
1994 F1 Review Show
#1
Posted 22 November 2016 - 03:56
I can't believe how much F1 has changed in less than a generation. Unreliable cars, cars blowing up, cars on fire, cars shedding parts without warning, drivers trying to pass (and crashing) anywhere and everywhere, gears failing, drivers not totally strapped into their vehicles, much more accessiblity at these events and definitely less "polish" and more of an organic feel to everything. Certainly had a more dangerous aura to it.
And drivers getting suspended in season from subsequent races for violations, no license point system or accumulators. Let's not forget artificial chicanes added to the track. Imagine trying to do that today.
One thing that stood out is just how corporate and structured F1 is now compared to 1994. There was definitely a more amateur feel to the proceedings back then.
Advertisement
#2
Posted 22 November 2016 - 07:00
I for one, might argue that it's even more amateurishly run now....
#3
Posted 22 November 2016 - 07:43
Try comparing 94 to , say, 73 and your eye brows will rise even further.. But I bet you understand why we old farts enjoyed Grand Prix racing (not the abbreviated 'F1' please) back in the day .
#4
Posted 22 November 2016 - 08:01
Just got a chance to watch the 1994 review show from motor trend on demand's vault section.
I can't believe how much F1 has changed in less than a generation. Unreliable cars, cars blowing up, cars on fire, cars shedding parts without warning, drivers trying to pass (and crashing) anywhere and everywhere, gears failing, drivers not totally strapped into their vehicles, much more accessiblity at these events and definitely less "polish" and more of an organic feel to everything. Certainly had a more dangerous aura to it.
And drivers getting suspended in season from subsequent races for violations, no license point system or accumulators. Let's not forget artificial chicanes added to the track. Imagine trying to do that today.
One thing that stood out is just how corporate and structured F1 is now compared to 1994. There was definitely a more amateur feel to the proceedings back then.
That was because then were no rpm. limit and no engine/gear box/etc. per year limit.
+ the were no asphalted run-off areas, just gravel traps.
I don't like the word "amateur". I think "natural" is better, because imho todays F1 is rather overregulated and artificial than professional.
#5
Posted 22 November 2016 - 08:26
#6
Posted 22 November 2016 - 12:39
Try comparing 94 to , say, 73 and your eye brows will rise even further.. But I bet you understand why we old farts enjoyed Grand Prix racing (not the abbreviated 'F1' please) back in the day .
I was well aware of what it was like in the 70's. That was a lifetime ago. I was amazed that 3 years before I started watching things were so much different than today. I loved it back then and this review show only drives home be fact that F1 has gone backwards in certain ways in its attempt to go mainstream.
#7
Posted 22 November 2016 - 12:44
That was because then were no rpm. limit and no engine/gear box/etc. per year limit.
+ the were no asphalted run-off areas, just gravel traps.
I don't like the word "amateur". I think "natural" is better, because imho todays F1 is rather overregulated and artificial than professional.
I use the word amateur in a complimentary way. I agree it is more overregulated today. I wish more innovation was allowed today rather than being stifled.
If you overused the engine it blew up, if you made a mistake you ended up in a gravel trap. If nothing else, gravel traps need to be brought back.
#8
Posted 22 November 2016 - 13:13
... if you made a mistake you ended up in a gravel trap. If nothing else, gravel traps need to be brought back.
I often think of the comparison between motor racing and tightrope walking often expressed by Stirling Moss: If you stretch a tightrope eighteen inches above the ground, plenty of people have the ability to walk along it without falling off. Only a very few special people can do the same when the tightrope is stretched high over Niagara Falls.
These days, with tarmac run-off areas, you can now step off that tightrope and get back on, and incur only a minor penalty at most.
#9
Posted 22 November 2016 - 17:31
I was well aware of what it was like in the 70's. That was a lifetime ago. I was amazed that 3 years before I started watching things were so much different than today. I loved it back then and this review show only drives home be fact that F1 has gone backwards in certain ways in its attempt to go mainstream.
Indeed - forgive my presumption but if your were surprised at 94 I had assumed your knowledge of an even earlier period would be corespondingly less.
The biggest shock I guess is the gratuitously obscene levels of budget now when , back in the day , Ken Tyrrell ran a team on a budget which wouldn't keep Red Bull in front wings ..
#10
Posted 22 November 2016 - 17:52
Indeed - forgive my presumption but if your were surprised at 94 I had assumed your knowledge of an even earlier period would be corespondingly less.
The biggest shock I guess is the gratuitously obscene levels of budget now when , back in the day , Ken Tyrrell ran a team on a budget which wouldn't keep Red Bull in front wings ..
The 60's and 70's historically have gotten more press and more airtime.
My surprise was that things were so much different in my lifetime. I was a kid in 1997 and compared to today, it seems like centuries have passed.
#11
Posted 22 November 2016 - 17:54
Indeed - forgive my presumption but if your were surprised at 94 I had assumed your knowledge of an even earlier period would be corespondingly less.
The biggest shock I guess is the gratuitously obscene levels of budget now when , back in the day , Ken Tyrrell ran a team on a budget which wouldn't keep Red Bull in front wings ..
or anyone who employed Damon Hill.
#12
Posted 22 November 2016 - 19:02
Indeed - forgive my presumption but if your were surprised at 94 I had assumed your knowledge of an even earlier period would be corespondingly less.
The biggest shock I guess is the gratuitously obscene levels of budget now when , back in the day , Ken Tyrrell ran a team on a budget which wouldn't keep Red Bull in front wings ..
Somewhat to my own surprise, whilst googling for companies information totally unrelated to the 'Tyrrell Racing Organisation' i ended up googling them anyway and was very interested to see that with each annual set of accounts filed away and now stored on line, you can judge for yourself how much of a shoestring Ken operated upon, right through the 1980's...
Tried the same thing for Team Lotus and McLaren Racing without too much joy..
#13
Posted 22 November 2016 - 19:34
Just got a chance to watch the 1994 review show from motor trend on demand's vault section.
I can't believe how much F1 has changed in less than a generation. Unreliable cars, cars blowing up, cars on fire, cars shedding parts without warning, drivers trying to pass (and crashing) anywhere and everywhere, gears failing, drivers not totally strapped into their vehicles, much more accessiblity at these events and definitely less "polish" and more of an organic feel to everything. Certainly had a more dangerous aura to it.
And drivers getting suspended in season from subsequent races for violations, no license point system or accumulators. Let's not forget artificial chicanes added to the track. Imagine trying to do that today.
One thing that stood out is just how corporate and structured F1 is now compared to 1994. There was definitely a more amateur feel to the proceedings back then.
We still get unreliable cars (ask Lewis Hamilton) we still get cars on fire (ask Lewis Hamilton) it was only a couple of seasons ago when Carlos Sainz (?) front wing fell off, Bottas has had a few issues with his seat belts this season, Max Verstappen tries to pass everywhere, his dad also tried it back then but usually ended up beached in the gravel trap. The budgets may have changed as may the paddock club but the sport still manages to mess it up somehow....
#14
Posted 23 November 2016 - 07:15
Lewis' car is unbelievably reliable, if not quite as reliable as the engine driven by the man he calls 'my teammate' - and it was that fact alone which triggered daft conspiracy theories about causation when , for once , it let go. It sure ain't Zakspeed levels of self immolation .