15 replies to this topic

[zooropa21]

After watching Dakar 2001 repeatedly I am curious to know who do you think are the Top Five most technically oriented drivers of F1 history? Although these two racing categories (F1 & Rally) vary significantly on overall skill priorities, technical savvy, with a secondary role in F1 vs. Rally, is still a significant part of an F1 driver's success.

Since it is almost impossible to know who is the best at installing a wing or fixing the cars suspension, please focus your comments on the drivers ability to communicate with the engineers to get the best car setup. Base your comments under the assumption that the more technically savvy drivers will be able to pin point with greater accuracy what requires adjustment to get the best car output at a given track.

[Daemon]

First and foremost, and there is no question in my mind. The undisputed champion of the technical minded drivers, is the only guy to win a world championship in a car he built - Sir Jack Brabham.

Apart from him, theres another guy who built his own race car - Dan Gurney.

Damon Hill is supposedly a brilliant technical and development driver.

Apart from Michael Schumacher, who was instrumental in developing the Ferrari to where it is today, I can't think of any others.

[LeTurc]

Whenever a firsttime circuit comes MS shines.

[312B3]

In no particular order, other than for chronological reasons:

(1) Brabham;
(2) McLaren;
(3) Hulme;
(4) Stewart;
(5) Lauda;
(6) Andretti;
(7) Piquet;
(8) Prost;
(9) Senna; and
(10) Schumacher.

These guys stand out because they combined their development expertise with sustained success. Of course, there may have been others who were much better at developing cars, but who were either not as quick or not lucky enough to find their way into race-winning cars.

Beyond this group, there were plenty of others in both the pre-war and immediate post-World War II eras, but it is hard to say how much input they really had. Supposedly, Fangio was fantastic and hands-on, but most of the team bosses back then were autocrats who did not care very much about what the driver had to say. In that formative era of Neubauer and Ferrari, the engineers did most of the testing, but Rosemeyer and Nuvolari are said to have had great suggestions for improving their cars' performances.

[david_martin]

Originally posted by Daemon
First and foremost, and there is no question in my mind. The undisputed champion of the technical minded drivers, is the only guy to win a world championship in a car he built - Sir Jack Brabham.

Black Jack was a fine development driver, and without him it is questionable whether Cooper would have been as successful as they were without his technical input. But I think Ron Tauranac's contribution at MRD is often underplayed. It was Ron who designed and built the champsionship winner Brabhams, and Jack who developed them and drove them.

I would also put a big vote in for Ritchie Ginther, who was widely considered to be the development driver during the late fifties and early sixties. He was always Enzo Ferrari's first choice to test and develop any of his cars, be them open wheelers or sports cars. Ferraris considerable success during that era owes a lot to Ginther's efforts in testing and development skills.

[taran]

312B3 (just how old are you to have seen that beauty?), you have nailed the definitive top 10.

Except for 1 teensy weeny "mistake", IMO.

Mario Andretti. When supermario was teamed with Carlos "El Lole" Reutemann, Carlos wasted no time in becoming Lotus' #1. And he did that in the year that Mario was the reigning worldchampion. Colin Chapman was even willing to get rid of Mario for 1980 if Carlos would stay and was heartbroken when the Argentinian signed for Williams. Chapman said he had thought that Ickx and Andretti were good with their technical feedback (and Peterson really bad) but that Reutemann was on a different level entirely.

So, exit Mario, enter Reutemann.

I think special mention should go to Lauda, Prost and Senna.
Nelson Piquet said that he only tested the Brabham thrice in 1980!
Lauda started the ball rolling in 1984 when he was outclassed by prost in qualifying. He needed something extra for the races and started the art of detailed analysis (before telemetrie was really big). Prost learned from his mistakes and then Senna perfected the art.

If not for them, Jean Alesi would have been a multiple champion...

[jimmy mike]

(1) Jean Alesi

[zooropa21]

Daemon, Le Tur, 312B3, David-Martin, & Taran. Thank you for your great insights! I am very interested in trying to grasp how important is technical savvy for the modern era F1 driver.

