You have to also remember that the grooved tires have a HUGE amount of development in them. Slicks are just now coming back into the picture. You can't assume that just because they're slicks that they'll be faster. Even tires take an incredible amount of time, money, and deveolpment to make them fast.
Yeah I know lol. I remember the times from Jerez that were posted were usually topped by someone running slicks.
I would like to hear your logic behind "Its still a racing slick". I don't think you understand how well the current grooved tyres perform. From what I've read, the slick tyres are a part of the 2009 low downforce rule change/proposal so comparing times would be irrelevant. I haven't really been following though.
I may be wrong, but doesn't the logic behind this go something like... Decrease downforce -> Decrease the effects of aerodynamics -> Use slicks to gain back the grip that was lost by the decrease in downforce -> Increase passing
the slicks are not slower running on this years downforce but in 2009 there is 30% decrease in donwforce removing of winglets etc... and that explains the drop of times from grooves to slicks the fastest lap on grooved tires was 1:19.3 hamilton while the fastest time with slicks was 1:18.2 vetell....while the fastest time with 2009 downforce which is 30% less than this years downforce is 1:19.1 schumacher
Rabbilt summed it up pretty well. Basically, once everything is worked out, teams have time to fine tune the suspenion to take full advantage of slicks. And after r&d, i can't see how they would not be faster. Unless like you stated. Maybe the downforce changes will offset the tire change.
Thtats a pretty good idea. Are they definitely bringing them back to race on then? Should make things more exciting surely?
Wut <A BORDER="0" HREF="http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?displayFAQ=y"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="pitlane/emoticons/sad.gif"></A>