Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 2 votes

formula one fastest cars relative to opposition


  • Please log in to reply
66 replies to this topic

#1 jesee

jesee
  • Member

  • 1,906 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 07 April 2014 - 22:03

I have watched many a formula one race but Bahrain last 10 laps showed what a beast the Mercedes is when fully unleashed. At full canter, on the entire race, this car could have lapped everybody. I was watching live timing and i could not believe that at times the W05 was lapping at nearly 3secs per lap faster than the 3rd placed car. I know tires may have played a part but still this pace was flightening to watch.

 

The killer car as far as i can remember was the f2004. This car demolished the opposition in such a manner sometimes it looked like two different classes of cars and still some of the records it sets are still unbroken with its monstrous V10. However in dominance The MP4/4 is in my eyes was the monster that rules them all. Entering 16 races it won 15 set 15 pole positions and 10 lap records powered with the monstrous Honda 2.5Litre V6 Turbo.  I would put F2004 second followed closely by Williams FW 14B. Of recent cars, Brawn GP takes the crown followed by The RB6 on its way setting the fastest times in 15 of the 19 races. I don't think, the W05 might have the dominance of these cars through out the season but watching Bahrain was a real shock to the system. I might not be old enough to have watched races in earlier years, so what would you rate as your best f1 cars relative to opposition and why? Driveability, reliability, fastest but unreliable, extreme engineering, innovation? If i might add, for me the most innovative car was the R25 which introduced mass damper only to be banned. However, it brought about the innerter or J -damper which although doing the same thing..is more tunable.



Advertisement

#2 mudboy

mudboy
  • New Member

  • 1 posts
  • Joined: March 14

Posted 07 April 2014 - 22:51

For me it has to be the Lotus 78, a revolution in aero that at the time was stunning.



#3 stewie

stewie
  • Member

  • 3,608 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 07 April 2014 - 22:55

As much I love seeing another team at the front of F1 after the last 4 RBR years (especially the 2nd half of last year where I gave up watching), if Mercedes keep lapping 3s a lap faster than everyone else then this season is completely f**ked.



#4 Farhannn15

Farhannn15
  • Member

  • 746 posts
  • Joined: August 13

Posted 07 April 2014 - 23:04

As much I love seeing another team at the front of F1 after the last 4 RBR years (especially the 2nd half of last year where I gave up watching), if Mercedes keep lapping 3s a lap faster than everyone else then this season is completely f**ked.

Perhaps not completely if Lewis and Nico can still keep the title hunt going. Yes they're not always going to be as close together as they were last race, but I wouldn't bet on a couple of almighty scraps going on between the pair later on in the year



#5 wepmob2000

wepmob2000
  • Member

  • 709 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 07 April 2014 - 23:46

Perhaps not completely if Lewis and Nico can still keep the title hunt going. Yes they're not always going to be as close together as they were last race, but I wouldn't bet on a couple of almighty scraps going on between the pair later on in the year


This! If Nico and Lewis maintain this rivalry its going to be a wonderful year - two superb drivers in equal cars, and actually allowed to race. It really could be the equal of 1988, in fact some of the similarities are almost spooky - the 'cerebral driver' versus the 'natural', etc. I hope Mercedes maintain their policy of letting drivers race, it will do wonders for their popularity and profile worldwide.

#6 Otaku

Otaku
  • Member

  • 1,820 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 07 April 2014 - 23:58

The Brabham fan car.... 100% effective :p

 

BTW the Honda turbo in the mp4/4 was 1.5 liters and not that monstruous, around 650 HP "only"  :up:



#7 PorcupineTroy

PorcupineTroy
  • Member

  • 302 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 08 April 2014 - 00:15

What's scary for me is how Merc looked even more dominant at Sakhir than at the first two rounds. You have to wonder how much they would win by if bonus points were given out based on the margin of victory.



#8 wepmob2000

wepmob2000
  • Member

  • 709 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 08 April 2014 - 00:34

The way they pulled out a lead after the safety car was just phenomenal, it reminded me of the MP4/13 at Melbourne or FW14B pretty much anywhere, but to an even greater degree.

