have can put at risk the life of the drivers, do you blame them? Because they have been honest? Because they prefered the security of drivers than making money or rubish their brand and image?!

Michelin in the same day tried to bring new tires from France (If not mistaken) to change them with the wrong ones, but the FIA refused this proposition. Who to blame? Michelin or FIA?

For me both were wrong. Michelin with wrong tyres in the race (unless stupid people who never make a mistake). The FIA to blame as well because they refused the second option from Michelin even just to race for the public. I agree it was against the F1 regulations, but all regulations are made by people and exception does exist as well.

And now you welcome Pirelli with the poor result they showed last 2 years in WRC?! Try to check record only for the last season and compare the performance of the cars with Pirelli and the cars with Michelin and see who were right and deserve to win the bid?

But above all those things, I agree with one driver who said one day that : "The F1 is totally business 7/7 and 24/24 and it is only 2 hours on sunday where it is a sport."

The same thing is happening in WRC now. Cars with the same tyres, and soon with the same engine capacity, geir box, etc (S2000). So now, where is the competition?

[MikeD]

I do understand your point. For you the life of the drivers doesn't matter to you.

Ohhhh please, stop writing such crap. I have said nothing like that, and don't you dare write that about me again! Understand?

When FIA, Michelin, Bridgestone og the team-managers met, all - except Michelin - agreed that the Michelin drivers should either drive through a chicane - or with a speed-limiter to prevent more Michelin tyres from exiting the tyre-rim going through the banked corner on the track. But Michelin would not agree unless the race was changed to a non-scoring event - or making sure the Bridgestone drivers were to go through the chicane aswell.
So Michelins reply to their poor tyres were to punish Bridgestone for producing a tyre that didn't break. How do you think Michelin would have replied to such a stupid proposal had it been Bridgestone having the poor tyres?

It's poor sportsmanship, it poor ethics and that's why it's fully justified if FIA has denied Michelin a new contract in WRC (or in anyother FIA championship for that matter)



Michelin in the same day tried to bring new tires from France (If not mistaken) to change them with the wrong ones, but the FIA refused this proposition. Who to blame? Michelin or FIA?

That's not true (again). Michelin was indeed allowed to test those tyres, but when FIA asked Michelin if they could garantie that their new set of tyres wouldn't exit the rim through the banked corner, Michelin hesitated. They later send a message to FIA that they couldn't find the root of the problem and therefor they would tell the F1 teams that they would not be allowed to race on Michelins.


And now you welcome Pirelli with the poor result they showed last 2 years in WRC?!

I welcome any tyre supplier to WRC - excepts Michelin/BFG. And Pirelli might not have been the best of tyres in the last couple of years, but they have proved previously that they have build winning tyres.

[SubaruNorway]

Some comercial is better than nothing right, What championships are Micheling/BFGdoing at the moment. I gues the new gravel tyres will be a developtment of the old safari tyre don't remember if they used mouse at the time maybe some knowns when the mouse came.

http://www.crash.net/news_view~cid~4~id~143840~pid~0.htm

[RALLY TEAM GB]

Maybe subaru should hire one weatherman incsae if the new car is crap too, now they cant blame on the tyres anymore, crap weatherman would be a good excuse.

how about Michael Fish

[jonkka]

Please, discuss circuit circus in F1 forums. Passing references are OK but remember that this is WRC forum. Thank you.

[jonkka]

maybe some knowns when the mouse came.

I think it was Acropolis 1987 for Michelin with Pirelli a year or two later.

[MikeD]

Please, discuss circuit circus in F1 forums. Passing references are OK but remember that this is WRC forum. Thank you.

Point taken,

but this situation with Pirelli getting the contract, is very much related to THAT episode at Indy. At least that's what Michelin/BFG claims.

[Daniel]

Hmmmm and you don't think that EU would have a problem with a breach of contract from Michelin (by not showing up). You think again ;)

PS: "Dead drivers" was not the only alternative for Michelin at Indy in 2005!
Michelin aren't the ones being unfair. The FIA are the ones that started it.

Mike as for your ramblings on Michelin in F1 they are so far of the mark it's not funny.

[MikeD]

Michelin aren't the ones being unfair. The FIA are the ones that started it.

Mike as for your ramblings on Michelin in F1 they are so far of the mark it's not funny.

Pfffff,

Look who's talking!

i work in GP2, and have several connections in the Bridgestone camp. I know a lot more than most about what went on at Indy than you do!

But please, enligthen me on your lack of knowledge on the subject. Please make me laugh!

[FrankenSchwinn]

i have several connections in the Bridgestone camp.

you've explained yourself right there buddy. now leave that F1 crap alone. it's been long enough, there's a difference between F1 and the WRC like a former member of this fine forum named Sir Hobbes once said: "F1 is going around in circles, even if it is squiggly circles!"

i dont understand why you all think that there will be less testing all the sudden. they still need to test the cars according to the tires. they will still need to test all the tires and the set ups. i really do not think that it's the testing that will change but the price manufacturers are paying for tires. each wrc tire is manufactured months in advance by hand and per driver per team (according to what they order). the same compounds and manufacturing technics are used. there is nothing technically different between any tire (according to Dupasquier's daughter). if it were me, i would have asked the manufacturers to decide on which company should provide tires after tire companies were to submit a proposal.

[WRC2006]

Ohhhh please, stop writing such crap. I have said nothing like that, and don't you dare write that about me again! Understand.

What if I don't understand? Better to turn your tongue 7 times before to talk.

[COD]

The FIA decision must have a lot to do with Pirellis young driver development scheme. They are offering young up and coming drivers chanches to get to WRC-level in few years. I think Michelin was only prepared to deliver tyres, Pirellis is doing more. Simple right? So is it really bad for the sport as many of you here seem to suggest? I don't think so

[Daniel]

Pfffff,

Look who's talking!

i work in GP2, and have several connections in the Bridgestone camp. I know a lot more than most about what went on at Indy than you do!

But please, enligthen me on your lack of knowledge on the subject. Please make me laugh!
Ah yes. Bridgestone. A company I'm sure who want Michelin to be dealt with fairly in all ways by the FIA. :rotflmao: Think about where you get your information from before you put it forward as being law

[DonJippo]

i work in GP2, and have several connections in the Bridgestone camp. I know a lot more than most about what went on at Indy than you do!

Anyone who was not present in Indy has second hand information about what went on there regardless of their connections...

[SubaruNorway]

Q & A with Pirelli's Paul Hembery

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/56973

[amberie]

How about this from autosport.com:

"From next year's Monte Carlo Rally onwards, only one asphalt tyre will be produced and used for both wet and dry conditions."

[koko0703]

The FIA decision must have a lot to do with Pirellis young driver development scheme. They are offering young up and coming drivers chanches to get to WRC-level in few years. I think Michelin was only prepared to deliver tyres, Pirellis is doing more. Simple right? So is it really bad for the sport as many of you here seem to suggest? I don't think so

That's good point! In fact Galli is there simply because of Pirelli after Mitsubishi left. As far as I know, I've never seen Michelin/BFG entering a driver in WRC rally.

