Drivers in the Senna era vs. Schumacher era

Well if you look at it from the start, Senna started his F1 career in 84 when Piquet, Prost, Mansell, and Lauda were in the field. MS came up in 92 against Mansell, Senna, Piquet (on the decline at that time). He showed flashes of being good but nothing to prove him truly outstanding. Senna was working wonders with a Toleman that was a midfield car at best. Senna basically had to contend with these same drivers, save Lauda, in decent cars for all the rest of his career. Mansell was in a fast, if not unreliable Ferrari and later Williams and so was Berger who could be very quick, as well as Prost in an equal car. Now fast forward a bit in the MS era. 1994 Senna is gone. Aside from Mansell that only ran a handfull of races, Berger and Damon Hill there are no other race winners in the field, let alone world champs. This continued into 1997 when McLaren and Mika came on form. MS basically had around 5 years without having another world champ in a decent car to contend with.

 

When Senna first came into F1 in the mid-80s, the talent was incredibly deep--Lauda, Prost, de Angelis, Alboreto, Piquet, Arnoux, Rosberg, Mansell, Patrese, Laffite, Berger, Bellof, Watson. So to catch the eye of team bosses while driving the Toleman says quite a bit. When Senna won his first title in '88, the real competition was Prost, Berger, Alboreto and Piquet. Boutsen was 4th in the Benetton, but when was the last time someone mentioned him? In one sense you are absolutely right--Senna didn't really have much more competition. But the one he DID have in Prost was more than anything Michael faced. Especially when Senna and Prost were teammates. Michael never had a teammate capable of beating him in a straight fight.

 

I get where you are going with this but I'm not sure I agree with you. In 94 other than the cream at the very top (Senna/MS) the field was pretty shallow. A lot of the drivers at the rear of the field were also rans that we never heard of again. Also Formula one was changing. In the past there had been probably about 6 cars that could win at any event. Williams, Benneton, Ferrari and McLaren were all top teams. By 94 this was narrowed to probably 2 or 3 cars max (the Williams and MS's Benneton). Ferrari was struggling and so was McLaren. While other drivers back then, such as Mika, DC, Alesi, etc were very talented they didn't have top cars. In Senna's era the cars were closer performance-wise (1988 being an obvious exception),therefore more competition. In MS's title years in 94 he had a hell of a fight will Hill who was trust into a number one driver role because of Senna's death. Hill was no team leader but he did as well as he could. A dubious move by MS secured the 94 title. In 95 his competition was basically again just Hill and Williams, which he clearly had the measure of especially with the Renault engine in the Benneton. In the Ferrari years it was his team and his team only. He had DC in the McLaren on his tail once Mika spazzed and that was about it. DC again, a good driver but not the driver Mika was. The rest of the time he clearly had the best car, best tires and a teammate that couldn't race him.

 

Both periods had seasons where one team was dominant, 1988-1989 McLaren (Prost & Senna) and 2002 and 2004 (Schumacher and Barrichello), it is fair to say that Prost was a much stronger teammate than Barrichello and he never received the move over call from the pits. That being said it interesting to see that the periods in which both Senna and Schumacher won their titles, there was not that many other teams that won races for Senna (1988 only McLaren & Ferrari, 1990 McLaren, Ferrari, Williams & Benetton, 1991 McLaren, Williams and Benetton); for Schumacher (1994 Benetton, Williams and Ferrari, 1995 Benetton, Williams & Ferrari, 2000 Ferrari & McLaren, 2001 Ferrari, McLaren & Williams, 2002 Ferrari, McLaren & Williams, 2003 Ferrari, McLaren, Williams, Renault & Jordan, 2004 Ferrari, Renault, McLaren & Williams). Only during the 2003 season was there more than one other team that was competitive for the title for either Senna or Schumacher. The power has almost always been concentrated in the top 2 teams in any given season in Formula with few exceptions are there more than 2 teams in the hunt late in the season (1974 (Ferrari, McLaren, Tyrell & Lotus) 1982 (Williams, Ferrari, Renault & McLaren) and 2003 (Ferrari, McLaren & Williams) and possibly this year if BMW regains its earlier form). A tremendous difference in Senna and Schumacher's career is the reliability of the cars has dramatically improved since 1994. This makes it more likely that drivers in the last decade have a better chance of racking up impressive statistics provided they are in one of the top teams (the old in order to finish first, you must first finish cliché), not to mention the cars are much safer (thank god). I think we were cheated out of several great seasons of rivalry between Senna and Schumacher due to the events of Imola 1994. There are those who have stated that Senna would have been willing to retire after 1994 had he won the title now that Prost his arch nemesis was gone, or at least after he had bettered Prost's number of titles won (getting to 5 vs. Prost's 4), but I think the challenge issued by Schumacher would have been too great for him to just walk away. He had to be the best and this overpowering trait ruled all of his life. Schumacher was not that dissimilar in his quest to be the best, though he did not have the obsession to be on pole position that Senna did. The cars, the tracks, the safety, the competition have all been different for all of the greats, therefore it is difficult if not impossible to say one may be better than the other, I prefer to say the best of each period is: 1950s Fangio, 1960s Clark, 1980s Senna & Prost and 1990s-2004 Schumacher. There are many other great drivers, but I have a difficult time putting them on the same pedestal as these 5.

