MotoGP tyre rules tweaked

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jazkat @ May 20 2009, 06:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>“Teams must inform the tyre supplier of the number of each front slick specification required no later than 2 hours after the MotoGP race finish of this preceding Grand Prix (or 2 hours after the end of the final session of the official test, in case of the first Grand Prix). This allocation request will be final and no changes are permitted after this time.”

2 hours after the MotoGP race somewhere else 2 weeks in advance and your choice is final. Job well done. Drinks all around.

They really should revert to the old rules now that there is only one tire manufacturer

But in this economy that's not gonna happen so this is at least something.
Besides the cost of shipping throusands of tires...Why is it so hard to let them make their selection after Q1

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jazkat @ May 20 2009, 11:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The MotoGP tyre rules are to be tweaked, following an announcement from the Grand Prix Commission that the number of hard and soft front tyres will no longer need to be the same from June 24 onwards.

At present, the eight front tyres available to each rider are split equally between "4 of Specification “A” + 4 of Specification “B” = 8", meaning four of the softer compound and four of the harder compound.

However, from Assen (round seven) onwards, teams will be allowed to decide how many of each compound they would like. The choices available being:

3 of specification “A” + 5 of specification “B”, or:
4 of specification “A” + 4 of specification “B”, or:
5 of specification “A” + 3 of specification “B”.

“During the preceding Grand Prix (or the official test organised by Dorna/IRTA, in case of the first Grand Prix), the tyre supplier will inform the teams of the two front tyre specifications that will be available for the next Grand Prix,” said the statement.

“Teams must inform the tyre supplier of the number of each front slick specification required no later than 2 hours after the MotoGP race finish of this preceding Grand Prix (or 2 hours after the end of the final session of the official test, in case of the first Grand Prix). This allocation request will be final and no changes are permitted after this time.”

The change has been made to help riders who have been unable to effectively use one or other compound. They will now be able to have more of their preferred option.

The rear tyre allocation will remain unchanged, consisting of "6 of Specification “A” + 6 of Specification “B” ".

2009 is the first season of single-tyre MotoGP competition. All tyres are supplied by Bridgestone.

LINKY: http://www.crash.net/motogp/News/147070/1/...es_tweaked.html


I'm sure it will take a couple of changes to get these tyre rules right, so they help everyone, however for those teams who previously ran with 'stones, the data they already had, will make choices easier, those who haven't are on a steep learning curve.
I know we've covered this before but with hind sight, doesn't it make you wonder how much inside information Pedro really had!

What thousand of tires? There are what 18 bikes on the grid? So lets see 18x8=144 tires. Come on this is Bridgestone here they make that many tires a second. They can bring whatever they need and the teams can choose on the Thursday before the first practice. Anything else is crap. It is bad enough having a single supplier but to restrict the compound selection to 2 hours after the previous race is the stupidest ....... thing Dorna ever did and they have done plenty of stupid things. What is a tire good for? Even say they can sit for a month without degrading noticeably then make a ton of tires of every grade and bloody well stuff a transport full of them and park it in parc ferme and <u>serve</u> the teams. Enough of this .......it is becoming all about Bridgestone here. Single compound tires? I'm really pissed about this. I can buy a multi-compound Bridgestone 016 set for 250 bucks but the MotoGP squad can't use them? Bull ....... ..... .........

It doesn't look like a real fix, it just lookes to me like they will have choice of same ..... Where the hell are the intermediates that the rules called for? I'm sure if a certain Italian rider didn't like the tires they'd be all over it. The farce continues, only the fools continue to be fooled.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ May 24 2009, 12:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It doesn't look like a real fix, it just lookes to me like they will have choice of same ..... Where the hell are the intermediates that the rules called for? I'm sure if a certain Italian rider didn't like the tires they'd be all over it. The farce continues, only the fools continue to be fooled.
Told you control tyre would cause more problems than it solved. TOLD YOU SO !! Dorna couldn't organize a piss up in a brewery. .... they signed the tyre contract with bridgestone before they even found out how many or what type would or could be supplied. F1 ...... about with it and still are trying to get it right. Ezy is to pig headed to learn from there mistakes or admit he got it wrong. They will be playing with this for many seasons to come, just like F1.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (jazkat @ May 20 2009, 10:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>“Teams must inform the tyre supplier of the number of each front slick specification required no later than 2 hours after the MotoGP race finish of this preceding Grand Prix (or 2 hours after the end of the final session of the official test, in case of the first Grand Prix). This allocation request will be final and no changes are permitted after this time.”


