4 degrees of camber

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Did Bridgestone ever asked the FIA to enforce camber angle recommendations?

---

Because they were never produced aggressive compounds to improve the show.

We have no tyre war and therefore no grounds to say that Pirellis are crap.

Interesting to point out that Scarbs reckons some teams are pushing their luck with camber and Hembrey being worried.

#35 The Flying Lap: Italian GP Preview with Romain Grosjean and ScarbsF1 - YouTube

Safety great importance. No, sorry, how silly of me, its a company saving face.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wedge

Because they were never produced aggressive compounds to improve the show.

---

Frankly these tires are miles slower than the Bridgestones, and the Bridgestones could take serious beating on the fastest tracks while not looking like cow pie after a couple of laps.
So what is aggressive about Pirelli compounds are the Pirelli's made engineered fail? I don't think so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

How does this 'rule change' help McLaren and Ferrari over Red Bull? Firstly there is no rule change, just a tyre supplier recommending a camber angle to the teams, and secondly Red Bull have adapted to the tyre regulations better than anyone. Ferrari and McLaren experienced blistering of their tyres at Spa just like Red Bull and there is nothing in this that plays to the advantage of either team.

Setup can be pushed over the limit regardless of the tyre manufacturer, and the fact Pirelli have recommended a safe camber angle goes to prove they are doing their jobs brilliantly. Bridgestone and Michellin tyres experienced blistering in years gone by and this is nothing new, and I can't understand your gripes at all. And please no more PM's insulting me please! :rolleyes:

---

A recommendation that is enforced by the FIA during race is a rule, and this rule didn't exist before, so it's a rule change. Elementary logic, Watson.

PS: If you don't want to be insulted, then please do not insult others for a start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Frankly these tires are miles slower than the Bridgestones, and the Bridgestones could take serious beating on the fastest tracks while not looking like cow pie after a couple of laps.
So what is aggressive about Pirelli compounds are the Pirelli's made engineered fail? I don't think so.

---

The complaint with Bridgestone , after the tire war with Michelin pushed both makers to go long on endurance , was that they aided in the procession , in that they did not drop off in performance suddenly or early , making for less passing , and less action .

They were working to achieve the maximum distance at the maximum speed .
Now , that makes you look pretty good as a tire maker , but it was having a lot of folks complaining about the sport in general , and losing interest .
"You can't pass in F1 !" , they said , and , they were right .


Pirelli came in , knowing they would have guys like you , Ioan , who see they traits of the tires they have supplied as short-comings , rather than triumphs of balance in a world where the target is always moving .
That's a little more the way I see it , but I do get where you are coming from .

Now that we're far enough into the season for them to have worked out most of the issues , do you agree that the racing has been better as a result of the teams needing to deal with the disparate wear rates of the tires ?

Do you , or anyone else , know if Bridgestone issued camber limits when they supplied ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

The complaint with Bridgestone , after the tire war with Michelin pushed both makers to go long on endurance , was that they aided in the procession , in that they did not drop off in performance suddenly or early , making for less passing , and less action .

They were working to achieve the maximum distance at the maximum speed .
Now , that makes you look pretty good as a tire maker , but it was having a lot of folks complaining about the sport in general , and losing interest .
"You can't pass in F1 !" , they said , and , they were right .


Pirelli came in , knowing they would have guys like you , Ioan , who see they traits of the tires they have supplied as short-comings , rather than triumphs of balance in a world where the target is always moving .
That's a little more the way I see it , but I do get where you are coming from .

Now that we're far enough into the season for them to have worked out most of the issues , do you agree that the racing has been better as a result of the teams needing to deal with the disparate wear rates of the tires ?

Do you , or anyone else , know if Bridgestone issued camber limits when they supplied ?

---

Bridgestone issued recommendations no limits, and they never asked the FIA to police and enforce their recommendation and turn them into rules, additional rules that never existed before in the sport, and which further limits the creativity of the engineers.
Exactly what we were all against for years already stupid and restricting rules due to incompetence in making a competitive race tire.

I'm getting my asbestos coat now as the keyboard jockeys will be flaming soon. :\

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

The complaint with Bridgestone , after the tire war with Michelin pushed both makers to go long on endurance , was that they aided in the procession , in that they did not drop off in performance suddenly or early , making for less passing , and less action .

---

Oh, and don't forget the tires made the race much more SAFE for the drivers when they didn't randomly fall off.

Gee, and I thought we are "all about the safety".


This is just another bull**** attempt by the morons at the FIA to slow down Vettel.

Too bad he destroyed the field today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

You seem to think me disagreeing with you is an insult where I tend to class PM's asking me to grow up and get a life along with comments about my nationality an insult!

Back to the topic, you would like to see evidence the FIA asked Pirelli for tyres that degrade after a few laps? Have you got evidence to suggest this wasn't in the spec as proposed by the FIA? Its a double edged sword, you can't demand evidence then dismiss the links given, only to provide nothing to support your stance in return.

---

I think you are looking for troubles and I am not willing to go that way.
If you have a problem write a PM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Frankly these tires are miles slower than the Bridgestones...

---

Is that another unsubstantiated claim?

The cars may be slower this year, but if that's the case it's due to a number of factors. The FIA has always introduced rules to curb the speed of the cars for safety reasons. Once again Pirelli are not to blame for that, and their tyres cannot be compared with those run under different regulations.

If teams, and it's not only Red Bull, are pushing the limits of the tyres then either the FIA should change the regulations relating to tyres, or the teams should adhere to Pirelli's recommendations.

As the advert on the tv just said "simples".

I hate to admit it but ioan in his blind hatred for Pirelli has actually stumbled onto a valid point.

I don't think the FIA should make a change to the regulations to limit camber. It's up to a team how they set their car up and if a team is stupid enough to exceed a Tyre manufacturers recommendation, then that's up to them. There is also the argument that after running at a recommended 4 degree (for example), a team looks at how their tyres perform and decide that they can run more.

However, it's not fair to Pirelli if a team exceeds the recommendation with insufficient data to back up the decision and then blames the Tyres as RBR did. In this circumstance it should be made abundantly clear that it's the teams fault and not the Tyres.

I would suggest that the teams declare their Camber angle after Qualifying and this is made public knowledge. That way, the commentators and us the fans (remember us Jean Todt?) will be aware of what is going on and Pirelli won't get negative publicity in the event of a preventable tyre failure.

As for the safety aspect? It is the teams responsibility and always has been to protect their drivers and how they configure their cars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

Is that another unsubstantiated claim?

---

Depends how good you are at Maths.

They've got DRS and KERS back this season plus much softer rubber and yet the lap times are still slower.

But who knows, maybe it's because of the moon phase! :rolleyes: