123 replies to this topic

[Formula Once]

Michael Schumachers performance thus far this year, has once more underlined quite how remarkable Niki Lauda's comeback was in 1982. And that was his second comeback already of course.

Not only had F1-cars changed rather dramatically since he'd decided to stop at the end of 1979 - the ground effect having just reached its peak - they then continued to do so quite signifcantly (without skirts and venturii, but with turbo charged engines and computers) until he'd won his third world championship in 1984.

Considering the differences between racing a 1972 March 721 against Stewart, Hill, Fittipaldi, etc. and a 1985 turbo charged, Bosch Motronic-ed McLaren against Prost & co. - and the rapid evoltution of the sport as a whole in that same period - I wonder who else raced in two so very different F1-worlds and was successful right til the end of his career. In short: who else won races/titles in F1-cars as different as the mid-seventies Ferrari's and the mid-eighties McLarens-TAGs?

Moss perhaps, if we forget about titles, given the differences between a '55 Mercedes and a '61 Lotus, but then the biggest thing that changed in that period was perhaps that it almost looked like as is F1 became a bit "easier", or tamer, if anything. I mean, was it as challenging a change as the difference between a '73 BRM and a '82 ground effect McLaren for example?

Andretti (Mario of course) would probably qualify given his performance at Monza in a '68 Lotus and, fourteen years later, a '82 Ferrari, but unfortunately after his '78-title he mostly drove too uncompetitive cars to win a Grand Prix again.

I wonder who you think should be added to the list of what one might call the most adaptable F1-drivers, who inspite of their experience, age and succes, managed to adapt and motivate themselves to new cars i.e. challenges successfully.

[Chezrome]

Lauda is perhaps the perfect example (from V12 to Alfa 12, to Fan-Car to wingcar, to flatbottom Cosworth car to turbo flatbottom... but I dare to say that even Lauda would not have won a Worldchampionship (or even a Grand Prix) if, for instance, pitstops would have been implemented between his departure and comeback. Lauda was on average 0.75 seconds slower in qualifying than Prost in 1984 (a difference for which Schumacher now will and would be rubbished), but because the tactics in race (start on full tanks, in principal one set of tyres for the whole race) was the same before and after his comeback, he could still win in his own style. With pitstops, the races would have been what they have been for several years: three 20 lap races on full steam. And Lauda did not have that outright speed any more.

Schumacher was very, very good in those short stint circumstances, but now the races HAVE changed because of the full tanks. Some people have benefited from the rule - Adrian Sutil for example, to my suprise. But I think that if the old rules (with smaller tanks, more tyrestops) had applied Schumacher would have had less trouble than at the moment.

[D-Type]

It's partly a function of how long a driver's career stretched. The longer the career, the greater the changes he needs to accommodate.

Varzi and Chiron started racing when roads were still unsurfaced in cars like the Bugatti 35 and and Alfa Romeo P2 through to the Formula 1 era and the Alfetta and Maserati 250F. I'm not sure how much difference the change to rear engines made - the likes of Salvadori, both Hills, Trintignant, Bonnier etc appeared to be equally competitive in either. Likewise the drivers had no difficulty adapting when wings came, when turbos came and went, when ground effects and solid suspension came, etc. Look at Andretti and Foyt - they won in midgets and sprint cars on dirt, on ovals, on road courses, in sports cars. Consider the different routes drivers have followed on their way into Grand prix racing - karts, saloon cars, small sports cars, large sports cars, Formula 3 and the myriad single seater formulae- Formula Ford, Formula Atlantic, etc. Basically a good driver adapts to the changes. Just think of the classic story of Jim Clark in the ERA.

[David Birchall]

We went through a similar discussion several years ago and Mario Andretti came out the winner. Very broad field of race wins.

[Bloggsworth]

Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss - end of discussion.

[macoran]

Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss - end of discussion.

OK, you've stirred the pot ! now what?

[Formula Once]

Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss, Stirling Moss - end of discussion.

Always nice to hear a well balanced opinion... And its not a discussion by the way.

