18 replies to this topic

[P1 Pyrsol]

Well?

Is it just recently?

An attempt by Hak's fans to pump themselves up after the bitter disappointment of the first two rounds?

Sure, I get it: the F1-2000's the best car this year, so Mika must be the better qualifier, what with getting pole in the inferior car and all.

Guess I answered my own Q just by reasoning it out.

Thanks,

P1 Pyrsol

[Nathan]

I still think the McLaren is the better car, performance wise. Alot of people say MS is faster than everyone by atleast .25-.5 seconds per lap. Martin Brundle said he is atleast good for a half second. If that is true, then he should be racking in the poles, not Hakkinen. If the Ferrari was faster, MS shouldnt have to push the car so hard, that he makes mistakes. Plus I think RB is faster than DC. Yet which one of the number 2's have the better position?

Dont get me wrong, Im a huge Ferrari fan, but I can admit the facts. Overall McLaren has the better car, Ferrari has the better team and drivers.

[JaqFan]

Since when has Ferrari had the fastest car?

Well, after the late 1970s, it hasn't...ever.

[Nikolas Garth]

Dont get me wrong, Im a huge Ferrari fan, but I can admit the facts. Overall McLaren has the better car, Ferrari has the better team and drivers.

How big of you.

[HartleyHare]

The Ferrari is clearly a match for the McLaren on pace. The difference is that the Ferrari lasts the race distance. So the Ferrari is the better car. MS has been uncharacteristically poor in qualifying and has blown pole a couple of times. MH has been exemplary in his pursuit of pole. The difference is in the durability. And top speed...

[The RedBaron]

I think you'll find most people will say the Macs are the fastest car in terms of straight line speed, however that doesn't necessarily mean best car once you introduce the reliability factor. Ferrari havn't had the fastest car for donkey years. Anyone care to take a stab when it last was? Would I be right to say in Gille's last year or was it during N.Lauda's reign?

[Vicster]

I'd say the '82 Ferrari was faster compared to the competition. It was just too fragile and we know the drivers paid the price for that.

[Bruce]

The 82 Ferrari should have been a WDC car for either GV or DP. We all know what happened to both of them - but it was not because the car was too fragile - that's how cars were built in 1982...

As to the 2000 Ferrari, I think that I've had this conversation elsewhere... the McLaren is probably faster then the Ferrari (faster being a very relative term... especially in F1). However, the ferrari is the car to have - it finishes races...

As to how close they are - I think that Martin Brundle made a good comment about how amazing it was that 2 different teams with 2 different philosophies and 4 different drivers etc etc etc, could produce cars of such equal calibre - or something to that effect. The cars ARE very close... but the Ferrari's reliability places it head and shoulders above the McLaren.

[hhffan]

To tell you the truth this years Ferrari isn't the fastest - When you think about it Michael Schumacher seems to be the only one able to break the two McLarens in Qualifying - Rubens hasn't and you all saw when DC got past Rubens in Imola how much of a lead he claimed. The car is quick but not the quickest this year

[RaggedEdge]

To answer your question: In Malaysian GP of 1999 -MS was on pole, EI second. In Suzuka, MS was again on pole.

In the first three races, only mistakes by Ferrari and their drivers have prevented Ferrari from taking pole position.

Example, in Australia 2000, Michael's warm-up time on Saturday morning would have take pole for him by some 0.2 seconds. By driving off the road and due to DC's crash, he could not reach his warm up time, hence he lost the pole.

In Brazil, it was not so clear, but clearly Ferrari guys again drove off the road while Mika and even DC did the business.

In Imola, with hard tyres vs. Mika, Michael by his own admission was 0.4 sec faster than Mika, and that is not even taking into account the tyre difference.

Nikolas,

[This message has been edited by RaggedEdge (edited 04-19-2000).]

[Frans MSH]

Simple, never, only when "a button" or soemthing is pressed to release the "secret device" what makes the laptimes faster when needed!

Frans

[Janzen]

You keep using fast and best in the same meaning.
I think the McLaren is still slightly faster though it is closer than ever.
But Ferrari has the best car this season so far, as they have performed strong through the whole race. And they are leading the Championship.

[Mrv]

First of all has it not occured to you all that the first 3 races have been driven on circuits that favor Mclaren. How can you all say that Mclaren has the fastest and better car? Lets see what happens in Monaco, Montreal and France etc... I bet the Ferrari will be pulling away quite easily. The best car doesn't mean the fastest. Last years Ferrari was the best car on the grid. This year it is even better. If we look at the last race in Imola Michael made the wrong tire choice as he opted for hard tires while Mika was on soft compound that in itself was the difference of .1 to .2 seconds a lap. Not to mention that the Ferrari had a slightly heavier fuel load. Look at all the variables people before making observations. The two cars are virtually equal on the track and Ferrari has the advantage of reliability on their side.

