[vishaltanksale]

Originally Posted by Shan2nu

If you want fast cars. Watch Indy 500. 230+mph for over 200 laps. Nothing even comes close. Their average speed is the top speed of F1 cars but, it's still boring to me.

Because I am for speed and that is why I want to see this new rule change and help teams decide on pit-stop stratergy, so they can change tyre with every stop and come out all guns blazing..

I guess u mis-understood me...yes I am for speed but want to see those pit-stops do lot more than just fueling and help car perform.
Why let that beast run on tyres which are doing nothign to help run.

Dont you think even pit-stops are nowdays boring with nothing to do for those highly paid engg ?

btw, if I know correctly, with new rule you can only change only 1 tyre at time (if tyre change is required in worst case)..not sure though. but if it is true, well its not justice to teams and those poor drivers who are strecthing themselves to extreme to perfom.

Again all this is my personal opinion and cud be biased because I am following F1 for some many years and just not ready to accept changes. but not matter wht rules are, I will still continue to watch and love F1.
Well as far as Indy is concerned...use to watch whn I was in states but thats just waste of time and all USA hyped.... F1 is F1 and no one can match it...

[turbo_lover]

I believe F-1 is all about the total package ... the faster the teams adapts to the rule changes better they perform ...

if the car has good aerodynamic and mechanical grip tires will suffer less

, again if the tire manufacturer comes up with the right mix in tire compound with higher durability and give optimum traction again it ups the car /tire package

,and driver if he drives by a strategy should nuture the car well and set a good pace in the race ...

if we can recollect in nurburgring mclarens didnt quite have the blistering pace that they set in Monaco , Williams was way quicker ... which led Kimi to push harder trying to overtake the backmarker ...i think kimi drove beautifully in that race ...
He knows when to be up his pace and when to preserve ...like he did in monaco ..
where good old alonso lost his podium finish due to his failing rear tires ...

my only worry due to the new rules is that ...i dont want to see a serious crash resulting into a bad injury from such committed strategies ... the tyre rule will not change this season slowing the car but certainly not the drivers ...

[Shan2nu]

Why let that beast run on tyres which are doing nothign to help run.

That's bcoz, if these guys can manage to master the black art of making grippy tyres, capable of surviving 1.5 hrs, 350+kms and 3-5 Gs' of hardcore F1 racing, they could use similar technology in making road tyres better and safer.

It's been long since road cars favoured from F1 technology, these tyre designs could be the next break through. U will no longer find yourself saying "Oh I have very grippy tyres but, they didn't even last me 30K kms".

F1 isn't just a war between the cars but also between the tyre manufacturers. Unless you're gonna put them to the test, they'll never improve.

I believe F-1 is all about the total package ... the faster the teams adapts to the rule changes better they perform ...

Exactly!! Adaptation is what it's all about. Kimi just learnt that "Pedal to the Metal" isn't going to win him a championship. He's got a lot to learn about racing (as a complete package).

He knows when to be up his pace and when to preserve ...like he did in monaco ..
where good old alonso lost his podium finish due to his failing rear tires ...

Alonso let go in Monaco bcoz he realised that he was in no shape to challenge the 2 William cars breathing down his neck. Same case in Imola, Schumacher was atleast 1.5 secs quicker than Alonso but, instead of trying to increase his pace to match Schumi's, he made Schumi drop down to his pace and follow him all the way to the cheqr'd flag.

Championships aren't based on 1 or 2 races, it's all about how consistant you are through out the season.

Back, when Collin Edwards and Troy Bayliss were fighting out in SBK, it was Edwards who won the championship that year but, it was Troy Bayliss who had won most of the races. It's just that Edwards was more consistant. For Troy, it was either a win or a DNF.

Shan2nu

[Revvmaster]

My 2 cents

Tyre manufacturers need to expand the envelope to create better and longer lasting tyres. Accepted. FIA alters rules... Accepted. FIA doesn't give leeway and or studies the impact of such change in rules... Not Acceptable.

That is exactly what happened in Kimi's case. While the rule changes are meant to make cars run longer on a set of tyres, there doesn't seem to be enough background study done to ensure how these changes would impact F-1 cars as a whole. It could also be the reason why Ferrari could be underperforming. Changes in rules mean that Bridgestone aren't getting the compound right to ensure that the car performs at a competitive level.

The decision to change tyres only if the situation is extremely grave is just not acceptable. Teams who anyways change tyres in situations other than normal circumstances lose a lot of time in making a normally uncalled for pitstop resulting in possible lose in positions. So really, if FIA thinks that it'd give that team an unfair advantage, its thinking wrong.

Safety is a priority. If a team decides to change its tyres, it should whenever it wants to without having to be bothered by FIA. Thinking that F-1 cars are banger car racers is a bit far-fetched. Its asking for too much from an already stressed setup in an F-1 car. FIA should really re-consider this rule if it is to prevent Kimi type incidents in the future.

Revv

[Mpower]

Originally Posted by Shan2nu

If you want fast cars. Watch Indy 500. 230+mph for over 200 laps. Nothing even comes close. Their average speed is the top speed of F1 cars but, it's still boring to me.

Shan2nu

Oh man...you took the words right out of my mouth. Was watching the Indy 500 on Sunday. Guys were banging wheels at 200+ and we had last lap overtaking...I was on the edge of my seat.

[Shan2nu]

That is exactly what happened in Kimi's case. While the rule changes are meant to make cars run longer on a set of tyres, there doesn't seem to be enough background study done to ensure how these changes would impact F-1 cars as a whole. It could also be the reason why Ferrari could be underperforming. Changes in rules mean that Bridgestone aren't getting the compound right to ensure that the car performs at a competitive level.