 

I would hardly classify fernando alonso and kimi raikonnen as "no competition"

 

While you are right about the engines needing to last more than one race (they even had engines that only lasted for qualifying for a couple of years) I think the search for every last hp during the turbo era blew up more engines and therefore had less cars around for the finish of each race. Senna's Lotus Renault suffered from this issue many times. If I remember correctly the BMW was putting out over 1,300 bhp in qualifying! Had Renault been able to make their engines more reliable, they probably would have had several more championships (possibly 1981-1983, Senna led the most laps in 1985 with the Renault powered Lotus). When Renault introduced the turbo in 1977-1978, the English teams referred to the car as the yellow teapot because you knew it was going to blow its engine sometime during the race. The cars are much more reliable now, part of this is because of the rules requiring the engines last as well as technology has improved. I do enjoy having more cars able to race to the finish instead of wondering if they will break down.

 

I once read the BMW 1.5 turbo engine had 1500 hp available in short busts. Very short.
1000 HP/ litre, too cool.

 

I do not think that Senna had to worry about any teammate other than Prost, he walked into Lotus an took number 1 away from Elio DeAngelis and walked into McLaren and took number away from Prost, he did do this on the track and not in his contract, once again Lotus and McLaren never had to put out the move over sign to his teammates. I think that Berger thought he was in the same league as Senna when he joined McLaren, but found out real fast he was not.

The 80s also had the limitation of fuel and a fair amount of races were lost by Senna because he ran out of gas, he may have gone all out, but in the end he just ended up all out of fuel.

Agree completely, I think Bernie and company wanted the points reorganized to make sure we all tuned in later in the season after having Mansell and Schumacher lock up the championship so early in the season in 1992 and 2002.

 

They were still blowing up motors fairly regularly in the mid 1980s. The TAG/Porsche was reliable, but the Renault and BMW had their issues.

As much as it pains me to give Prost credit, I do think he made Senna a better driver, it is possible that Senna was over driving the Renault and causing some of the problems, but the motor was fairly unreliable, though it did make plenty of hp though!

 

Only comment: Senna did not dominate Prost.

Even when in the same team Prost still managed to win the WDC, Senna did not. Senna might have more poles, but Prost (until MS) won more races than anybody. And yes Senna would have won more but Prost also retired ...

Nothing since has been as good as the Senna versus Prost years. MS versus Hakinen was the closest ... but no where near as intense.
Pete

 

1000000% agree.

This is why I am so disappointed with MS not allowing a good team mate. Too many of the years he raced he had weak opposition due to cars or other drivers lack of F1 experience, etc. ... if he had just accepted a really good team mate, somebody that could push him he would have got EVEN better.

This is also behind some of my LH comments, and why he is not learning as much sitting in the dominant car.
Pete

 

At least he hasn't had any light weight teammates. Alonso and Kovalainen? Schumacher hasn't had teammates as illustrious as them his entire career.

 

Rubens once said that his biggest surprise on joining Ferrari was learning how insecure Schumacher would become if Rubens was faster than him in a session (written in Mark Hughes column in Autosport). Rubens was a close friend of Senna's and knew how incredible Senna's self-confidence was in a race car. He expected the same of Schumacher and was surprised to find out this was not the case.

My feeling is that Schumacher would likely have beaten Kimi in equal machinery but Schumacher was simply (and unquestionably) unwilling to drive alongside a top-level driver in equal machinery.

Prost and Senna were not.

And for me, that is all the difference in the world.

 

i recall Prost was saying that since Honda came to Mclaren, there were about 20 mechanics buzzing around Senna's car, and Pros had only 2 mechanics.

also, he said his car was often setup the way he didn't like it.

 

As much as I love Schumi (I think he's one of the best drivers ever, with Fangio, Clark, Senna and... Prost) and what he has done for Ferrari, I have to admit that the most exciting years of modern F1 were the Senna and Prost years. Their rivalry was just incredible! I still remember the tension on every race and the excitement I had watching those two jab at each other...

Nowadays, drivers are a bit like robots without any edge or personality... Heck they look like they're all kids driving cars...

 

+1.

Pete