| Author | Message | ||
| Jack (Gilles27)
New member Username: Gilles27 Post Number: 8 Registered: 3-2002 |
Art--you know your Toyota! I think what I respect the most so far about their program is the overall way they have gone about it. Sort of the Anti-BAR. Sure, they have the benefit of Pollock's braggadacious hind-sight, but I don't think they would have done it differently anyhow. They have quietly gone about the business of assembling a team, one that should be interesting to watch. | ||
| Arnaldo Torres (Caribe)
Member Username: Caribe Post Number: 262 Registered: 2-2001 |
James D., the Malayasian GP is a perfect example of what good F1 pilots can accomplish even under the worst circumstances. Montoya bump to 11th position (his fault though) on the first turn, Schumi back to the pits and had to restart with over 45 seconds behind the leader (R.B.) and both makings their way up to the front of the pack. BMW has a great car, and Ferrari has last year racer. Nevertheless, besides mechanical breakdowns, or a crash, little can stop a good F1 driver from moving to the front. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 305 Registered: 6-2001 |
Jack: Keep an eye on Toyota. Most of the recent SAE papers on 4 stroke engine technology have been written by the Japanese, an awful lot from Yamaha, and guess who provides assistance to Toyota's engine program? Toyota. Toyota recently became competitive in CART, after Ford and Honda were discovered "cheating", in that those people had figured out how to have a low pressure area in the intake chamber under the pop-off values, thus increasing the boost, giving an extra 50 - 60 HP. It looks like Toyota in their first season has competitve horsepower, and I'd expect them to be more than that latter on in the season. | ||
| Jack (Gilles27)
New member Username: Gilles27 Post Number: 6 Registered: 3-2002 |
All that is very much true. And what I am finding interesting this year is what's going on just behind the top 3 teams. Everyone knew that, when Williams was struggling, it was only a matter of time until they turned it around. But compare Jordan, Jaguar,BAR, Benetton/Renault, Sauber and now Toyota. Jordan seem to have come about 90% of the way, but that final push towards success always seems to elude them. Perhaps the 'hip' image they insist on portraying conflicts with that. BAR and Jag have made a shambles of throwing good money after bad, showing the world that $$$ isn't the only answer to winning. Renault and Sauber have taken a slow and steady approach that is paying off. While they won't likely win a championship, Sauber does use reliability and proven Ferrari engines to get points (a couple years ago Alesi was the lap leader in a Sauber). Renault, meanwhile, has stuck by their guns and pushed on with their engine. Only a year ago, people were mocking them. Anyone see Button pulling away from Montoya in Malaysia? As for Toyota, I guess they're showing that gobs of cash thrown around the right way may have merit. Only 2 races, and they are really making Jag and BAR look BAAAAAAD!!! O.K.--I'm done. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 300 Registered: 6-2001 |
Guys: I think that the following is true: 1. The best combination of driver and car usually wins. 2. The best combination depends upon what the driver wants, and can use. Different drivers on different equipment will set them up differently, depending on how they get faster. 3. The development of the car is important, but those developments must reflect the driver's style. To that end, no one is talking about the test drivers for the various teams (Nicolo Lardi for Ferrari). Those guys do most of the work, and they must have the ability to know what the drivers want. Having said the above, I think that the most important thing for a F1 car is that the motor be competitive, that doesn't mean the most power, but enough to stay with those with the most power. The power has to be useable, not just a spike on the Dyno. The second more important thing for a F1 car is the handling, and that includes the tires and they way their interact with the chassis and engine. Fry the tries and the car goes slower. Lastly the driver is important. He must have the abiilty to get to the front. That, from what I have seen in my experience in racing, is probably the most important thing about racers: whatever their skill level, they must want to win more than anything else in the world. A famous American Racer: Ken Roberts (motorcycles) used to say that at the highest level, the racers could maintain that desire for about 5 - 7 years at the most. I think that he's right from what I've seen over the years. When a team gets all of the above right, they win. When they start winning, they forget what got them there, and someone starts winning. I think that we are seeing that with Williams, while Ferrari and McLaren fall back a little. Art | ||
| Manu Sachdeva (Manu)
Junior Member Username: Manu Post Number: 74 Registered: 2-2002 |
Well said Gilles27! Oh the mess that was Ferrari before Schumi arrived.... He's changed everything | ||
| Jack Stanley (Gilles27)
New member Username: Gilles27 Post Number: 2 Registered: 3-2002 |
