Capirex interview / tyre issues

[fritzchen]

Hello to everybody,

this is my first post, so I'd like to shortly introduce myself.
I'm watching MotoGP races since 2006. In my spare time I like to ride and work on my moto-bikes (there are all two strokes, a little bit older and not that powerfull[from 15 to 23 hp]).
I'm not a native english speaker, so please, be so friendly and excuse my bad english.
I've been reading the motomatters-site/forum for quite a while but did not had anything to say/ask.

But today I stumbled over an interview with Capirex:
http://www.racer.com/capirossi-vows-to-improve-safety/article/221681/

The point that makes me suspicious is:

"There were problems with serial numbers, too: with that number you can figure out when the tire was built. A tire built two years ago can't go as quick as one built last week. Some riders had the new tires and some others the old ones. That's not OK; that must be fixed. I want the last rider to have the same possibilities the first one has."

Does this mean that some riders(for example #24) got only old tyres on some/any races this year?

In my mind this is violating the single tyre-rule. I thought this rule implies that any rider gets the same tyres, or can choose one from the same variety.

Does anyone know more about it?
What's your opinion about this?

[Hansd]

Hello Fritzchen, welcome here.
Your english is quite OK, so don't worry about it.

I agree this sounds very unfair, but i'm afraid this is not about the single-tyre rule, as this refers to a single tyre SUPPLIER.
E.g. everybody gets the same tyre brand.

[TwoStroke Institute]

No please tell me it's not true, that all riders are not getting the same tyre .Hansd is 100% correct and this is racing fair doesn't usualy come into off track stuff.

[Kropotkin]

I find this impossible to believe. I have had explained to me in detail how the tires are selected (by Mike Webb, technical director, not someone from Bridgestone) and he has a computer program that draws serial numbers at random. Every rider that does badly (as Capirossi did in 2011) believes there must be some reason for it, so he appears to be giving the tires the blame. Now, there is a lot wrong with the tires. But the allocation system is not the problem.

[Squidpuppet]

I find this impossible to believe. I have had explained to me in detail how the tires are selected (by Mike Webb, technical director, not someone from Bridgestone) and he has a computer program that draws serial numbers at random. .

I dont like the sound of "random" at all. I would prefer to see a deliberate assignment of all age tires spread uniformly across all riders.

[Kropotkin]

I dont like the sound of "random" at all. I would prefer to see a deliberate assignment of all age tires spread uniformly across all riders.

That would incite charges of favoritism. Random is better, the least worst option, in my opinion.

[Squidpuppet]

I dont like the sound of "random" at all. I would prefer to see a deliberate assignment of all age tires spread uniformly across all riders.

That would incite charges of favoritism. Random is better, the least worst option, in my opinion.

What if a computer program selected the tires based on serial numbers, in a non random manner? If it had 20 rears from age group "X", it would allocate one to every rider and be sure not to fill a riders weekend allotment from that batch. It could be written in such a way to force stock rotation, ensuring the oldies get used first.

[Faster1]

,, I think that we kind of glossed over another "hard to believe",, "2 year old tires?

The tires are purpose built for gp only and expensive, and one would think, re-developed each year based on feedback and evolution of the bikes. I find it "impossible to believe" that more tires would by manufactured than that which would be used up in one season, rendering old vs new moot. Also, wouldn't tires that were stored properly and un (heat) cycled be just as effective if they were used a week after manufactured, the same as, 6+ months after manufactured? ,,

then random selection is perfect.

[TwoStroke Institute]

If tyres are re-developed each year wouldn't rider who has been in the top tier for more than 10yrs easily be able to tell what 09 v's 2011 tyres were like? The allocation would be random and fair but that does not say anything about the tyres supplied

[Squidpuppet]

,, I think that we kind of glossed over another "hard to believe",, "2 year old tires?

The tires are purpose built for gp only and expensive, and one would think, re-developed each year based on feedback and evolution of the bikes. I find it "impossible to believe" that more tires would by manufactured than that which would be used up in one season, rendering old vs new moot.

I can see a bunch of leftovers being accidentally created. An all rain weekend would result in a bunch of slicks being unused. Or, any weekend where a rider doesnt participate because of an injury from the week before. Not many tires there, but it could add up over the season multiplied by a few riders.