[jparker]

How about this from autosport.com:

"From next year's Monte Carlo Rally onwards, only one asphalt tyre will be produced and used for both wet and dry conditions."

Yeah right. How about only one set of non-inflatable solid hard rubber tires per season allowed?
Well, I'm disappointed, very disappointed. I can't see any good coming out of all this.

[jparker]

That's good point! In fact Galli is there simply because of Pirelli after Mitsubishi left. As far as I know, I've never seen Michelin/BFG entering a driver in WRC rally.

Why should they? What and where somebody spends their money is their own business. You made it sounds like Pirelli are charitable organization, but that's not the case. They are doing it for their own benefits.

[bowler]

have a look at the FIA website, and you can see the tender documents that all the tyre suppliers had to submit.

It tells about testing, and numbers of tyres.

No matter whether the tyre supplier is pirelli, BFG or anyone else, all the cars will now compete on one tyre, so it doesn't matter the quality.

The issues of what happened in F1 may or may not have had an effect on who wins the tender, but I don't think so.

There will be a schedule, and Pirelli will have come out with the best, that is all. Nice to have conspiracy theories,makes for good rumours, but I think the truth is much simpler.

[Karukera]

I'm afraid unrelated F1 posts + hypothetical youngster's policy (as if the FIA actually cared for the youngsters) + schedule or plot aren't the way it was decided.

Pirelli simply decided to inject money in FIA's pockets as they were doing with Subaru, Mitsu, Peugeot...

Everybody knows Michelin always refused to do so.

So it's just a matter of willing and marketing issues by both tires companies.

Michelin said they took point of the FIA's decision because they already knew Pirelli would get the deal due to their own strict policy.

Now we can either blame the system and/or Michelin.

By the way, standardization is boring !

[A.F.F.]

But the cars have tyres next years, right ??

What's all the fuzz? :confused:

[WRC2006]

I'm afraid unrelated F1 posts + hypothetical youngster's policy (as if the FIA actually cared for the youngsters) + schedule or plot aren't the way it was decided.

Pirelli simply decided to inject money in FIA's pockets as they were doing with Subaru, Mitsu, Peugeot...

Everybody knows Michelin always refused to do so.

So it's just a matter of willing and marketing issues by both tires companies.

Michelin said they took point of the FIA's decision because they already knew Pirelli would get the deal due to their own strict policy.

Now we can either blame the system and/or Michelin.

By the way, standardization is boring !

I agree with you, Pirelli has the policy to inject money and ask everyboy to shurt up his mouth. They did with Peugeot and with Subaru particuraly with Petter Solberg to shut up his mouth blaming the crap tyres.

How about this link : http://www.rally-live.com/wrc/en/accueil/news2.shtml

[cut the b.s.]

have a look at the FIA website, and you can see the tender documents that all the tyre suppliers had to submit.

It tells about testing, and numbers of tyres.

No matter whether the tyre supplier is pirelli, BFG or anyone else, all the cars will now compete on one tyre, so it doesn't matter the quality.

The issues of what happened in F1 may or may not have had an effect on who wins the tender, but I don't think so.

There will be a schedule, and Pirelli will have come out with the best, that is all. Nice to have conspiracy theories,makes for good rumours, but I think the truth is much simpler.

Good to see some sense posted in this thread, and for all those who worry about 'standardization' relax, the top teams are already on the same tyre, if it reduces costs and if we see tougher hard wearing tyres(no mouse so they will need to try and do this) it may reduce the speed fractionally but it should not affect the spectacle. I just hope that the construction is got right for rougher rallys and we dont see events decided by punctures as seemed so common last year in JWRC

[jonkka]

But the cars have tyres next years, right ??

What's all the fuzz? :confused:

Best comment so far!

[[WRCRR]]

Ok, some may argue that for the competitive aspect of WRC it is better that there is only a single tyre manufacturer who is supplying all. But - looking at other aspects, standardization plain and simply - sucks.

I know there will be tyres on all cars next year like A.F.F. humorously mentioned, but still I dont like this kind of route what leads to more simple type of top level championship. These kind of moves are good in lower categories, but in the top level there should ALWAYS be the possibility to compete with the best in all aspects of the sport - whether tires, cars, seat belts, gearboxes, spark plugs - you name it.

If somebody makes better tyre than somebody else - they deserve the success they get...it might not always be good for tightly fought rallies, but it would certainly be the most progressive way.

Next year all will be running with Pirelli tyres...would it be good if some year all would be running with Citroën cars?

[JAM]

The discussion goes on the usual BS from the ones that live in the sky and far from the earth reality.

What's WRC problem right know? MONEY, the LACK OF MONEY. If you have a one tyre supplier system you will need to spend less money. One tyre suplier will not kill the competition neither the rallying.

Rallying needs costs cutting measures and the one tyre suplier is a good option to help that. We are waiting for more measures to help the WRC and to create conditions to have more manufacturers and teams, because only this way will be possible to do WRC strong. The ones who defend the WRC as a pinacle of technology should have a cold bath the open the eyes and put the feet on the ground. On the ground the reallity is different than seing fro the sky.

Wake up while is time... Less MONEY spent is what we need. The pinacles of technology costs a lot of money and ther is no money. Is not dificul to see, isn't it?

[L5->R5/CR]

The discussion goes on the usual BS from the ones that live in the sky and far from the earth reality.

What's WRC problem right know? MONEY, the LACK OF MONEY. If you have a one tyre supplier system you will need to spend less money. One tyre suplier will not kill the competition neither the rallying.

Rallying needs costs cutting measures and the one tyre suplier is a good option to help that. We are waiting for more measures to help the WRC and to create conditions to have more manufacturers and teams, because only this way will be possible to do WRC strong. The ones who defend the WRC as a pinacle of technology should have a cold bath the open the eyes and put the feet on the ground. On the ground the reallity is different than seing fro the sky.

Wake up while is time... Less MONEY spent is what we need. The pinacles of technology costs a lot of money and ther is no money. Is not dificul to see, isn't it?


JAM,

aside from testing, how much do the teams have to spend with regards to tires? I was under the, perhaps mistaken, impression, that the tire manufacturers provided the tires in the form of sponsorship in exchange for being included on the vehicle.

So if the only expense teams are bearing is the testing expense, then how will limiting the supply of tires (which means now for the next year or two, tire testing will be very important so car set up can be developed and adjusted to the tires which will be totally different) cut costs.

A tight limit on testing, or tire testing, would likely have resulted in similiar expense reduction, unless of course there is more to tire supply costs for teams than I understand. Honestly, I was under the impression that minus the testing the tire companies bore the brunt of the costs of tires, and the need to do even more testing with the next batch of tires, will increase expenses for teams for the next 18-24 months. I just see this is one of those long term reduction ideas from the FIA that increase the short term expenses and technological barriers to entry.

If teams bear some of the costs of the tires beyond testing then my argument is null and void...

[Captain VXR]

I agree with you, Pirelli has the policy to inject money and ask everyboy to shurt up his mouth. They did with Peugeot and with Subaru particuraly with Petter Solberg to shut up his mouth blaming the crap tyres.