The thing to remember is that talent will always show itself, even in inferior equipment. Granted, Schumacher wouldn't be winning in a Jaguar (I don't like to pick on Minardi), but his car-handling would show through. The perfect example of a driver made better by good equipment is David Coulthard. Every year, we read how this year he is much tougher mentally and physically, blah, blah, blah. Other than a few wins, DC has done nothing beyond what any other driver could have accomplished in the same circumstances. Also, Schumacher has an intelligence that has placed him in position to win so many races and championships (How many people can say that they were able to get Ferrari to mold around them?). The opposite example of this is Jean Alesi. While I admire him, and always pulled for him, he followed his heart rather than his head, and ended up with only 1 win to show for it. | ||
| C. Smith (Italianauto)
Junior Member Username: Italianauto Post Number: 59 Registered: 10-2001 |
Agree 100% Dominic | ||
| Dominic L. DiMento (Domenico)
New member Username: Domenico Post Number: 14 Registered: 2-2002 |
Michael has surrounded himself with Ross Brawn and Rory Byrne. They are the 2 key engineers who helped him win at Benetton and know what kind of car he likes. He is involved in all aspects of car design and testing. He's undoubtedly THE BEST driver. Watch his qualifying laps and when he needs to make a gap for pit stops during the race. He knows when to drive on limit. It would have been nice to see him and Senna still going at it. Senna, had he not been killed may have been the only driver in the modern era of equal talent as Schumacher. BTW, qualifying on Fri. at midnight est., race at 1:30am late sat evening/sun am. Forza Ferrari!!! | ||
| Randy (Schatten)
Junior Member Username: Schatten Post Number: 237 Registered: 4-2001 |
MS made Ferrari into a great team. I think its a combination of the driver and the team. Look at Damon Hill, he was a big contender years ago... and then, what the heck happened to him? He was up at the top, fighting with MS after Senna died, and once MS left Bennetton for Ferrari, he turned Ferrari into a great team. Several interviews w/MS state that he's one of the best drivers out there because he can give feedback to the team for car adjustments quickly and acurately. That provides MS with a better prepared car. | ||
| Steve Smith (Steve308)
New member Username: Steve308 Post Number: 5 Registered: 2-2002 |
The big leveller is when it rains... then having the best car, the best team, everything becomes an irrelevence compared to raw ability to hang it all over the edge and just drive the car. That's when you can often spot the truly great drivers. Remember Senna at Monaco in 84? As a F1 rookie driving some no-hope Toleman he would have walked away with the race if it hadn't been stopped. And if you look at current drivers, the two who always really shine in the wet are....(big drum roll) Barrichello and of course above all Schumacher: the "regenmeister". So even it it rains it looks like the other teams in for a tough season... | ||
| Bill Sawyer (Wsawyer)
New member Username: Wsawyer Post Number: 19 Registered: 2-2002 |
Let's remember that racing is more than a sport--it's also a business. Sure, Football teams and Baseball teams are businesses also, but they are essentially marketing organizations whereas many racing teams are manufacturing organizations. That's what makes racing so special, it reflects the skill needed to win in today's society. No other sport does. Most companies rely upon their people and technology to survive. F-1 is no different. On the people side a champion driver requires driving talent, physical conditioning and attitude. The truly great drivers of the past two decades have been very ruthless, self-absorbed people for a reason. Schumacher is the fittest driver in F-1 and he also has the mental edge. Villeneuve seems more fragile. Schumacher has also had the sense of urgency and mission and the charisma to rally the team around him. Before him the company had the technical know-how but they couldn't pull it all together. Montezemolo got the business side working and then brought Schumacher in to complete the circle. Irvine is cocky enough, but Ford hasn't been able to get the business side of the equation right. Could Schumacher make Minardi successful? Maybe, maybe not. They would still have to raise enough money to do the job and then get the technical side right. I don't think Michael has enough years left in him to make things happen at Minardi. | ||
| Jon P. Kofod (95f355c)
Junior Member Username: 95f355c Post Number: 115 Registered: 8-2001 |
This question has been raised many times and it is no longer a question of which is more important, the car or the driver. It's a comination of the two and I would argue that both are equally important, especially in the past 10 years where F1 cars hve become more reliable. Back in the 80's turbo era a good driver stood a chance of winning in a bad car. Look at Senna winning races in the Toleman and Lotus cars. It is rare to see that today unless the entire field gets taken out. All one needs to do is look at recent driver changes. In 99 Irvine was one race away from the F1 Championship, the next year with Jaguar he struggled to score a single point. Damon Hill won the F1 title one year with Williams and the next with Arrows he barely scored any points and finished 18th in the standings. Same for Villienue who after winning the world title also with Williams has had only one podium finish in the past 3 years with BAR. As pointed out earlier it takes a great car, great driver, and a great team. If you don't have all three you can't win the title (though you may be quite successful and get some wins). | ||
