Is the car more important today than in years past?

Hey,

Now we're done with one of the most dominating performances we've seen from one team in a while, I got to thinking back over the years..... Prompted by some comments here, do you think the car is more important today, about the same or less important..... Can't envisage many votes for the latter (!), but I'm not convinced, as some seem to be, that this is any different to years past.

Sometimes there's more 'good' cars, and the competition is 'tighter', but the very best, from Fangio, through Jimmy to Michael and Fred need the equipment to deliver. Personally, I don't think it's any different today to how it's always been.

What say you?

Cheers,
Ian

 

Somehat off topic! But it's all good.....

I happen to agree with you. While there's no question road cars are in many ways 'more advanced', certainly in regards to electronic nannies etc, these new PU's and brake by wire etc are certainly more relevant to the industry at large.

There's no way Honda would have returned if they were still using V8's or 10's for example. We may rue the lack of noise, but hopefully they'll get that figured out soon.

Cheers,
Ian

 

I have to beg to differ there.

I did a quick lookup, and in fact, on the two circuits where direct comparisons remain possible - Suzuka & Brazil, they were ever so slightly quicker this year than the mighty V10's of 2004;

Pole laps;
Suzuka 2004 - 1:10.646
2014 - 1:10.023

Brazil 2004 - 1:32.750
2014 - 1:32.506

OK, Brazil has been resurfaced, and given the same tires the 10's may have been quicker yet, but they're definitely running at the speeds the FIA feel are 'appropriate'. Driver fitness remains a key ingredient and they're obviously not 'slower round the corners'.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Broadly have to agree with you there. Good points.

Having said that, we are at least seeing them spinning their wheels and some pretty lurid slides again given the monster torque of today. Not the monster four wheel drifting of yesteryear, but we also know that's not the fastest way these days.

I'd say they're on as much of a knife edge as ever. But, as you say, the big difference is its 'easier' (or least generally more forgiving) to keep them on that edge for lap after lap. And the consequences for screwing up are, generally, minimal versus the old days, no question there!

Cheers,
Ian
PS; also meant to note that 'back in the day', option 3 could well have been a legitimate answer - Big balls were certainly needed, but OTOH, I think that remains the case today too.....

 

Interesting. And possibly correct!

I still don't think that significantly contributes to a need for 'less fitness' though. They may well be a little 'easier' to drive, but pedaling one round for 200 miles still requires immense levels of fitness was my point.

Having said that, I'm not sure about the '1g less cornering force' either. We know they've got less D/F, sure, and maybe the g-circle display has been rescaled, but they're still pulling very significant G's in the corners.

Further, while I can see them accelerating quicker being correct given their big torque, I'd have expected that to lead to significantly higher top speeds too. We haven't seen that - they still typically top out at just over 200mph after all. Getting there faster may make up some time, and obviously gearing is the key, but such a huge 'slow down' in the corners would still slow lap time overall I would think. And why wouldn't they go quicker on the straights if they could?

Would *love* to see the data traces for the laps referenced above.....

Furthermore, if the Merc PU is that good, where the hell were Mclaren and FI!?.... They must be *really* ****!..... FI I can understand, but the Woking boys pretty much sucked all year; no top speed advantage like Williams and crap thru the twisty bits too!

Cheers,
Ian

 

Yep, and a little of what I was trying to get at here..... Some are claiming the car is much more important now than in times past. I just don't think that's true.....

You need a decent jockey - I agree probably half the guys would have been up front in the Merc. Or the all conquering Mclaren that won all but one race. Or a couple of Michaels Ferrari's.

Sometimes, 2-3 teams build a car capable of 'dominating', and we get an epic season. Other times it's just one. Nature of the game.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Understood, and some very fair comments. Certainly the pioneers had balls with their own gravity fields!.....

However, if your heart is not occasionally 'skipping a beat' I'd postulate you're not pushing the limits. (Not something to do on the street in a modern high performance car of course! )

That the limits are now so much higher doesn't negate the need for (to quote Hobbs) 'testicular fortitude' IMO. They remain on a very thin knife edge at the limit. That we're not losing 3 or 4 of them every year doesn't give me a problem - it just allows them to maybe push harder than they would have in the past?

Cheers,
Ian

 

Don't quite agree there. I agree the *team* is all important - damn, it takes a bank of computers and engineers to just get the things fired up, but that doesn't render the car any more (or less) important than prior IMO.

I hear you on the data flowing back and then the engineers ability to analyze that and make changes has reduced the reliance on driver feedback - the data doesn't lie - but at the end of the day I still think driver feedback is one thing that separates the greats from the others, at least to a degree.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Kimi being Kimi!..... Possibly he's doing some of his own private testing; changing diff settings and so on to feel the differences..... Can only do that when way out in front after all....

I personally preferred the Ross/Michael exchange at Indy, 2002 (?) after he spun and rejoined still leading;

Ross; "are you awake Michael?"
MS; "I am now!......"

I hear you, but I doubt even Kimi leading by a country mile is 'daydreaming' at around 200mph!..... As for reliability, one could argue that made the car even more important back then, surely? "To finish first, you must first finish."......

Agree re dear old Mark, but I'm pretty sure that's always been the case too; a 'good' car allows the greats to win, but will also elevate a 'journeyman' towards the front too. Particularly if it happens to be really dominant like the Cans for the past few years as you say.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Agreed. And I believe that's always been the case. Not a modern phenomenon.

In terms of the entire season, surely a bigger one? You certainly aren't going to win if you can't reach the flag at the end. (Ask Jimmy )

That they're all so reliable today goes a ways to leveling the field I feel.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Pretty much agreed on both points.

However, without any testing even the best of the best can't make that much difference I feel. Michael pounding out endless laps at Fiorano, encouraging the guys, working with them late in to the night etc definitely improved his cars over the years. But those days are gone unfortunately. At least for now.

Cheers,
Ian