288 replies to this topic

[karlth]

The Benetton B195 leads the Williams FW17 at Monza in 1995



It has been called the worst car ever to have
won a Formula 1 World Championship but was the
Benetton B195 really that bad or was it perhaps the
best car of the 1995 season?



After a highly successful 1994 season much was expected of Benetton's designer Rory Byrne for
1995. Michael Schumacher had driven the B194, powered by Ford's highly driveable V8 engine, to
the world championship and 1995 promised much the same after team principal Flavio Briatore
signed a works deal with Renault promising them a 3 year supply of the most powerful engines on
the grid.

The B195 was launched in Italy in late January. The major changes in the car being in the rear
with a highly revised bodywork and suspension to fit and adjust to the new engine.

Initial impressions where very favourable. the team even canceling a test session at Silverstone as
it thought it didn't need it. At Estoril in Portugal though the car's pace was not as good as
expected eventhough Schumacher topped the test.

We made a lot of progress, but we are still not quite where we want to be.
Ross Brawn

A strange comment from the technical director as Benetton later said that Schumacher's time had
been set on almost full tanks and with worn tyres while Hill's best time had been set on new tyres
and yet was nearly half a second slower. The importance of this revealed itself later.

Nevertheless Benetton arrived at the first Grand Prix of the season in Brazil expecting to be behind
Williams. The B195 had been reported as being very twitchy so perhaps they didn't expect to be
as consistent as the Williams FW17 over race distance although the Benetton obviously had the
performance to match it lacked the stability.

The weekend started badly with Schumacher crashing heavily in Friday practice after his steering
broke and Benetton cancelled Herbert's session while they investigated his car. In qualifying
though Schumacher qualified second 0.3s behind Damon Hill, driving what he described as
a "perfect" Williams FW17.

That 0.3s difference stayed on Sunday as well. With both Hill and Schumacher on a 3 stop
strategy the englishman seemed slightly quicker and was edging away from Michael when the
William's gearbox broke. After Hill's retirement Schumacher cruised to victory but it didn't change
the fact that the Williams had been quicker during the whole weekend and more was certainly
needed from the car.

The Argentinian and San Marino Grand Prix followed with Benetton still fighting the car. In Buenos
Aires Schumacher struggled with car balance during the whole race and in San Marino he lost
control of the car both in practice and the race itself.

And then came Barcelona.

At the Spanish Grand Prix the Benetton team managed to turn a car that the World Champion
could hardly keep on the tarmac and yet off the pace into the the most stable and fastest car on
the grid and that transformation was made during a single qualifying session.

The weekend started as any other with the Benetton struggling for grip and having to use more
wing than the Williams to stabilize the car.

I have never driven a car as bad as mine ... it was out of proportion.
Michael Schumacher

In qualifying on Saturday, desperate for improvement, Benetton and Schumacher tried some
radical setup changes by copying parts of Schumacher's teammate Johnny Herbert's setup onto
Michael's car. Magic. Schumacher went from having struggled to keep up with the Ferraris and
Williams in first qualifying to taking pole position by a massive 0.6s margin over Damon Hill.

Impressive as that was Schumacher's race pace was even more so. On a two stop strategy the
Benetton driver was faster than Damon Hill on a three stop strategy, a massive improvement over
last race when the Williams had obviously been quicker. Perhaps even more importantly the B195
was stable and that allowed Schumacher to push the car to its limit without risking an off.
Strangely the Williams that had appeared smooth in every Grand Prix until Barcelona now suddenly
seemed erratic and "all over the place".

"...the car went so smoothly today, so perfectly, that I want to pay a big compliment to the
team. Over the last three races there has been a lot of hard work and a lot of long nights. They
deserved this victory now."
Michael Schumacher

After this crushing performance in Barcelona Benetton along with the other teams gathered at
Monaco. Williams expected to bounce back after their disastrous weekend and Damon Hill duly
delivered with a great pole position lap, 3 quarters of a second ahead of Schumacher. But on
Sunday everything changed.

As has been proven many times in Monaco races are won and lost in traffic. Huge chunks of time
can be lost when lapping backmarkers on the tight street circuit and overtaking is simply not an
option. Coupled with a very slow pitlane speed limit everything adds up to making a single stop
strategy an absolute must in a dry race at least.

And therein lay FW17's fatal weakness. It's fuel tank was too small and thus it seemed unable to
allow their drivers the option of a single stop race. Williams has often has often been critized for
bad strategy during races that year but much of the blame must lie in the design of the car. This
design decision that may have helped in the car in single lap performance hurt the team badly in
race pace as often a fewer stop strategy was calculated to be much quicker but the amount of fuel
the car could carry didn't allow it. The Williams was unable to match the race pace promised by the
B195 in pre season testing and as soon as the setup changes stabilized the car the writing was
on the wall for Williams.

Before the Spanish Grand Prix, Benetton were struggling. Even with Schumacher's undoubted
driving genius the car was unable to keep up with Damon Hill in the Williams FW15. The B195 had
the pace as was evident by its fastest laps and pole position in San Marino but it was nevertheless
obviously underdeveloped observers describing the car as being "all over the place". Williams on
the other hand had emerged from winter testing with a perfectly setup car and they were
immediately on the pace but when Benetton struck back the car had nothing more to give.