#9 Spillage

Spillage
  • Member

  • 11,145 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 08 April 2014 - 00:46

An overlooked contender for the most dominant car ever has to be the Ferrari 500. Indy aside, Ascari won every race in 1952 apart from the Swiss GP, which he missed. That was won by his teammate Piero Taruffi. Ferraris were actually 1-2-3-4 in the WDC. The following season Ferrari won seven out of eight races (again discounting the 500) and Ascari set his nine-consecutive wins record that lasted until last season. Shorter seasons than nowadays, of course, but a level of total dominance as great as any F1 has seen.

 

Mercedes' last championship-winning car, which won nine of the twelve races it contested including six out of seven in 1955, has to be another contender, as have the legendary Lotus' 25 & 33. Hell, in 1965 the only race Clark didn't win before he took the title was Monaco, and that was because he happened to be busy winning the Indy 500 that day.

 

I really think Mercedes have the produce one such season this year, but I hope I'm wrong. These are nice stories, of course, but I feel they're not good periods for the fans, and accordingly not good periods for the sport. The gap already seems to big for the championship, but I hope towards the end of the season the other teams are able to start challenging for wins so at least we get some variety mixing it at the front this year.

 

Happily it looks like we're going to have a title fight between Hamilton & Rosberg, which might save F1 from the worst affects of absolute dominance by one team. If we can't have competitiveness from other teams, I'm praying for another 1988 and a title battle that goes to the wire.


Edited by Spillage, 08 April 2014 - 00:52.


#10 akshay380

akshay380
  • Member

  • 604 posts
  • Joined: June 12

Posted 08 April 2014 - 06:03

I am a fairly recent follower for F1 but having rewatched almost all races from 1988, I find so many similarities between MP4/4 and W05. 



#11 bauss

bauss
  • Member

  • 5,067 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 08 April 2014 - 06:14

the Mercs were the cars with the freshest tires after the safety car, all the others pitted around 5 - 6 laps before the safety car... that counted quite a bit towards the big gap at the end.



#12 Boing Ball

Boing Ball
  • Member

  • 428 posts
  • Joined: July 00

Posted 08 April 2014 - 06:52

The Brabham fan car.... 100% effective :p

 

BTW the Honda turbo in the mp4/4 was 1.5 liters and not that monstruous, around 650 HP "only"  :up:

 

If I recall correctly, that engine was so successful, because it was so efficient (and not that loud). Clearly, not a real race engine at all. 



#13 Jamiednm

Jamiednm
  • Member

  • 2,546 posts
  • Joined: March 10

Posted 08 April 2014 - 07:13

the Mercs were the cars with the freshest tires after the safety car, all the others pitted around 5 - 6 laps before the safety car... that counted quite a bit towards the big gap at the end.


That doesn't make cars seconds slower, it makes them tenths slower. And again, the Mercedes were fighting each other and the lead car had the slower primes. Deny Mercedes' relative pace all you want, but their dominance over the field is very clear.

On topic, the most recent example of this kind of pace advantage must be the Brawn, but even that didn't have such a gap and its dominance was short lived - I can see Mercedes dominating the whole season now Brackley has massive, sustained investment from one of the worlds largest automotive companies.

#14 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 13,648 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 08 April 2014 - 07:25

Another car that is often mentioned as making the season it competed in dull yet not mentioned here:

2002 Ferrari F2002.

It dis not compete a full seasonm, mssed the first two races of the season and only MS drove one in its debut race. But once entered, it was beaten only once (Monaco) and won 14 out of 15 events in which appeared at least one. In the 14 races that 2 appeared, they scored 9 double victories.
Now the MP4/r raced when a victory gave only 9 instead of 10 points. If I correct that and do the mats, then we see some interesting figures.
The MP4/4 scored 83% of the maximum point score the car could have scored (16 double victories), the F2002 scored 88% of its maximum possible score with 15 victories and 14 doubles. If we calculate the point score in each start: then the MP4/4 had 6.7 points per start (32) the F2002 had 7.1 point per start (29)
The car was less convincing in qualifying hence not being remembered for being utterly dominant all weekend long like the MP4/4.

