View Full Version : Bridgestone/Firestone: One Series Or No Tires
So says an anonymous source: http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Motorsports/CART/2004/07/05/525969.html
Other interesting notes in there as well:
TG says, "I must be in charge."
Ford Says, "We have zero interest in the IRL's engines."
Railbird
07-05-04, 11:17 PM
No knock against Bridgestone but tire manufactures come and go.
Sell the deal to one of the other Asian outfits and mandate a harder wider tire.
TG isn't doing much of a job running what he's got.
Ford's already been burnt by those guys once.
No knock against Bridgestone but tire manufactures come and go.
Sell the deal to one of the other Asian outfits and mandate a harder wider tire.
TG isn't doing much of a job running what he's got.
Ford's already been burnt by those guys once.
So what is the real story concerning Ford and the 96' season?
So what is the real story concerning Ford and the 96' season?
Ford provided engines at reasonable prices, ensuring the IRL had decent sized fields. The other CART manufacturers refused. Even though they were legal, Honda never let one of their engines near the track. Same with Toyota (not that anybody would have wanted one of those). The only Mercedes to be seen all year was the Galles entry at Indy.
If it wasn't for Ford, there would have been the handful of leftover Menard/Buick engines, and nothing else. The IRL would not have turned a wheel.
As a thank you for their support, the IRL spec announced for 1997 was written in cooperation with GM - so that GM could adapt their already developed IMSA engine for use at Indy. Needless to say, Ford was not amused.
Railbird
07-05-04, 11:37 PM
yep
Mr. Vengeance
07-05-04, 11:45 PM
TG says, "I must be in charge."
I don't know how to express my disgust with this man without launching into a tirade.
Once again, Bugs (http://www.nonstick.com/sounds/Bugs_Bunny/ltbb_052.wav) says it better than I can.
Let the IRL die, already.
Lizzerd
07-06-04, 12:37 AM
I'd love to know who those anonymous sources are...
Ford provided engines at reasonable prices, ensuring the IRL had decent sized fields. The other CART manufacturers refused. Even though they were legal, Honda never let one of their engines near the track. Same with Toyota (not that anybody would have wanted one of those). The only Mercedes to be seen all year was the Galles entry at Indy.
If it wasn't for Ford, there would have been the handful of leftover Menard/Buick engines, and nothing else. The IRL would not have turned a wheel.
As a thank you for their support, the IRL spec announced for 1997 was written in cooperation with GM - so that GM could adapt their already developed IMSA engine for use at Indy. Needless to say, Ford was not amused.
Thanks
So when Ford decided to do the engine deal they didn't have a contract for future years or anything else. I wonder why the others didn't budge but Ford did?The strange thing is that now Ford/Cosworth bailed out GM.
Lizzerd
07-06-04, 02:27 AM
We seem to be getting off topic here. Sorry, but I'm OT, too.
True, Ford could have balked and killed the irl before it turned a wheel, but CART could have, too. But, it would have required a lot of forward thinking... and not trying to compete on Memorial Day, '96.
Considering that all the teams still had '95 chassis still in their stables when the '96 specs were mandated, and the '95's would be used in the irl, they could have run the first two irl races that year (assuming the schedules allowed it), been in the top 25 in points, and gone to Indy, never to look back. 25/8 fiasco would have been moot. The irl originals would have been wiped out financially, book closed, early painful death. Ahhhh.... what could have been....
Spicoli
07-06-04, 08:10 AM
Hankook Tires.
Madmaxfan2
07-06-04, 08:21 AM
Hoosier Tires. They doing nothing but racing tires. Challenged Goodyear in NASCAR, and made tires for AIS, a series that ran old Champ Cars, so they are a capable company. Anything with the name Hoosier attached to Champ Cars will drive the gomers wild, which maybe the best reason of all. :rofl:
Bad tires may cause a positive effect on the racing. If a new supplier comes on board, it may mean a learning curve that will create a challenge for them and the teams trying to adjust to a different compound and one that may not be as consistant.
Bridgestone has the capability to produce a tire above the level of preformance that Champ Car requires. The tires that are currently used are so durable and functional that they never come into question. That is a good thing in general.
I don't want them to leave but, there would be an acceptable supplier if they do. Avon, Yokahoma, Hankook, Kuhmo, on and on.
Andrew Longman
07-06-04, 09:46 AM
"Anything else is just speculation by people who don't know," he said. "I don't think that we need the IRL to be successful. And I don't think they need us for whatever version of success (they envision)." :)
Sean O'Gorman
07-06-04, 10:45 AM
Kumho or Hankook would be nice, they both have their technical centers based in Akron.
racer2c
07-06-04, 10:52 AM
Every Champ Car race this year has had a 'tire segment' with the top motor sport exec from Bridgestone who is at the race. Bridgestone is a presenting sponsor of the series and has repeatedly said that the CCWS fits their marketing demographic. I'm of the opinion that if there is any pressure for unification coming from Bridgestone, it's aimed squarely at Tony George.
michelin?
for what it's worth, I've shown my loyalty to Bridgestone. I bought a set of Potenza's for my car.
Andrew Longman
07-06-04, 11:11 AM
Every Champ Car race this year has had a 'tire segment' with the top motor sport exec from Bridgestone who is at the race. Bridgestone is a presenting sponsor of the series and has repeatedly said that the CCWS fits their marketing demographic. I'm of the opinion that if there is any pressure for unification coming from Bridgestone, it's aimed squarely at Tony George.
That's my bet too.
Time and money spent by B/F on the IRL only increased their overall marketing effort with the likely result of confusing the market and decreasing returns.
And Ford would never trade a cost controlled exclusive sponsor/supplier arrangement with CCWS for a competitive engine war arrangement with the IRL. Winning the I500 just doesn't mean that much. And Ford has already done that anyway.
Goodrich,maybe....I'd rather see a larger, better known tire mfg. to help with promotion of the series...once again...if TV's were tuned in, you wouldn't be hearing theses rumors.
Sean O'Gorman
07-06-04, 06:36 PM
Goodrich,maybe....I'd rather see a larger, better known tire mfg. to help with promotion of the series...once again...if TV's were tuned in, you wouldn't be hearing theses rumors.
I believe that BFG is now a Michelin owned brand.
I believe that BFG is now a Michelin owned brand.
I wasn't aware of that but it still makes sense versus a mfg that sells few tires in this country or North America.
Sean O'Gorman
07-06-04, 07:17 PM
I wasn't aware of that but it still makes sense versus a mfg that sells few tires in this country or North America.
Well what better way for them to try and gain market share? Besides, Kumho and Hankook are much more involved in the grassroots levels of motorsport in the US, this could be a great way for them to showcase their technology.
I remember the problems Hoosier Tires had when they tried to tackle big time racing (NASCAR). The tires had some problems. Although they were trying to compete with Goodyear, I'm sure the expertise needed wasn't their. Michelin/Goodrich would probably, already have the engineering expertise in house. It wouldn't be much of a stretch for them to tackle Champcar and produce a safe, raceworthy tire. I'm not so sure about companies that either don't race or have lower formula experience.
Motomaster.
http://www.als.ca/concert_of_hope/logos/Canadian%20Tire%20logo.jpg
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.