How about this link : http://www.rally-live.com/wrc/en/accueil/news2.shtml

They just sound like sore loosers to me

[JAM]

JAM,

aside from testing, how much do the teams have to spend with regards to tires? I was under the, perhaps mistaken, impression, that the tire manufacturers provided the tires in the form of sponsorship in exchange for being included on the vehicle.

So if the only expense teams are bearing is the testing expense, then how will limiting the supply of tires (which means now for the next year or two, tire testing will be very important so car set up can be developed and adjusted to the tires which will be totally different) cut costs.

A tight limit on testing, or tire testing, would likely have resulted in similiar expense reduction, unless of course there is more to tire supply costs for teams than I understand. Honestly, I was under the impression that minus the testing the tire companies bore the brunt of the costs of tires, and the need to do even more testing with the next batch of tires, will increase expenses for teams for the next 18-24 months. I just see this is one of those long term reduction ideas from the FIA that increase the short term expenses and technological barriers to entry.

If teams bear some of the costs of the tires beyond testing then my argument is null and void...

I don't know exactly how many tests are done because the tyres, but i believe that are many days a year. With standard tyres there is less a thing to test and develop, and the money saved by the tyre manufacturer could be a sponsor to the championship. If things were well done, then the one tyre suplier could have a lot of money saved in many areas. But, as i said, IF the things...

I'm totally in favour of "cost reduction", even if we must have less development. I don't like the price of rallying.... very high, very very high even to manufacturers. If os not possible to increase the visibility of the WRC under the Media, then lets make the WRC cheaper, unless one day neither official neither private teams.

[FrankenSchwinn]

I don't know exactly how many tests are done because the tyres, but i believe that are many days a year. With standard tyres there is less a thing to test and develop, and the money saved by the tyre manufacturer could be a sponsor to the championship. If things were well done, then the one tyre suplier could have a lot of money saved in many areas. But, as i said, IF the things...

I'm totally in favour of "cost reduction", even if we must have less development. I don't like the price of rallying.... very high, very very high even to manufacturers. If os not possible to increase the visibility of the WRC under the Media, then lets make the WRC cheaper, unless one day neither official neither private teams.

i'm sorry you have to pay so much money to the WRC jam. but you know teams have a restricted amount of days testing. so, they have to test a lot of things with these days and they HAVE to test the car's reactions to what-ever tire you put on and under different conditions. except for when a tire manufacturer puts a new type of tire out, i do not see how having a controled tire manu would decrease testing costs. show me, show me the money.... that the teams will save. in the end, i think the single tire thing was just for "leveling" the competition and getting rid of as much french stuff as possible.

[L5->R5/CR]

i'm sorry you have to pay so much money to the WRC jam. but you know teams have a restricted amount of days testing. so, they have to test a lot of things with these days and they HAVE to test the car's reactions to what-ever tire you put on and under different conditions. except for when a tire manufacturer puts a new type of tire out, i do not see how having a controled tire manu would decrease testing costs. show me, show me the money.... that the teams will save. in the end, i think the single tire thing was just for "leveling" the competition and getting rid of as much french stuff as possible.


I more or less agree with FrankenSchwinn.

Teams will now be forced to try to do more testing, and more development of the car to the tires since the tires can't be developed to the surface and car. I think this will cost teams more for the next year or two, and will only start saving the teams as the supplier contract goes up for re-bid, and then the whole thing could start all over.

Teams like Ford, with its own testing facilities on site (I believe other teams have private testing facilities but I can't remember for certain) will be doing perhaps even more testing since the testing limits I believe only apply to offsite tests that must be within Europe...

[jparker]

The discussion goes on the usual BS from the ones that live in the sky and far from the earth reality.

What's WRC problem right know? MONEY, the LACK OF MONEY. If you have a one tyre supplier system you will need to spend less money. One tyre suplier will not kill the competition neither the rallying.

Rallying needs costs cutting measures and the one tyre suplier is a good option to help that. We are waiting for more measures to help the WRC and to create conditions to have more manufacturers and teams, because only this way will be possible to do WRC strong. The ones who defend the WRC as a pinacle of technology should have a cold bath the open the eyes and put the feet on the ground. On the ground the reallity is different than seing fro the sky.

Wake up while is time... Less MONEY spent is what we need. The pinacles of technology costs a lot of money and ther is no money. Is not dificul to see, isn't it?

JAM, you can repeat "LACK OF MONEY" 10 times per post, uppercase, bold, whatever, but it still not going to be true. If cost is an issue, why do we have gearboxes costing almost 1/2 of the WRC car? Now that's a lots of tires I'm telling you.
Also, now that we have S2000 whoever doesn't have money to run WRC program is welcome there.

[jparker]

i'm sorry you have to pay so much money to the WRC jam. but you know teams have a restricted amount of days testing. so, they have to test a lot of things with these days and they HAVE to test the car's reactions to what-ever tire you put on and under different conditions. except for when a tire manufacturer puts a new type of tire out, i do not see how having a controled tire manu would decrease testing costs. show me, show me the money.... that the teams will save. in the end, i think the single tire thing was just for "leveling" the competition and getting rid of as much french stuff as possible.

Yep, you nailed it right in the middle. The old saying "If you can't beat them, destroy them". Leveling is bad, but I guess that's the only way for Ford and Finns to come back on top.

[WRC2006]

Maybe it is me who is wrong, but I don't understand this issue about cost cutting while teams will be obligead to test the maximum possible (with test limit) their machines to find tyres which are comfortable with them?

I agree WRC is expensive and reducing the costs would be a good thing to everybody involved in WRC. Above this I have one question:

Are manufacturers rallying just because of the pleasure of the sport and give show to the public? Or in rallying they are doing business (marketing) in advertising their cars?

If yes why are they mourning about the cost? Why not cut totally the costs and advertise theirs cars on the TV where the cost is cheaper than in WRC and leave those who are capable to continue with the Rally?

Rally is my passion and I would love to follow it for ever, but one tyre supplier is really a joke whatever could be the reason. Why not the FIA could set up a standard tyre (or basic tyre) then leave Michelin and Pirelli develop it for their customers?

Or impose a maximum price for the tyres to every manufacturer and in this case every tyre supplier will design his tyre according to the maximum price they can charge?

Pirelli will have to increase his opretaing costs : new staff, new material, wages, more working hours (to produce more tyres than before), and all the charges related on transport, food, hotels, for its staff during the rally events, etc.

Yes they will be making money in the same time, how long it will take to cover or those costs and start enjoying profit of this business? Imagine if it happens and some manufacturers withdrawl their teams (even if they are some rumoured to enter in 2008) following different reasons? Who will be under pressure then?

Yeah, for me it is like a shift of costs from one way to another way even if it looks like a good business for Pirelli and good policy for FIA in trying to cutt costs for the sport.

[JAM]

If you have a bigger variety of tyres, thens we have two things:

Teams must test more, the tyre is always different and everything needs to be tested. Almost every rally teams need to find new solutions not only for the surface but also for the tyre compound, and they need to use various compounds on tests to reach a solution. More work more money spent.