| Frederick Thomas (Fred)
Member Username: Fred Post Number: 362 Registered: 2-2001 |
I agree that Schumacher made Ferrari competitive a few years before they really had the car to win. It is funny to me that in F1 Ferrari in known for it's reliablity but on the road cars it's just the opposite. | ||
| Peter S�derlund /328 GTB -88 (Corsa)
Junior Member Username: Corsa Post Number: 125 Registered: 4-2001 |
Right, Kim. Ciao Peter | ||
| Kendall Kim (Kenny)
New member Username: Kenny Post Number: 24 Registered: 9-2001 |
Being a good race driver particularly in something as sophisticated as F1 is not only knowing how to handle a car on the track and going fast, but a balance of chemistry between being consistently on top of your game all the time mentally and physically, knowing how to communicate properly with your mechanics in setting up the car properly, as well, handling team politics well.. Fortunately, for Schumacher, Michael consistently exhibits all of these qualities well.. A Barrichello can once in a while beat out Michael with a faster lap, Hakkinen can do wonders when he's in the ideal car and properly motivated, and Montoya can dazzle with his daring passes.. Out of all the drivers though, only Schumacher in F1 knows how to always get his team fully behind him and give 100%.. He's brutally consistent and understands how to look at the big picture to win world championships.. | ||
| Peter S�derlund /328 GTB -88 (Corsa)
Junior Member Username: Corsa Post Number: 124 Registered: 4-2001 |
The greatness with MS is that he also develops the car in a way that Alesi and Berger never did. That is also why I hope Montoya will go to Ferrari, He thinks in the same way, as MS. Remarkably Ralf doesn't. MS don't go home at 5 pm if there is some testing to do. With that in mind he would with a 5 year contract turn Minardi to a winner, but I don't think the first season would be any hit even if he would be on the podium occasionally. I�ve just read in a magazine that the difference between MS and Senna compared with many other drivers were that even if all drivers could identify 10 actions needed to be made MS and AS could identify and focus on those 2 or 3 of them that gave 3-4 10th. Ferrari might not have the most powerful engine but it lasts. They have the most reliable package of all teams and that's is a MAJOR part of good race design. To finish first you need to finish, remember. Williams might have 20 hp more in the engine but Ferrari have 50 more in the cars balance which is more important. The way McLaren handled their launch control last year was just stupid. DC, JPM or JV in Ferrari? They would probably win at least the first year. Ciao Peter | ||
| Willis Huang (Willis360)
Member Username: Willis360 Post Number: 566 Registered: 8-2001 |
Mika Salo did fairly well substituting for Schumacher. | ||
| Martin (Miami348ts)
Intermediate Member Username: Miami348ts Post Number: 1592 Registered: 5-2001 |
I think Michael has shown that when he was with Benetton. But I also believe that other drivers could win races with a Ferrari today. Barricello is on a good track. | ||
| TomD (Tifosi)
Member Username: Tifosi Post Number: 369 Registered: 9-2001 |
Agree with Ken, only reason ferrari was even competitive with Mclaren (which had a better car) a few years ago was Schui. Now there are some more variables - like tires | ||
| Dave L (Davel)
Junior Member Username: Davel Post Number: 90 Registered: 7-2001 |
To a certain degree I agree with Ken. They seem to have better tires on Ferrari. The cars are not the most powerful, the BMW is for now. Skill of the driver, overall pit strategy and thorough testing seem to make or break the performance. Plus lots of luck on a good start!  | ||
| Ken (Allyn)
Junior Member Username: Allyn Post Number: 236 Registered: 10-2001 |
If Schumacher raced on another team he'd still be an elite driver. Great drivers are a combination of the obvious stuff like fearlessness, agression, etc. but the champions also understand how the cars work and can translate what the car is doing, or not doing, better to the crews than an average driver. Thus they know how to set the car up to reach it's optimum. Ferrari F1 cars are no better than the others; in fact they may not even be as good. Schumacher has the ability to get the most out of whatever he'd be driving. | ||
| James Dixon (Omnadren250)
Junior Member Username: Omnadren250 Post Number: 113 Registered: 7-2001 |
Hi guys, I have been having this debate with my uncle for the past 6 years, and would like some of your input. Before I start, I would like to state my opinion that Ferrari has the best F1 team currently and that Micheal Schumacher is currently the best F1 driver. My question is, does the skill of the driver in todays F1 races really have a great impact on the outcome of the race?, If Ferrari had any of the top 10 drivers in F1, would they still be dominating?? What would happen if Schumacher was on one of the low budget teams?? Remeber a few years back when Jacques Villneuve kicked ass with Williams?? He even won the "Canadian Athelete of the Year" in front of a disgruntled Canadian baseball player (Larry Walker) who had an amazing season. As soon as Jacques left the Williams team, he has been performing quite badly, makes terrible mistakes and cannot even finish a race, let alone win one. James |