Tyre Issues at the Brickyard (F1/NASCAR)

[ArrowsFA1]

In the light of Michelin's experience at the 2005 US GP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_United_States_Grand_Prix) it was interesting to see the problems that Goodyear suffered at the NASCAR Allstate 400 (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/69469) this weekend.

Obviously circumstances were slightly different given that Goodyear are the sole tyre supplier in NASCAR, but the response to the issue was different as well:


Speaking on the Speedway's behalf, track president Joe Chitwoood said the situation is completely different to what happened in the 2005 Formula One US Grand Prix: "I think what you're seeing right now is different because we have Goodyear, NASCAR, and myself sitting up here talking about how we're in it together," Chitwood said. "The goal is to make sure the fans enjoy the event, that's what it's about when they come to the Indianapolis Motor Speedway.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/69481

Perhaps NASCAR could teach F1 a thing or two :)

[F1boat]

Definetly!

[Dave B]

From what I've read the NASCAR race was every bit as farcical as the F1 debacle. Good on the organisers for getting all the cars to start, but a race interrupted by cautions every few laps could hardly have been a great spectacle.

[ArrowsFA1]

From what I've read the NASCAR race was every bit as farcical as the F1 debacle. Good on the organisers for getting all the cars to start, but a race interrupted by cautions every few laps could hardly have been a great spectacle.
True. According to Autosport (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/69485): "NASCAR decided to run no more than 12 laps under the green flag, causing the yellows to come out another six times and for a total of 52 laps. However, drivers wouldn't drive those 12 laps on the limit, lapping nearly two seconds off the pace to avoid blowing out tyres before the cautions."

[ioan]

The only difference I see is that the teams in Nascar were grown up enough to go out instead of hiding in the pits and blaming it all on the organizers.

[ArrowsFA1]

The only difference I see is that the teams in Nascar were grown up enough to go out instead of hiding in the pits and blaming it all on the organizers.
I think the phrase "we're in it together" was the difference.

[V12]

Yeah it's a shame that nothing could have been sorted out that day, maybe we would still have 2 tyre suppliers in F1 if it had...

[ioan]

I think the phrase "we're in it together" was the difference.

Yeah, because they were all in it, they all had the same tires.
This wasn't the case in F1 back in 2005, so I don't see why you are searching for similarities between these 2 cases?! :rolleyes:

[ArrowsFA1]

Yeah, because they were all in it, they all had the same tires.
No, not for that reason. In this latest case the circuit (Indianapolis), the governing body (NASCAR), and the tyre manufacturer (Goodyear) were all "talking about how we're in it together" with the goal "to make sure the fans enjoy the event".

[ioan]

No, not for that reason. In this latest case the circuit (Indianapolis), the governing body (NASCAR), and the tyre manufacturer (Goodyear) were all "talking about how we're in it together" with the goal "to make sure the fans enjoy the event".

And if they had two tire suppliers and a part of the teams wouldn't have had tire problems than they would still have been all in it together?! I doubt it!
Still you are "welcome" to throw mud at F1, while criticizing Mosley for his private life! :down:

[wedge]

Did you actually read the Indy Cup Race thread on the Nascar Forum?

A manufacturer brings a crap tyre - its a joke

the organisers try to continue running the race its - its a joke because its a farce

if the drivers park their cars - its a joke because they should've put on a show.

its a no win situation!

[BobbyC]

NASCAR also has experience with such disasters -- and it was 39 years ago and their precedence was in 1969 at the first Talladega 500.

Tyres were a question at the first race to be held at Talladega and a drivers' strike ensued by the Professional Drivers Association, organised for this specific race concern. NASCAR responded with safety car sessions every 25 laps to prevent a disaster, and the race ended without crashes.

NASCAR also had the 2005 races at Lowe's Motor Speedway where diamond grinding led to a controversial incident where 22 safety car sessions took place -- many of them crashes.