Benetton had the same engine and tyres as Williams but switching from a small and nimble V8
engine to the massivelypowerful and heavy Renault V10 required more development than perhaps
the team anticipated. When development and setup changes finally caught up with the car in
Barcelona the Benetton B195 was transformed.

The ugly duckling had turned into a swan.

[HSJ]

Treu.

Kartlh

What is a most interesting pathology of certain (most) M$ fans is the insisntence on inferior cars (yada yada yada and what not else for that matter). In reality what has been going on since mid 90's is that the Benetton/Ferrari (Brawn+Byrne) philosophy simply differed from Williams/McLaren (possibly Newey influenced) philosophy: they have started the season with a slower car (most of the time, except recently of course) but with one that ultimately had more potential than the rival car(s). E.g. 97, 98, and 99 Ferrari started slower but ended up fastest on the grid. But for some reason the early pace is taken as the "true" measure of MS's cars by his fans. Strange, but what are you going to do...

[TheD2JBug]

You know what the best looking Benetton of all was ?

The Ligier JS41 late season 95 car :

[Jhope]

Originally posted by TheD2JBug
You know what the best looking Benetton of all was ?

The Ligier JS41 late season 95 car :

That was effectivley a B195.

[ZZMS]

"Finding the edge.

Everybody say sphere is round. But is it true or just a mere vision effect?..."

Nice article. Revisionism full swing that is.

[Smooth]

Boy, that is a strong case you made there, karlth. Even got HSJ to concur! And he only bases his theory on facts. (As he didn't even see the B195 in action).

Brilliant, well researched and utterly overwhelming examples of the B195's utter dominance.

You should be proud.

[coos]

DH: I mean, in your Benetton days, the on-board camera would show you doing 6000 revs per minute with your arms! You used to be very busy in the car, and you seem to have calmed down a bit now.
MS: This is true, but I'll tell you the reason why. You remember when I left Benetton, and [Jean] Alesi and [Gerhard] Berger took their first steps in that Benetton? You remember how many crashes they had?

DH: Yes, I do remember.
MS: Well, if you had ever driven that car, Damon, you would know why I was driving it that way. I mean, that car was really unbelievable. Really difficult to drive. It was so edgy. But it was fast when you just drove it exactly on that edge. Now, though, there have been a lot of aerodynamic improvements to the cars and so the cars I have driven have been a lot more stable. And that applies to most of the cars today.

http://www.ferrariow.../120100_ii.html


He's not talking about B195 before Barcelona. He's talking about B195 all year.
Berger and Alesi drove that car and they said it was ugly to drive.

Also, in TV it was clear that Williams was far better than Benetton. FW17 was a perfect car highly regarded by Newey.

Why would I believe you and not Berger, Alesi or Michael?

[Smooth]

Originally posted by coos
Why would I believe you and not Berger, Alesi or Michael?

Read his post again. It is crystal clear!

[Arrow]

The williams was clearly the quicker car than the benetton in qualifying right?
DC even handed it to michael.

So why would it be so much quicker in qualifying and not in the race????
Where did that pace advantage go?

You cant say tyres or engine because they both used the same.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Originally posted by Arrow

You cant say tyres.......

Look at the differences between Mclaren and Williams in the races when it comes to tires in 2002

[Arrow]

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld



Look at the differences between Mclaren and Williams in the races when it comes to tires in 2002

Well an argument that the benettonof 95 was better on its tyres than the williams is tooth fairly material.

I never heard the car ate its tyres or anything remotely like that.
In fact ive never read anything negative about that car apart from slight unreliablilty problems.

[berge]

Originally posted by karlth
[BThe ugly duckling had turned into a swan. [/B]

....with MS driving.

How would MS have done if HE was driving the Williams.

or..

How would Hill and DC have done if they were driving the Benetton.

I think the true performance of the 95 Benetton was shown by Herbert, personally.

[Bladrian]

Originally posted by berge


....with MS driving.

How would MS have done if HE was driving the Williams.

or..

How would Hill and DC have done if they were driving the Benetton.

I think the true performance of the 95 Benetton was shown by Herbert, personally .

I agree totally. In evaluating all the cars Michael has driven in F1, I've always looked at his teammate's times in order to accurately evaluate the true worth of the car. And that tells me that, for the majority of his career, Michael has been driving cars that were definitely not the fastest out there.

[TheD2JBug]

Originally posted by Jhope


That was effectivley a B195.

that was my point

[Sir Frank]

As for cancelling a test session for Silverstone:

Bernard Dudot of Renault:
Benetton has had to spend a lot of time adapting their engine management computers to ours, mainly because they did not use the same programming language as us

Therfore Benetton was unable to test more. Williams had managed 3.600kms testing with the FW17 (which was not too many compared to 93 when they did 12.000) The Benetton B195 had been ready earlier, but nevertheless had only completed 1000kms because of this communication problem between Benetton and Renault.



As for Buenos Aires:

Schumacher:

It was a desaster. My first and third sets of tires didnt work at all. I was losing at least two seconds a lap. On my second and fourth it was better. With my second set I was able to catch Jean, but not to pass him as the track is so twisty. My last set was absolutely perfect. I was quicker than at any other time this weekend. I think it was a problem with the track not the car.