The tyre manufacturer will have to be always developing new products, new tyres and new solutions, a full year with the reserach labs working full and a year with the production making a lot of different tyres. This costs more money than less development and a standard product being made on a daily basis. All of this is economy to tyre manufacturer. And in terms of image, i think is better a sticker in 20 cars by less money in developing than a sticker in 10 cars with more development. Nowadays the sport research is not so important as some years ago, now tyre manufacturers have a lot of ways to develop and test. Still is important, but so important.

About the overall costs, is true that a gearbox / transmission costs almost half of a car, but when a standard and economic gearbox will be imposed then a lot of peole will argue that are limiting development...

[Lousada]

The more you limit, the more it costs to find a little extra over your competitor. With the tyrewar, part of these costs were channeled to the tyremanufacturer. Now everyone has the same tyre, so it becomes even harder and more expensive to find that little extra.

[WRC2006]

If you have a bigger variety of tyres, thens we have two things:

Teams must test more, the tyre is always different and everything needs to be tested. Almost every rally teams need to find new solutions not only for the surface but also for the tyre compound, and they need to use various compounds on tests to reach a solution. More work more money spent.

The tyre manufacturer will have to be always developing new products, new tyres and new solutions, a full year with the reserach labs working full and a year with the production making a lot of different tyres. This costs more money than less development and a standard product being made on a daily basis. All of this is economy to tyre manufacturer. And in terms of image, i think is better a sticker in 20 cars by less money in developing than a sticker in 10 cars with more development. Nowadays the sport research is not so important as some years ago, now tyre manufacturers have a lot of ways to develop and test. Still is important, but so important.

About the overall costs, is true that a gearbox / transmission costs almost half of a car, but when a standard and economic gearbox will be imposed then a lot of peole will argue that are limiting development...

Yeah you are right and I agree with what you are saying. But If I understand you well, it is like nowadays we sacrifie the development ?

So if it is like that and the development can be done using the new technology why rallying then?

[WRC2006]

I am not a technician or engineer, but there is something I don't understand?

Subaru in this time is struggling with the weight with his car and it was reported that they new car will have less weight than the old one. Don't you think that the new car failed to adapt on the new tires (Michelin)? Even the Impreza 06 failed to adapt with the tyres. Or it is Petter who always clamed for bad tyres choice?

Every manufacturer will struggle to redesign the new chassis, body, spoil etc based on the new tyres they have to use. Don't you think that this will increase the costs for them?

[bowler]

JAM,

aside from testing, how much do the teams have to spend with regards to tires? I was under the, perhaps mistaken, impression, that the tire manufacturers provided the tires in the form of sponsorship in exchange for being included on the vehicle.

So if the only expense teams are bearing is the testing expense, then how will limiting the supply of tires (which means now for the next year or two, tire testing will be very important so car set up can be developed and adjusted to the tires which will be totally different) cut costs.

A tight limit on testing, or tire testing, would likely have resulted in similiar expense reduction, unless of course there is more to tire supply costs for teams than I understand. Honestly, I was under the impression that minus the testing the tire companies bore the brunt of the costs of tires, and the need to do even more testing with the next batch of tires, will increase expenses for teams for the next 18-24 months. I just see this is one of those long term reduction ideas from the FIA that increase the short term expenses and technological barriers to entry.

If teams bear some of the costs of the tires beyond testing then my argument is null and void...

your argument is null and void

[bowler]

Teams will now be forced to try to do more testing, and more development of the car to the tires since the tires can't be developed to the surface and car. I think this will cost teams more for the next year or two, and will only start saving the teams as the supplier contract goes up for re-bid, and then the whole thing could start all over.

T

numbers of tyres for testing are limited, so testing is limited.

[jparker]

My final post under this thread will be as follows.
If you don't have the desire to succeed, no one (even FIA) can help you succeed. It's all 100% determination and passion to be on top at all cost. As long as you keep it this way, you always win. If you wait for somebody to give you a hand, ........ well you are f***d up.
I’m sure Michelin will find other ways to release their potential.

[rwssport]

reducing sliding = reducing the show

What sliding -- even on gravel just now the cars are driven as if on rails....

[JAM]

The more you limit, the more it costs to find a little extra over your competitor. With the tyrewar, part of these costs were channeled to the tyremanufacturer. Now everyone has the same tyre, so it becomes even harder and more expensive to find that little extra.

In 2005 only Subaru and Peugeot had Pirelli, the other four had Michelin. In 2006 only Subaru had Pirelli, the other team had BfGoodrich. In 2007 everybody uses BFGoodrich. Isn't the same tyres to everyone? In 2008 you'll have the same tyres by law not by choice. Where is the big difference?

[bowler]

In 2005 only Subaru and Peugeot had Pirelli, the other four had Michelin. In 2006 only Subaru had Pirelli, the other team had BfGoodrich. In 2007 everybody uses BFGoodrich. Isn't the same tyres to everyone? In 2008 you'll have the same tyres by law not by choice. Where is the big difference?

2007 is one supplier, but not the same tyres.

[JAM]

Yeah you are right and I agree with what you are saying. But If I understand you well, it is like nowadays we sacrifie the development ?

So if it is like that and the development can be done using the new technology why rallying then?

Do you really think that manufacturers are on WRC by the results of developping? Then i think that GM don't have good products, they aren't on rallying neither track racing that means that they can't develope new things.

Manufacturers are in Motorsport because they think that it could be positive to his image near the public. Is a question of promotion and inrease sells, but only possible if in their managemente someone has some kind of sympaty by motorsport, otherwise how to explain the presence of Toyota on F1? The biggest budget and the under the average results.

[A.F.F.]

Leveling is bad, but I guess that's the only way for Ford and Finns to come back on top.


:rolleyes:

[Lousada]

In 2005 only Subaru and Peugeot had Pirelli, the other four had Michelin. In 2006 only Subaru had Pirelli, the other team had BfGoodrich. In 2007 everybody uses BFGoodrich. Isn't the same tyres to everyone? In 2008 you'll have the same tyres by law not by choice. Where is the big difference?

You assume it's the same tyre for everyone. This doesn't mean something negative. For example BFGoodrich could supply tyres that suit the Subaru better and supply tyres that work better on Citroen. Different cars, different wear and different priorities the manufacuters set. With the new contract every car has to adapt to the same tyre.

Also there are many different tyres in Group N. Correct me if I'm mistaken but the reports say the tyre tender is for every 4x4 rallycar, so they have to switch too.

[SubaruNorway]

This goes only for the guys that are entered in WRC and PWRC right

[JAM]

This goes only for the guys that are entered in WRC and PWRC right

It will now enter into a formal contract to supply tyres in all events of the Championship to all competitors with a four-wheel drive rally car (as defined in the International Sporting Code).


Source: http://www.fia.com

[DonJippo]

This goes only for the guys that are entered in WRC and PWRC right

FIA press release says...