[David Birchall]

But Moss did not win at LeMans or at the Indy 500--two major accomplishments.

[macoran]

But Moss did not win at LeMans or at the Indy 500--two major accomplishments.

He didn't even win the WDC !
But my respect for him is no less
So what the hell are we talking about?
Statistics ?

[Formula Once]

He didn't even win the WDC !
But my respect for him is no less
So what the hell are we talking about?
Statistics ?

Well, certainly not "the most versatile driver" thing. I thought the topic was pretty clear. Some replies make me wonder...

[David M. Kane]

I rate Redman pretty high because of the variety of cars they drove well and SURVIVE. To hop in a Ferrari at Monza and put on the pole!
Now that was something!

[Nick Planas]

Don't overlook the likes of Jack Brabham - who started racing in the mid to late 1950s in front engined beasties, and was still competitive in his last year of racing (1970) in a winged rear-engined car. OK he didn't win in a front-engined car but he raced in them. And but for a couple of mishaps he would have been right at the front of the championship campaign in 1970.

Less successfully, Graham Hill...

[Rob G]

It's partly a function of how long a driver's career stretched. The longer the career, the greater the changes he needs to accommodate.

Absolutely. One of my top choices, Mario Andretti, had a very long career, but one thing that made his adaptability so impressive was the fact that he'd switch to a different form of racing for a few years, then come back to F1 and still be very competitive. His 1982 Ferrari outings immediately come to mind.

I think in order to find a truly adaptable F1 driver, achievements outside of F1 must be taken into account. Jacky Ickx did well in F1, but he was superb in sports cars and even won the Paris-Dakar.

Dan Gurney was another who could easily jump from one type of racing to another and succeed. However, his F1 career started just as front-engined cars were on the way out, and it ended just after the cars started sprouting wings.

[David Birchall]

Well, certainly not "the most versatile driver" thing. I thought the topic was pretty clear. Some replies make me wonder...

The title of the thread is "The most adaptable F1-driver"...

[Ray Bell]

You would have to rank Jack Brabham in this...

He adapted overnight from speedway midgets (no front brakes, V-twin engine) to cars like the Cooper Bristol, then adapted to the rear engined Cooper Bristol and got the best out of it. Pressing on, he adapted to the later Coopers, and drove them hard enough that others had to adapt to the rear engined style of car.

Then he adapted even better to cars that were more scientific in their suspensions than the leaf-sprung Coopers, working with Ron Tauranac to get the utmost out of the little engines and the rapidly-developing tyres. Add, then, his adaptation to the more powerful cars of '66, which followed on from his annual adaptation to the Tasman cars with the old 4-bangers in them.

He adapted, more than adapted, to the inclusion of wings on F1 cars, being at the vanguard of development in that regard, and to then to the stiffer monocoque chassis of the BT33, winning races in his final year.

[Bloggsworth]

But Moss did not win at LeMans or at the Indy 500--two major accomplishments.

Graham Hill won the World Championship twice, and both the Indy 500 and the Le Mans 24hrs, and he appears on nobody's list of the best of the best (the best character by a country mile, just not the best driver, a great one, but not up with Fangio, Senna, Moss and Schumacher) - individual races are not a measure of all round ability.

Try reading the history and range of his achievments before you you consider anyone else. Please nominate any other out and out contender for the post of the best all rounder ever (and I don't count driving 3 different makes of F1 car as being "all round" or particularly "adaptable") who has won several Grand Prix, in both front and rear engined cars, quite often in inferior ones at that; the Mille Miglia, the Nurburgring 10000 Kilometres 3 times, twice in an Aston Martin and once in the Birdcage Maserati; IIRC he won an Alpine Rally among others. Moss was the complete driver, he won in every class he entered, including lawnmowers (just for fun, and for him, it was all to be enjoyed) - a couple of weeks ago, at the age of 80, he was leading his class at Silverstone until the car failed him. I don't have the statistics to hand, but I understand that Moss won an astonishingly high percentage of the races he participated in over his career.

