4 degrees of camber

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

Ah , just googled "red bull camber" , came up with the BBC site , and read this from Newey :
"just a hair over four, four and an eighth, or something, just a tiny bit over".

That doesn't sound like a lot at all , but maybe it is .

---

But, if 2 degrees was the safe limit (and I don't actually know what the limit was that Pirelli said was the safe maximum) then an extra 2 is quite a margin.....

EDIT - numpty alert - I've just read the article - 4 degrees max from the horses mouth!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

We don't , exactly , but we do know this , from Paul Hembery of Pirelli :
"So were left in a situation where one team in particular was stretching the limits of our recommendations and we felt that that in a race situation would create difficulties, and blistering."

If it was not a big safety issue , would Newey have said this ? :
“Frankly, at the end of the race, I was just very relieved that both our drivers were safe.”

---

The important point here is that maximum camber allowed according to FIA regulations is 5 degrees. The RBRs were running at just over 4 degrees. Pirelli recommended below 4 degrees to stay safe.

In other words, Pirelli couldn't guarantee the safety of its tyres throughout the entire envelope that the FIA has declared legal.

While I think Pirelli have done a great job this season on this particular topic they messed up but they are doing a great PR job of covering up.

Of course the counter argument is that at no point were the tyres unsafe despite being used outside the camber angle recommended by Pirelli, there probably wasn't even a drop off in performance.

Would this all have been avoided if the teams were allowed more testing ?

Feedback is essential for both the teams and the tire maker .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

Would this all have been avoided if the teams were allowed more testing ?

Feedback is essential for both the teams and the tire maker .

---

The million dollar question. Did they ever test at Spa in the old days? Might be a bit academic as the circuit is so unique, if they never test there they'd likely never replicate the issue. The wet practice sessions hampered proper tyre behaviour discovery this time around.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

Would this all have been avoided if the teams were allowed more testing ?

Feedback is essential for both the teams and the tire maker .

---

Can't have that. Makes FAR too much sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malbec

The important point here is that maximum camber allowed according to FIA regulations is 5 degrees. The RBRs were running at just over 4 degrees. Pirelli recommended below 4 degrees to stay safe.

In other words, Pirelli couldn't guarantee the safety of its tyres throughout the entire envelope that the FIA has declared legal.

While I think Pirelli have done a great job this season on this particular topic they messed up but they are doing a great PR job of covering up.

Of course the counter argument is that at no point were the tyres unsafe despite being used outside the camber angle recommended by Pirelli, there probably wasn't even a drop off in performance.

---

I understand what you are saying but disagree with your analysis.

Just because a regulation says you can go to a maximum 5 degree, doesn't mean the tyre manufacturer is going to produce one that can go to that extreme. The reason the regulation limits the camber is to stop cars running on sidewalls and I would also imagine it goes back to stopping manufacturers producing round footprint tyres like a motorbike.

This is a good insight. McLaren, Ferrari followed Pirelli recommendations | Formula 1 Blog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

A game , or performance trumping safety , as it had when they chose not to start from the pits ?

Or , are you saying that Newey was feigning being nervous about the race , and blatantly lying about it afterwards ?

---

Re-read my post.

I would go as far as to say RBR exploiting the safety concerns to manipulate as much control over damage limitation by arguing over a grey area.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

Would this all have been avoided if the teams were allowed more testing ?

Feedback is essential for both the teams and the tire maker .

---

In NASCAR you have a competion yellow if practice is rained out.

But it was RBR making the biggest noise, not a collectve issue as was say Indy 2005.

I don't remember Kimi making a fuss after his race was compromised with the no tyre change rules in Nurburgring 2005 and ended up in a massive shunt.

Last I checked, driving around a glorified piece of plastic with wheels 200 miles per hour isn't exactly a "safe" thing to do. Redbull obviously would have changed the camber if they had the opportunity to do ith without their drivers having to start from the pitlane. But the FIA painted them in a corner, and just like you expect out of people who driver 200 mile an hour pieces of plastic, they put their nuts on the table and drove with it. The reason this happened was the severe lack of dry weather testing.

Just curious, did the FIA control the weather at Spa? The teams that had issues painted themselves into a corner IMO. They were hoping to dodge the regulations in the interest of "safety" but that "safety" wasn't a large enough issue to cause them to lose grid positions in the interest of maintaining said safety.