For more details and insights (at least fgrom my point of view, feel free to differ) .... http://8w.forix.com/dominators.html



henri

#15 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 13,648 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 08 April 2014 - 07:37

 

If I recall correctly, that engine was so successful, because it was so efficient (and not that loud). Clearly, not a real race engine at all.



Huh?

I thought that the prinicple of racing was to finish first you must first finish?
And MP4/4, too silent to your liking as is may have been, id did win all but one race it competed in.
Sorry, but since it was all about winning and not about making the loudest noise, I would say that the 1988 Honda engine was one of the best ever racing engins ever built.

Examples of the importance of loudness and results?
Indy has two perfect examples to underline th importance of loudness and the efficiency as a racing engine

A) 1994 PIlmor 265E in the Penskes was more silent than the 2.65 litre quadcam engines of the opponents. Yet it defeated them handsomely in the only race the engine ever did. Efficient racing engine? Real racing engine?

B) between 1941 and 1966 there was no other engine used at the Speedway that was as powerful and as loud as the 3 liter centrifugally supercharged Novi V8. It had some 130 dB and it was the only engien that, during qualifying could be heard over an entire lap so you knwe where the drivers were.
Starts for Novi powered cars are some 25 or so between 1941 and 1965 (generally 2, somtimes only 1 car in the race), All that the Novi v8 powered cars ever won in the race was a 3rd place and 3 4th places, in qualifying it was 5 times the fastest car in the field yet with only 2 Pole positions.
According your theory, it was: "Clearly a racing engine", perhaps the ultimate racing engine ever at Indy. The final results however show that it was an entirely wrong concept for a racing engine, at least at Indianapolis.

If you're asking engineers of racing engines: I bet you that 100% rather are responsible for a silent unbeatable engine then the loudest of the bunch that is defeated each and every time.


Henri

Edited by Henri Greuter, 08 April 2014 - 07:39.


#16 Boing Ball

Boing Ball
  • Member

  • 428 posts
  • Joined: July 00

Posted 08 April 2014 - 08:21

Huh?

I thought that the prinicple of racing was to finish first you must first finish?
And MP4/4, too silent to your liking as is may have been, id did win all but one race it competed in.
Sorry, but since it was all about winning and not about making the loudest noise, I would say that the 1988 Honda engine was one of the best ever racing engins ever built.
 

 

I should have emphasized my sarcasm more clearly. My point was that already back in 1988, one of the most iconic F1 cars ever, was so successful because of its efficient engine. 



#17 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 13,648 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 08 April 2014 - 08:50

 

I should have emphasized my sarcasm more clearly. My point was that already back in 1988, one of the most iconic F1 cars ever, was so successful because of its efficient engine.



Ah, OK.

In that case: My apologies for misunderstanding.


henri

#18 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 12,230 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 08 April 2014 - 08:56

Qualifying for the 1988 San Marino Grand Prix:

 

1 12 22px-Flag_of_Brazil.svg.png Ayrton Senna McLaren-Honda 1:41.278 1:27.148 — 2 11 23px-Flag_of_France.svg.png Alain Prost McLaren-Honda 1:41.597 1:27.919 +0.771 3 1 22px-Flag_of_Brazil.svg.png Nelson Piquet Lotus-Honda 1:44.806 1:30.500 +3.352

 

Good lordy lord. I haven't gone through all quali sessions, but randomly discovered this. Can anyone top this in a dry Q session? Fastest team is more than 3s per lap faster than the second fastest team?

 

Edit: Obviously also the length of the circuit has to be taken into account, as in the old Nurburgring the gaps were bigger.:p


Edited by sopa, 08 April 2014 - 08:59.


#19 Mohican

Mohican
  • Member

  • 1,986 posts
  • Joined: May 01

Posted 08 April 2014 - 08:58

The 1998 McLaren (Hakkinen/Coulthard) was certainly the class of the field that year.