Fangio never matched Moss in sports cars, niether did Clark, Hill, Hawthorne, Collins... Well, the list is endless; none of the great sports-car drivers were a patch on Moss in a single seater, neither were any of the rally drivers who crossed over to F1, rallying being a different, and in many ways, more difficult skill set.

The heading of this thread contained the word "adaptable", and adaptable doesn't mean that you can draw with 3 different makes of pencil...

Edited by Bloggsworth, 07 August 2010 - 08:36.

[kayemod]

I don't have the statistics to hand, but I understand that Moss won an astonishingly high percentage of the races he participated in over his career.

That post sums up for me why Sir Stirling would be my choice for 'the greatest Ever', and I'm pretty sure that the percentage for career entries/wins is about 25%, quite a feat when you consider some of the cars he drove.

[Lifew12]

It's a pity this is restricted to F1 drivers, cos my mum learned to drive in an A35 and has since driven everything from a min to my brothers Ferrari 512BB.

[Bloggsworth]

That post sums up for me why Sir Stirling would be my choice for 'the greatest Ever', and I'm pretty sure that the percentage for career entries/wins is about 25%, quite a feat when you consider some of the cars he drove.

I believe it was much higher than that - Unfortunately I didn't keep the recording of the Goodwood festival, but I'm pretty sure someone mentioned a figure.

Moss has always topped my list of the greatest driver; Fangio my list of GP drivers - 48% win rate in an era of astonishing unreliability.

[Bloggsworth]

It's a pity this is restricted to F1 drivers, cos my mum learned to drive in an A35 and has since driven everything from a min to my brothers Ferrari 512BB.

I've driven everything from an Austin 7 to a Ferrari 275GTB, F3 Cooper to Mk11 Merlyn - Didn't make me any good, just versatile.

[Lifew12]

I've driven everything from an Austin 7 to a Ferrari 275GTB, F3 Cooper to Mk11 Merlyn - Didn't make me any good, just versatile.

You're not my mum, though.

[aditya-now]

... And Lauda did not have that outright speed any more.

Schumacher was very, very good in those short stint circumstances, but now the races HAVE changed because of the full tanks. Some people have benefited from the rule - Adrian Sutil for example, to my suprise. But I think that if the old rules (with smaller tanks, more tyrestops) had applied Schumacher would have had less trouble than at the moment.

Also Schumacher doesn´t have the outright speed anymore. Look no further than his qualifying speed. Even if there where three stint/20 lap races, it wouldn´t help him, he would be behind Rosberg.

Indeed, Lauda is the most unique among the F1 world champions, and it is quite interesting that Schumacher´s comeback is proving this point.

[aditya-now]

Graham Hill won the World Championship twice, and both the Indy 500 and the Le Mans 24hrs, and he appears on nobody's list of the best of the best (the best character by a country mile, just not the best driver, a great one, but not up with Fangio, Senna, Moss and Schumacher) - individual races are not a measure of all round ability.

Try reading the history and range of his achievments before you you consider anyone else. Please nominate any other out and out contender for the post of the best all rounder ever (and I don't count driving 3 different makes of F1 car as being "all round" or particularly "adaptable") who has won several Grand Prix, in both front and rear engined cars, quite often in inferior ones at that; the Mille Miglia, the Nurburgring 10000 Kilometres 3 times, twice in an Aston Martin and once in the Birdcage Maserati; IIRC he won an Alpine Rally among others. Moss was the complete driver, he won in every class he entered, including lawnmowers (just for fun, and for him, it was all to be enjoyed) - a couple of weeks ago, at the age of 80, he was leading his class at Silverstone until the car failed him. I don't have the statistics to hand, but I understand that Moss won an astonishingly high percentage of the races he participated in over his career.

Fangio never matched Moss in sports cars, niether did Clark, Hill, Hawthorne, Collins... Well, the list is endless; none of the great sports-car drivers were a patch on Moss in a single seater, neither were any of the rally drivers who crossed over to F1, rallying being a different, and in many ways, more difficult skill set.

The heading of this thread contained the word "adaptable", and adaptable doesn't mean that you can draw with 3 different makes of pencil...

The heading of this thread also contained the word F1-driver, and within the environment of F1 Niki was surely the most adaptable.

Stirling Moss - the most versatile racing driver
Niki Lauda - the most adaptable F1-driver

Graham Hill - the best character in F1
Ayrton Senna - the most charismatic driver in F1

Nigel Mansell - the most lion-hearted and "most prima-donna" driver in F1
Michael Schumacher - the statistically best and at the same time the most ruthless driver in F1

Alain Prost - the most calculating driver in F1
Andrea de Cesaris - the most crashing driver in F1


Continue ad lib.

The calmest driver ?
The most whining driver ?
The most star-power driver ?
The fastest driver ?
The most emotional driver ?
The hippest driver ?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

[stevewf1]

Well, Mario Andretti got pole in his first start in 1968 and got it again in his next-to-last race in a turbo Ferrari 14 years later. That's pretty good.

[aditya-now]

Well, Mario Andretti got pole in his first start in 1968 and got it again in his next-to-last race in a turbo Ferrari 14 years later. That's pretty good.

And he was winning - or on pole from 1968 to 1982. Then again, so is Schumacher 1992 - 2006 (14 years). But yes, the framework of F1 did not change as much in Schumacher´s day.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Patrese somewhere in the top candidates? Consider the state of cars at the beginning and end of his F1 career...

[kayemod]

I believe it was much higher than that - Unfortunately I didn't keep the recording of the Goodwood festival, but I'm pretty sure someone mentioned a figure.

You're right, some quick mental arithmetic has told me that the true figure is about 40%, though even my earlier incorrect figure would still have been pretty impressive.

[stevewf1]

Patrese somewhere in the top candidates? Consider the state of cars at the beginning and end of his F1 career...

Yes. I thought he had the most amazing career. He had a short, promising start then faded to the back-marker teams for years. And then came that stint at Williams.

[Ralliart]

What about Jan Lammers? Wasn't it, like, 10 years between F1 starts for him? That's pretty adaptable.

[Bloggsworth]

You're not my mum, though.

I could nip out to Top Shop...

[Bloggsworth]

Patrese, great sportsman, good driver, but adaptable doesn't describe him. I suggest that before posting the word adatable should be looked up in a dictionary. I don't believe "adaptable" means that the driver piloted more than one make of F1 car; if that were the criteria, in 1959 Moss came second in a privately owned front engined BRM while others were driving Coopers, in other races in the Championship Moss drove a privately owned Cooper.

Skill in racing is something on a higher plane than most understand, as was proved last year by Badoer and Fisi. Badoer, who has probably driven more miles in an F1 Ferrari than anyone else on the planet, was an abject failure when asked to race it; poor Fisi, the biggest mistake of his long career was to replace Badoer in the hot seat, he could drive it no faster.

This is odder than it seems, as Fisi was fresh off a second place at Spa, so was clearly still a competetive driver, Badoer was the man who developed many years of Ferraris, so should have been very familiar with the car's idiosyncrasies, but both abjectly failed to drive the car as fast as either Massa or Raikkonen.

Adaptability is not just a matter of hopping from one car to another, it is an altogether different skill set.

Edited by Bloggsworth, 07 August 2010 - 13:38.

[Bloggsworth]

The heading of this thread also contained the word F1-driver, and within the environment of F1 Niki was surely the most adaptable.

Stirling Moss - the most versatile racing driver
Niki Lauda - the most adaptable F1-driver

Beg to differ - Moss took part in F1 races in HWM, ERA, Connaught, Maserati, Mercedes, Cooper, Vanwall, BRM, Lotus (winning GPs in 5 of them) and including winning on the first outing of the 4 wheel drive Formula One Ferguson, the only driver IIRC to win an F1 race in a four wheel drive car. He often drove more than one make of F1 car in the same season, occasionaly practising in two different makes of car for the same race, then making the choice of which to use for the GP. I believe he practiced both the Cooper and BRM before using the BRM in the British GP at Aintree in 1959 - Nobody, but nobody, matches that range of different F1 cars. Versatile doesn't do Moss justice, he was in a class by himself when it came to the ability to adapt his style to differing cars.

