Subscribe

Sign up for free

  • Get quick access to your favorite articles

  • Manage alerts on breaking news and favorite drivers

  • Make your voice heard with article commenting.

Autosport Plus

Discover premium content
Subscribe

US Preview Quotes: Michelin

Pierre Dupasquier, Motorsport Director: "We knew that the previous race in Monza would place a greater emphasis on aerodynamics than on the relationship between a chassis and its tyres. In circumstances that perhaps favoured our main rival, however, our partners proved to be extremely competitive. Juan Pablo Montoya and the BMW WilliamsF1 Team gave Michael Schumacher a run for his money while Kimi Raikkonen and West McLaren Mercedes pushed Rubens Barrichello all the way to the end. Average lap speeds at Indianapolis are about 200 km/h (125mph), 40km/h (25mph) slower than at Monza -- despite the huge, banked straight on the section of the track that F1 shares with the celebrated Indy oval. There is a very delicate balance to be struck because teams need to generate high top-end speeds without compromising downforce to such an extent that they will struggle on the tight, twisty infield section. This provides engineers with a real headache: you need a reasonable level of downforce to be quick over a lap but you mustn't run too much or you will become easy prey on the straight. We aim to use our cutting-edge tyre technology to help our partners overcome this dilemma."

Pierre Dupasquier, Motorsport Director: "We knew that the previous race in Monza would place a greater emphasis on aerodynamics than on the relationship between a chassis and its tyres. In circumstances that perhaps favoured our main rival, however, our partners proved to be extremely competitive. Juan Pablo Montoya and the BMW WilliamsF1 Team gave Michael Schumacher a run for his money while Kimi Raikkonen and West McLaren Mercedes pushed Rubens Barrichello all the way to the end. Average lap speeds at Indianapolis are about 200 km/h (125mph), 40km/h (25mph) slower than at Monza -- despite the huge, banked straight on the section of the track that F1 shares with the celebrated Indy oval. There is a very delicate balance to be struck because teams need to generate high top-end speeds without compromising downforce to such an extent that they will struggle on the tight, twisty infield section. This provides engineers with a real headache: you need a reasonable level of downforce to be quick over a lap but you mustn't run too much or you will become easy prey on the straight. We aim to use our cutting-edge tyre technology to help our partners overcome this dilemma."

Pascal Vasselon, F1 programme manager:"Indianapolis is pretty much two tracks in one. The banked section accounts for about one third of the circuit's length and features the season's longest stretch of flat-out driving. The infield section, meanwhile, is very slow and incorporates sequences of tight corners that wouldn't look out of place in Monaco. These two distinct facets compel us and our partners to focus as much on aerodynamics as we do on tyre compounds. The fastest part of the circuit generates a great deal of heat, particularly where the left-hand tyres are concerned. The banking offsets some of the centrifugal force by increasing the vertical load and this places a massive strain on tyres. It tests our rubber to the limit and our tyre compounds are principally designed to cope with this, the circuit's most challenging element.

"We will be bringing just two different types of dry-weather tyre to Indianapolis. They are based on new constructions that were developed prior to Monza. The nature of this track obliges us to compromise and opt for tyres from the medium sector of our range. If we brought tyres that were too soft, they would be ill suited to the banking. Hard tyres would struggle to generate adequate grip through the tighter sections of the track and would slide around too much. The surface on the banked area of the circuit is very abrasive. The infield, on the other hand, is fairly smooth - and this is the most significant contrast between the two different parts of the track.

"A two-stop strategy will probably be the favoured tactic here, given that the fuel weight penalty is relatively slight - less than 0.3s seconds per lap for every extra 10kg - and pit stops are relatively swift, at about 28 seconds per visit."

Be part of the Autosport community

Join the conversation
Previous article McNish assessing his options for 2004
Next article Preview: Montoya Needs Historic Win at Indy

Top Comments

There are no comments at the moment. Would you like to write one?

Sign up for free

  • Get quick access to your favorite articles

  • Manage alerts on breaking news and favorite drivers

  • Make your voice heard with article commenting.

Autosport Plus

Discover premium content
Subscribe