2005 Coca-Cola 600 - Lap and Driver:
6 - Truex, 10 - Kurt Busch, 93 - Debris, 101 - Five car incident, 115 - J. Gordon (another track breakup), 139 - Johnny Sauter (tyre failure), 149 - E. Sadler, 162 - Kurt Busch, 200 - Wimmer, 209 - Kvapil, 216 - Marlin and Mears crash, 227 - McMurray, 239 - McMurray, 246 - DEI Teammates Waltrip and Earnhardt Jr Big One, 266 - Debris, 288 - Blaney, 308 - Rudd (Engine), 355 - Kahne (tyre blowout), 368 - Blaney (engine), 377 - Five car incident, 391 - Nemechek

NASCAR chose to play it safe, much to the delight of race sponsor Allstate. No cars were officially knocked out by crashes (all of them came back), and engine failures knocked two cars out. All 43 cars ran at least 91 laps.

So what they did Sunday was had precedent in 1969 at Talladega, and even had precedence in 1998 in Atlanta because of concerns caused by racing at night for the first time at the circuit because of rain in the day (the IRL race that year was the first to be run on the newly installed lights; Atlanta now runs pole qualifying and one Truck race at night).

[Bagwan]

Is this Goodyear's fault ?
Was '05 Bridgestone's fault ?

Who was it that had the track ground up into an LP record ?

Neither a grooved tire or slick can run that oval safely .
And , according to a few drivers , 12 laps was too many .

Tony has a serious problem with his track .

[ArrowsFA1]

As far as I'm corncerned the purpose of the forum is to raise questions and exchange opinions. I just thought that recent events in NASCAR raised interesting comparisions with the 2005 US GP. Nowhere did I say that the situation was the same, just similar.

The point I was making related to what people thought of the ways the two situations were dealt with. Were they dealt with differently? If so why? And how different were the outcomes?

Still you are "welcome" to throw mud at F1, while criticizing Mosley for his private life! :down:
It would have been interesting to have the views of those who follow F1 and NASCAR. Instead the same old **** gets brought up again which attempts to kill reasonable discussion :rolleyes:

And if they had two tire suppliers and a part of the teams wouldn't have had tire problems than they would still have been all in it together?
A relevant question :up: I think Joe Chitwoood's comments suggest that NASCAR would have approached that situation differently because NASCAR appears to put the fans interests first. That said, was a 'race' interrupted by competition yellows, and run at a reduced pace 'better' or 'worse' than what we saw in 2005?

Did you actually read the Indy Cup Race thread on the Nascar Forum?
Haven't had the chance yet. Perhaps that would answer my questions.

[ArrowsFA1]

NASCAR also has experience with such disasters -- and it was 39 years ago and their precedence was in 1969 at the first Talladega 500...
Thanks for the background info :up:

[thelurker]

Is this Goodyear's fault ?
Was '05 Bridgestone's fault ?

Who was it that had the track ground up into an LP record ?

Neither a grooved tire or slick can run that oval safely .
And , according to a few drivers , 12 laps was too many .

Tony has a serious problem with his track .
The IRL Firestones don't seem to have a problem with the track. Nor did the F1 Bridgestones (it was Michelin that had the problem in 05). Given that NASCAR has had several tire issues with this new car (see Tony Stewart's comments after the Atlanta race), I'd say it isn't the Indy surface thats to blame. Goodyear brought last years tire hoping it would work with the COT, it didn't. Had they done the propor testing, this likely wouldn't have happened.

[ArrowsFA1]

Had they done the propor testing, this likely wouldn't have happened.
That rather backs up Dale Jnr's comment (http://www.nascar.com/2008/news/headlines/cup/07/27/brickyard.tires.saga/1.html) that ""when I was here [testing], they were wearing out in five laps."

[ioan]

So, there are similarities in the end, and it's about the two tire companies, Michelin and Goodyear, not doing the job as well as they should have.

[ArrowsFA1]

Given that we're talking about two different tyre companies (Goodyear & Michelin) having the problems, a common factor appears to be the track surface. In NASCAR's case a contributory factor also appears to be the characteristics of the current car.

Another common factor is that Bridgestone (F1) and Firestone (Indycar) are one and the same company, and they do not appear to have suffered the same problems as their rivals.