But your point is a good one. At the end of the season, arent they all "Last years" model? Shouldnt they be discarded?

Also, wouldn't tires that were stored properly and un (heat) cycled be just as effective if they were used a week after manufactured, the same as, 6+ months after manufactured? ,,

I havent used a Bridgestone GP tire, obviously, but I can say that I have found large performance and degradation characteristic differences in two "exact" slicks (Dunlop and Michelin) that were made in the same plant on the same day and were stored identically. Significant differences.

[Oscar]

Firstly, hello fritzchen, welcome to the mob!

The concept of random selection is fair - but if there is the possibility of that selection taking place from a selection of tyres of very considerable age difference then it's far from perfect. I've been banging on on mtm for probably two years about the apparent inexplicable differences between tyres, as quite frequently commented on by Stoner, Edwards, and Capirex amongst others - and perhaps this is the reason and not factory QC in manufacturing as I had suspected.

If tyres are subject to different significant heat cycles during storage e.g. some have been sitting in a container/truck in the blazing sun while others have not, the performance is likely to be different even if they were absolutely identical at the time they left the factory door. How often have we heard a rider say that they 'had the set-up working well' with a tyre, changed it for an apparently identical compound and the set-up was immediately wrong for no other reason? If you add to that a bike for which it is extremely difficult to find a sweet spot (Ducati..) then those problems are magnified - but even Edwards, on what is generally regarded as the least finicky bike and with a huge amount of experience, has had major problems with tyre variations amongst a batch.

The problems of post-production handling and storage are well known in other industries - for example, for high-performance pre-preg carbon fibre, a complete history of the age and all storage conditions including during transport is required for 'release-grade' (i.e. for use in manufacturing where its performance to specification is essential). The same goes for aviation fuels.

I suspect Capirex may have uncovered (or exposed) a real can of worms here..

[Squidpuppet]

The concept of random selection is fair - but if there is the possibility of that selection taking place from a selection of tyres of very considerable age difference then it's far from perfect. ..

Thanks for wording that better than my attempt.

[Cam D]

so in 2012 I will choose the tires for the riders. I mean, I will do it personally: I will go by the bunch of tires and pick them myself.

Not a good solution imo.

[sir_nj]

off topic but is it just me who has a problem with ram bam capriex being the anointed saftey advisor?

Today he has decided tyres (probably not before time, though don't forget that no tyre manufacturer can currently perform magic and make both a fast warm up and long lasting tyre) but please please tell me does his job description does NOT lead to any involvement in reviewing rider behaviour etc?

Oh, and err, nice thread fritzchen, welcome

[TwoStroke Institute]

The tyres could be affected depending where and how they are shipped. The tyres in a shipping container seafrieghted across the equator might be affecting the tyre. The Norwegian spirit 'Aquavit' is actualy put in a ship carted across the equator and bottled back in Norway(is that right phil?) all coming from a shippment that was not unloaded at it's desitination port , the company was sure it would be ruined but upon the first sip
Back to tyres some tyres could be airfreighted to flyaway rounds and rounds in Europe sea frieghted, leading to inconsistent tyres.
I would tend to believe a senior rider who rode a significant part of his career on Bridgestone tyres. I could not see left over tyres thrown away, like leftover snags after a bbq.
Good point sir-nj

[Upon1]

Like many have said, I fail to see how a 2 year old tyre would even end up in the selection for a GP weekend. There is no way that any of the GP riders from 1st to last place would accept a 2 year old tyre...(except maybe Elias)

so in 2012 I will choose the tires for the riders. I mean, I will do it personally: I will go by the bunch of tires and pick them myself.

Not a good solution imo.

I was just about to post this as well Cam. I wonder if it depends if you're on Capirossi's good side when he goes to pick your tyres! But seriously, how is that going to help? He's not riding them, he won't know what they feel like. Some might like the 2012 tyres and some might not. I understand he's trying to do it with the riders safety in mind, but it just doesn't feel like a good system. Also, how is he going to pick 12 tyres (or is it 16 for a weekend?) by hand for each of the 17 riders on the grid? Along with his other safety duties?