As for San Marino:

Schumacher after qualifying:

I didnt expect it (edit: the pole). Last week we were testing at Jerez and I was a second slower than these guys (pointing at DC). I didnt think they would have a second over us here, as this is a power circuit, but I expected to be half a second off their pace. So you can imagine that to be 2 or 3 tenth quicker is quite a schock. It is mainly due to the huge amount of work we got through at the Jerez test. I am very happy, especially for the mechanics, who have not had an easy time over the winter. A lot of work and very little sleep. But for the first time this season I have a well balanced car.

Hill after qualifying:

Of course Im dissapointed. But I take comfort in the fact that my car is perfect in race set-up.

Schumacher after his crash:

Everything was going well and I was controlling the race. But after I changed tires, the car felt unstable at the back. I dont know what happened, but it got away from me for no reason.

As for Spanish GP:

The B195 needed two fundamentaly different settings for every circuit. Sometimes the team needed all the practice sessions to find the right setup. The Benetton was a beast, it needed a perfectly smooth track surface to work at its best (kind of explains why the car did not work at its best at Hungary, Argentina, Brasil, Monaco) and MS, even in these circumstences often complained of chronic understeer during qualifying sessions. Generally, the faults that had plagued the car in qualifying could be corrected for the race, but most of the time Benetton and Schumacher needed all their resources to tranform the tempearmental Friday version of the B195 into a Sunday winning machine.

MS after qualifying:

I have to say, Im surprised, I dint expect to be 6 tenth in front. Yesterdays the car was diabolical. To be honest I have never driven such a bad car. It was totally irrational. All the settings were changed and everything was better. Basically we have 2 main options for settings. We chose one or the other depending on the circuit. Here we chose one when we should have chosen the other.

Damon did have the required race pace in Barcelona, but his setup did not allow him to do only two stops because of greter tyre wear. Even MS opted for a strategy that could be altered throughout the race because he wasnt sure about the tyre wear, it turned out, that his tires were holding up well.



The B195 was very good in race trim after this and Schumacher won a lot of GPs starting from behind. The Benetton looked very good in the hands of MS, especially on single stop strategy, but was lacking when multiple (especially 3 stops were needed) stops were required.

As for Williams fuel tank, I dont know how big it was but DC could make only 1 stop at Hockenheim and Hill was on a one-stopper at Monza. Of course these tracks propably require less fuel than others, but Im not sure.

Also lets not forget that the rookie and not unlimited David Coulthard could work wonders with the FW17. Especially the FW17B, which arrived in time for the Portugese GP

Hill explains:

The FW17B reacts much more predictably than the previous model. I think its also better aerodynamically. With this new version, some of our difficulties of race setup will dissapear.

The B versionhad a new rear suspension and a completely new back end, including modified gearbox and diffuser. Hill has lapped half a second quicker in testing than with the standard version. DC dominated qualifyings for the rest of the year exept for Suzuka, which is well known to be a big boys track.

Hill retired due to mechanical faliure at Brasil, Canada, Germany lost 3 points in Spain, crashed twice into MS when victory seemed more than propable. Spun out at Suzuka and Nurburgring. Whereas MS retired due to mechanical trouble at Hungary, lost 8 points in Canada, was involved in an accident 3 times (2Hill, 1Alesi) and spun out at San Marino. So Hill not only made more mistakes but was handicapped by his cars reliability.

But the most important issue was team strategy where Willaims were clearly inferior to the Benetton team, however it should be mentioned that Hill was not on MS level when dealing with the traffic. The best example being Aida, where Hill lost 30 seconds on MS only because of track position.

All in all, one has to say that Schumacher and Benetton !together! were superior to Willaims/Hill from Spain to Portugal, which is the better part of the season. The Williams was a not so difficult car to setup, yet Hill and his engineers often messed it up. But clearly Willaims did not give the amount of support to Hill that MS recieved from Benetton.

IMO Schumacher would have won the title that year in a Williams. Whereas Damon surely would have not won the WDC in the Benetton. Hills performances at Nurburgring/Montreal/Suzuka/Belgium were clearly inferor to that of Schumacher, and he made too many mistakes, also running into MS twice.

I think the Willaims FW17 was the better car but Benetton/Schumacher/B195 the better package.

[SeanValen]

That driver, Michael Schumacher, clearly made a difference, there was article in Autosport a while ago, about how Schuey does it, showed driver telemetry, and all that amazing stuff Schuey does in the corners, bringing in the speed, while Herberts telemetry was pretty average. But I'm sure more and more in years to come, when we look back on the Schumacher era, a full article and books will be published on this amazing driver. So we'll just quote, Schumacher M, page 5, Benneton years, this is what he did to beat the rest etc:smoking:

[Foxbat]

Even with Schumacher's undoubted driving genius [..]

This is quite obviously nonsense, the guy couldn't keep the damn car on the track and was too slow. The only thing that caused this alleged genius to turn a car that was doggy-doo in his hands into a competitor with the Williams. Read the article "Schumacher tried some radical setup changes by copying parts of Schumacher's teammate Johnny Herbert's setup [..] Schumacher went from having struggled to keep up with the Ferraris and Williams in first qualifying to taking pole position by a massive 0.6s margin over Damon Hill."