The Lotus 79 (Andretti/Peterson/Jarier) dominated the 1978 season, and nobody has mentioned the Lotus 49 (Clark/Hill) blitzing the field in 1967 even though unreliable.

In addition, Ferrari owned the 1961 season with its "sharknose" driven by Hill/von Trips/Baghetti.



Advertisement

#20 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 13,648 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 08 April 2014 - 09:06

 

Qualifying for the 1988 San Marino Grand Prix:
 
1 12 22px-Flag_of_Brazil.svg.png Ayrton Senna McLaren-Honda 1:41.278 1:27.148 — 2 11 23px-Flag_of_France.svg.png Alain Prost McLaren-Honda 1:41.597 1:27.919 +0.771 3 1 22px-Flag_of_Brazil.svg.png Nelson Piquet Lotus-Honda 1:44.806 1:30.500 +3.352
 
Good lordy lord. I haven't gone through all quali sessions, but randomly discovered this. Can anyone top this in a dry Q session? Fastest team is more than 3s per lap faster than the second fastest team?
 
Edit: Obviously also the length of the circuit has to be taken into account, as in the old Nurburgring the gaps were bigger. :p



And to rub it in aven more: that third driver using basically the same engine.....


henri

#21 DampMongoose

DampMongoose
  • Member

  • 2,258 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 08 April 2014 - 09:28

Ferrari 500 in 1952 won every round it entered of the championship, also claiming every pole and fastest lap along the way.  Although that wasn't an F1 car ;)



#22 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 13,648 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 08 April 2014 - 09:32

 

Ferrari 500 in 1952 won every round it entered of the championship, also claiming every pole and fastest lap along the way.  Although that wasn't an F1 car ;)



Maybe we should talk about Grand Prix cars. Then the 500 certainly qualifies. But in all fairness, i think it was a bit easier for the 500 to dominate since there were not that many different spcies of cars it competed against and also it faced them with more than 2 examples against their opponents.
And with less races in the season, alltogether the odds were much better for the 500 than for ist modernd day sisters F2002 and F2004 and the MP4/4


henri

#23 DampMongoose

DampMongoose
  • Member

  • 2,258 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 08 April 2014 - 09:50

 


Maybe we should talk about Grand Prix cars. Then the 500 certainly qualifies. But in all fairness, i think it was a bit easier for the 500 to dominate since there were not that many different spcies of cars it competed against and also it faced them with more than 2 examples against their opponents.
And with less races in the season, alltogether the odds were much better for the 500 than for ist modernd day sisters F2002 and F2004 and the MP4/4


henri

 

Yes, although the MP4/4 was only up against 2 other turbocharged cars specifically designed for 1988 regulations, with one of those being Zakspeed. Everyone else ran updated 1987 cars which weren't exactly going to challenge that much, plus the Ferrari's of the 2000's had the distinct advantage of unlimited testing on bespoke Bridgestones.  But yes generally I agree that the later domination was probably more impressive from a statistical point of view. 



#24 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 12,230 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 08 April 2014 - 09:52

Just looking up 1952 results. Some of the qualifying gaps are pretty eye-opening. :p



#25 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 13,648 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 08 April 2014 - 10:06

 

Yes, although the MP4/4 was only up against 2 other turbocharged cars specifically designed for 1988 regulations, with one of those being Zakspeed. Everyone else ran updated 1987 cars which weren't exactly going to challenge that much, plus the Ferrari's of the 2000's had the distinct advantage of unlimited testing on bespoke Bridgestones.  But yes generally I agree that the later domination was probably more impressive from a statistical point of view.



DampMongoose,

I'm glad you point this out.
Because to me, I rate the F2002 and F2004 as more impressive in their race day domination then MP4/4 did because both Ferrari's faced opponents created according the same rules, this unlike tho MP4/4 as you pointed out.
But I do agree with you that the figures of MP4/4 certainly are impressive and probably even more because it was the first time ever we saw anything like that in modern days.
I also believe that MP4/4s achievements are more well liked and appreciated because of the feelings regarding the drivers who drove them compared with the drivers who drove the two Ferraris.