[Bagwan]

If I'm not mistaken , they've had issues at other tracks where grinding has been introduced .

It runs to another question , though .
If tires that are fine at tracks that have not been diamond ground get chewed up , is it a good thing ?

I suppose the idea was to improve grip laterally , but if the result has the cars unable to run 12 laps consecutively without serious issues , was it really an improvement ?

Presumably , the life of ANY make of tire would be shortened by the grooves if they tear these ones up this badly . This was at least better than the 5 laps Jr. mentioned .


I wouldn't expect that track owners are lining up at the diamond grinders door right now .
That's unless they want to groove all the tracks , and I doubt it .

[Roamy]

There is no excuse for this - plus they had a backup tire that would have eliminated the BS and the fans would have gotten what the paid for. Arrogance and ignorance in both sports lead to this result. If technology is no better than this after all these years then perhaps 300k should be the car allowance. But at least Crashcar when out and raced.

[Lee Roy]

There is no excuse for this - plus they had a backup tire that would have eliminated the BS . . . . .

They had brought in the tires for next week's Pocono race as a stop-gap measure, but there is no indication that those tires would have done any better than the original tires they had for this race.

[Valve Bounce]

True. According to Autosport (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/69485): "NASCAR decided to run no more than 12 laps under the green flag, causing the yellows to come out another six times and for a total of 52 laps. However, drivers wouldn't drive those 12 laps on the limit, lapping nearly two seconds off the pace to avoid blowing out tyres before the cautions."

If this is all NACCAR can come up with, they need Max over there to whip them into shape.

[AAReagles]

If this is all NACCAR can come up with, they need Max over there to whip them into shape.
:laugh:

But with a politically correct theme this time of course.



Though I feel sorry for the fans, I'm glad in the sense that it's another pie in Tony George's face, beings that he's partly responsible for the CART/Indianapolis 500 split and for generating another spec-car series.

Also great to see Goodyear fall flat as well... for obvious reasons stemming from their decisions to cut AAR funding for GP projects in 1968.

[ArrowsFA1]

Interesting to see Dale jnr's latest comments (http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/69589) on the subject:

...diamond-grinding the race track with the grooves does directly have an effect on tyre wear. Directly. And anyone who wants to say otherwise is just in denial. All right?

"So, with that said, obviously I wouldn't expect him to repave the race track even though they did diamond-grind it for no good reason. They just paved it. I wouldn't pave it either, or again.

"But what we're going to have to do, and I think that Indy is an isolated case, it's always this time of year that we see this. Whether we want to go or need to go or whatever, we're going to have to go down there and put two days of rubber on the race track one or two weeks prior to the race, just to fix that issue."

"I don't think changing the tyre is going to help it. A harder tyre might last 20 laps, but it didn't seem like the tyre got better as the race got better. The tyre wasn't putting rubber down; it was turning to dust and not laying on the race track and not merging with the asphalt.

"And you can't tell me that those grooves in the race track don't have a direct affect on tyre wear. That's crazy.

[speeddurango]

Reading that comments on Jr's again, it looks like somehow Indy has been an interesting place for the last few years, firstly it was the tyre gate where basically it was more of a political battle between F1 and GPDA, then it is this delicate situation between Indycar and NASCAR, some words Jr said there and I quote
"It's not like we turned our back on Indy and just didn't want to go."

And here's what TG said and I quote: "The problem is solely theirs, and by that I mean it's theirs to figure out"

Well, it doesn't look like Indy and NASCAR is not enjoying a well bonded freindship at the moment and again the interesting thing about it is the fuse of the conflict again is the tyre issue.

[call_me_andrew]

From what I've read the NASCAR race was every bit as farcical as the F1 debacle. Good on the organisers for getting all the cars to start, but a race interrupted by cautions every few laps could hardly have been a great spectacle.

At least the fans at the USGP were given a refund.

And a week after the USGP kerfuffle, Champ Car honored all USGP ticket stubs at the Cleveland Grand Prix.