Uh, what?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ May 23 2009, 04:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It is bad enough having a single supplier but to restrict the compound selection to 2 hours after the previous race is the stupidest ....... thing Dorna ever did and they have done plenty of stupid things.It's just done to give riders who know they can't effectively use one of the tires on offer a chance to get an extra tire out of the ones that they can use. It's not like they have freedom to determine their whole selection - they're controlling only 2 out of the 8 fronts and they're only choosing those 2 tires between 2 options. 75% of their front tire selection is locked-in.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ May 23 2009, 04:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>What is a tire good for? Even say they can sit for a month without degrading noticeably then make a ton of tires of every grade and bloody well stuff a transport full of them and park it in parc ferme and <u>serve</u> the teams. Enough of this .......it is becoming all about Bridgestone here.Providing tires gets a lot more expensive if you go that route, and allocation gets a lot less transparent. It's not all bad the way it is, just like it's not all good.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ May 23 2009, 04:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Single compound tires? I'm really pissed about this. I can buy a multi-compound Bridgestone 016 set for 250 bucks but the MotoGP squad can't use them? Bull ....... ..... .........Your multi-compound tire and a motogp multi-compound are a lot different in goal and execution. Multi-compound means that bridgestone would suddenly need to produce many more specifications of tires - moving back towards the very expensive "tire for every track and condition" way of doing things. It's not that they can't put together a multicompound tire effectively and economically, it's that by doing so they're back in the business of making different tires for each track, with different compounds on either side depending on circuit design. If you're going to be pissed at anything, be pissed at the economy, at Michelin for losing the war, at the idea behind the one-tire rule, etc. The details you're moaning about are about as good as it gets within the framework and motivation of the current rules. The current rule concept is to produce a limited number of tires with a wide operating range that are not track-specific, and adapt them to different bikes primarily through bike setup. There's some good in that, and some bad. Moaning about the details that are necessary to make such a system work at all is missing the point, in my opinion. On the bright side, there's no more BS about certain favored riders getting the best rubber - while everyone is stuck on the rubber likely designed with one or two riders in mind, no one gets special magic tires available to no one else.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ May 23 2009, 06:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It doesn't look like a real fix, it just lookes to me like they will have choice of same ..... Where the hell are the intermediates that the rules called for? I'm sure if a certain Italian rider didn't like the tires they'd be all over it. The farce continues, only the fools continue to be fooled.The new rules never called for intermediates. They include provisions for slicks and wets. The wets can either be molded or (hand) cut, and a specific land-sea ratio and other cutting criteria is given to determine what constitutes a legal wet tire. Tires cut less than that are considered slicks. Cutting and other such modification only happens if Bridgestone says it's necessary, and then they do it for everyone. There's no provision for intermediates.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mattsteg @ May 27 2009, 09:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The new rules never called for intermediates. They include provisions for slicks and wets. The wets can either be molded or (hand) cut, and a specific land-sea ratio and other cutting criteria is given to determine what constitutes a legal wet tire. Tires cut less than that are considered slicks. Cutting and other such modification only happens if Bridgestone says it's necessary, and then they do it for everyone. There's no provision for intermediates.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>"Bridgestone have not yet supplied a two- compound tyre, and of course they won't make inters, even though the rule book mentions them." superbikeplanet.com