Edited by Bloggsworth, 07 August 2010 - 13:43.

[Peter Darley]

Let us not forget that Jim Clark would drive a saloon car, single seater and/or sports car in the course of a single meeting

[stevewf1]

Let us not forget that Jim Clark would drive a saloon car, single seater and/or sports car in the course of a single meeting

And didn't he drive a Lotus Cortina down a bob-sled run once?

[stevewf1]

Speaking of adaptable, was there ever an F1 driver who never got a speeding ticket on public roads?

[Mansell4PM]

Leaving F1 results aside, surely the most adaptable driver ever to have driven in Grands Prix is Vic Elford, given his results in both rallying and sportscars?

[Ross Stonefeld]

We have to change our definition of adaptability depending on the era they're in. In the old days a race car was a race car was a race car, certainly in a pre-aerodynamic era. It's much more difficult now to go from single seaters to stock cars to rallying, etc, et al; partly because the cars have evolved further away from each other but also because of those requirements the drivers in each field are specialists in that type of car.

[Bloggsworth]

We have to change our definition of adaptability depending on the era they're in. In the old days a race car was a race car was a race car, certainly in a pre-aerodynamic era. It's much more difficult now to go from single seaters to stock cars to rallying, etc, et al; partly because the cars have evolved further away from each other but also because of those requirements the drivers in each field are specialists in that type of car.

I think it is more a matter of insurance nowadays Ross. Top F1 drivers are paid so much that they are not allowed to risk themselves in other classes of racing. Indycar drivers still turn out for the odd Daytona 500, and the odd one or two for ill advised attempts at NASCAR.

[jj2728]

I'd say Mario Andretti.

[Ross Stonefeld]

I think it is more a matter of insurance nowadays Ross. Top F1 drivers are paid so much that they are not allowed to risk themselves in other classes of racing. Indycar drivers still turn out for the odd Daytona 500, and the odd one or two for ill advised attempts at NASCAR.

Insurance isn't what makes them less than competitive.

[Bloggsworth]

Insurance isn't what makes them less than competitive.

We have no idea how competetive Hamilton or Alonso would be in saloon cars or sports cars as they are not allowed to race them. I suspect that they would be pretty competetive with the Nish's and Capellos of this world, and don't doubt that they would be the equal of most, if not all, Indycar drivers.

[Ross Stonefeld]

But when Michael Schumacher, who is no slouch regardless of what we think of his ethics, is struggling to extract the very last from an F1 car, it's hard to imagine lesser men hopping in a NASCAR and being competitive. I think the days of the guys hoping into other series and immediately challenging the front runners is gone. If nothing else the driver depth is too great.

[D-Type]

Perhaps we should turn the question on its head.

Name any top F1 driver who could not adapt to the changes as cars evolved? I can't

Name any top F1 driver who could not adapt to other types of car? I'd rather not name names on such a negative note, but I can think of a few from more recent years when retired GP drivers drove in other series and were midfield runners. I wonder if this was more a case of lack of motivation rather than inability to adapt. Having competed in F1, is a retired driver less "hungry" than a youngster still trying to progress a career and likely to subconsciously drive at "nine tenths"?

[dmj]

Fangio never matched Moss in sports cars

Ah, that old myth again...
Fangio definitely prefered single-seaters, mainly due to the fact that back in South America a codriver of him was killed and he always remained feeling guilty for that.
But if you check Fangio's sports cars results it is hard to say that they are anything less than great!

[kayemod]

Ah, that old myth again...
Fangio definitely prefered single-seaters, mainly due to the fact that back in South America a codriver of him was killed and he always remained feeling guilty for that.
But if you check Fangio's sports cars results it is hard to say that they are anything less than great!

It's not a myth. Fangio was a great driver, maybe the best ever as far as F1 was concerned, but he rarely beat Moss in equal sports cars.