How would you rank technical savvy amongst the following: (1) reflects, (2) charisma, (3)driving skill (throttle + clutch + brake techniques = speed), and economic support (parental support, PR, manager, etc). What is the limit to the amount of input a driver can give to his engineer? Do modern drivers actually research the engineering going behind their cars?

Of course it is really up to them, and besides, the engineers are on the team’s payroll exactly for that. However, the ongoing example for the last three years of the #2 drivers with the Williams team serve as a good scenario where a technically savvy driver would fare best in his battle with the more established driver if he were more aware of the ongoing technical problems with the car.

[Billy]

Originally posted by LeTurc
Whenever a firsttime circuit comes MS shines.

Didn't EI outqualify him the first time at A1-Ring and Melbourne?

[Zawed]

Prost
Damon Hill
McLaren
and I heard Berger was rated for his testing abilities although that might be relative to Alesi.

[asterix]

your a cruel, cruel man jimmy ;)

i always looked up to brabham beacuse of the obvious reasons stated above

[Pikachu Racing]

Ayrton Senna, Dan Gurney, Michael Schumacher.

Away from F1 another driver that was still good with the hands and car is AJ Foyt. Old school style, let me fix the damn thing and see if it's work. I watch 1985 Indy where Foyt got out of his car and try to fix the front wings by himself. No success. Threw down a computer when Brack ran out of fuel in 1998.

[ebe]

...coming from past days to present time:

Brabham
Stewart
Lauda
Prost
Schumacher

[miniman]

Current drivers: Schummi, DC, Wurz. I believe the later has a degree in mechanical engineering.

[taran]

On another Forum we had a discussion about this (more or less).
It was about #1 drivers and what constitutes a #1.

This was my contribution:

First one needs to clarify what a #1 driver is.

This is my idea:
The #1 driver determines the focus of development & basic characteristics of the car. He supplies the technical feedback to help develop the car. He determines the basic set-ups for racetracks. But perhaps most importantly, he must inspire the team and give them focus. To perform well, a #1 must have the personal standing/imago to make the technical boffins follow his lead.

The #2 driver determines the feasability of alternative setups & race-tactics as well as additional testing feedback.

The #3 driver (test driver) usually does installation work, comparison tests of new design versus current car as well as the so-called “long runs” i.e. repetitive testing with tyres or engines that wear out or bore the regular drivers.

All drivers need to be (relatively fast) but that is not always the most important factor. For instance, Patrese at Williams was never the fastest driver available but he was technically proficient, eager to test and experienced.
Often teams pair an experienced older driver with a young hotshoe. The older driver supplies the technical knowhow while the younger driver learns and drives the wheels off during the race.

Of course, a driver is only so good as the total package of team, engine, tyres, engineers and budget but good drivers can “lift” a team, while poor drivers sink with them.


Ferrari has Michael who is famous for his leadership talents. Less kindly people say he bullies the team in performing. Either way, Michael improves a team and is the definative #1.
Barrichello has a more spotted reputation, perhaps because he came into F1 too young. At Jordan, he never really made it his team and the partnership broke down in 1995. At Stewart, Rubens was reborn and rose to a new level. He dominated every teammate (JM, JV, JH) and was the undisputed #1, gifted with the best cars and latest developments. ==> MS yes, RB yes

McLaren has a pair of drivers that also still have a question mark behind their names. David Coulthard has great technical ability while Mika does not. However, Coulthard lacks the reputation to be a true #1. His entry into F1 was irregular and he failed to make the most of his time in top teams. He fails to overtake lesser cars, makes too many mistakes and is too inconsistent to be champion. True or not, this is the impression of David, so he isn’t taken seriously. Mika was McLaren’s main man during the poor post-Senna years, so some blame must be given. However, since given a good car, Mika has grown into a formidable driver. Yet one wonders how he would perform in an other team without Papa Ron calling the shots. ==> MH yes, DC no

At Williams, Ralf has steadily climbed into the limelight. Zanardi was supposed to be the man, but he failed and Ralf stepped in. He has become a #1. Montoya has the reputation and image to be a superlative #1 but perhaps not yet the experience. ==> RS yes, JPM yes