Pirelli has won the tender to be the official tyre supplier to the 2008, 2009 and 2010 FIA World Rally Championships. It will now enter into a formal contract to supply tyres in all events of the Championship to all competitors with a four-wheel drive rally car (as defined in the International Sporting Code).


to me it looks like it is as you say WRC & PWRC drivers in Championships...but I do hope that it does mean ALL competitors in WRC & PWRC in events...

[DonJippo]

getting rid of as much french stuff as possible.


Yep, you nailed it right in the middle. The old saying "If you can't beat them, destroy them". Leveling is bad, but I guess that's the only way for Ford and Finns to come back on top.

:rotflmao: FRM works in mysterious ways... :bandit:

[jparker]

:rotflmao: FRM works in mysterious ways... :bandit:

You know better DonJippo, and I can feel it in your post. It hurts, doesn't it

[Brother John]

i think the single tire thing was just for "leveling" the competition and getting rid of as much french stuff as possible.

Do you mean get rid of Citroën also? :laugh: ;)

[DonJippo]

You know better DonJippo, and I can feel it in your post. It hurts, doesn't it

Only thing that hurts is my stomach as I'm laughing so much :D

[jparker]

Only thing that hurts is my stomach as I'm laughing so much :D
To bad we can't see that ;)

[FrankenSchwinn]

FRM works in mysterious ways...

we will find other ways :angryfire :.... oh yes we will find other ways :devil: ..... the TRUE FRM will make the fakes pay for this!!!!!! misterious bears :monster: with large rocks are not to be only found in Japan :ninja: , but all over the world!!!!







me: :angel:

[FrankenSchwinn]

Do you mean get rid of Citroën also? :laugh: ;)

no, but make rules to restrict them.

[L5->R5/CR]

your argument is null and void



Good to atleast learn something.

[bowler]

to me it looks like it is as you say WRC & PWRC drivers in Championships...but I do hope that it does mean ALL competitors in WRC & PWRC in events...

I read it as being for WRC and PWRC competitors.

It would be a burden on low end competitors to bind them into something for one WRC event, which did not then apply on their national events.

I see it as setting a level playing field across FIA series competitors.

I am sure it will be clarified.

[Helstar]

Uhm... I'm seeing more people starting to act like in the F1 forum, too bad.

My only view about all of this: let's wait for the next year. One year, before making final judgement and be able to say if it is a good choose or not.
All this "Pirelli good - Pirelli bad !", "Costs cut - More costs !", "More/less punctures sliding" whatever etc. will get clear. Until now I'm only seeing flames and it's not good to read if you ask me.

[jparker]

Uhm... I'm seeing more people starting to act like in the F1 forum, too bad.

My only view about all of this: let's wait for the next year. One year, before making final judgement and be able to say if it is a good choose or not.
All this "Pirelli good - Pirelli bad !", "Costs cut - More costs !", "More/less punctures sliding" whatever etc. will get clear. Until now I'm only seeing flames and it's not good to read if you ask me.

Helstar, sorry to jump back on that topic, but just want to clerify one more thing (in case your post applies to me as well).
We don't have to wait 1 year because it's not about the quality of tyres, it's not about good or bad desision that is for the WRC, for the team, cost and and so on. It's true that there are beneits in this regards.
It's more about how it's done.
I do beleive that the fundamentals of the motorsports is copetition of proving who can make better product. Supporting one brand by restricting other is wrong, no matter how you put it. And in general, you don't solve one problem by creating others. That's dirty business.

[jparker]

Apparently, because of all the problems that the teams have had with Sadev gearboxes, FIA is going to allow Xtrac and Ricardo transmissions as well as Sadev.

Teams can choose which ones they want - all at same maximum price.

Hmm, double standards? I think so ........

[Brother John]

Uhm... I'm seeing more people starting to act like in the F1 forum, too bad.

My only view about all of this: let's wait for the next year. One year, before making final judgement and be able to say if it is a good choose or not.
All this "Pirelli good - Pirelli bad !", "Costs cut - More costs !", "More/less punctures sliding" whatever etc. will get clear. Until now I'm only seeing flames and it's not good to read if you ask me.

Best post in this thread :up:

[Brother John]

Helstar, sorry to jump back on that topic, but just want to clerify one more thing (in case your post applies to me as well).
We don't have to wait 1 year because it's not about the quality of tyres, it's not about good or bad desision that is for the WRC, for the team, cost and and so on. It's true that there are beneits in this regards.
It's more about how it's done.
I do beleive that the fundamentals of the motorsports is copetition of proving who can make better product. Supporting one brand by restricting other is wrong, no matter how you put it. And in general, you don't solve one problem by creating others. That's dirty business.

We are SPECTATORS and have NOTHING to do with this business! :rolleyes:

[SubaruNorway]

Hey guys this means the Pirelli girls will be back :cheese:

[Helstar]

Best post in this thread :up:
Thanx m8 ! ;)

Hey guys this means the Pirelli girls will be back :cheese:
:rotflmao: you are the man ! You have understood everything in life ! :)

[SubaruNorway]

Girls and cars, thats life :D

[Helstar]

Girls and cars, thats life :D
http://img.freeforumzone.it/upload/459333_up.gif

[ArrowsFA1]

Michelin takes legal action against FIA (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/57254).

[FrankenSchwinn]

wow, i didnt even know they withdrew from F1.....

my work is basically all about tender processes and contracts for bid etc. there are many ways that a "choosing committee" makes irregularities. i don't think it's something that is too alarming, it's part of the bidding process. unless of course, there really are grounds for contesting the decision..... either way, if they get it reversed i do not think it as a good image booster unless there is clear indication of cheatery (is that a word?).

[WRC2006]

Michelin takes legal action against FIA (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/57254).

Fantastic decision from Michelin.

[bowler]

Fantastic decision from Michelin.

Why fantastic?

Now the lawyers win.

[Captain VXR]

Michelin takes legal action against FIA (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/57254).

Michelin are sore loosers it seems. If michelin had been chosen, who would have sponsored Gigi Galli?

[Daniel]

Michelin are sore loosers it seems. If michelin had been chosen, who would have sponsored Gigi Galli?
If Goodyear had won would they have sent a giant squid to my parents back in Australia?

My post makes is just as valid as yours......

[DonJippo]

Michelin are sore loosers it seems. If michelin had been chosen, who would have sponsored Gigi Galli?

Why you think Pirelli will sponsor any individual driver now when they are the sole tyre supplier for WRC?

[koko0703]

I wonder how Michelin is going to argue against FIA's decision. Did any of the team have a tire supply contract beyond this season??? If FIA have forced teams to break contract and switch tires, then I can see the point of Michelin's action. But other than that, are they going to argue FIA is biased??? (which is true, but it's not something just started right now....)

Both Pirelli and BFGoodrich bidded for being sole tire supplier, and Pirelli came out as winner. For me, it is as simple that is.

[FrankenSchwinn]

what some seem to not realize about a bidding process is that this is actually normal. my company wins a few contracts (due to me of course :) ) and the decisions are often contested. the thing is michelin is probably basically asking to see how the deciding guidelines were followed. a debrief basically. sometimes that's why companies do this. but they could also do it because the guidelines were not followed and in that case there could be a re-bid. i don't think they'll win it with this action, but they could get it put out for bid again.