The crash you're referring to took place in a road race in Peru in 1948, Fangio was almost unhurt, but his friend and co-driver Daniel Urrutia died. I don't think he did much road racing after that, but it was a completely different thing from racing European sports cars anyway. The only effect as far as Fangio was concerned, was that he wouldn't have a co-driver in the car, handicapping himself in races like the Mille Miglia, in identical 300SLRs he finished second to Moss in the 1955 event, and he was also second to Stirling in the Targa Florio in the same year.

[dmj]

It's not a myth. Fangio was a great driver, maybe the best ever as far as F1 was concerned, but he rarely beat Moss in equal sports cars.

The crash you're referring to took place in a road race in Peru in 1948, Fangio was almost unhurt, but his friend and co-driver Daniel Urrutia died. I don't think he did much road racing after that, but it was a completely different thing from racing European sports cars anyway. The only effect as far as Fangio was concerned, was that he wouldn't have a co-driver in the car, handicapping himself in races like the Mille Miglia, in identical 300SLRs he finished second to Moss in the 1955 event, and he was also second to Stirling in the Targa Florio in the same year.

Well, being second without any help from co-driver in my book certainly doesn't mean "not being the match." As well as coming second at MM with good part of the race having only one wheel steering...

IMHO people tend to repeat that Moss wass better than Fangio in sports cars without thinking, without engaging full research. Indeed Fangio did much less sports car racing than Moss, probably simply due to his age and general preference to single-seaters. But he was really great sports car driver, too. Just like Moss.

[kayemod]

IMHO people tend to repeat that Moss wass better than Fangio in sports cars without thinking, without engaging full research.

No, they say it because it's undeniably true, which isn't in any sense any criticism of Fangio, who was undoubtedly one of the all-time greats.

[D-Type]

It's not a myth. Fangio was a great driver, maybe the best ever as far as F1 was concerned, but he rarely beat Moss in equal sports cars.

The crash you're referring to took place in a road race in Peru in 1948, Fangio was almost unhurt, but his friend and co-driver Daniel Urrutia died. I don't think he did much road racing after that, but it was a completely different thing from racing European sports cars anyway. The only effect as far as Fangio was concerned, was that he wouldn't have a co-driver in the car, handicapping himself in races like the Mille Miglia, in identical 300SLRs he finished second to Moss in the 1955 event, and he was also second to Stirling in the Targa Florio in the same year.

Hmmm, ignoring DNFs
1953 Mille Miglia: 1 wheel steering for half the race, result 2nd. Carrera Panamericana: failed to win a single stage, race result 1st
1954 TT: 2nd after his car's engine failed and he took over from Taruffi
1955: 2nd to Moss in the Mille Miglia, TT and Targa Florio, but 1st in the non-championship Eifelrennen, Swedish GP and Venezuelan GP
1956: 1st Sebring 1st, 4th Mille Miglia, 2nd Nurburgring 1000km (to Moss),
1957: 1st Cuban GP, 1st Sebring, 5th Nurburgring 1000km (with Moss!). Non-championship: 1st Portuguese GP, 1st Sao Paulo 1st, 1st Boa Vista

Against Moss, I'd say that the score was about even

[Ray Bell]

You have to admire him for his efforts in the Mille Miglia with one wheel steering... that's very true...

But I must be honest, you get very little in books about his efforts in sports cars. Some about him dicing with Hawthorn at Le Mans in 1955, Neubauer wrote about his efforts in the '55 season generally, but wrote as if he was overshadowed by Moss totally.

What other good drives did he put in?

Of course, he leapt into the BRM V16 and immediately adapted to it. That's got to be a point in his favour.


*edit* - And there you go... I wait around for a few hours looking at this thread and finally get to post and my question is already answered.

I never knew he won the Carrera Panamerica... that really is something!

Edited by Ray Bell, 07 August 2010 - 22:24.

[David Birchall]

I think Bloggsworth's comments about Graham Hill are apt. He is not usually classed with the very top drivers but he should be shouldn't he?
To my mind what puts Mario Andretti above him is that Mario won in cars as diverse as front engined sprint cars and Ford GT40s and modern Indy cars-a hell of a range.