[coos]

Interestingly the gap in qualifying performance between the five time champion and his Ferrari team mate has dropped off markedly this season. And there is a reason for that. At Benetton in the mid 1990s Schumacher's race machine was on a knife-edge. It was fast and competitive but had tricky oversteer. It was only Schumacher's talents that kept it in line - and he actually won two world championships with it.

When he left in 1996 Gerhard Berger stepped into the breech, confident he could do everything the young German could. It didn't take long for his illusions to be shattered. "On the first day I comfortably got close to Michael's time and then thought 'Tomorrow, I'll just do those few extra tenths'. But when I tried it I crashed three or four times and that made me think 'wow Michael'. The car was nervous but he managed to hold it there not just for one lap right on the edge, but for 50, 60 or 70 laps."

It was that precision that earned Schumacher victories his team mates could only dream of - and championships at the expense of Irvine and Barrichello. But this season the gap has closed markedly. Technical director Ross Brawn and his design team have to take the credit for that - or blame. Schumacher's phenomenal control was what made the difference with a bad car. But with a good one the gap closed.

"Michael doesn't like an oversteering car, but he can cope with it more than other drivers," says Brawn. "Rubens doesn't like a car that is in any way nervous. He can drive it but it is not what he prefers. Michael just copes with it. That is one of the things about this year's car. In the past there has been more of a gap between our drivers but this year's car is a bit more stable and that is why the gap has narrowed. Michael doesn't want an oversteering car, he can just deal with it better than Rubens."

http://www.formula1..../09/s10532.html

[Sir Frank]

We may consider what would have happened if Hill did not drop out at Brasil and Hockenheim. He is likely to have won both of them. That would mean a 28points difference, which is huge if you look at the WDC standings at the end of the year, MS won by 33 points. So with equal reliability, Damon would have come really close.

[John B]

Sir Frank, in Brazil Hill did have a problem causing the spin (MS was temporarily DQed after the event for fuel), but in Germany he spun out on the first or second lap.

That was the event which played a key role in Williams courting JV. He was pretty disgusted that Coulthard could not step up and beat Schumacher, which kind of gives me the impression that FW believed that his cars should have been able to handle the Benetton.

[karlth]

Originally posted by Sir Frank

Great comments Frank.

As for cancelling a test session for Silverstone:

Therfore Benetton was unable to test more. Williams had managed 3.600kms testing with the FW17 (which was not too many compared to 93 when they did 12.000) The Benetton B195 had been ready earlier, but nevertheless had only completed 1000kms because of this communication problem between Benetton and Renault.

Might have been some Benetton spin but this was posted after their initial session:

Schumacher was quite pleased with the performance of his new car,
especially with the performance of the engine. Because of the good
impression of the new car the team cancelled their next test session in
Silverstone next week.

As for Buenos Aires/Imola/Barcelona: Some interesting comments snipped

There was an interesting post on the Usenet after the Barcelona GP:

I looked carefully at the the pit-in/pit-out times and track
configuration and the only thing I can figure is, the only reason
Benetton gambled on the two-stop plan was because the team had
incredible confidence in their chassis. I doubt any other team/car
could have used the same two-stop plan to such effect. So fool-proof
was this plan that it even worked for teammate Johnny Herbert, who is
usually well off the pace of his teammate. Johnny made the most of a
realatively poor starting position and had no trouble besting the
Ferrari of Gerhard Berger who made three stops.

I could not help but notice how incredibly smooth the #1 Benetton looked
(the #2 being shown only on the two pit stops), while nearly everyone
else was twitching and sliding all over the road. I can't tell you how
many times the phrase "active suspension" crossed my mind, but seeing
Schumacher sawing at the wheel dismissed such thoughts. Not being privy
to the lap times of the German, I cannot honestly say he was consistent,
but that is sure how it appeard to me. Michael was taking exceptionally
fine care of his tires, with a noticeable lack of twicthing, sliding and
brake lock-up.

A badly balanced car will kill the tyres and Schumacher found that balance in qualifying and the official reason for Benetton's change of pace was that Schumacher had copied parts of Herbert's setup. That was probably Herbert's only major contribution to the B195 as it was obvious that the B195 was being developed around their star driver, with great results I might add.

Information on the FW17B snipped

I stopped at the Monaco GP because in my mind the championship was over at that point. Benetton and Schumacher had managed to stabilize the car and Williams couldn't respond. I think also the setbacks during that period deeply affected Hill, so much in fact that Coulthard who had simply not been a factor in the early races surpassed him in speed during the end of the year.

I think the Willaims FW17 was the better car but Benetton/Schumacher/B195 the better package.

I think the cars were more or less equal. In qualifying pace and over shorter stints the FW17 might have had the edge but it suffered a bit more unreliability and was slower during longer runs.

If the FW17 was a faster car what does that say about Damon Hill's, or even more so Coulthard's, in Barcelona? If the FW17 was really the faster car in Spain it is difficult to comprehend how massively slow the Williams drivers must have been and I simply don't believe that.

