So – Bridgestone out after 2010. There’s time to line up another source
of tires, but what other manufacturer is likely to step up?
And – Toyota out immediately. What are the penalties for leaving before
2012 under the new Concorde agreement? Why is the FIA talking about
needing to clarify the legal situation (especially as this prolongs the
uncertainty around Sauber Qadbak’s entry)? And why are the FIA and
Ferrari sniping at each other again over cost containment?
Oh, and does anyone think that if the Renault board had decided today to
continue in F1 they wouldn’t have announced it immediately (rather than
delaying past their PR event already scheduled for Thursday)?
–
Mark Jackson – http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~mjackson
Not knowing is much more interesting than believing
an answer that might be wrong. - Richard Feynman
In article <7lemh3F3bpn2…@mid.individual.net>, Mark Jackson
<mjack…@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
> So – Bridgestone out after 2010. There’s time to line up another source
> of tires, but what other manufacturer is likely to step up?
Pirelli, Goodyear and Michelin have all apparently said no. Dunlop?
–
Mike Fleming
Comment by admin — February 5, 2010 @ 4:00 pm
Mike Fleming wrote:
> In article <7lemh3F3bpn2…@mid.individual.net>, Mark Jackson
> <mjack…@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
>> So – Bridgestone out after 2010. There’s time to line up another source
>> of tires, but what other manufacturer is likely to step up?
> Pirelli, Goodyear and Michelin have all apparently said no. Dunlop?
There’s a bloke round my way does a good deal on retreads…
–
Duncan Snowden.
Comment by admin — February 5, 2010 @ 4:00 pm
[Default] Thus spake Mark Jackson <mjack…@alumni.caltech.edu>:
>So – Bridgestone out after 2010. There’s time to line up another source
>of tires, but what other manufacturer is likely to step up?
Rumors from Speed say Kumho might be a choice. Obvkously Goodyear
won’t touch F1. At least not until Bernie’s body is getting moldy.
Michelin? Nah.
>And – Toyota out immediately. What are the penalties for leaving before
>2012 under the new Concorde agreement? Why is the FIA talking about
>needing to clarify the legal situation (especially as this prolongs the
>uncertainty around Sauber Qadbak’s entry)? And why are the FIA and
>Ferrari sniping at each other again over cost containment?
I sure hope Peter gets back on the grid. Talk about "one of the good
guys".
>Oh, and does anyone think that if the Renault board had decided today to
>continue in F1 they wouldn’t have announced it immediately (rather than
>delaying past their PR event already scheduled for Thursday)?
I think they’ll stall for a while. I think that, let’s say, the
Cosworth teams will be a tad bit "short on power", at least for the
first portion of the season. Yeah, engine parity is supposed to be a
good thing, but look at what happened at the Indy 500 with it’s
supposed "parity" rules.
For Americans, look at how well "parity" has worked in the NFL, NBA
and, in particular, MLB.
—
- dillon I am not invalid
"Always shoot first. At the very least you’ll
distract the guy enough to make the second one count"
— Lazurus Long
Comment by admin — February 5, 2010 @ 4:00 pm
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 05:30:21 -0600, Duncan Snowden wrote
(in article <hd113d$cr…@aioe.org>):
> Mike Fleming wrote:
>> In article <7lemh3F3bpn2…@mid.individual.net>, Mark Jackson
>> <mjack…@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
>>> So – Bridgestone out after 2010. There’s time to line up another source
>>> of tires, but what other manufacturer is likely to step up?
>> Pirelli, Goodyear and Michelin have all apparently said no. Dunlop?
> There’s a bloke round my way does a good deal on retreads…
Looks like it’s up to Canadian Tire to the rescue…
–
Cheers!
Dennis
Remove ‘Elle-Kabong’ to reply
Comment by admin — February 5, 2010 @ 4:00 pm