Henri

Edited by Henri Greuter, 08 April 2014 - 10:07.


#26 Murl

Murl
  • Member

  • 744 posts
  • Joined: October 06

Posted 08 April 2014 - 10:10

Another car that is often mentioned as making the season it competed in dull yet not mentioned here:

2002 Ferrari F2002.

It dis not compete a full seasonm, mssed the first two races of the season and only MS drove one in its debut race. But once entered, it was beaten only once (Monaco) and won 14 out of 15 events in which appeared at least one. In the 14 races that 2 appeared, they scored 9 double victories.
Now the MP4/r raced when a victory gave only 9 instead of 10 points. If I correct that and do the mats, then we see some interesting figures.
The MP4/4 scored 83% of the maximum point score the car could have scored (16 double victories), the F2002 scored 88% of its maximum possible score with 15 victories and 14 doubles. If we calculate the point score in each start: then the MP4/4 had 6.7 points per start (32) the F2002 had 7.1 point per start (29)
The car was less convincing in qualifying hence not being remembered for being utterly dominant all weekend long like the MP4/4.

For more details and insights (at least fgrom my point of view, feel free to differ) .... http://8w.forix.com/dominators.html



henri

 

After reading your article a couple of years ago I thought "well reasoned, well spotted". I'm convinced :up:

 

Interesting that perception can override "actual reality".
 



#27 Wander

Wander
  • Member

  • 2,367 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 08 April 2014 - 10:52

Just looking up 1952 results. Some of the qualifying gaps are pretty eye-opening. :p

 

Yup. An extreme example from that season's Belgian GP qualifying (14km circuit):

1 4  Alberto Ascari Ferrari 4:37.0

2 2  Nino Farina Ferrari 4:40.0 + 3.0

 3 6  Piero Taruffi Ferrari 4:46.0 + 9.0

 4 14  Robert Manzon Gordini 4:52.0 + 15.0

 5 16 Jean Behra Gordini 4:56.0 + 19.0 + 21.0

 6 8  Mike Hawthorn Cooper-Bristol 4:58.0 +19.0

 7 36 Ken Wharton Frazer Nash-Bristol 5:01.0 + 24.0

 8 28  Paul Frère HWM-Alta 5:05.0 + 28.0

 

 

But this really appears to be an anomaly. Typically, the qualifying gaps between the top cars were already quite small in the 50s, with the top drivers of the top teams typically qualifying within a couple of seconds of each other on normal sized circuits.


Edited by Wander, 08 April 2014 - 10:59.


#28 Jejking

Jejking
  • Member

  • 3,111 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 08 April 2014 - 10:54

The Brabham fan car.... 100% effective :p

 

BTW the Honda turbo in the mp4/4 was 1.5 liters and not that monstruous, around 650 HP "only"  :up:

That was with the turbo pressure knocked down quite a lot, full tilt it was still putting out 900 BHP ;)



#29 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 13,648 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 08 April 2014 - 11:17

 

That was with the turbo pressure knocked down quite a lot, full tilt it was still putting out 900 BHP ;)



No, I'm sorry you're wrong.

the 1988 Honda engine wasn't capable of using the 4.0 or higher boost s of 1987 and before. The basic design perhaps was but the 1988 Honda was never designed to run on a higher boost than 2.5, assuming that Honda didn't mess with the boost levels and managed to run higher boost levels then officially measured and regulated by the FIA provided pop-offs.

The highest power output it was capable of was in peractice/qualifying and by then it produced a maximum of 685 hp, On race day that power output was a bit lower.
Don't think about that 1988 Honda as a detuned version of the earlier high-boost versions. it was an extensively modified, if not actually new version with many details that the highboost engines never had, one of them being a much smaller flywheel/clutch arrangement. Because of that, the entire engine could be much lower, enhancing the GC and that was one of the key points within the lowline design of the car.