[Sir Frank]

Originally posted by John B
Sir Frank, in Brazil Hill did have a problem causing the spin (MS was temporarily DQed after the event for fuel), but in Germany he spun out on the first or second lap.

That was the event which played a key role in Williams courting JV. He was pretty disgusted that Coulthard could not step up and beat Schumacher, which kind of gives me the impression that FW believed that his cars should have been able to handle the Benetton.

I know that Hill did have a mech failure in Brasil, where did I write otherwise?
At Hockenheim Hills car had a suspension failure as admitted later by the team

[Foxbat]

Originally posted by karlth

I could not help but notice how incredibly smooth the #1 Benetton looked
(the #2 being shown only on the two pit stops), while nearly everyone
else was twitching and sliding all over the road. I can't tell you how
many times the phrase "active suspension" crossed my mind, but seeing
Schumacher sawing at the wheel dismissed such thoughts. Not being privy
to the lap times of the German, I cannot honestly say he was consistent,
but that is sure how it appeard to me. Michael was taking exceptionally
fine care of his tires, with a noticeable lack of twicthing, sliding and
brake lock-up.

A badly balanced car will kill the tyres and Schumacher found that balance in qualifying and the official reason for Benetton's change of pace was that Schumacher had copied parts of Herbert's setup. That was probably Herbert's only major contribution to the B195 as it was obvious that the B195 was being developed around their star driver, with great results I might add.

It doesn't add up, so Schumacher drivers the car smoothly because he has found balance (through Herbie's setup). Yet at the same time he is sawing at the wheel like a man possesed? I have this vague impression that it might be Schumacher sawing at the wheel that kept the car balanced...

And what is this obsession with Schumi wanting crappy cars? How is the car developed "around him" if it is last years tub with a new engine bolted in? Did Micheal say to Rory: "I want diabolical handling, vicious understeer, and balance problems again"

[Arrow]

Originally posted by karlth
[i]
If the FW17 was a faster car what does that say about Damon Hill's, or even more so Coulthard's, in Barcelona? If the FW17 was really the faster car in Spain it is difficult to comprehend how massively slow the Williams drivers must have been and I simply don't believe that.

As difficult to comprehend as michael going 1 second a lap faster than rubens at spa 2 weeks ago?
As difficult to comprehend as michael destroying coulthard in many races in 98 when the mclaren was inarguably the fastesr car in race conditons?

If the FW17 was a faster car what does that say about Damon Hill's, or even more so Coulthard's, in Barcelona?

Is says they were mediocre compared to michael.
I thought that was obvious by now.

[John B]

Originally posted by Sir Frank


I know that Hill did have a mech failure in Brasil, where did I write otherwise?

I wasn't implying you did.



At Hockenheim Hills car had a suspension failure as admitted later by the team

I actually hadn't heard that, the (admittedly few) accounts I read of the accident didn't mention it

[Sir Frank]

Schumacher was quite pleased with the performance of his new car,
especially with the performance of the engine. Because of the good
impression of the new car the team cancelled their next test session in
Silverstone next week.

Might be the case, but if the car was so good why did they discover the problem with the rear only in Brasil? Maybe the bumps played a big role here.

I could not help but notice how incredibly smooth the #1 Benetton looked
(the #2 being shown only on the two pit stops), while nearly everyone
else was twitching and sliding all over the road. I can't tell you how
many times the phrase "active suspension" crossed my mind, but seeing
Schumacher sawing at the wheel dismissed such thoughts. Not being privy
to the lap times of the German, I cannot honestly say he was consistent,
but that is sure how it appeard to me. Michael was taking exceptionally
fine care of his tires, with a noticeable lack of twicthing, sliding and
brake lock-up.

He was consistent indeed. He had clearly had the setup of the B195 spot on.
Just remember how much of a difference can be managed in time at Barcelona and Suzuka. MS and MH are almost lapping everyboby every year. Including their team mates DC, RB, EI

If the FW17 was a faster car what does that say about Damon Hill's, or even more so Coulthard's, in Barcelona? If the FW17 was really the faster car in Spain it is difficult to comprehend how massively slow the Williams drivers must have been and I simply don't believe that.

I think the way Hill and DC developed and setup the car was the key here, just imagine if Hakkinen, Senna or Schumacher had set up that car for Barcelona or Suzuka.

I have the preseason issue of Auto Motor und Sport extra, I dont remember the year , Adrian Newey talks about the FW17 and reveals that this is his favourite Williams not the 92/93 but this one! That sais a lot. Also the FW17 was the base concept of the championship winning 96/7 Williamses.

[Garagiste]

Don't they both look nice?
Yep, the Williams was the better car, but the Benny was no slouch.
Next to nobody on this BB rates Herbert, yet he was there to pick up the top step when Hill had some - er - slighly ambitious moments at home and at Monza.
So the car was rubbish and so was Johnny and yet...

[Sir Frank]

Yes JH was there at Silverstone and Monza while DC was not, speeding in pit lane in England and spinning on the warm up lap in Monza and spinning off after the restart.

