222 replies to this topic

[SophieB]

That's fantastic, he sounds like he is coaching the delivery of a baby.

[FortiFord]

Also found a livetiming on youtube:

 

 

What's interesting is that Schumacher's times after his 2nd stop (low 26s, high 25s) are similar to the times he was doing after his 1st stop (before he caught up to the back of Hakkinen and Frentzen) . To me this indiciates that Schumacher probably didn't have a problem with the car and was indeed nursing his tyres at the start of each stint. 

 

Villeneuve on the other hand pushed like crazy aimmediately after his 1st and 2nd stops. Remember, he had a go at Michael at the same spot just after the first round of stops. 

[TomNokoe]

What's interesting is that Schumacher's times after his 2nd stop (low 26s, high 25s) are similar to the times he was doing after his 1st stop (before he caught up to the back of Hakkinen and Frentzen) . To me this indiciates that Schumacher probably didn't have a problem with the car and was indeed nursing his tyres at the start of each stint.

But he was stuck behind traffic after his first stop, compared to being in clean air here.

 

Also worth nothing that his speed in the first stint immediately after lights out was properly quick.

Edited by TomNokoe, 09 April 2020 - 15:54.

[FortiFord]

Indeed, those first couple of laps from MS were Vettel-esque. 

[PlayboyRacer]

Frentzen suffered syndrome of Coulthard and Fisichella. Once given top equipment in 1997, 1999, 2000, 2005-2006 they all seemed to struggle. They were not terrible though.

In 1998 Frentzen was on par, if not better a lot of time than Villeneuve.
The question is how good was Jacques himself? He seems to be a bit like Kimi, very quick in his best days, but those were short and after that it's just plodding around.
I know Jacques put some amazing perfomances in that terrible car in 1999 and was very good in 2000, but after that he was just a shadow of his former self. I can imagine it was difficult to keep up the motivation though.

Couple of points - to say in '98 Frentzen was on par or better most of the time than JV isn't correct. He was closer overall than 1997 yes but Jacques was still comfortably the better. And when JV was on proper top form, the gaps between them were like 1997. Imola, Magny Cours, Silverstone (qualy), Hockenheim, Monza (qualy) etc.

In fact JV was in the fight to win Hockenheim and planted the FW20 on the front row at Monza (in front of both McLarens). In that car... no idea how.

Your last point is actually very true. From 98-01 he was driving the wheels off every poor car he was given, put in some epic performances. But after 3-4 seasons of it, yes I think his motivation was drained. Particularly with the politics at BAR becoming toxic. However that was his choice ultimately.

Thereafter a shadow of himself. Interesting to note though in 2005 he was on par with Massa quite often and in 2006 he outqualified Heidfeld 7-5 until BMW got their wish. He wasn't the old JV but still deserved better than what he got.

[Anuity]

Couple of points - to say in '98 Frentzen was on par or better most of the time than JV isn't correct. He was closer overall than 1997 yes but Jacques was still comfortably the better. And when JV was on proper top form, the gaps between them were like 1997. Imola, Magny Cours, Silverstone (qualy), Hockenheim, Monza (qualy) etc.

In fact JV was in the fight to win Hockenheim and planted the FW20 on the front row at Monza (in front of both McLarens). In that car... no idea how.

Your last point is actually very true. From 98-01 he was driving the wheels off every poor car he was given, put in some epic performances. But after 3-4 seasons of it, yes I think his motivation was drained. Particularly with the politics at BAR becoming toxic. However that was his choice ultimately.

Thereafter a shadow of himself. Interesting to note though in 2005 he was on par with Massa quite often and in 2006 he outqualified Heidfeld 7-5 until BMW got their wish. He wasn't the old JV but still deserved better than what he got.

 

He did improve a lot in 2006 and was unlucky with some retirements, was probably almost slightly better than Heidfeld actually. But then again it's not like Heidfeld was a top quality driver, just a very good one. He was not not treated very nicely by BMW though.

 

As for 2005, his perfomances were just embarassing at times and he had no pace for the majority of the season. Had a couple of good races like Imola and especially SPA, but that's about it. He also struggled in qualifying against Massa.

[PlayboyRacer]

2005 he started quite poorly. We agree there and I actually thought he'd retire. Being out most of 2004 and trying to adapt to the Sauber Cleary he found hard. But he did come good and found some real speed, I remember in Canada he had a great qualy lap. But from what we expected of JV, it wasn't great.