I am pretty sure that the Honda engineers designed the engie so specifically within the window in which it had to operate (thus no massive overengineering to withstand more boost etc.) that I wonder if it would be capable of living on much more boost so it would crank out that 900 hp figure you mention without going to pieces. Not impossible that it could't produce that amount of power at all since it wasn't designed to be a 900 hp engine

Henri

Edited by Henri Greuter, 08 April 2014 - 11:18.


#30 Jimisgod

Jimisgod
  • Member

  • 4,954 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 08 April 2014 - 13:56

I also believe that MP4/4s achievements are more well liked and appreciated because of the feelings regarding the drivers who drove them compared with the drivers who drove the two Ferraris.


Henri

 

The difference being that in 1988 the drivers could "race"... not so much in 2002...



#31 superden

superden
  • Member

  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 08 April 2014 - 14:36

Williams FW14B.



#32 Otaku

Otaku
  • Member

  • 1,820 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 08 April 2014 - 17:14

That was with the turbo pressure knocked down quite a lot, full tilt it was still putting out 900 BHP ;)

 

No.

 

http://www.k20a.org/...A168EEngine.pdf



#33 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 13,648 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 08 April 2014 - 17:46

The difference being that in 1988 the drivers could "race"... not so much in 2002...

 

Definitely a factor too but I was more thinking about the popularity of both Senna and Prost and McLaren with the fans being bigger than the symapathy for MS and Ferrari at the time. the impopularity of Ferrari being increased by the factor you mention.

 

 

henri



#34 halifaxf1fan

halifaxf1fan
  • Member

  • 4,846 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 08 April 2014 - 18:12

Perhaps not completely if Lewis and Nico can still keep the title hunt going. Yes they're not always going to be as close together as they were last race, but I wouldn't bet on a couple of almighty scraps going on between the pair later on in the year

 

It is likely they will be close as they are basically driving to a set point. It all depends on how the car is working.  Tire life would be the only real variable.



#35 S3baman

S3baman
  • Member

  • 2,864 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 08 April 2014 - 18:19

What's scary for me is how Merc looked even more dominant at Sakhir than at the first two rounds. You have to wonder how much they would win by if bonus points were given out based on the margin of victory.

 

They would be crowned WCC already since they would have lapped the field I reckon.



#36 S3baman

S3baman
  • Member

  • 2,864 posts
  • Joined: October 11

Posted 08 April 2014 - 18:28

the Mercs were the cars with the freshest tires after the safety car, all the others pitted around 5 - 6 laps before the safety car... that counted quite a bit towards the big gap at the end.

 

I think the slowest lap from a Merc car in the final stint was a 1:38.7 and that included multiple passes and and going to the limit of the track from T1 all the way into the T5-6 complex. Add that they were pushing like hell the tires were getting some serious strain put on them, yet the lap times were still 2.5s faster than the competition. The Williams on fresher rubber couldn't get by a damaged RBR, and Daniel barely pulled away from a lingering Hulkenberg on much older tires.

 

The Mercs are so far ahead they CAN lap the entire field if really required. Their pace is genuine and the only Saving Grace for us is that the team is letting their drivers race against each other.



#37 eronrules

eronrules
  • Member

  • 3,395 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 08 April 2014 - 18:31

if only the mercedes powerplant could've kept their **** together for a whole GP, i'd say the most dominant car i saw was the MP4-20. it was  a beast, the most powerful of the V10 beasts ... should've clinched both championships with ease ... but didn't  :(



#38 demet06

demet06
  • Member

  • 126 posts
  • Joined: December 13

Posted 08 April 2014 - 18:43

 

 

Still more powerful than the dfv's and Judd's though.



#39 DampMongoose

DampMongoose
  • Member

  • 2,258 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 08 April 2014 - 18:59

Definitely a factor too but I was more thinking about the popularity of both Senna and Prost and McLaren with the fans being bigger than the symapathy for MS and Ferrari at the time. the impopularity of Ferrari being increased by the factor you mention.


henri


I think the fans were happy to see a battle between the best two drivers in 88 in the best car, along with the politics that were part and parcel with that, no enjoyment available with a Schumacher bias and unlimited budget at Ferrari during the early 2000's. Just foregone conclusions.