[RaggedEdge]

The fact remains that Ferrari, in the hands of Schumacher, has had every possibility performance-vise to claim the pole position since the Malaysian GP last year. They did so in the Malaysia and Suzuka, but only various mistakes by their drivers and (such as driving off the road, timing of whether to go fast in early runs vs. save it all in the last attempt only to run into rain or yellow flags, or switching on pit lane speed limiter while on fast lap) coupled with the sublime qualifying talent of Mika Hakkinen has prevented Ferrari and Micheal specifically from taking poles in the first three races as well.

So: Yes, there is not much in it, but Ferrari is every bit as fast as McLaren and has been so since Malaysian GP.

[RedFever]

Funny how people have opinions on things they never witnessed!!!

first, the Ferrari 312T in 75, the 312T2 in 76 and 77 and the 312T3 in 78 were the fastest cars (T3 was the fastest of the legal cars, it lost the WC to a completly illegal Lotus 79 with miniskirts, when these were illegal according to the rules!!! yeah, pro-Ferrari FIA!!!).

In 1979, the T4 was not alway the best, but on several occasion it was the fastest car. Only toward the end of the season the Williams of Alan Jones was better, but iwas too late.

In 1982, Ferrari was head and shoulder over the competition after 4-5 races. It is ridiculous to read comments like that from Vicster who states the car was fragile!!! Gilles and Pironi were both airborne, both at speeds close to 180-190mph, and the cars landed frontally, after flying for several hunderd feet!!! You saw what happened to Schumi or Panis with much lighter impacts in recent years. Do you really believe that today's McLaren or Ferrari, in case of an accident like the one Gilles suffered (flew in the air, landed after 300 feet front down, rolled over three more time, was ariborne again and landed frontally on the track one more time, when the car broke in two) would allow the driver to survive? you must be dreaming!!! all we can do is hope that something like that will never happen again (Pironi was qualyfing under wet, saw a car in front moving on the side, so he thought the door was open for him, but Prost instead was there. He flew over him and landed frontally as well, a miracle he survived the crash).

That car deserved to win both the WC and WDC, but unfortunately fate had other in mind. It was so superior that Tambay, without a drive at the time, won with it after only 3-4 races he replaced Gilles, and an old Mario Andretti was caled out of retirement to replace Tambay (back pain problem, really Ferrari's year!!!) and immediately scored pole and podium in Monza on his first race!!!

[HartleyHare]

A typically well focussed contribution to the debate about whether the 2000 Ferrari is quicker than the 2000 McLaren, RedF....

[Don Capps]

Actually, it was during the 1949 season when Alfa Romeo sat the season out and Maserati was still running what were basically recycled prewar cars in the technical sense. In 1950, Alfa came back and creamed the Scuderia in a car which was by then 12 years old....

In 1951, Scuderia Ferrari finally beat a by now 13 year old car with a car designed & built at the end of the 1950 season over the 1950/1951 Winter.

In 1961, the Dino 156's smoked everyone (a plug for the Rear View Mirror series on the way), but were dead meat by mid-1962...

------------------
Yr fthfl & hmbl srvnt,

Don Capps

Semper Gumbi: If this was easy, we’d have the solution already…

[Nelson]

IMO the Big Macs are faster than the Ferraris over a lap, although the Ferrari looks a more comfortable drive over a race distance, i.e. the Ferrari is a better car but a slower one (albeit not by much)

[man from martinlaakso]

I think, that at the end of the last season Ferrari indeed was a better car. In Malaysia the difference to McLaren was big, but in Suzuka the situation was a very balanced one. On Saturday Ferrari was slightly better, but on Sunday McLaren was ahead, especially with full loads.

In Melbourne Ferrari was ahead on Friday, on Saturday morning and in the race. In the qualifying McLaren managed to take 1 - 2 places, but this was an underachievment from the Ferrari drivers.

In Brazil McLaren was slightly ahead on Friday and on Saturday, but in the race the two cars were practically at the same level.

In Imola Ferrari was ahead on Friday and Saturday, but the right tyre choice gave McLaren a small advantage in the race.

I think, that Ferrari is now a clearly faster car than the last year's model, but perhaps it is little more difficult to drive. McLaren is the opposite case : it is not much faster than the last year's model, but its drivebility is clearly better. That gives the driver a possibility to push harder for a longer time. MH has driven now better (despite his points) than in early 1998 or 1999, one reason for this might be, that the car now is easier to drive.