I'm just going off of the rules...
http://www.fim-live.com/fileadmin/alfresco...CING_GP_Eng.pdf
There are references to intermediates...but not in the tire/tyre section.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE ('FIM')<div class='quotemain'>For Grand Prix race events, each rider will be restricted in the
quantity and specification of tyres that they may use at a single
race event as follows:
During all practice sessions, warm up and the race a maximum
of 20 slick tyres, specifically
Front slick tyres:
4 of Specification “A” + 4 of Specification “B” = 8 in total
Rear slick tyres:
6 of Specification “A” + 6 of Specification “B” = 12 in total
53
During all practice sessions, warm up and the race a maximum
of 8 wet tyres, specifically
Front wet tyres: 4 of the standard specification
Rear wet tyres: 4 of the standard specification
The tyre supplier may allocate 1 extra set (1 front + 1 rear) of wet
tyres to every rider, should this be deemed necessary by Race
Direction due to weather conditions at the event. Specifically in
the case of every practice session being fully wet, requiring the
use of wet tyres, 1 extra set of wet tyres will be allocated to every
rider for the race.
A wet tyre is defined as a tyre which has a land to sea ratio of at
least 20 % overall, and a minimum ratio of 7% in each third of the
section profile.
The tyre may be moulded or hand cut, but each groove must
have a minimum depth of three millimetres over 90 % of its
length. Any tyre with a land to sea ratio of less than 20 % will be
deemed a slick tyre and therefore must be part of the rider’s slick
tyre allocation. In case of dispute the decision of the Technical
Director will be final.Intermediates might exist (and do elsewhere in the rules, perhaps as leftovers), but by rule the tires available to the riders are either slicks or wets, with restrictions on the number of each and condition that any changes Bridgestone makes (like a cut-slick intermediate) are only done if necessary and to everyone's tires. The "let's make this .... up on the fly" implementation of the rules is quite apparent here. It's unclear where a 20% land/sea tire that doesn't meed the 7% criteria or has too shallow of cuts would fit - presumably in with the slicks.

Any intermediate would need to fit into either the dry or wet allocation (neither of which is very large) depending on land/sea etc. They could distribute them if they wanted to. Of course, as they would officially be "wet" or "slick" tires at that point, inclusion of "intermediates" in the rules is meaningless.

"Intermediates", as such, are not legal under the new tire rules, as riders are only allocated "wet" and "slick" tires. It'll take some more ...-pulled rules to officially bring back intermediate tires. Until then, any intermediates used will have to fit into the wet or slick tire allocation depending on their configuration. Maybe if we get an absolutely drenched weekend with a possible wet-drying track for the race Bridgestone could be convinced to cut some slicks to make intermediates, but other than that I doubt we'll see them any time soon.

Could it be we are talking about two different things? Intermediate in the sense that they only provide a soft and hard tire, but nothing in-between as in 'intermediate'. It seems from the superbikeplanet quote that the rules did mention a provision for a two-compound tire (as oppose to a cut slick for rain purpose) that Bstone has yet to provide. Your thoughts.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ May 27 2009, 10:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Could it be we are talking about two different things? Intermediate in the sense that they only provide a soft and hard tire, but nothing in-between as in 'intermediate'. It seems from the superbikeplanet quote that the rules did mention a provision for a two-compound tire (as oppose to a cut slick for rain purpose) that Bstone has yet to provide. Your thoughts.
i understand intermediates to be between slicks and wets , designed for damp rather than pissing down, now they use cut slicks.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ May 27 2009, 04:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Could it be we are talking about two different things? Intermediate in the sense that they only provide a soft and hard tire, but nothing in-between as in 'intermediate'. It seems from the superbikeplanet quote that the rules did mention a provision for a two-compound tire (as oppose to a cut slick for rain purpose) that Bstone has yet to provide. Your thoughts.
Nah, "Intermediate", as used in the rules, refers to a "partial rain" tire. One way of providing these is with cut slicks. For example (from a motogp-specific portion of the rules, even):
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (FIM)<div class='quotemain'>If the race has been declared wet (Art. 1.20), changing from a
machine equipped with rain tyre to a machine equipped with
intermediate or slick tyre, changing from a machine equipped
with intermediate tyre to a machine equipped with rain or slick
tyre, and changing from a machine equipped with slick tyre to a
machine equipped with intermediate or rain tyre is permitted at
any time during the race.There's no provision for or against multi-compound tires - they're not used because they're pricier to make and less universal when used to full benefit. If Bstone wanted to they could roll them out as part of the A/B slick selections. Bridgestone can't choose from the same small handful of specifications for each race if they're using multi-compound tires to any significant advantage, so they stick with the more universal single-compounds. Multi-compound and intermediate tires are separate things, and the intermediate tires referred to in the rules can only exist through ignoring/rewriting the tire regs or by cutting slicks and doing it for everyone. As it is the tires that riders have available is very precisely specified.