[da Silva]

I agree totally. In evaluating all the cars Michael has driven in F1, I've always looked at his teammate's times in order to accurately evaluate the true worth of the car. And that tells me that, for the majority of his career, Michael has been driving cars that were definitely not the fastest out there.

That´s were the myth starts...
No, no compairing against his teammate that never has had an equal chance exept for Piquet.
So many looks at his performaces against his teammate and therefore acually believes
Schumacher to be 1.5 seconds faster than Herbert....
Maybe Schumacher is a little bit faster than Herbert or Barrichello but he really needs to get back to that DTM ride to prove himself against others on equal terms.
If he could lap 1 seconds faster than Aiello then I could also start to believe the myth...

I can´t stop thinking of this Spa performance of his, how on earth could he be that 'quicker'
than anybody else? Because he was really trying? Didn´t he try on the other 14:teen races?
Another thing I find strange is that Schumacher is famous for his quick in-and-out laps, driving much faster during that time. If he starts to drive really fast then means he´s not close to the limit otherwise, not driving flatout. Right????
So Schumacher is driving flatout when? Yes, during qualifing and his in-and-out laps..

[Bart]

It was reported at the time that the problem with the FW17 was not, as stated here, that it had a small fuel tank, but that it handled like a dog on full tanks, presumably because of the weight distribution. This is why they were always doing more stops than Benetton, and why their qualifying performance was so flattering.

This information came from somebody at Williams after Monaco to explain why they went for a two-stop strategy that clearly cost them the race win. I think it was DC who said it but I'm not certain. It could be misinformation, but Monaco is an incredibly low fuel-consumption circuit (remember Salo going the whole race in the Tyrrell without making a pit stop?) and the fuel tank would have to be tiny for a car not to be able to go half distance on a full tank. I rather doubt that the car would be designed with such a small tank -- it seems far more likely that it handled badly when the tank was full (something you can't really find out until you've built it and put it on the track).

[2 for 5 dollars]

Where you read "highly drivable ford V8 engine" it should say TRACTION CONTROL.

The FIA found illegal driver aids on Schumachers car after the San Marino GP in 1994. Benneton's lawyers said that the aids were not being used in the races. I guess it was just expensive ballast.

It is easy to make a fast car when you cheat.

[karlth]

Originally posted by Sir Frank
Might be the case, but if the car was so good why did they discover the problem with the rear only in Brasil? Maybe the bumps played a big role here.

I don't know. Benetton did their initial run at Paul Ricard which was at that time a fairly bumpy circuit, it wasn't resurfaced to its smooth self until 2000-2001. Of course though there is a bumpy circuit and there is Interlagos so you might well be correct.

I think the way Hill and DC developed and setup the car was the key here, just imagine if Hakkinen, Senna or Schumacher had set up that car for Barcelona or Suzuka.

Yes, that must have been a part of the reason.

I have the preseason issue of Auto Motor und Sport extra, I dont remember the year , Adrian Newey talks about the FW17 and reveals that this is his favourite Williams not the 92/93 but this one! That sais a lot. Also the FW17 was the base concept of the championship winning 96/7 Williamses.

The FW17 was much more a Newey creation than the FW14b and FW15 where Patrick Head still had considerable input.

I remember a interview with Patrick Head where he talks about the FW18 (1996 Williams) as having been the final version of the FW17, "with all the necessary improvements needed." or something to that effect.

Great comments again Frank.

[karlth]

Originally posted by Arrow
Is says they were mediocre compared to michael.
I thought that was obvious by now.

We are talking about a second difference. So in effect you believe that Irvine was a better driver than Hill in 1996 because he was less than a second behind Michael?

Something does not add up.

[Clatter]

Originally posted by Bladrian


I agree totally. In evaluating all the cars Michael has driven in F1, I've always looked at his teammate's times in order to accurately evaluate the true worth of the car. And that tells me that, for the majority of his career, Michael has been driving cars that were definitely not the fastest out there.

No driver can drive a car quicker than it is capable of going. The fact that MS teamates were slower says nothing about the capabilities of the car, but everything about the capability of the driver.

The true speed and worth of a car can only be measured by whoever drove fastest.

[Clatter]

Originally posted by Arrow
The williams was clearly the quicker car than the benetton in qualifying right?
DC even handed it to michael.

So why would it be so much quicker in qualifying and not in the race????
Where did that pace advantage go?

You cant say tyres or engine because they both used the same.

Fuel load?

Could be that the car was better balanced when running on light fuel loads.

[coos]

I remember a interview with Patrick Head where he talks about the FW18 (1996 Williams) as having been the final version of the FW17, "with all the necessary improvements needed." or something to that effect.

Adrian Newey rates '95 Williams above the following Williams.
Maybe because those were evolutions of the great FW17, in the same way as the '98 McLaren, but that's the fact.

There was an interesting post on the Usenet after the Barcelona GP

mmm... Usenet... A reliable source much better than Berger or Alesi.

The fact that the Benetton was very fast in Barcelona doesn't mean that the same happened in the rest of the season.

[karlth]

Originally posted by coos
Adrian Newey rates '95 Williams above the following Williams.
Maybe because those were evolutions of the great FW17, in the same way as the '98 McLaren, but that's the fact.