Kimi still hasn't realised that he's not supposed to take off like a "Wasp" from the word go, especially when he's not allowed to change tyres.

That's exactly what he's been doing. Weren't the Williams and Renaults running on the same tyres as that on Kimi's car? They didn't seem to be in any trouble (except for William's pathetic fuel strategy).

There are many factors that affect tyre wear and Kimi's driving style plays a major role in it. A flat spot is what caused the car to vibrate and weaken the suspenssion, which caused the accident. In a way, FIA were wrong in not letting Kimi come in and change his front right tyre but, it is also Kimi's reponsibility as an F1 driver, to see to it that he doesn't drive the way he does.

It's upto Bridgestone and Michellin to come up with better, long lasting tyres. How they do it, is their problem.

Shan2nu

[turbo_lover]

Originally Posted by Shan2nu

In a way, FIA were wrong in not letting Kimi come in and change his front right tyre but, it is also Kimi's reponsibility as an F1 driver, to see to it that he doesn't drive the way he does.
Shan2nu

Kimi always had the option of changing his tyre .. FIA allows one tire change in such circumstances ... it was the teams decision not to give up first place by pitting the car for the tye change ...

[Gordon]

I think Kimi did just fine. The car was unstable because it lost its barge board during the first gravel incident. Due to this, Kimi had to alter his driving. He had two more incidents in the gravel because of improper handling. Due to this, the front right tyre started giving problems. He drove well for the final laps and tried to keep the tyres safe while maintaining a decent speed. But it just gave away on the last lap.

Not calling Kimi for a tyre change was a good decision IMO. Remember Barrichello in Germany 2000. He was on dry and the track was wet. He could've easily ran off the track and got himself stuck in the gravel, or worse be involved in an accident. The team and Barrichello decided to go ahead with the dry tyres instead of coming in and losing the lead. Result is that he controlled his car for the remaining laps and they WON!

[Gordon]

I don't see why everyone's telling that he isn't conservative about his tyres.

During the first incident, he lost his barge board. It was damaged. Later, when he was about to lap Villeneuve, he had a brake-lock and went out. During this his tyre was damaged. So it wasn't the driving style fault, it was due to an accident. Even though, he continued to be performing well with his car. He kept Alonso behind him till the end.

[turbo_lover]

thats what i have been trying to say all the time...
his driving was fine...the lapping villeneuve triggered the whole incident ...

[Neo.]

Originally Posted by Gordon

Not calling Kimi for a tyre change was a good decision IMO.

I don't think you guys are getting the point. The team could not have changed the tyres even if they wanted to.

The FIA rule states explicitly that " a tyre can be changed only in the event of a puncture "

So technically Kimi could not have changed his tyres. There were only two options:
1: Stop the car in the pits if you are concerned about your safety, unfortunately the FIA isn't.
2: Try your luck and drive on. If you are lucky you will reach the finish line or get away with a minor crash and if its not your day, may as well end up as a wallpaper on the signboards if the tyre blows up @ 330kmph.

That's the reason I mentioned that the FIA rules are a recipe for disaster.

[Gordon]

Originally Posted by Neo.

The team could not have changed the tyres even if they wanted to.

I disagree. The team could've changed tyres under the FIA law.

According to the rules, a tyre can only be changed during this time if it is punctured or damaged. Kimi's tyre had a flat-spot [read damaged] which caused it to wobble and send massive vibrations to the suspension that eventually caused it to fail.

So technically what Kimi could do was:
1. Enter pits, change tyre, finish in top four.
2. Continue and try finishing the race with a win.
3. Ease back and finish second.

[Shan2nu]

I don't see why everyone's telling that he isn't conservative about his tyres.

During the first incident, he lost his barge board. It was damaged. Later, when he was about to lap Villeneuve, he had a brake-lock and went out.

So why blame FIA if Kimi locked up his wheels? Was FIA driving the Mclaren that day? Was Kimi the only driver who had to overtake that day? And if i'm not wrong, Villeneuve was a back marker, wasn't he?

Now i dunno if the rules allowed Kimi to come in and change tyres, if it did, then it was completely Mclaren's fault that they didn't. A 4th place finish is anyday better than not finishing a race.

Frankly, for the last 10 laps, Kimi was driving on hopes and dreams which ended in a nightmare.

Shan2nu

[Gordon]

So why blame FIA if Kimi locked up his wheels?

I didn't blame the FIA.

Villeneuve was a back marker, wasn't he?

He was. But maybe his car wasn't handling properly because of the damaged barge board.

Originally Posted by Shan2nu

Now i dunno if the rules allowed Kimi to come in and change tyres, if it did, then it was completely Mclaren's fault that they didn't. A 4th place finish is anyday better than not finishing a race.

True, a fourth place finish in anyday better than not finishing a race. But a win would be even better, it was a risk that they took. Just like Barrichello. He won the race, so everyone was proud of Ferrari for the risk they took. Everyone said it was a good decision. If he would've spun out and disqualified, everyone would surely say its a bad decision.

Its a matter of risk. And in conditions of risk, the decision was taken. I'm sure they are better decision makers than us. Thats exactly why they are in this sport. Thats exactly why they have won races and championships.

Frankly, for the last 10 laps, Kimi was driving on hopes and dreams which ended in a nightmare.

Of course, but it could've been a dream come true.

[Shan2nu]

True, a fourth place finish in anyday better than not finishing a race. But a win would be even better, it was a risk that they took.

Of course, but it could've been a dream come true.

That's exactly my point. FIA and Michellin have nothing to do with it. It was Kimi's and Mclaren's decission that ended his race, the way it did.

Shan2nu