[jparker]

what some seem to not realize about a bidding process is that this is actually normal. my company wins a few contracts (due to me of course :) ) and the decisions are often contested. the thing is michelin is probably basically asking to see how the deciding guidelines were followed. a debrief basically. sometimes that's why companies do this. but they could also do it because the guidelines were not followed and in that case there could be a re-bid. i don't think they'll win it with this action, but they could get it put out for bid again.

True, and I think Michelin knows that, but FIA will be exposed in wrong doing and that's what matters. Unfortunately the damage is done, and I don't think Michelin are coming back to WRC anytime soon, which is sad.

[Helstar]

If Goodyear had won would they have sent a giant squid to my parents back in Australia?
My post makes is just as valid as yours......
I think he was just sarcastic or joking ... when you see that name you always go out of your head eh ? http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/images/icons/hmph.gif

I think that Michelin with this sue against FIA has burned every chance of a future (?) presence on WRC / F1 forever and ever. If you ask me it's a pity.

[bowler]

If Goodyear had won would they have sent a giant squid to my parents back in Australia?



Are you saying that Pirelli sent a giant squid to Australia?

Could that be bribery?

[Daniel]

I think he was just sarcastic or joking ... when you see that name you always go out of your head eh ? http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/images/icons/hmph.gif

I think that Michelin with this sue against FIA has burned every chance of a future (?) presence on WRC / F1 forever and ever. If you ask me it's a pity.
What I said had nothing to do with the fact that it was Galli or anyone in particular.

yes Bowler :D that's exactly what I meant :D This whole thing smells fishy and stinks of politics ;)

[Bjorn240]

We are SPECTATORS and have NOTHING to do with this business! :rolleyes:

We are not all spectators and some of us would be significantly affected by the decision.

For instance, Pirelli has virtually no distribution in North America and the prices are much higher than BFG. If BFG stops producing rally tires, we will be rallying on bare rims here.

- Christian

[Brother John]

Michelin sues the F.I.A. with the assignment of the unit tires the Michelin company went out empty. Now they sues the FIA, because they feels to be treated in a unfair way.
http://www.rallye-magazin.de/index.php?PHPSESSID=2edljpfcj92d27d8ckbm0kk3c0&newsID=10065&view=news_detail
What do you think about this?
Maybe the French mafia! :p : is frightened that Citroën can no longer win rallys with Pirelli! :D

[1LM1]

Nothing to do with the French. I am French and I don't like the mafia.
Michelin think the FIA is trying to punish them. Maybe they are wrong maybe they are right. Anyway, we will never know. Only the FIA and Michelin know.

And Citroën has nothing to do with this story. They said that they are ready and happy to work with Pirelli and that the FIA's decision is none of their business.

[euskalteam]

I think Michelin is now paying the bill of the EEUU F1 GP at Indianapolis when all the teams with Michelin didn't start the race.

[1LM1]

I think Michelin is now paying the bill of the EEUU F1 GP at Indianapolis when all the teams with Michelin didn't start the race.

Could be indeed.

[MJW]

And Citroën has nothing to do with this story. They said that they are ready and happy to work with Pirelli and that the FIA's decision is none of their business.
Maybe not quite so - In Autosport today Citroen say that the decision to go Pirelli could make them consider to quit WRC at the end of 2007. Guy Frequelin said it would not be his decision but his boss in Citroen. For 30 years Citroen cars (road cars) have been supplied with Michelin tyres when they leave the factory and sent to the dealers. The fact that the Citroen WRC Team
were running on PIRELLI could be problematical for the senior management of the Citroen company. As Citroen and Peugeot are the same parent company how was the decision by Peugeot to opt for Pirelli tyres in WRC veiwed by these "senior managers"?

[A.F.F.]

Or maybe Citroen knows more than us on the forum and prepare to leave the scene politely in front of S2000 machinery ;)

[1LM1]

I tell you what.
Citroën was owned by the Michelin group a long time ago. Peugeot bought Citroën in the 70's and the agreement (maybe tacit) between Peugeot and Michelin said: all Citroën cars will be supplied with Michelin tyres in the future.

That's why Frequelin remains cautious.

But I honestly believe it's no more a problem nowadays. Times have changed and Citroën will continue in WRC with Pirelli tyres.

I can tell you that the senior management of PSA Peugeot Citroën is brand new (with a great new CEO btw) and future-oriented.
They won't take a story of tyre brand into account to decide the commitment of the Group in motorsport.

[jparker]

Or maybe Citroen knows more than us on the forum and prepare to leave the scene politely in front of S2000 machinery ;)
It makes sence, there is nothing else for them to prove. Or is it? Maybe the tyres are the winning part for Citroen?

[bowler]

BFG mucked up the deal, and lost to Pirelli.

It is no different to getting the fastest time in a rally, there is always someone with the second fastest time-----but they don't sue.

[FrankenSchwinn]

BFG mucked up the deal, and lost to Pirelli.

It is no different to getting the fastest time in a rally, there is always someone with the second fastest time-----but they don't sue.

but stage wins are not determined by a panel/committee made up of several people with different interests nor is it determined by strict guidelines as to choosing the winner. if Michelin is really "suing" the FIA then that's sort of interesting on the legal level. there must be something that they know about the decision process that we could only speculate. though, i think the .de article might actually refer to the fact that they are appealing the decision of the FIA, which, as i said before, is quite common if their debrief with the FIA did not show them sufficient reasons for choosing Pirelli over Michelin...... man, i actually want to see that RFP now (request for proposal that the FIA put out for tire supplier) i want so see what their decision criterias are and their weight......

[FrankenSchwinn]

ok, apparently in the roastbeefs' english it's called an "invitation to tender" and the FIA website won't allow you to see them unless you are a reffered business..... Scheiße!

[Brother John]

It makes sence, there is nothing else for them to prove. Or is it? Maybe the tyres are the winning part for Citroen?

I think there is a surreptitious cooperation between Citroën and Michelin!
Maybe Michelin have a super tyre only for Loeb and this year is Sordo allowed to use It! Same tyres for everybody?
What you see is not always like it looks!
Can someone proving contrary? :s mokin:

[Isthmus]

I think there is a surreptitious cooperation between Citroën and Michelin!
Maybe Michelin have a super tyre only for Loeb and this year is Sordo allowed to use It! Same tyres for everybody?
What you see is not always like it looks!
Can someone proving contrary? :s mokin:

You all guys like to think that way, perhaps an excuse to swallow the Citroën/Loeb victorys. But they will keep winning, whatever you think.

Just to say that Citroën was owned by Michelin since 30´s to 70´s and is the only brand in the world wich delivers its cars with just one tyre suplier, of course, Michelin. ;)

[jso1985]

I think there is a surreptitious cooperation between Citroën and Michelin!
Maybe Michelin have a super tyre only for Loeb and this year is Sordo allowed to use It! Same tyres for everybody?
What you see is not always like it looks!
Can someone proving contrary? :s mokin:

can you prove your point?
with your logic I could claim anything with just saying that you can't prove me the contrary and using a smokin smilie to make me look cooler...