The great FW17? Which is probably why they created a B version mid season, because the original was simply too good?

mmm... Usenet... A reliable source much better than Berger or Alesi.

Just because Berger crashed a few cars. Do you know how many chassis Schumacher destroyed in the early part of 1995?

The fact that the Benetton was very fast in Barcelona doesn't mean that the same happened in the rest of the season.

Everything changed in Barcelona. Before that the Benetton was too unstable to be competitive.

[Garagiste]

Yes JH was there at Silverstone and Monza while DC was not,

Right, so you take both Williams and MS out of the race and Herbert wins both times.
That on its own makes a pretty good case for the B195 being the second best car on the grid.

[coos]

The great FW17? Which is probably why they created a B version mid season, because the original was simply too good?

That's what Adrian Newey said, not me...
The F2001 was a great car. Why did they build a B version?
Because they are developing constantly.
The FW17 was born as a great car, and it seems that its small flaws were easily identified and improved.

Everything changed in Barcelona. Before that the Benetton was too unstable to be competitive.

OK, before Barcelona it was slower than Ferrari, Jordan, McLaren.
Then it was in the same level.
Of course, the FW17 much faster than all those. Ask Newey.

[Foxbat]

Originally posted by karlth

Just because Berger crashed a few cars. Do you know how many chassis Schumacher destroyed in the early part of 1995?

But that's the problem with your thesis isn't it? The car was at first causing MS to crash frequently, then it was unstable later causing the same to happen to GB. In between however we are to believe that a few setup changes made it the perfect car, evidence for that is that you claim it to be so.

Now I realise that you are apt to ignore this, but it seems to me that while Benneton may have found a better setup for their car the main reason for the cars competetiveness is the fact that MS managed to get a handle on it.



"On the first day I comfortably got close to Michael's time and then thought 'Tomorrow, I'll just do those few extra tenths'. But when I tried it I crashed three or four times and that made me think 'wow Michael'. The car was nervous but he managed to hold it there not just for one lap right on the edge, but for 50, 60 or 70 laps."

As posted earlier Berger seems to think the same thing.

[karlth]

Originally posted by coos
The F2001 was a great car. Why did they build a B version?
Because they are developing constantly.
The FW17 was born as a great car, and it seems that its small flaws were easily identified and improved.

Small flaws? Compared to it's qualifying pace the FW17 was simply slow in race setup and the fuel tank was also too small. The car also had reliability problems which were not convincingly fixed until the FW18. These are no small flaws.

OK, before Barcelona it was slower than Ferrari, Jordan, McLaren.

How on earth to you deduct that the Benetton was slower than the Jordan and McLaren before Barcelona?

Because of Herbert? Herbert like all of Schumacher's teammates was a non entity in the Benetton team. A driver that is ignored in testing and even during the race, witness the Imola pit stop fiasco, can not be used for comparison.

How come Herbert was some seconds of Schumacher's pace at Benetton but during Michael's one off test in the Sauber, Herbert seemed just as quick? Any ideas?

[Arrow]

Originally posted by karlth
Originally posted by Arrow
Is says they were mediocre compared to michael.
I thought that was obvious by now.

We are talking about a second difference. So in effect you believe that Irvine was a better driver than Hill in 1996 because he was less than a second behind Michael?

Something does not add up.

Where was the second difference?
Hill was only 25 seconds behind michael when he hit trouble near the end.

Thats more like half a second a lap slower.

Irvine was regularily 1 second a lap slower over a race distance during 96,97,98.

And as i said before we saw rubens that much slower 2 weeks ago.
Your memory cant be that bad.

[Arrow]

Originally posted by karlth
Originally posted by coos

How come Herbert was some seconds of Schumacher's pace at Benetton but during Michael's one off test in the Sauber, Herbert seemed just as quick? Any ideas?

yes.
It was a [b]test
Did you notice that irvine used to thrash herbert when they were team mates?
And michael used to thrash irvine.

You add it up.

[karlth]

Originally posted by Foxbat
But that's the problem with your thesis isn't it? The car was at first causing MS to crash frequently, then it was unstable later causing the same to happen to GB. In between however we are to believe that a few setup changes made it the perfect car, evidence for that is that you claim it to be so.

Perfect for Schumacher. Listen to Montoya for example, he has said that he is unable to control a car setup for Ralf, the car being simply to unstable under braking. Now imagine that Williams had developed the FW24 only with Ralf in mind during the whole 2002 season and Juan wouldn't have been able to drive it, do you think Montoya would have been able to jump into the car and post competitive times right away after the season?

Does that mean Montoya is a worse driver? Hardly, he simply has a different driving style.

Am I saying that Berger is just as good as Schumacher? No but what I'm saying is that it is unrealistic for a top level to jump into a car that has been developed around another driver and be immediately competitive.

Now I realise that you are apt to ignore this, but it seems to me that while Benneton may have found a better setup for their car the main reason for the cars competetiveness is the fact that MS managed to get a handle on it.

Schumacher didn't just suddenly become a massively better driver over night. Benetton said that the reason for their new found competitiveness was that Schumacher had copied parts of Herbert's setup. Not my words.

[Foxbat]

Originally posted by karlth
Originally posted by coos
[B]The F2001 was a great car. Why did they build a B version?
Because they are developing constantly.

