Bridgestone announce tyre compounds
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Bridgestone announce tyre compounds
Bridgestone tyre allocations for the 2009 season:
Australia - super soft, medium
Malaysia - soft, hard
China - super soft, medium
Bahrain - super soft, medium
Spain - soft, hard
Monaco - super soft, soft
Turkey - soft, hard
Britain - soft, hard
Germany - super soft, medium
Hungary - super soft, soft
Europe - super soft, soft
Belgium - soft, medium
Italy - soft, medium
Singapore - super soft, soft
Japan - soft, hard
Brazil - super soft, medium
Abu Dhabi - soft, medium
I am not a big fan of the gap between compounds but I understand the infinite amount of strategy variances they provide.
Article: http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2009/8/9808.html
----It's interesting to hear the reasoning for tire selection for the circuits.
Discuss.
Australia - super soft, medium
Malaysia - soft, hard
China - super soft, medium
Bahrain - super soft, medium
Spain - soft, hard
Monaco - super soft, soft
Turkey - soft, hard
Britain - soft, hard
Germany - super soft, medium
Hungary - super soft, soft
Europe - super soft, soft
Belgium - soft, medium
Italy - soft, medium
Singapore - super soft, soft
Japan - soft, hard
Brazil - super soft, medium
Abu Dhabi - soft, medium
I am not a big fan of the gap between compounds but I understand the infinite amount of strategy variances they provide.
Article: http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2009/8/9808.html
----It's interesting to hear the reasoning for tire selection for the circuits.
Discuss.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,040
Likes: 0
From: kuwait
imo, all tires compounds should be allowed in every race and the team would pick the best tire suiting their car! that would also allow for infinite choice of strategies.
what i dont get is the stupid rule that each car must use the two compounds during the race! why?! if the car is fine with the harder option more than the softer option of example, why force the team to use both!
what i dont get is the stupid rule that each car must use the two compounds during the race! why?! if the car is fine with the harder option more than the softer option of example, why force the team to use both!
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,863
Likes: 125
From: Pawtucket, RI
The "tire thing" is a stupid gimmick, supposed to result in more passing, but IMO that's not RACING. Better to FIX THE FORMULA, which has made passing near-impossible without a minimum 2-second lap time advantage.
I don't know why the forced use of sub-optimal tires is so popular in open-wheel racing right now, I *hate* it. That's not RACING.
Fix the formula, dammit!
1. Single-element, reduced-chord, reduced depth wings front and rear (for aesthetics lose the WIDE-front skinny-rear look, change widths back to ~2008 specs).
2. Allow limited underbody tunnels.
Going to the skinny rear wing, but leaving all the elements, chord, and camber (depth) didn't help much. Making the front wing BIGGER was a step in the wrong direction for sure. Reduce overall downforce, and allow SOME of it to come from underbody venturis, and the cars will be able to RACE each other on-track. Sick to death of fuel-strategy/pit-stop "racing".
I don't know why the forced use of sub-optimal tires is so popular in open-wheel racing right now, I *hate* it. That's not RACING.
Fix the formula, dammit!
1. Single-element, reduced-chord, reduced depth wings front and rear (for aesthetics lose the WIDE-front skinny-rear look, change widths back to ~2008 specs).
2. Allow limited underbody tunnels.
Going to the skinny rear wing, but leaving all the elements, chord, and camber (depth) didn't help much. Making the front wing BIGGER was a step in the wrong direction for sure. Reduce overall downforce, and allow SOME of it to come from underbody venturis, and the cars will be able to RACE each other on-track. Sick to death of fuel-strategy/pit-stop "racing".
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post