[motomania]

Hello to everybody,

this is my first post, so I'd like to shortly introduce myself.
I'm watching MotoGP races since 2006. In my spare time I like to ride and work on my moto-bikes (there are all two strokes, a little bit older and not that powerfull[from 15 to 23 hp]).
I'm not a native english speaker, so please, be so friendly and excuse my bad english.
I've been reading the motomatters-site/forum for quite a while but did not had anything to say/ask.

But today I stumbled over an interview with Capirex:
http://www.racer.com/capirossi-vows-to-improve-safety/article/221681/

The point that makes me suspicious is:

"There were problems with serial numbers, too: with that number you can figure out when the tire was built. A tire built two years ago can't go as quick as one built last week. Some riders had the new tires and some others the old ones. That's not OK; that must be fixed. I want the last rider to have the same possibilities the first one has."

Does this mean that some riders(for example #24) got only old tyres on some/any races this year?

In my mind this is violating the single tyre-rule. I thought this rule implies that any rider gets the same tyres, or can choose one from the same variety.

Does anyone know more about it?
What's your opinion about this?

Welcome Fritzchen, enjoy MTM. Your english is fine and your point was well put. I'm glad you found and brought forward this subject/article up. I'd been contemplating starting a thread on the tire situation myself, I'd mentioned it in a PM to a couple of members.

I find this impossible to believe. I have had explained to me in detail how the tires are selected (by Mike Webb, technical director, not someone from Bridgestone) and he has a computer program that draws serial numbers at random. Every rider that does badly (as Capirossi did in 2011) believes there must be some reason for it, so he appears to be giving the tires the blame. Now, there is a lot wrong with the tires. But the allocation system is not the problem.

What is impossible to believe? That there's 2 year old tires that are being used by Bridgestone or that those tires were distributed to some riders over a weekend but not others? Nowhere there does he state that there was favorable treatment toward any certain riders during this process, only that some riders had new tires and some had old ones.

"The tire situation in 2011 has never been clear, so in 2012 I will choose the tires for the riders. I mean, I will do it personally: I will go by the bunch of tires and pick them myself."

While it's not perfectly clear what he means here, I don't think he's saying that he'll be choosing tires for the individual riders. It sounds more to me like he's saying that he will choose the groups of tires to be distributed, not which tires will be given to whom.

"My meeting with the Bridgestone people at Valencia was tough. I told them that certain things won't be accepted anymore: the tires are too hard and therefore too dangerous, so they must be changed."

I don't think there's many on MTM that would disagree here. Look at the issues with tires that everyone has had with front tires not getting warm over the last few years. Think about the number of incidents in both practice and race sessions that have occurred. In fact, not only occurred but also have caused some damn serious injuries, at the very least.

,, I think that we kind of glossed over another "hard to believe",, "2 year old tires?

Faster1 hit the nail squarely on the head. These guys shouldn't have to race on 2 year old tires. Period. Especially when you take into account all the issues that the riders have had with the BS tires and their inability to come up to a SAFE temperature to use.

I've been banging on on mtm for probably two years about the apparent inexplicable differences between tyres, as quite frequently commented on by Stoner, Edwards, and Capirex amongst others.
<snip>
If you add to that a bike for which it is extremely difficult to find a sweet spot (Ducati..) then those problems are magnified - but even Edwards, on what is generally regarded as the least finicky bike and with a huge amount of experience, has had major problems with tyre variations amongst a batch.
<snip>
I suspect Capirex may have uncovered (or exposed) a real can of worms here..

Some great points Oscar, and yes there's been several of us that have beat upon the tire issue for quite awhile now. Personally, I'm not in favor of a "control" tire or "control" anything else for that matter. Racing is about competition and that should include the parts of the bike that the manufacturers don't usually try to specialize. Things such as brakes, shocks, exhaust systems, forks, tires, etc. When you limit or even eliminate an element of the competition than the quality of racing goes down. If you feel this isn't true, do you want to watch a MotoGP series where everyone is using exactly the same parts when it comes to the aforementioned items and the only thing different is the chassis and engine.

