Damon Hill vs Lewis Hamilton

What's better measles or chickenpox ??

 

Hill was not a good driver, he was in the Williams, the class car of the field. I have to give it to elton on this one, much as it pains me.

 

Sid said it....i don't like Elton, Hill is a much more likeable person, but Elton could run rings arouns Hull...he's much faster with a lot more car control, Hill was a perfectly average driver in a much superior car....i would say that at the time he was champion, Hill would barely enter the top 10 best drivers on the grid.

 

Mansell on the other hand was good, very fast, with a lot of car control...but he was also a complete tool...same like Elton...but i liked him, and he was probably the most exciting driver to watch!

 

Different eras, so not realistic to compare.

For what it is worth statistically:-

Lewis Carl Davidson Hamilton

192 Grands Prix
54 Wins (28.13%)
63 Pole Positions (32.81%)
33 Fastest Laps (17.19%)
107 Podiums (55.73%)
25 Retirements (13.02%)


Damon Graham Devereux Hill

115 Grands Prix
22 Wins (19.13%)
20 Pole Positions (17.39%)
19 Fastest Laps (16.52%)
42 Podiums (36.52%)
41 Retirements (35.65%)

 

Both Damon Hill and Jacques Villeneuve were with Williams at the right time. All they had to do was steer that car in the right direction. Period.

 

+1

 

The main difference is that Hill was mentally very strong. Both Hill and Elton had/have great cars, but Elton is relatively easy to rattle. Hill had MS trying to rattle him all the time, and sure while not a natural driver, if Hill had pole he usually won.

If Elton had Hill's mental toughness ... nobody else would win a race!
Pete

 

Damon didn't start racing cars until he was 26 did not have the natural talent that his peers such as Schumi,Senna,Prost etc had,he had to really work his way up gradually .When Senna passed away ,he stood up to the challenge in a very good car and delivered,only to be taken out by Schumi at the end of that season...

The way Williams dropped him at the end of 96 as WDC was crazy ,to be replaced by Frentzen.Of course after that he had a tough time with Arrows then Jordan.

Lewis has been racing since age what ,5 i think.and has a lot more natural talent so he didn't have to work that hard when he got into F1 he was fast right out of the block.

So yes Lewis has the best record by far,Damon is more in the same camp as Rosberg,actually similar, F1 dad just the 1 WDC.

http://atlasf1.autosport.com/99/jpn/kelkar.html

 

Damon concentrated on motorcycle racing quite a bit, he actually raced his daily drive 'courier' bike due to lack of funds. He somehow got into the Williams by default when senna passed, and the Williams at that time was the absolute class of the field, with the Bennetton benefitting from the installation of schumi which was worth two seconds a lap at the time.

 

+1 spot on

 

There is no comparison. Hamilton is, by far, the superior driver.

 

I object to that !!!

Damon Hill was a very good driver, but not an aggressive racer.

He was excellent at developing a car and sorting out a chassis at a time was testing was unlimited. That's how he became test driver at Williams, and progressed from that when Senna was killed.

Hill was fast in qualifs or when on his own on the track, but pretty useless in a dogfight or fighting wheel-to-wheel with an opponent. I think he was spooked by close contact with other cars, and then rather defensive and intimidated. More Rosberg than Hamilton in that sense.

If Damon Hill had been no good, Frank Williams wouldn't have taken him on board, because at that time, Williams was a top team that could still choose its drivers, unlike now ...

 

Reminds of his father...... https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ee/Anefo_924-6564_Graham_Hill%2C_Zandvoort_16.06.1971.jpg

 

Graham Hill

 

Oh.... Was that his name....????


(edit: 'Thought it wuz Dudley Doright..... )

 

Graham Hill didn't pass his driving test before 24 years old, and never had ambition of becoming a racing driver. He started at Lotus sweeping floors and offered his engineering skills to assemble cars.

That puts his career into perspective, compared to the kids with pushy parents who start karting at 6 and emerge into F1 when they are still teenagers.

 

Not that good...but it's true he was a good qualifyer...again, as you said pretty useless when it came to a close fight...the way alesi overtakes him at Suzuka 95 it's embarassing...

 

Hmmmm... Maybe I wuz mistaken. Per haps it should be "Anti-Do-Right"; put 'em side by side.....

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ee/Anefo_924-6564_Graham_Hill%2C_Zandvoort_16.06.1971.jpg

http://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/1361434322_tumblr_m9batpOhFq1rwvesco1_1280.jpg

edit: But, to get serious now....how about Lewis vs Jimmy...

 

Jimmy Clark was the actual GOAT, #1. If he hadn't been so faithful to Chapman he would have had many more titles (eg Fangio). Despite all the Lotus mechanical failures that denied him titles over the years, he was very gentle on a car, mechanically sympathetic. Graham Hill used to go through a set of brake pads every two race weekends, Clark would have his changed at mid-season only because he felt guilty because he wasn't using up his brakes.

Lewis is fast and a naturally gifted driver, but he's no Jim Clark.

 

Seriously... who IS a Jim Clark? There was only one.

I think comparing today's drivers with yesteryear's is impossible. The training and experience drivers have today is phenomenal. And the personal trainers, the technicians, the sports psychologists, the nutritionists, the technology, driving simulators, radio coaching, onboard monitoring, etc etc makes it impossible to judge one from the other.

But the real test of the old school drivers was their sure willingness to accept that every time they put their asses in the seat, it might be the last thing they do on this earth.

And for Jim Clark, it was just that one day during a Formula 3 race.

The amount of bravery --or foolishness-- to get in these tin boxes with no safety gear, no fire protection, and no medical attention if you crash is beyond what we can imagine today.

One thing you can say is that the drivers of the past had the natural driving skills to exceed while forcing back the fear into the back of their minds which constantly told them -- "slow down!"

 

+1

 

Ernt. Fail. 'Formula 2.

Thanks, but no edumucation about Jimmy needed fer me. He was (and is) my only childhood "hero".

 

In which team? Driving for whom?

Clark would only race for a British team; that excludes Ferrari. .

BRM only had one successful season; 1962. Graham Hill later re-joined Lotus.

Cooper was on the decline after 1960; that's why McLaren and Brabham started building their own cars later.

Brabham only started in 1964, and became successful only after his death.

McLaren didn't exist until 1966. Same for Eagle (not British anyway).

Really Lotus was head and shoulders above the opposition, so no wonder Clark stuck with them.

Anyway, I am not sure if he received any offer to join the opposition.