Citroën have always used Michelin tyres so it's quite obvious they don't feel like using Pirelli's
But hey what's the need of arguing, if Citroën quits, Loeb can still win on any car :s mokin:

[Helstar]

can you prove your point?
with your logic I could claim anything with just saying that you can't prove me the contrary and using a smokin smilie to make me look cooler...
Citroën have always used Michelin tyres so it's quite obvious they don't feel like using Pirelli's
But hey what's the need of arguing, if Citroën quits, Loeb can still win on any car :s mokin:
The best thing would be having Loeb and Bosse in the same car with Pirelli tyres eheh :) then the truth wil come out - anyway if you ask my opinion the truth is what you see already now.

[Daniel]

can you prove your point?
with your logic I could claim anything with just saying that you can't prove me the contrary and using a smokin smilie to make me look cooler...

Citroën have always used Michelin tyres so it's quite obvious they don't feel like using Pirelli's
But hey what's the need of arguing, if Citroën quits, Loeb can still win on any car :s mokin:
Brother John eats baby children. Until it is proven without a doubt that he doesn't eat babies he should be banned from the forums just because I made this outlandish claim :s mokin:

Works both ways?

[DonJippo]

Brother John eats baby children. Until it is proven without a doubt that he doesn't eat babies he should be banned from the forums just because I made this outlandish claim :s mokin:

Works both ways?


Naah I met him in Sweden he is loveable guy and all he want to eat is you and that will not bring a ban for him :p :

[bowler]

I think there is a surreptitious cooperation between Citroën and Michelin!
Maybe Michelin have a super tyre only for Loeb and this year is Sordo allowed to use It! Same tyres for everybody?
What you see is not always like it looks!
Can someone proving contrary? :s mokin:

of course there is cooperation between BFG and Citroen.
No one would expect otherwise.

This is exactly what "one tyre" is designed to fix.

The tyres BFG supply to Citroen are not the same as those supplied to Ford as each team has its own specific requirements, and as a responsive and clever company BFG supplies what its clients need.

There is no secret or controversy.

There are also times when the tyres are exactly the same.

From next year they are all the same, for everyone, all the time.

[jparker]

Naah I met him in Sweden he is loveable guy and all he want to eat is you and that will not bring a ban for him :p :

Absolutely, he is the Swedish Clint Eastwood, always shoots the bad guys and no one can light up cigarette like him. It just smells bad, but I guess I can handle it :p : :s mokin:

[Brother John]

Nice to see these kompliments about me here! ;)
I know that I express myself not always well in the written English language.
My expressions come direkt from lives experiences, I had in the past myself three own companies and have learned much there and have seen a lot of things those most of the people cannot present themselves! As a transport company I came in companies all over Europe and if you can see how people are deceived by the big multinationals you start to think differently as most of the ordinary people with normal lives.
The same thinks to happen there in associations and organisations.
I will name no names here of companies where I have seen remarkable things and yes there were also suppliers for the motor sport companys.
In the first place It always concerns money and profit and how they want reach that is generally hidden for the general public!
For this reason I said "never believe everything what you see and hear".

I have absolutely now problem with what Daniel said concerning me, I like to have discusions with people with an own opinion.
Such as I already did say, it´s not easy to write this in the English language, for this reason I find it terrible nice to be able to meet forum members during WRC rallys!
I´m here on the forum to have fun! :s mokin:

[Daniel]

Naah I met him in Sweden he is loveable guy and all he want to eat is you and that will not bring a ban for him :p :
Did you have your boys with you? If you did I assure you it would be different :mark:

[Flyinglex]

1One of rally prieview showed the proces of producing BF rally tyre.One thing i metioned was special sticker where was placed name of driver for whom that tyre was prodused (there was printed some usual info and "loeb" in big letters. So, why not to type universal index of rubber softness?
2I notice some kind of nationalism in France. Mean not discriminations and other illegal things but advertising all-the-french: u can se it in "taxi" movie and in last race of champions(renualt and Xsara cars, seb as main title contender and most famous racer in France).
May be i am too conservative, but imo Pirelli more suitable cause it has long sport history, unlike ,unknow may be, BF .
Last thing: teams and drivers doesn't loose anything because everybody in equal condion. If citroen afraid of unpleasant advertisment they can stick bf logo on tyre :)

[Helstar]

There is no secret or controversy.
There are also times when the tyres are exactly the same.
From next year they are all the same, for everyone, all the time.
http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/images/icons/icon14.gif
Fair for all, maybe somebody has fear of this situation ...

[jparker]

http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/images/icons/icon14.gif
Fair for all, maybe somebody has fear of this situation ...

How could that be fair? The teams with better tyres are loosing, the teams with bad tyres are benefiting.

[FrankenSchwinn]

1One of rally prieview showed the proces of producing BF rally tyre.One thing i metioned was special sticker where was placed name of driver for whom that tyre was prodused (there was printed some usual info and "loeb" in big letters. So, why not to type universal index of rubber softness?
2I notice some kind of nationalism in France. Mean not discriminations and other illegal things but advertising all-the-french: u can se it in "taxi" movie and in last race of champions(renualt and Xsara cars, seb as main title contender and most famous racer in France).
May be i am too conservative, but imo Pirelli more suitable cause it has long sport history, unlike ,unknow may be, BF .
Last thing: teams and drivers doesn't loose anything because everybody in equal condion. If citroen afraid of unpleasant advertisment they can stick bf logo on tyre :)

2. of course loeb is the most famous racer in france, he is the only racer in a top level motorsport! and do you really think that there is no nationalism in norway anytime solberg wins? or do you think there is no nationalism in the uk when a ford wins? (they have not realized that ford is american yet!) do you think that there is no nationalism in japan when a subaru wins? <- ok, i'll give you that they cant control their bear and rock population, but still.... i've been to finland and it took a lot for him to be recognised as a rally driver because he was not finnish (and maybe they thought he was not human either) but in france marcus is really well respected in the media. they call him "Monsieur Marcus" or "Monsieur Gronholm" (that's mister marus/gronholm). when it comes to rallying, it's like rugby, the french fans love everybody but with a little bit more for french stuff of course. but they are definitely not like you describe.

actually, now that i think about it, when ford won the championship last year BFG had ads in rallye magazine about it. ford is not french and they still advertise the win.



also, now that i think about it, there is single type of tire rule in french rallying and as it turned out last year, the xsara of Henry was no where near adaptable to that type of tire. he had to drop out of the championship because he could not score decently.

that could happen in the wrc, but of course, world rally teams have a lot more money to test and do adjustments and stuff but it will mean tons of testing and money spent to adjust to the tires.

[Helstar]

How could that be fair? The teams with better tyres are loosing, the teams with bad tyres are benefiting.
If you are referring to 2007 (this year) I don't know what you're talking about. They're all on BFG (except Gigi with Pirelli on a private car) so who are the teams with good and who are with bad tyres ? They're all the same, Citroen, Ford, Subaru, etc.

And the same goes to 2008. Pirelli for all, there is no better or worse tyres because it's only ONE supplier ! We won't have excuses anymore "ah he lost because his tyres sux !" or "he won because he has better secret tyres".
If this is not fair then let me know what is ...