In my view, going to a control tire has affected the racing unlike any other factor in the recent past. If you don't think the tires have had a huge effect on the racing then let's take 2 different racers and where their paths went with the advent of Bridgestone as the control tire. When Stoner changed bikes and tire manufacturer in 2007, he went from having issues and carrying a bit of a reputation as a crasher to clearly being the one to beat in 2007. While Ducati had definitely done a good job with the new 800cc bike, there was absolutely no doubt that Casey really got on well with the BS tires. In fact, it was seen by many riders that the BS tires appeared to have an edge. We all know about what happened in 2008 and then suddenly DORNA decided that a control tire was the answer and after 36 years in the series, Michelin was gone. No chance for Dunlop, Pirelli or any other tire manufacturer to step in and see what they could do. So much for competition.

I mentioned 2 different racers above and the 2nd racer I want to talk about is Tony Elias. If there's any rider that depicts how the BS control tyre can truly change someone's career, it has to be him. By the end of the his 2nd year in MotoGP, he was winning on a satellite bike and showed in his battle with Rossi at Estoril for his first win, that he would and could scrap with anyone for a win. Many feel that his win over Rossi, worth 5 points, is what cost Vale the 2006 title with Hayden. After all, Hayden won the championship by that exact margin. 2007 was the 2nd year for him on the Gresini Honda. 2007 wasn't a good season, he retired from 3 of the first 8 races scoring only 38 points total during that period before he missed Assen, Germany and the US rounds. He managed a 3rd at Japan followed by a 4th at Phillip Island. Michelin had begun to show signs that they were having problems and then Toni's move to the Ducati & the BS tires in 2008. It was obvious that between the bike and tires, Elias just wasn't comfortable, at all. 2009 saw a move back to Gresini but there wasn't much doubt that Toni and the BS tires didn't get on well. We all know about his move down for the first year of Moto2 and how he dominated there. It was quite obvious to anyone that in 2011 that Toni's main goal was about staying upright.

Simply put, Casey and Toni have endured opposite experiences with the BS tires. Stoner does better than others on them while Toni might be faster on a set of rubber from a Schwinn. That's the first problem I have with control tires.

A couple other things I don't like and will give my thoughts later on (feel free to post yours) :

Did/How did/does the control tire affect the manufacturers and how they construct their bike?

However, my biggest concern is the safety factor. Simply look at the number of incidents & thus injuries that we've seen because these damn tires don't get truly warm till you've seemingly run a 1/4 of the race/session.

More of my thoughts on this topic soon. For now, this Sierrabilly is calling it a night.

Edited to add missing words that made a difference

[Tourn46]

I think the 2 year old tyres business is pretty damn shocking.

I've been trying hard to think of a decent comparison... but what happens to a rubber band when it's left for a while? The properties change. Don't get me wrong, they are different items, but rubber can perish.

Unless these tyres have been stored in PERFECT conditions for 2 years, who is to say that these could perform as well as "new" tyres? Perhaps Tech3 had drawn the short straw when we saw Edwards and Cruthchlow chunk their tyres up?

Surely this compromises the safety of the riders big time... if there is a control tyre rule, then these tyres MUST be identical on all bikes otherwise it's utterly farcical.

I also find it hard to understand how the 2011 spec tyres could possibly be 2 years old? Are Bridgestone going to smuggle some left over 2011 tyres into the allocation in 2012 to use them up?

[Kropotkin]

A quick note on tires: If you have a bike of your own, go outside and have a look at the markings on it. There is a date stamp on there (typically something like 0922, which means that the tire was produced in week 22 of 2009) which will tell you how old it is. You will be surprised at just how old they are.

Tires, as long as they are unused, can be stored for several years with only marginal tire degradation. The problem that Bridgestone has is not the length of time that the tires have been stored, but the stiffness of the carcass and the hardness of the rubber. That, I think, is what Capirossi is alluding to in his talks with Bridgestone, and it is something that every rider in the paddock has been complaining about. The tires should be a lot better next year anyway, because Bridgestone is altering both the carcass and the compound of the tires, but I think Capirossi will be pushing for even softer tires.

[L34]

I couldnt imagine that there would of been many BS tyres left after all the testing Ducati was doing.