3-5 A front slicks
3-5 B front slicks
6 A rear slicks
6 B rear slicks
4 sets of "standard specification" wet tires and one more set if the whole weekend is underwater.

Of course, maybe "rain" and "wet" tires are different
I can only hope that the French (official I believe) version of the rules is better-written. They're a ....... mess.

Only motoGp can switch between rain/intermediate/slick tires on the fly. Yet motogp is officially limited to slick tires and wet tires. I would suggest that both "rain" and "intermediate" tires might be "wet" tires, but the "wet" tires available are all supposed to be of the "standard specification". That leaves intermediates to be taken out of the slick allocation by cutting (no way in hell that A or B will be an intermediate) which only Bridgestone is allowed to do, only if they deem it necessary, and if they do it for everyone.

Ridiculous.

I don't care what it costs Bridgestone they should provide a tire worthy of racing in this series. And yes that means I want track specific tires. Great tires and multicompound for the tracks that require them. Who cares what a couple of hundred tires cost Bridgestone? They get all the advertising for this series. All of it. I know the economy well people are still wearing out tires and the income from that market hasn't dried up. They are supplying manufacturers that custom build an entire racing motorcycle from scratch for millions, run teams, pay for monstrous transportation costs and they want to cheap out while only making a flippin' tire? What is the cost ratio like 1,000,000:1? Make me laugh...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ May 27 2009, 11:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I don't care what it costs Bridgestone they should provide a tire worthy of racing in this series. And yes that means I want track specific tires. Great tires and multicompound for the tracks that require them. Who cares what a couple of hundred tires cost Bridgestone? They get all the advertising for this series. All of it. I know the economy well people are still wearing out tires and the income from that market hasn't dried up. They are supplying manufacturers that custom build an entire racing motorcycle from scratch for millions, run teams, pay for monstrous transportation costs and they want to cheap out while only making a flippin' tire? What is the cost ratio like 1,000,000:1? Make me laugh...
I agree, and if bridgestone cant they should never have bid in the first place.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ May 27 2009, 05:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I don't care what it costs Bridgestone they should provide a tire worthy of racing in this series.They care. They're not a charity. Neither is Michelin or any other tire company.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ May 27 2009, 05:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>And yes that means I want track specific tires. Great tires and multicompound for the tracks that require them.That sort of worked when we had more than one tire manufacturer in the series. They had motivation to win and their resources weren't spread throughout the entire field.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ May 27 2009, 05:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Who cares what a couple of hundred tires cost Bridgestone? They get all the advertising for this series. All of it.Bridgestone cares. Getting "all of" the advertising isn't that great. it's not like they can say "we competed against the best and won". They can only say "we beat ourselves" and they can say that regardless of how good their tires are. As far as prototyping goes, developing race tires that operate well under a wide range of conditions is interesting/useful.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ May 27 2009, 05:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I know the economy well people are still wearing out tires and the income from that market hasn't dried up. They are supplying manufacturers that custom build an entire racing motorcycle from scratch for millions, run teams, pay for monstrous transportation costs and they want to cheap out while only making a flippin' tire? What is the cost ratio like 1,000,000:1? Make me laugh...Tires aren't that cheap to develop and manufacture.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m)<div class='quotemain'>I agree, and if bridgestone cant they should never have bid in the first place.What'd really be awesome would be everyone ridding around on rims!

Making a tyre decision for the next race up to two hours after the current race has finished seems a bit stupid.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mattsteg @ May 28 2009, 12:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>What'd really be awesome would be everyone ridding around on rims!
Just tyres fit for the weather conditions and track there racing at would be fine

The lap times suggest that the bridgestone "control" tyre is fairly high tech. I think it would be reasonable for them to produce an intermediate tyre though; I presume pirelli manage to do it for wsbk.

However it is also seems likely (lex where are you?) that whatever deal dorna did with bridgestone is far from fully on the public record; does anyone think michelin were ever a chance of being the sole tyre provider? Dorna have stated probably genuinely that they want closer racing and may want to limit tyre choices to this end; the surprise would be if it is at their direction that it seems to be working to some extent. It will be interesting to see this weekend when rossi's (and stoner's) preferred hard tyres are apparently available whether this will lead to a gap on lorenzo and pedrosa, although the influence of tyres may be hard to separate from rossi's mastery of mugello.