deal on Michelins

[limoncello]

I've had good performance with Michelins over the years on Volvo's & a couple of other cars. But they shot themselves in the foot at Indy. I agree that they did what they had to do safetywise, but this will leave a sour taste in folks for a while, and deservedly so. Will be curious to see how they recover.
Nuff said, & back to reasonably priced tires for Boxsters: I took some heat on this forum for getting Sumitomos - they're OK for me on the street (I don't push it that hard on the street) but on the track at limit they do scrub around certain corners, and I think the sidewall flex mentioned by another reader correctly identifies the problem. So I will run these tires down some and then change.
Any first hand knowledge of the PS2 or Contisports ON THE TRACK? Would appreciate it.
Also, it seems that going from my 17" to 18" and a lower profile may help on track, at some expense to street comfort. Open for experience on that as well. Thanks.

[pez]

Great Debate!
I too lost out at Indy as well
It’s great to see that Michelin took safety as top priority, to save us from another Williams/Ayrton Senna disaster. However they have raced at Indy several times and should know the stresses involved there.
Several years ago JPM ran a whole race on one set of Michelins and I think that was at Indy but I may be wrong about the track. They even loaded up a jet and flew over a second batch to run and that set failed on the test rig with the same failure. It just seems to be a case of poor engineering but who knows it could be from the recent change in management for Michelin’s F-1 program. Regardless Michelin “was caught with their pants down” plain and simple and was not prepared for Indy. Those Pirelli and Bridgestones are sounding better each day!

Pez

[Brucelee]

I am not one to reopen the debate, and certainly never one to defend the French. However, if I though Michelin made the best tire for my Box and I was after the best tire (ignoring price for the moment), I would buy it. If not, I would not.

I can't see the connection between what happens at Indy and what happens on my Box, but I could just be being stupid here. If so, enlighten me please.

[pez]

If you were one of the many that had tickets to the USGP Michelin is offering a refund..
I know this thread got off the topic but thought this would go with the debate...

Pez

http://www.itv-f1.com/News_Article.aspx?PO_ID=33279

[Perfectlap]

This event makes me want to buy a set of Michelin tires. Too bad I spent $1000 on Toyo RA-1's. (just cut a side wall in the back had to buy a new one after only 1,700 miles $240).

I applaud Michelin for their decision to ensure the driver's safety. Anger directed at Michelin is misdirected. I am still appalled that a governing body would green light a race after the tire manufacuter cam out point blank and said we goofed and these tires are not safe. Yet the governing body said 'no, get in the cars and race". Utterly reprehensible decision making. A queue of cars weaving their way in 6th gear through a train of cars going significantly slower is begging for a high speed collision.
And as we saw last year at Indy when one of the driver's hit the wall, this particular racing formula is poor at quickly responding to accidents. I don't think I've ever seen a driver at Indy sit in a car that long before a medic came to his aid. Once the wreckage was cleared the officials failed to properly clear the track and a driver quickly crashed out a few laps later after running over carbon fiber. They didn't even have the sense to redirect the saftey car and the other cars through the pit lane during the caution period while the wreckage was cleared. THe cars were litteraly driving over carbon lap after lap when they could have been safely rerouted throught the pit lane.
And we are supposed to trust these guys?

Michelin did the right thing. This season brought new rules that required the teams to use only one set of tires all weekend. A ridiculus rule in motorsports. It compromises the racing as the drivers have to go easy all weekend even in qualifying which has degenerated into a marketing/advertising session. And during the races the driver's have to constantly be driving at 90% effort for fear of flat spotting. Its complete nonsense to spend $400M on two little cars and then dilute the racing.

I feel very bad for all the people who spent thousands to attend this race but don't blame Michelin entirely. This turned into a poker a match and the F1 rules makers were fully expecting the teams to be bluffing. They got a big surprise.
In this country with infinite laws, there could be no other outcome once the tire manufacturer stated that the tires were dangerous under full cornering load.
The directors of the Williams team were only recently fully exhonerated after a 10 year Italian criminal investigation into the death of one their drivers a 3X world champion. Those directors could well have been arressted and sent to prison once they stepped foot in Italy. I think we can learn something about from the Italians about being 100% behind the driver's safety.

[IceBox]

The issue doesn't revolve around whether the right decisions were made after it was revealed that the tires were unsafe. Michelin should have provided proper tires. Period. They didn't. Each team is required to bring two types of tires, their fast competitive ones and a harder compound set that, while not as competitive, are of a harder compound and will last. The Michelin teams didn't feel they needed to bring their back-up sets. Any argument for a chicane or some other 'solution' has a viable counter-argument. At the end of the day, last years Michelins worked fine. So what's the deal here? Perhaps I have a different consumer appreciation but I can't find anything laudable in Michelin's failure to be competent enough to produce a tire as good as last years', nor in the Michelin teams failure to find a way around THEIR problem. The axiom in the entertainment world is 'the show must go on!'. It didn't. No action after the announcement on saturday that they may not have useable tires is in any way worthy of applause. That an organization like F1 couldn't solve the problem on re-enforces the perception that fans are last on their list of priorities, and that while they want the U.S. bucks, they have nothing but distain for the U.S. race fan. You can bet this would not have happened at Imola or another European venue. The riot that would insue would be devastating. This is why I watch CHAMP car and ALMS/ Le Mans racing. A couple of years ago, Mercedes had three car flip ene-over-end at Le Mans, one in the race, and they did EVERYTHING under heaven and earth to be there at the starting line, to fufill their commitment to the race and the fans. They 'balled up' as the brits would say. Was it wise for them to run a car that was apparently flawed? Was it safe? Probably not. Accounting is safe. Gardening is safe. Racing is not. Kimi had to be forcibly held back by Ron Dennis and was in tears. He was redy to go. On his Michelins. By not, as a group, going out to race, the Michelin teams assured themselves that the point standings would not alter that much. Think about it. All the points leaders not running at the same time, and Minardi and Jordan posing no threat at all, the only net-net liability to the no-shows was Micheal getting a few points closer to being able to see the leaders. And it's not like the Ferrari's gonna get a lot faster as the year progresses. Consider that math before you 'applaud the teams' putting safety first. The only thing they kept safe was their point standing. Shame on F1!

[IceBox]

And Bruce, to offer a rejoinder to your question of how Indy and your Box are related at the tire level, the whole reason companies go racing is to develop products and technologies that make it to the street car. "Win on Sunday, sell on Monday.' In Michelin's premiere showcase event, F1, they missed a major design flaw rendering their teams cars' unsafe. How is that possible? The banked turn and straight is the signature part of the track, the reason they're there instead of Watkin's Glenn or some other "real' race track, yet that's only part the tires couln't handle. And this was missed by their very best engineers, the ones that get to design the 'sexy' race stuff. It HAS to make you wonder what their less-gifted street tire designers might not see. We all rember the Firestone SUV tires that had an alarming way of de-laminating when they were run under-pressure. And while user error was involved, these are regular people who aren't always attentive to their vehicles condition. Manufacturers take that into account when they make products for general use. So even with pit crews and telematry etc., Michelin could't provide a safe tire for use in a highly controlled environment like F1. What happens when an 'un-discovered' design flaw that seems to me should have been relatively obvious given that these tires were made specifically for Indy yet failed to incorporate side loads generated by banked turns...like you find at Indy...what happens when a flaw surfaces in street tires? Used by Joe Public, no pit crew, no strict adherance to user guidlines? Death and carnage, just like the Firestone tires. So I'll be saying 'Non' to Michelin for my cars.