Bridgestone Report Card - D

[Kirk]

When the skies opened up last race it was repeated more than once by the Speed commentators that the “intermediate” wets were too hard and seemed to lack tread. I imagine some (many?) drivers and teams are disappointed by the lack of grip encountered at Nurbergring. I suppose if you have only one tyre manufacturer there is always the possibility of complacency in certain areas. Is this the case at Bridgestone I wonder?

[Knowlesy]

When did they say the intermediates lack tread? If this was meant during the first deluge then this is hardly a surprise. Inters can only cope with so much standing water. Full wets would struggle with that.

If it is meant during the second sprinkling then I am puzzled. At least on the tread part. It is easily possible they were too hard a compound though.

[Adam43]

They are intermediates. That was not intermediate rain, it was full rain. The track was not a bit wet, it was a river.

I agree with Knowlesy, if they are talking about the second bit of rain. The tread was perfect for that, and I don't really see that the compound could have been too hard. I'm sure they had a better compound, but they bring a tyre without knowing how much rain they will get.

Those tyres were probably better than the wets or inters than most with seen in F1.

[chillibowl]

iirc, the Speed guys were making the comment in regards to the the fact that the inters were of both a poor/hard compound and lacked grip in so much that the second rain period was not initially covering the whole track.
so the teams were forced to run the inters and they were a very poor compromise on a partially wet track.

but it is a good point, both Massa and Webber commented on the problems when they went back to the inters and im sure others were having their problems as well. the lack of competiton combined with a seldom used compound can be resulting in the company not putting its best foot forward.

[Knowlesy]

Such problems were not the case when Bridgestone ran alone in 1999 and 2000 though.

I can't see that the tyres lag so far behind. It's only last year we were at the height of the tyre war.

Having said that though....the Bridgestone inters were poor compared to Michelins the past two seasons.

[chillibowl]

and it might not necessarily result in a lack of inovation on the part of a single supplier. F1 has some very high standards and that alone should be enough for Bridgestone to continually push, but as you say, in the case of inters and wet they have been behind for a bit now and progressing without more testing in these conditions could be a problem.

that said , it would be hugely disappointing if Bridgestone didnt take it seriously considering when conditions are variable there are are more chances for accidents etc.
im sure thats all the incentive they need to get it sorted.

[SLK55]

I think the most significant point is that whether the tyre was good or bad , it was in consistent use across the grid and it was therefore a level playing field

[Adam43]

I'd prefer a tyre war, but I'm not sure that is what this thread is about.

When on inters there were a few laps where drivers were hunting the wetter parts of the tracks to keep the tyres cool. This suggests at that point they would have preferred a harder compound.

I'm sure Bridgestone do take this seriously, how did these tyre related to that brought to Nurburgring previously?

[Knowlesy]

A significant step forward I should imagine.

[kartracer41]

I hear what you all are saying regarding Bridgestone staying on top of development. But on the other hand, it is a sole/control tire situation, so everyone is on the same rubber. That is the spirit of a rule like that, it is used to control speeds, promote racing, and save money. They may be doing 100% of what the FIA is asking. There is no more co-development between the Ferrari and the Bridgestone per say. Maybe the gap between the wet and dry isn't evenly split by the intermediate, but what is wrong with the drivers having to work a little harder, when they all are on the same rubber?

IMO, with their dry rubber, it seems as though there isn't as much grip as the past. I have heard drivers complain of this. This is hurting the overtaking. The teams are making up for the mechanical grip with aero grip. And when a driver comes to another car, we all know what happens to the aero. That is why it we haven't seen any drivers do a spectacular drive from the rear of the grid as in previous years. But I think the amount of grip is something the FIA wanted to reduce with a single tire supplier.

[Marbot]

Tyre war doesn't seem to be going down too well in some other quarters.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/61108

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/61114

This kind of says it all for me. Valentino Rossi:"Like this is very bad for the show. All the fans like the riders and the manufacturers. Nobody is a Michelin or a Bridgestone fan."

Certainly Michelin had the upper hand recently in F1 with their wet tyres,but it all depended upon how much rain was on the track as they could only operate in certain 'windows'.I'm sure that Bridgestone have developed wet weather tyres that operate in a much larger window than in recent years.

[Kirk]

I agree, the key is that all teams are in the same boat (pardon the pun) and the driver must adapt to what is given them; but I was surprised at the lack of grip initially. In essence it kind of ruined the race that intermediates did not meet the needs of most teams when they needed it. On a more upbeat note, the wets were much better. Hopefully Bridgestone will be motivated to do better next time.

[RotorFan]

Webber and Massa complained of actual vibrations in the inters in the last stint. I wonder if any of the other drivers had this problem?

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by RotorFan

Webber and Massa complained of actual vibrations in the inters in the last stint. I wonder if any of the other drivers had this problem?

Maybe it was because they had vibrations in their tyres that they finished second and third.

[Knowlesy]

Originally Posted by Kirk

On a more upbeat note, the wets were much better.

How many actually used wets for any amount of time that was indicative of their quality?

[BootsOntheSide]

With hindsight as to how much it rained early on, full wets would have been better than inters. I prefer the idea of inters not being able to handle a really wide range of conditions without serious management - it increases the challenge to the driver, which is the standard advantage of wet racing. As for the blistering later on, I wonder if other drivers were affected? Perhaps Massa and Webber made specific mistakes we didn't see?

[Adam43]

All these problems have been associated with wet tyres for years and years. You will get these problems when you run tyres outside their operating window. I really don't see how Bridgestone can be accused off letting the side down. It seems to me that operating windows were quite wide and suitable. They could have all come in and changed to better tyres if required. Of course Bridgestone could do better, you can always improve, but there is no reason to be disappointed in them here.

[JeremySmith]

I am of the opinion that the race should have been stopped..This was not a fault of the Bridgstone's, tyres can only push away so much water. I seem to remember the Speed team saying that the Inters were of a *harder* compound than in the past, not that the tyres were not suitable for the job at hand..

[Dutton]

The inters certainly were not adequate for the deluge at the start of the race.

Given that the conditions certainly required wets (if not monsoons of days gone by), well, it would surely not be a very good intermediate tyre that could deal with conditions.

[JeremySmith]

Yes sir.. I may have given the wrong impression? what I meant to say was that the inters do a good job for their intended use, but are not adequate in a deluge as you said Duton. I will shut up now

[Dutton]

Oh, yes, indeed, I was saying the same thing as you. I figured two shouting is louder than one, .

[FPV GTHO]

I think it couldve just been as a result of Bridgestone going with harder compounds across the board this year to have "safer" tyres. The tread depths and designs i dont think can be blamed for what happened at the Nurburgring. My only problem with how Bridgestone produced the tyres is they used the older design carcass and construction which tear the rubber up alot easier it seems.