i think brigdestone needs to pay up

[furnik28]

as Bridgestone owns Firestone tire company that also suplys the tires for the IRL. And 2 a half weeks agothey ran Indy 500 with the firehawk tire
so tell tell me why were there knowen f1 bridgestone techs testing the tires along side three us counterparts. Ive gone through the f1 rule boox and found that any team or mananufacture can not test at any track before the callender month of the race being held there dose tell you anything

[Guest]

as Bridgestone owns Firestone tire company that also suplys the tires for the IRL. And 2 a half weeks agothey ran Indy 500 with the firehawk tire
so tell tell me why were there knowen f1 bridgestone techs testing the tires along side three us counterparts. Ive gone through the f1 rule boox and found that any team or mananufacture can not test at any track before the callender month of the race being held there dose tell you anything

I'm a bit perplexed here...

Are you saying that Bridgeston violtated FIA rules by running tires at Indy during the Indy 500 ?

Known Bridgestone techs testing tires ? The were testing F1 tires ? On what ? There were no F1 cars there, so you can't very well test a compound on an Indy car.

Anyway, try to clarify yourself because I really don't see what you're getting at.

[Smeerak]

as Bridgestone owns Firestone tire company that also suplys the tires for the IRL. And 2 a half weeks agothey ran Indy 500 with the firehawk tire
so tell tell me why were there knowen f1 bridgestone techs testing the tires along side three us counterparts. Ive gone through the f1 rule boox and found that any team or mananufacture can not test at any track before the callender month of the race being held there dose tell you anything

I'm a bit perplexed here...

Are you saying that Bridgeston violtated FIA rules by running tires at Indy during the Indy 500 ?

Known Bridgestone techs testing tires ? The were testing F1 tires ? On what ? There were no F1 cars there, so you can't very well test a compound on an Indy car.

Anyway, try to clarify yourself because I really don't see what you're getting at.

(that was my post)

[Monstrobolaxa]

Don't understand the last part of the first post.....but teams have tested at a race venue 2 weeks before the race was held there....and 2 or 3 months before....just look at Barcelona! (I might not understood what the first post stated).

Concerning the tires....I don't think Bridgestone tested at Indy...they might have sent a few technicians....but I don't see the problem about that....your not going to put a car at 220mph on tires that aren't suited for the car!

[DaveKillens]

I think I understand the complaint. Bridgestone does own Firestone, and they did supply tires for the IRL Indy 500. The tires were entitrely different than the F1 tires. But Firestone did learn about the current track condition, and it may be assumed that this info was passed along to Bridgestone, so they could take these conditions into account for the tire design.
Technically, there was no F1 testing before the Indy race. But OMHO, Bridgestone did posess information that they probably incorporated into the tires they used at Indy. I don't have any issue with that, it's basic collection of information all involved in racing do.
If Michelin missed the boat (and they obviously did this time), and didn't prepare the correct tire, then it's definitely no fault of Bridgestone's.

[Lafora]

Technically, there was no F1 testing before the Indy race.

Then there's no violation of any sort now is there.

Rules are meant to be interpreted.

[Smeerak]

I think I understand the complaint. Bridgestone does own Firestone, and they did supply tires for the IRL Indy 500. The tires were entitrely different than the F1 tires. But Firestone did learn about the current track condition, and it may be assumed that this info was passed along to Bridgestone, so they could take these conditions into account for the tire design.
Technically, there was no F1 testing before the Indy race. But OMHO, Bridgestone did posess information that they probably incorporated into the tires they used at Indy. I don't have any issue with that, it's basic collection of information all involved in racing do.
If Michelin missed the boat (and they obviously did this time), and didn't prepare the correct tire, then it's definitely no fault of Bridgestone's.

I'd have to say that the data from the Indy 'test' would be almost 100% irrelevant.

Different time of year therefore different track temperatures, different conditions etc...

Different speeds

Slicks Vs Grooved

No excessive braking

Opposite direction when running on the track

Completely different speeds

And the obvious, only left turns.

The list goes on and on really, so I really don't think any violations occured.

Plus I would imagine the Firestone tires came from the US and not Japan.

[kilcoo316]

I'd have to say that the data from the Indy 'test' would be almost 100% irrelevant.

Different time of year therefore different track temperatures, different conditions etc...

Different speeds

Slicks Vs Grooved

No excessive braking

Opposite direction when running on the track

Completely different speeds

And the obvious, only left turns.

The list goes on and on really, so I really don't think any violations occured.

Plus I would imagine the Firestone tires came from the US and not Japan.

I would say its very relevant, in an abstract way...

The track was resurfaced for this year, and the surface rippled with diamond grinding. Now, Firestone could compare the old and new surface on what effects it had on its tyres - indeed, they had teething troubles with the new surface from what I have seen.

This information could be passed onto Bridgestone... say something like, the new surface grooving 1/2s tyre slip angles... therefore there is alot more stress on the sidewall....

[Smeerak]

I would say its very relevant, in an abstract way...

The track was resurfaced for this year, and the surface rippled with diamond grinding. Now, Firestone could compare the old and new surface on what effects it had on its tyres - indeed, they had teething troubles with the new surface from what I have seen.

This information could be passed onto Bridgestone... say something like, the new surface grooving 1/2s tyre slip angles... therefore there is alot more stress on the sidewall....

Hmm, thanks for the point of view, I didn't really think like that at all, interresting indeed.