Seriously though, what tyres were given out on test days?
Did BS give out the "newer" or "older" ones?

It would be bit of a downer to test for a couple of days and then modify/design a chassis around some newer rubber, then
having made some mods come back a few weeks later to test again only to be given the old stuff.

[Tourn46]

Tires, as long as they are unused, can be stored for several years with only marginal tire degradation.

But the fact is that tyres do degrade over time. It is very small differences in MotoGP that make big differences... a control tyre should mean identical tyres (or as identical as a manufacturing process enables), it should not have tyres with an age range in my opinion.

I know that this is very idealistic, but I think a control tyre must be that precise.

[Kropotkin]

But the fact is that tyres do degrade over time. It is very small differences in MotoGP that make big differences... a control tyre should mean identical tyres (or as identical as a manufacturing process enables), it should not have tyres with an age range in my opinion.

I know that this is very idealistic, but I think a control tyre must be that precise.

I think the biggest problem is that tire development has completely stagnated, meaning that the 2010 tires could be used for the 2011 season. That won't happen in 2012, fortunately.

[Cam D]

For those that haven't read it Casey describes some of the construction issue in the interview in this mag. It's quite interesting.
http://issuu.com/cycletorque/docs/cycle ... ipBtn=true

[Rusty Bucket USA]

Lifted from the Ducati thread:

I think we are confusing issues here. I have always understood a special to be a tyre just for an individual rider and superior to the other tyres that brand makes. The fact that some tyres will suit some bikes over others or even some riders over others is a different issue...

Elias crash types were carbon copy's of most of the Ducati's. Sudden front end washouts on corner entry...

A brief off-topic tangent: what's ironic about this is that Elias' lone MotoGP victory came on tires designed for Dani Pedrosa. Sometimes a tire designed for one rider (and perhaps made with more expensive materials) will benefit more than one rider. And, presumably, sometimes not... What's more ironic is that since they have been on (ostensibly) the same tires, Elias and Pedrosa have had significantly different fortunes.

Something brought up in Fastest (or maybe it was Spalding in the Extras), was that - in his estimation - the BridgeStone tires were designed for Ducati. So, the logic goes, when the control tire from BridgeStone became reality, the Japanese bikes had to be re-engineered to have weight distribution like Ducati. Relative success in the interim would seem to suggest that logic is flawed; how much of that is on BridgeStone and how much on Ducati, to me, is the interesting line of questions.

Mick, while you know I agree with you on the demise of Elias, and why it's a bad thing, there is a detail askew... Elias and Melandri were on BridgeStones with Gresini in '07 (this was a change from '06). Elias started the season of like gangbusters, until he got hurt.

What I was surprised to learn watching Fastest was that Rossi blames both Michelin and his beloved M1 for his crash at Valencia in '06!

Beyond that, I think we're overlooking something important. If there are 2 year-old tires still getting passed around (how many did they make in '09?!), it's not super-secret information. The teams will know they've been issued an older tire. It is their choice when to run it. I can't imagine they wouldn't use it early in the weekend. What may, in fact, be the case is the teams have found the older tires may perform better than the newer ones, but they could easily adjust to this, as well.

[Doca]

A quick note on tires: If you have a bike of your own, go outside and have a look at the markings on it. There is a date stamp on there (typically something like 0922, which means that the tire was produced in week 22 of 2009) which will tell you how old it is. You will be surprised at just how old they are.

Race tires behave very different to road tyres.

As a club racer I've always known that a race tyre's performance is very much affected buy the number of heat cycles it has had, with some brands more forgiving than others. I never understood how sacrificing tyre longevity could give a competitive edge (see qualifiers as an ultimate example) until an excellent piece the BBC had as part of the build up to the race where Simonchelli died.
Steve Parish went to the Dunlop factory in Birmingham and followed the production of a tyre. Basically you can get extra performance by only partially curing the rubber. The rubber cures a little more every time the tyre cools which is why once you heat a tyre up at a race meeting you should keep it at temperature all day.

So I can see why it might be possible that some tyres from the same batch might behave differently after many weeks travelling to a race circuit if for some reason they have experienced a different environment along the way. Maybe some tyres come by boat & some get air freight as an example?