Advertisement

#40 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 13,648 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 08 April 2014 - 19:12

Still more powerful than the dfv's and Judd's though.

 

True.

But the empty weigth of the atmo's was 500 kg vs 540 for the turbo's. so the power to weight ratio was closer to another that you may think.

Curiously however: the turbos were limited to 150 liters of fuel while the atmo's were unrestricted and often, if not always, started with more fuel than the turbos.  Though I don't think it was up to 40 kilos and more.

But while the race went on the atmos lost more weight than the turbos.

Taking everything into account, it was an interesting situation if it came to determining who had which handicaps and andvantages during which phase of the race.

 

Henri



#41 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 13,648 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 08 April 2014 - 19:19

I think the fans were happy to see a battle between the best two drivers in 88 in the best car, along with the politics that were part and parcel with that, no enjoyment available with a Schumacher bias and unlimited budget at Ferrari during the early 2000's. Just foregone conclusions.

 

 

I think that in 88 the budget at McLaren and Honda was near unlimited as well. Honda built effectively two engines that year, the V6 to race while they worked on a V10 for beyond 1988.

As much as I respect the MP4/4, I didn't like it at all to watch that year. During the Ferrari heydeys most people who hated that era did at least have a weak spot for Rubens. Senna and Prost were the two drivers I disliked the most of all at the time and my dislike of Senna at that time was so strong that I lost whatever sympathy I still had for McLaren when they hired him. When they dropped the TAGs for Hondas too there was not a single element within Team McLaren i felt any sympathy for left.

I admire the MP4/4 but I would have loved it had it carried a different name, other engine and had it been driven by other drivers than those two.

 

Henri


Edited by Henri Greuter, 08 April 2014 - 19:20.


#42 917k

917k
  • Member

  • 3,157 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 08 April 2014 - 19:37

People make the [mistaken] assumption that everyone thought 88 a classic season. To the contrary, there was great whining about utter domination from much of the press - and likely the fans if they had only had internet forums in those days.  ;)



#43 alexbiker

alexbiker
  • Member

  • 583 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 08 April 2014 - 19:51

I should have emphasized my sarcasm more clearly. My point was that already back in 1988, one of the most iconic F1 cars ever, was so successful because of its efficient engine. 

 

The fuel limit at the time was 155L with a 2.5-bar boost blow-off.  These 2014 engines have unlimited boost - the wastegates are just a safety measure to prevent a runaway - and 100kg of petrol being roughly (for pump fuel) 140L - maybe significantly more with the fuel development that has happened.

 

Deriding these cars compared to the "golden age" is simply silly.

 

That said, wouldn't it be fun to raise the flow limit for qualifying?



#44 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 13,648 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 08 April 2014 - 20:08

The fuel limit at the time was 155L with a 2.5-bar boost blow-off.  These 2014 engines have unlimited boost - the wastegates are just a safety measure to prevent a runaway - and 100kg of petrol being roughly (for pump fuel) 140L - maybe significantly more with the fuel development that has happened.

 

Deriding these cars compared to the "golden age" is simply silly.

 

That said, wouldn't it be fun to raise the flow limit for qualifying?

 

 

To  be precisely: the fuel limit was 150 Liters.

And I think the fuel restrictions were less then they are nowadays, The Honda ran on on a blend of primarily toluene with some pentane to comply to the maximum octane rating. A rating named afer a component of which there was nos single drop to be found within the blend.

I don't believe such a freedom is possible now.

 

Raising the flow for qualifying?

Dou you really want to go back to the days of handgrenade engines in practice that are much more stronger than the ones used in race day setup so that you effectively have two different events in one weekend: Who is the fastest over a single lap with unlimited flow and who is the fastest on race day with much less power? This was exactly the kind of thing why things went wrong in F1 from 1983 on and why the turbos got banned eventually.

Having said that, with the limited number of engines permitted thise days I think it is almost impossible to create two different types of engines: one for qualifying and on for race day only.

It has to be done with a single engine that can perform in both conditions. And I think that from the outset the current engines were not designed for such power levels so many components need to be entirely redesigned or rebuilt to operateto deliver and  and withstand more power.