He was finished as a top tier driver from 2003 in my opinion. But that doesn't change what he did beforehand and for 5-6 seasons he was one of the best in the world.

In fact if you include his IndyCar days, the only driver who achieved more from 1994 till the millennium was Michael Schumacher. Perhaps Hakkinen too... but that's some great company JV is in.

And happy birthday to him! 49 today. Time flies.

[messy]

I thought Frentzen put together a good 1998 to be honest. And for Jacques’ outstanding performances like Hockenheim and Monza HHF had his own - Brazil, Canada where he was in contention for a podium till Schumacher put him out, etc, and a solid run at the end of the season where he was ahead (Monza aside). Maybe on balance you’d say Villeneuve was still ahead of Frentzen but it wasn’t by much. JV missed the chance for big scores at Monza and Silverstone where he spun off from podium contention and his performance at Hockenheim was one of the drives of the season in a car with so little wing it could barely take the stadium section. He was an animal there.

The decision to go to BAR was the killer wasn’t it. Villeneuve from 1996-2001 was top tier F1 driver material.

[PlayboyRacer]

Fair assessment Messy. I think to break it up, Frentzen started the season stronger. Then from Imola onwards JV was very strong but overdriving occasionally if we're being honest (such as Canada vying for the lead). That run lasted till Hungary... then from Spa (with the exception of Monza) Frentzen gained ascendancy again.

His Hockenheim weekend was sensational. His Monza qualifying was crazy, front row in an underpowered car running basically no wing. I'd love to see the onboard of that lap. Of course, in his attempt to keep up with the McLarens and Ferraris, he spun off.

Those performances (and the ones at BAR) reminded me alot of his father and Keke Rosberg. Just hanging it all out with full committment and bravery, even when knowing it's hopeless. Who can forget his relationship with Eau Rouge? JV was one of a kind.

[Anuity]

Maybe you could describe his relationship with Eau Rouge as brave.

I personally think it was rather silly, particularly in 1999, in a car that was falling apart right left and centre, making that deal with Zonta who crashed even more heavily. With Craig Pollock sitting there laughing at both their accidents. It looked kind of dumb, though obviously they did have the balls to try it.

[PlayboyRacer]

Anuity it wasn't just Eau Rouge. JV had a thing for the very fast, daunting corners like Copse and 130R. Check out his pole laps from 96/97, his committment and bravery through those corners is insane.

He did manage to take Eau Rouge flat in the 1998 Williams. Crashed heavily on the Friday, managed it flat on the Saturday. Was happy like he'd taken pole! Balls of steel.

[Anuity]

I am not doubting his courage, altough opportunistic at times.

Just pointed out that particular event in 1999. That season the car was barely able to start a race and he had some failures prior to that qualifying in Spa. 

For me it looked silly, there was nothing at stake, it was pretty much like "let's see if the car will go off or not". You could say that it's brave, but there was absolutely no reason to play that game with Zonta. Brave is a move against Michael in Portugal 1996, Spa was just games.

And Pollock lauging at those crashes just showed how unprofessionally run that whole team was, at least in the beginning.

[PayasYouRace]

If there was nothing at stake, there was nothing to lose. Might as well do what racing drivers do and push to the limit.

[Anuity]

That is correct. I am not a racing driver after all.

But one thing is being brave making a move on Schumacher in Estoril to win the race and another thing is making a bet with your teammate to run flat out, which was potentially dangerous given the type of crap car they had for nor particular reason, just for fun. Which well, in the end is exciting for the fans.

I am not blaming him, it was part of his charm. Just looked reckless - like if he almost knew he would crash.

Edited by Anuity, 10 April 2020 - 14:25.

[PayasYouRace]

That is correct. I am not a racing driver after all.

But one thing is being brave making a move on Schumacher in Estoril to win the race and another thing is making a bet with your teammate to run flat out, which was potentially dangerous given the type of crap car they had for nor particular reason, just for fun. Which well, in the end is exciting for the fans.

I am not blaming him, it was part of his charm. Just looked reckless - like if he almost knew he would crash.

 

Do you have any particular evidence that the BAR 001 was not up to the safety standards of the rest of the field. That's the only reason why it would be reckless.

[Anuity]

Do you have any particular evidence that the BAR 001 was not up to the safety standards of the rest of the field. That's the only reason why it would be reckless.