Because of Herbert? Herbert like all of Schumacher's teammates was a non entity in the Benetton team. A driver that is ignored in testing and even [b]during the race, witness the Imola pit stop fiasco, can not be used for comparison.

How come Herbert was some seconds of Schumacher's pace at Benetton but during Michael's one off test in the Sauber, Herbert seemed just as quick? Any ideas?

Very convenient, because it means that MS performance is meaningless in the literal sense of the word. We can not ever know what it means. If he woins X races and the championship then that is because the car is capable of that (you can't make a car go faster than it can go after all) and we can't compare with his teammates, or with people who joined the team after he left either. Maybe he is actually a very bad driver, but his cars are 2s/lap faster than everone elses? We'll never know..

As for the Sauber test, let's see how that played out..
Peter Sauber gets Ferrari to lend them MS because he believes his drivers are off the pace. Schumacher starts pounding around the track eventually setting a time a second faster than Herbert. MS goes home, but Herbert's day isn't over and near the end of the session he manages to equal MS's times. Doesn't sound like a convincing example of Herbert being easily on the pace with MS to me...
Then there is the reason why Johnny was so much of the pace at Benneton. It wasn't because he had trouble sitting but because the car was so unstable, unlike the Sauber-Ferrari they both
tested.

[EDITED for profanity]

[karlth]

Originally posted by Arrow
Where was the second difference?

Qualifying. Schumacher botched up his fastest lap and yet was 0.6s ahead of Hill.

[Arrow]

Originally posted by karlth
Originally posted by Arrow
Where was the second difference?

Qualifying. Schumacher botched up his fastest lap and yet was 0.6s ahead of Hill.

Oh dear.
Your shocked that michael is able to qualify 1 second faster than hill or DC??
Whats so shocking about that exactly?

[karlth]

Originally posted by Foxbat
Very convenient, because it means that MS performance is meaningless in the literal sense of the word.

Not meaningless but his teammates cannot be used for comparison. Simple as that.

Lehto had to drive his car in qualifying with Schumacher's setup, in case Michael needed his car. Should we compare Lehto to Schumacher?

Herbert hardly did any testing at all and was not allowed to view his teammates setup during the race weekend. Should we compare Herbert to Schumacher?

Irvine had to sometimes do tyre testing on Fridays so Schumacher could focus on his setup at Ferrari. Should we compare Irvine to Schumacher?

As for the Sauber test, let's see how that played out..
Peter Sauber gets Ferrari to lend them MS because he believes his drivers are off the pace. Schumacher starts pounding around the track eventually setting a time a second faster than Herbert. MS goes home, but Herbert's day isn't over and near the end of the session he manages to equal MS's times. Doesn't sound like a convincing example of Herbert being easily on the pace with MS to me...

Hmmm. I think you'll find that it was Schumacher who did those fast laps in the end not Herbert:

From my earlier post:
According to reports Johnny Herbert did a 1.00.95 on the 11th of September.
Schumacher tested the next day and produced similar lap times until the last
laps when he managed a 1.00.10. Herbert then took over the day after and
broke the 1 minute barrier with a 59.96.

[Foxbat]

Originally posted by karlth
Perfect for Schumacher.

Except it wasn't perfect for Schumacher, and the car wasn't "developed around" Schumacher. It was developed as an evolution from a design that predated Schumachers arrival and the Renault engine that needed to be shoehorned in the back.
And I seriously doubt that Schumacher ever wanted a car that handled "diabolically" only to fend of the likes of Johnny Herbert and Jos Verstappen. But maybe he wanted to be the new Mansell and he asked Rory to design a car that would give him lots of opportunity to whine

Listen to Montoya for example, he has said that he is unable to control a car setup for Ralf, the car being simply to unstable under braking. Now imagine that Williams had developed the FW24 only with Ralf in mind during the whole 2002 season and Juan wouldn't have been able to drive it, do you think Montoya would have been able to jump into the car and post competitive times right away after the season?

Does that mean Montoya is a worse driver? Hardly, he simply has a different driving style.

Am I saying that Berger is just as good as Schumacher? No but what I'm saying is that it is unrealistic for a top level to jump into a car that has been developed around another driver and be immediately competitive.

Do you realise that Bergers entire career consisted in jumping from team-to-team, always just jumping into whatever was available.. it was only with Benneton that this was a problem. And given the fact that it caused Schumacher lots of problems as well I seriously doubt it was developed to suit Schumachers driving style.

Schumacher didn't just suddenly become a massively better driver over night. Benetton said that the reason for their new found competitiveness was that Schumacher had copied parts of Herbert's setup. Not my words.

But did those set-up changes make the car stable? Did the B195 become a massively better car overnight (in 30 minutes actually), or did they allow Schumacher to get a handle on a difficult and unstable car?
I seriously doubt that setup changes can cure design flaws/features.

[karlth]

Originally posted by Arrow


Oh dear.
Your shocked that michael is able to qualify 1 second faster than hill or DC??
Whats so shocking about that exactly?

Not only around 1 second faster but also in a much slower car. Do you really think Schumacher is Superman on vacation from planet Krypton?