Driver strain: When was it harder?

[Themis]

I was having a discussion with some friends whether formula 1 was physically harder on drivers a few years back, before the grooves and the narrower width was firstly introduced.

Could someone clear this up to me? I mean, was it harder for Mansell and Senna to drive in 1991, harder for Schumacher and Villeuneuve in 1997, or is it harder now, that the cars are faster than ever?

[joseff]

I think each era brings with it a new set of challenges...

Back in the old days (Jackie Stewart-era) it was about doing as many things at the same time (pumping the brakes, changing down, double-declutching, steering), while driving as smoothly as possible. Not to mention you'd need to be a bit suicidal...

In the 80s it was anticipating & coping with turbo lag, then hanging on to dear life when it kicks in. I know many would disagree, but I think the greatest driver of this era was Gilles Villeneuve.

in the senna/prost era, the cars are pretty much refined mechanically that the driver's talent is paramount (to wit: Senna's win in a Toleman @ Monaco).

Now we've got a spec-racer rulebook such that the performance difference between a Ferrari and Minardi isn't that great (no, really - back in '92 it's pretty normal for Mansell to outqualify the next best driver by 2 secs). days, performance gains are made at the margins, and drivers who are good to exploit the margins (traction control settings, pitlane-precision-driving, maximizing tires) will win. And this is where Michael Schumacher is brilliant.

Remember that the automobile is barely 100 years old... our road cars are evolving even quicker, requiring ever changing skill sets from the driver (how to drive a honda hybrid, dealing with CVTs, operating a sat-nav system, etc)

[Themis]

I absolutely agree with you joseff with everything you said. My question though, was more focused on the strain and physical stress the drivers take on. You know, all that g-force talk and stuff like that. How much does a driver get banged on his cockpit compared to other eras? How many forces act upon him?

For example, if we had a 1991 two seater F1, would the passenger get more sick on that, or on a modern F1 two seater?

[NickT]

My first thought is the amount of training these guys do. They are athletes in their own right. Having competed in Triathlon at national level and having read about their training routines, I am sure most would acquit them selves very well in at least two disciplines and a few in all three.

Where is all this going I hear you ask, well I believe today’s drivers are the best ever prepared to deal with the physical stress they are encountering in an F1 car. After all, many of them are regularly doing double race distances in testing.

For me the toughest physical time for the drivers would have been the ground effect era. Imagine doing your first ever season in a ground effect car without the physical training they have today. The physical punishment must have been huge for those pioneering drivers. If you have ever seen the film of John Watson lapping Silverstone in a McLaren, you will understand what I am trying to say. The G forces were huge , but it was the lack of suspension that was the real killer , it just didn’t move. If my memory serves me correctly there were some drivers who suffered blurred vision as a result.

What do you think?

[joseff]

Oops...

I have two vids of a lap of Monaco. One was Senna's 1991 pole position lap, the other one was Michael Schumacher's 2000 pole position lap. Both were full-lap onboard shots.

The Senna lap looks much more ragged, the driver bounces around a lot more, the picture was more shaky. Could be that the new cameras are better damped (which they are).

IMO "Grand prix" cars (1950 onwards) started out quite cushy, stiffened up towards the ground-effect/turbo era in the 1980's (at which time I think they also generated the most lateral g's), improved its ride much during the active-suspension bonanza, and ultimately reverted to very very stiff (but incrementally improving) in the interest of aerodynamics.

A very interesting comment by Alex Yoong last year, when he drove what I think was the '76 lotus. He says the suspension moves around quite a lot, he could see the front wheels actually traveling up & down. I'm not sure if it was a ground effect/'wing' car though.

[Monstrobolaxa]

Well....I agree with....Themis and Joseff...well diferent eras have diferent types of chalenges....mentally I think the old days were harder at least during driving you had to concentrate on driving, braking, clutching, de-clutching, shifting, pumping brakes, bliping the engine between gears....it wasn't very easy....and besides that during corners you'd have to take one hand off the wheel.....

[jgm]

I seem to recall that at the height of the ground effect era some drivers were getting injured without having accidents. The cars had so much downforce and consequently such stiff suspensions that everytime they hit a bump it was like being kicked by a donkey. I remember one driver ending up with a cracked rib just driving his car.

[ajg1030]

I would have to say that the 91-92 cars with active suspensions were the worst on the drivers as far a g' loading goes. As I understand one of the main reasons that the active suspensions were outlaw'd was cause corners speeds were so incredible that lap times were aproaching 1' laps on most circuits. I heard incredible numbers of 5 lateral g's being stressed on the drivers.
the older cars definately were more difficult to drive cause the driver was far more busy doing things inside the cockpit other than gas and steer, as noted above. The suspensions moved more cause in stewarts era, aero downforce was not really understood so the suspension had to be softer to get mechanical grip. As aero came into the picture and namely ground effects, the suspensions got stiffer cause you could push/ or suck the car down onto the road thus loading the tires with more pressure into the pavment and inproving grip. So as aero effects improve the car suspensions will get stiffer, cause a stiffer suspension is faster in a straight line and causes less body roll and more predictable load shifting during a transition.
I think some of the bone jarring effect has been lessened by tire development cause the tires, being pneumatic absorb some of the bone jarring effect.
I also agree that the guys are very much athleets. 1 1/2 hours in a car with that much g loading and those hot firesuits does put an enormous stress on a driver.