 

It was a poor car, which sometimes could not even start a race. that is well known.

From my memory he had a scary wing failure during Australia GP, and I think somewhere else as well (but maybe my memory is failing me).

 

I am not claiming that it was not up to safety standards.

but here are the words from the man himself:

 

0:25

https://www.youtube....h?v=fRH75RyTgKk

 

Apparently he did not have a very high opinion about its mechanical reliablity either.

[PayasYouRace]

It was a poor car, which sometimes could not even start a race. that is well known.

From my memory he had a scary wing failure during Australia GP, and I think somewhere else as well (but maybe my memory is failing me).

 

I am not claiming that it was not up to safety standards.

but here are the words from the man himself:

 

0:25

https://www.youtube....h?v=fRH75RyTgKk

 

Apparently he did not have a very high opinion about its mechanical reliablity either.

 

Of course it was unreliable. Despite being a solid midfield car it scored no points that year. But you said it was dangerous, not that it was unreliable.

[Anuity]

Of course it was unreliable. Despite being a solid midfield car it scored no points that year. But you said it was dangerous, not that it was unreliable.

Does not Jacques himself says in the video that "suspension has failed a lot of times this year"? That does not sound like the safest car out there.

[PlayboyRacer]

To be fair to Anuity, I must say I had seen that clip previously with JV talking about some of the failures (wings/suspension etc) that plagued the BAR 01 and that he'd 'been lucky'. It's not that it wasn't upto safety standards, more just very unpredictable because, from memory, it was the vibrations from the Supertec V10 causing them major issues and breaking things. They'd had numerous wing failures both pre season and during for example.

Given how hard JV raced that thing, makes him look beyond brave. Crazy more like it. But as Anuity said - that was part of his charm. Just like his father.

[Anuity]

Just listened to Villeneuve on Beyond the Grid podcast. Reminded me that he is indeed a funny, weird personality. But also special and very different from the rest.

I guess that's why I have always liked and supported him, even despite being a Michael fan.

 

It's interesting that he would not find anything special to say about Mika Hakkinen. Sounded like he does not think too highly of him as a driver. A pity he did not go into more details about what really happened in 2003 at BAR with Jenson.

 

But praised Alonso a lot, which comes across quite humble and respectable, given that he obviously got beaten by him easily in 2004. 

 

Great listen all around.

[PlayboyRacer]

With Hakkinen it came across to me that Jacques just didn't have much of a personal experience as such with Mika. Remember when Williams were flying, McLaren weren't and vice versa post 1997. Though I do remember Mika and JV having a great qualifying duel at the '97 Austrian GP, when the McLaren Mercedes package was becoming very strong.

Whereas with Schumacher he'd had many personal duels with him and was a teammate with Alonso briefly as you said.

[midgrid]

I don't know the story in terms of why they tried it, but it's clearly a case of experimenting in the wind tunnel and coming up with something that appears to work. This is the same Tyrrell that introduced the x-wings.

 

Having the single central mount probably has an advantage aerodynamically. Less drag both in terms of the profile of the mount and the interference that two closely positions mounts would cause for each other. The major disadvantage is that it must be quite thick to be structurally strong enough. It also provides less structural stability by having a see-saw effect of the wing hanging on a single mount.

 

The only other car I know of that used that sort of wing was the 1998 Penske PC-27.

 

 

 

I found this photo of the 1994 Pacific PR01 in pre-season testing configuration:

 

 

For the season itself, the car featured first a conventional high nose, before switching to a low nose for the final few races.  The PR02 also featured a low nose - unusual in an era when all the other teams were gradually heading in the opposite direction.

 

 

[PayasYouRace]

I found this photo of the 1994 Pacific PR01 in pre-season testing configuration:

 

 

 

For the season itself, the car featured first a conventional high nose, before switching to a low nose for the final few races.  The PR02 also featured a low nose - unusual in an era when all the other teams were gradually heading in the opposite direction.

 

 

 

 

 

I do wonder what the thinking behind that brick was. I doubt it was that thick for structural reasons, so I assume they thought the aerodynamic blockage produced an advantageous effect behind it, under the nose. The whole point of having a high nose is to scoop up as much air under it as you can, forcing it under the car faster to produce some downforce.

 

Pacific weren't the only team to go backwards at the time. Ferrari did exactly the same in 1995. Then for 1996 they had a sort of half way design before going back to a proper high nose.