Sounds like fun but I think that it is simply impossible to do without major redesigning of the engien and hence costs involved.

 

Henri



#45 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 13,648 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 08 April 2014 - 20:12

People make the [mistaken] assumption that everyone thought 88 a classic season. To the contrary, there was great whining about utter domination from much of the press - and likely the fans if they had only had internet forums in those days.  ;)

 

 

from what I can recall in my own country, the real moaning withi the local press about McLaren-Honda domination began after the first races of 1989 when it was clear that the team was still all dominant after the 1988 white&redwash. In 1988 it was taken for gratnted since it was clear that the team had don its homework the best of all, fielding only one of the two seriously newly degsinged for teh season turbocharged cars while veryone else ran stopgap options.

 

As for how I would have reacted on the Internet, had there been an internet, I don't even dare to think about it....

 

Henri



#46 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 17,232 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 08 April 2014 - 20:18

F2002 was the most crushing and demoralizing car ever. It was still winning and perfectly competitive a year later regardless of the huge strides taken by McLaren, WIlliams and Renault.



#47 Jejking

Jejking
  • Member

  • 3,111 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 08 April 2014 - 20:19

 


No, I'm sorry you're wrong.

the 1988 Honda engine wasn't capable of using the 4.0 or higher boost s of 1987 and before. The basic design perhaps was but the 1988 Honda was never designed to run on a higher boost than 2.5, assuming that Honda didn't mess with the boost levels and managed to run higher boost levels then officially measured and regulated by the FIA provided pop-offs.

The highest power output it was capable of was in peractice/qualifying and by then it produced a maximum of 685 hp, On race day that power output was a bit lower.
Don't think about that 1988 Honda as a detuned version of the earlier high-boost versions. it was an extensively modified, if not actually new version with many details that the highboost engines never had, one of them being a much smaller flywheel/clutch arrangement. Because of that, the entire engine could be much lower, enhancing the GC and that was one of the key points within the lowline design of the car.

I am pretty sure that the Honda engineers designed the engie so specifically within the window in which it had to operate (thus no massive overengineering to withstand more boost etc.) that I wonder if it would be capable of living on much more boost so it would crank out that 900 hp figure you mention without going to pieces. Not impossible that it could't produce that amount of power at all since it wasn't designed to be a 900 hp engine

Henri

Good information, my history lessons on that engine go back to 1987-spec Honda engine with pressure caps on 2.5 bar instead of 4. 



#48 Rob

Rob
  • Member

  • 9,223 posts
  • Joined: February 01

Posted 08 April 2014 - 23:02

F2002 was the most crushing and demoralizing car ever. It was still winning and perfectly competitive a year later regardless of the huge strides taken by McLaren, WIlliams and Renault.

 

I went to the British GP in 2002. Montoya led in the wet, but when the sun came out the Ferraris just drove off into the distance. Barrichello came second after starting from the back of the grid!



#49 jesee

jesee
  • Member

  • 1,906 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 08 April 2014 - 23:07

Anyone remember Monaco qualifying 1988 where Senna out-qualified the nearest non-Mclaren teams by 2.6ses!!! MP4/4 was a fantastic car. It was fast and reliable and in fact of the four retirements two were due to crash. The combination of the reliable Honda V6 to replace TAG-Porsche V6 which was used on the unreliable MP4/3, Senna and Gordon Murray made the car unbeatable. But the Porshe V6 Turbo was a monstrous engine and probably one of the most powerful capable of producing a maximum of 1500 horsepower in qualifying!!! Crazy!

#50 Spillage

Spillage
  • Member

  • 11,145 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 08 April 2014 - 23:09

F2002 was the most crushing and demoralizing car ever. It was still winning and perfectly competitive a year later regardless of the huge strides taken by McLaren, WIlliams and Renault.

It's certainly right up there. Schumacher scored the unprecedented achievement of being on the podium in every race - he only finished third once, and that driving the old car. Even then he lost his front wing on lap one and still made the podium.