[Flyinglex]

I meant not that usual glee of a coutry when its drivers, olympic team etc win something.I mean cases when iterests of sport are thrown of and sportsmen just win titles, championship without feeling that an act of sport where they compete is a holiday of consolidation of people. Another thing hapens when team consider the sport as boring job where members must reach goal with any price: money, making "special" rules, spying and so on.
And as for RoC I can say that it seemed for me as officials wanted certain person, sertain team win in sertain car.
If seb without Bf tyre is nothing he is not one of the gratest rallysts.

[jparker]

If you are referring to 2007 (this year) I don't know what you're talking about. They're all on BFG (except Gigi with Pirelli on a private car) so who are the teams with good and who are with bad tyres ? They're all the same, Citroen, Ford, Subaru, etc.

And the same goes to 2008. Pirelli for all, there is no better or worse tyres because it's only ONE supplier ! We won't have excuses anymore "ah he lost because his tyres sux !" or "he won because he has better secret tyres".
If this is not fair then let me know what is ...

Sorry Helstar, buy I'm from Missouri, and I need to see process that insures all tyres are the same (centralized, randomized distribution) before I believe it.

[bowler]

hate to disillusion you jp, but they probably don't care what you want to see.

Irrespective of your views however, the distribution will be handled in a fair manner.

[jparker]

hate to disillusion you jp, but they probably don't care what you want to see.

Irrespective of your views however, the distribution will be handled in a fair manner.

Well, is that "fair manner" means "by the books"? And if yes, can I see it?

[bowler]

if you are a team member you will, and if not no one cares what you think.

[jparker]

if you are a team member you will, and if not no one cares what you think.

... and that's why I respect them so much.

[jparker]

if you are a team member you will, and if not no one cares what you think.

Yes, I know. That's why your "fare manner" means nothing to me.

[bowler]

good.

that's the end of that then

[Helstar]

Sorry Helstar, buy I'm from Missouri, and I need to see process that insures all tyres are the same (centralized, randomized distribution) before I believe it.
I don't see the connection between this and the 'bad' or 'good' ... anyway, do you think that NOW with BFG all is ok and transparent ? (I'm not presuming anything, it's just a suggest to judge every aspect and not only those you want).

[MJW]

French courts have thrown out Michelin's legal actionagainst FIA for awarding the contract to Pirelli. Michelin still dont give up, they are going to appeal.
Meanwhile Citroen big boss has said that Citroen will not quit WRC because Pirelli were awarded the contract. Citroen stick with WRC to 2009, when their contracts with Loeb & Sordo expire.

[1LM1]

That's right and Gilles Michel (Citroën big boss) said that they will stick with WRC AT LEAST to 2009. So probably for a longer time. :)

I knew that Michelin departure would not change anything regarding Citroën presence in WRC. Now it's confirmed.

[jparker]

http://www.wrc.com/page/News/BreakingNewsDetail/0,,10111~1006686,00.html

Not that it matters anymore, but...............

[Helstar]

This shows that Citroen guys are fair people http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/images/icons/icon14.gif

And I think they will show that this presumed BFG 'good eyes' for them were only wrong thoughts.

[FrankenSchwinn]

This shows that Citroen guys are fair people http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/images/icons/icon14.gif

And I think they will show that this presumed BFG 'good eyes' for them were only wrong thoughts.

you know, since 99 and peugeot's "comeback" there has been sh!t, pardon my language, but it's sh!t, about how they are unfair, the french cheat, they don't care about driver 2, they adjust the rules for themselves, etc, etc.... no! no! they look towards a form of motorsport that can bring their image up, they go into that form of motorsport, and they don't just tip toe, they go in with both feet. they invest and actually show interest, as a vehicle manufacturer, into a form of motorsport that probably does not yield direct revenue, if any.

they put their blood sweat, tears, and sometimes their marriages into rallying and ONLY rallying. they don't run a nascrap program, they don't have a factory touring car program, they only care about rallying. if you really really think about it, they are the only ones who show signs of actually "caring" about rallying. subaru is a major corporation with actual positive revenue and yet they are not willing to "dump" money into their rally program like psa does. why not? it is their only source of branding? actually it's not. they are too worried about the 30/40 somethings in the usa who want that "yeah, funk SUV's! i drive a subaru" so they spend massive cash on that.

yeah, you can say that with the high budget peugeot and citroen have enjoyed they "ruined" the sport, but that's crap. they are not the ones who made the rules and when they were changed, it's not like they were kicking and screaming about it (active sway bars example). i'm sure that they would obied to any realistic rule the FIA throws at them, even the ones that clearly affects them and only them. so, these things that they developed are within the rules, the same rules everyone (except for ford apparently ;) ) is supposed to obey.

they, as any good competitor, have searched for ways to develop a racing advantage within these rules and guess what happened,..... they won, and are still winning. everyone's beef is that they are constantly winning and it's not fun for spectators. but why are they winning so much? is it because they are so good or is it because the opposition is just sitting there and whining?

in my no-one-actually-cares opinion is that there was this thing where the manufacturers involved in rallying have always had this "here is my place" attitude. everyone knew they could not beat lancia in the late 80's, there was a toyota and subaru push in the 90's to overhall mitsu with ford picking up the scraps, and everyone sort of knew their place from rallying with each other for the past 20 years. new kids come, how dare they be french!, and they win. how dare they! that's what basically happened. now we all bitch and moan, including me, because the others are just sitting on their asses and are not looking at the sport in new directions. 25 years ago some could not have seen a sequential gearbox be part of the future of rallying but yet since 98 it has evolved tremendously because of marques that invested in developing the sport. have you thought about how cool it is that there is enough technology out there for such awesome gearboxes and on top of that reliable enough for rallying in places like sweden and greece?????????

aaaaaahhhhhhh, funk it, i'm done writing to deaf ears / blind eyes. i need another beer.... et merde, putain ca sert a rien.....

at least respect the fact that PSA were the only ones to actually moved the sport.

whether you like it or not, you ought to respect that they went all in.

p.s. helstar, this post was not a "diss" on you, i just used your post as a launching pad.... .

[Brother John]

Yes have another beer and belief in your own dreams Frankenschwinn. :z

[Karukera]

Nah, Franken, keep the faith, your english is way better than all of us francophones here. :up:
It may sound childish (it is) but most of the anti PSA, Michelin, Loeb rants are only basic jealousy from those who have zero pilots, car industry or contribution to the sport and who are frustrated to see the current winning package (car, tires, pilot) coming from one nation.
We should appologize for that, not support our teams, not even talk about it, it's too arrogant.

Hopefuly Ford will take the manu...

You also have jealousy from those who import parts from overseas and would die of integrism for a foreign brand; or even a minority of paranoids who are having hard time to see a Wallon team doing well in the WRC.

Keep the faith, we need you ! :bandit:

[Helstar]

p.s. helstar, this post was not a "diss" on you, i just used your post as a launching pad.... .
I know :p

And I think the truth is always in the middle too.