Joined May 2009
6K Posts | 4K+
Shovel's Club
Two.
Let's not forget Sepang where Loris Baz found out the hard way as well.
Maybe different compounds and construction but I cannot recall similar with Bridgestone during the sole supplier era (was Nakano during or before the single supplier?)
Whilst there is talk that both riders who suffered the blowouts are the two largest riders and both on Ducati's, of course it should not matter and Michelin need to get a swift wire brush enema to get this right.
Joined May 2009
6K Posts | 4K+
Shovel's Club
From what I read today ...... no.
Officially it was said that a small puncture was found but there are still suspicions of a lower than recommended pressure ............ I guess we will never know as if all was good, then Michelin have some big questions to answer but if the pressure was low then the team does.
Joined Apr 2015
6K Posts | 5K+
NJ
My point still remains that those front tires are dangerous because of their proneness to washing out with no warning. When Iannone went down 2 weeks ago, what happens if he gets run over instead of sliding off the circuit?
The large rider/Ducati thing is a smokescreen to try and put some of the burden on someone/something other than Michelin. It sounds more like Michelin doesn't actually know what the problem is hence the removal of two compounds altogether.
Ianonne hit the white line and as for getting run over (a very realistic risk) it is the risk taken no matter how they have an accident as we all know ........... if risk is to rule the sport then there is no sport.
You want unexpected front end losses, check Lorenzo's from practice where it washes extremely early and I suspect well before full lean
Edited to add:
The larger rider thing is or seems to be media driven - Lorenzo was extremely pointed in his comments apparently
The withdrawal apparently is that they both use the same construction and thus it may be that Micheling are concerned with the construction and sidewall thickness (Reddings issue was the sidewall blew out)
Well, they could always ride slower so they don't keep crashing.
Joined Apr 2015
6K Posts | 5K+
NJ
I understand that, but you're still missing the point that to suddenly decide two of the rear tire compounds need to be withdrawn on safety grounds because 1 tire delaminates out of all the tires run over the past 2 days for god knows how many laps total, while being fine with front end tires washing out with no warning is HIGH COMEDY.
Yeah Michelin just happens to have this new medium rear on hand ready to go?
I mean...this raises all sorts of red flags.
Nope, not at all am I missing the point
Yes, front ends wash out but ask any rider which they prefer and I bet they would happily take a front end wash out over a blown tyre or highside.
Yes, as with ALL accidents the danger is being struck by a following bike and with such things as front end washing out the rider generally is in a form of 'controlled' slide (until the hit the gravel) and thus the risk of being struck is high due to the 'more mass to hit' principle.
Is it high comedy that they are concerned about rear tyres but not front fallers, well IMO only but they are concerned about blown rear tyres, to date there has been no such issue with the front blowing and as such, right now, I suspect that front end grip is the lesser of two evils and thay are trying to address the large evil.
And that was my first though ............ why bring additional or spare compounds if there is no intent to use them?
Krop could likely answer as to whether that is standard practice or whether this just happens to be a situation where they have tyres available that were scheduled for the next race and will use these instead.
In the rules, and in the contract. Bridgestone did the same. They have to have an extra compound available, just in case the tires they brought don't work out. In the case of Bridgestone, even the extra hard tire they brought to Phillip Island in 2013 could not save their arses.
Joined Apr 2015
6K Posts | 5K+
NJ
Yes but this new medium compound is what they bring? I get having something in the contract about a third backup compound, but what my question is, if they have an altogether different medium compound isn't that somewhat...strange? Makes it sound almost as if they are still experimenting with tire compounds that it's perfectly normal for them to have a different type of medium compound on hand. If it was just a different compound altogether that's another story.
It's not the compound, it's the construction. The two tires originally used had the same construction, but different compounds. This one has a much stiffer construction, with the medium compound.
Tires are a dark art. There are no simple answers. You cannot focus on a single aspect. If you do, you miss the point entirely.
Krop, is all to be reviewed again after the extended warm-up?
Asking as I am wondering if we may see another PI type race of 'must pit after X laps'
Joined Apr 2015
6K Posts | 5K+
NJ
Joined Aug 2007
11K Posts | 3K+
Pomona NY
Joined Apr 2015
6K Posts | 5K+
NJ
Dark art?
I can't agree with that phrase since all I ever heard was Michelin bragging for years about the things that they can do with race tire design.
Similar threads