Benetton suffers from young driver syndrome. Jean and Gerhard may have been long in the tooth but they did much better than the later kindergarten. This is not meant to put the Fischella down, as I consider him an excellent highly underrated star, but the youngsters lack the authority to make their voices heard. This leaves them with slow cars as the boffins run around in circles. ==> GF no, JB no

BAR or Team Villeneuve as some might say is in turmoil. While Jacques is a racer at heart, his testing skills are poor and even at Williams he was criticized for his poor leadership qualities. So, while he has the moral authority he lacks the necessary skills to be a #1. Panis rose to the top at Ligier/Prost only to go down in flames as the Prosts became slower and slower. How much was down to his broken leg is anybody’s guess but he was unable to turn the tide. His year at McLaren transformed him and he is now very much a #1. ==> JV no, OP yes

Jordan must feel lucky to have kept HHF. During his Mercedes days, HHF was better than MS and KW and he made Sauber his own. At Williams he failed because of personality clashes but at Jordan he again rose to his normal level. Technically strong and well likes, HHF is a #1. And yes, he has dominated his teammates. Jean-Christophe Bouillon, former F3000 champ, Williams tester and Sauber driver, was demolished and left F1, Herbert was unable to match Frentzen in ’96 and in ’99 Hill was made to look downright silly or perhaps pathetic is a better word. Trulli is also smeared with the Prost failure brush. Prost may well be the worst team in years but Trulli failed to turn the tide. ==> HHF yes, Trulli no

Arrows has Jos Verstappen who is propably the only driver that can engender more heated comments than MS himself. Arrows & Honda were impressed with his technical skills while his occasional stong race performances have given him a powerful if flawed reputation. At Arrows, he calls the shots, as he did last year, and is their undisputed #1. Bernoldi came into F1 with a poor F3000 reputation and a bag of gold, so he has his work cut out to became more than a pay-driver let alone a #1.==> JV yes, EB no

Sauber has two youngsters. Heidfeld had a dreadful year at Prost but the car was probably so bad, nobody could have made it work. At Sauber, the team is being rebuilt around him, so he is their #1. Raikonnen is showing the speed to be a great but he doesn’t shave, looks like a girl and sounds like a %^%@#. He simply doesn’t have the presence to be taken very seriously. ==> NH yes, KR no

Jaguar bought Irvine to be their #1. The cars have been slow and Irvine is being (partially) blamed, hence the introduction of PdlR. A true #1 does not have to prove himself anymore. If he is slow, it MUST be the car. Irvine has not reached that point yet and I doubt he will ever. Pedro seems a promise for the future and Jaguar rather hope he will become a #1. ==> EI no, PdlR yes.

Minardi’s drivers are difficult to assess. Tarso has experience and he doesn’t fit in the car. This would explain his poor performances. I don’t know how he is rated by the team and the engineers. Alonso is doing things with the Minardi that reminds me of Pierluigi. He has generated the buzz that Montoya has albeit at a different level and is a potential #1. ==> TM no, FA yes

Ah, Prost. What can one say about this team that would set of the moderator? Alesi is very much in the Jacques Villeneuve mould (or should that be vice versa). He is a great racer but the stories about his poor setup skills have surfaced for years. He has the charisma needed to be a #1 but lacks the technical skills. Burti lacks the charisma (as yet???), but might very well have the technical skills. However, can anybody imagine a potential Senna, Prost, Mansell etc. being kicked out of a team and then thanking the team for the good times??? Methinks Burti is too nice to make it in F1. ==> JA no, LB no

[bleakuzs]

Tisk tisk, no mention of Jim Hall.

Drove the F1 race at Riverside, IIRC, and went on to design and build the Chapparal's and race them until and accident cut his carrer short.

The inventor of what we know today as downforce, first with a brake and steering controlled wing and then the vacumn cleaner car with the snowmobile engines scking it to the ground. Also pioneered the use of venturi tunnels in CART and ground effect.

Brabham, he put his name on the cars, and that was the extent of it.