Separating car speed from driver speed

[raymondu999]

Hey folks; just a point that I wanted to discuss here. I find it quite frustrating that in F1 it's very hard to judge how fast a driver is relative to the competition. We say how the wet is a wonderful car equalizer, and how places such as Monaco, Spa, Hungary Suzuka can allow a good driver in a bad car to show himself off; but let's face it. A Hamilton, Vettel or an Alonso in an HRT is, under normal conditions not going to out qualify a Liuzzi or Karthikeyan (okay maybe Karthikeyan) in a Red Bull or a McLaren.

Even looking at on boards, we might see a driver driving a millimeter-perfect line through an entire lap; but we can't see if he's using all the grip, can we? We don't know if he used 100% of the grip to carry all the speed he could.

Just wanted to discuss here; is there any real way to judge, do you all think?

[Dragonfly]

No, I don't think there's a way to know how fast really are drivers in different cars. And it has been the eternal question and reason for disputes as long as I've been following F1 (and motor sports as a whole).

[raymondu999]

Unfortunately it is the case; isn't it.

[db__]

This is the reason why every driver wants to beat his team mate first as he's the only person driving the same equipment as you.

[raymondu999]

Yep; then they can say that every driver who finished ahead of them had the faster car. At least I know that's what I'd do

[izybluffen]

Agreed. This is one place though where you know the brilliance of Senna. 1984 Monaco, and the Toleman which is today's equivalent of a HRT. He would of won had the race not been red flagged. The reason it was stopped is another story.
The years at Lotus were very, very impressive.
Also Schumi in the sh*t box '96 Fez was proof.

The only real proof is to see what a WDC can do in average machinery. If he can make a slow car go fast in his own right, wet or dry.

[raymondu999]

That's deflecting the question again. How do you know the Toleman wasn't super quick in the wet? How do you know the 96 Ferrari was actually slow? That's the whole point of the thread

[izybluffen]

That's deflecting the question again. How do you know the Toleman wasn't super quick in the wet? How do you know the 96 Ferrari was actually slow? That's the whole point of the thread

Basically because the Toleman was the worst car on the grid.
1996 the Fez was woefull unless in the hands of MS.
All you have to do is look at the comparison to the team mate, and how that reflected in wet or dry conditions. Comprende ?

[beelsebob]

Yep, I've wondered about this quite a bit lately... Is the RB7 *really* faster than the MP4-26?

Is it that the car is faster and webber is doing a mediocre job, or is it that vettel is super fast and he's making it look like the car is faster than the McLarens.

The only hint I can get towards the answer is comments like "wow, you must have 30 points more downforce, you were disappearing through the last corner" after the race. What that doesn't say though is... how much more grip did the chasing driver have in the slow parts? How stable/unstable is each car, etc.

So really, the only way we ever see the car difference is if a driver says to another "wow, we simply couldn't do that in our car, we'd crash".

[beelsebob]

That's deflecting the question again. How do you know the Toleman wasn't super quick in the wet? How do you know the 96 Ferrari was actually slow? That's the whole point of the thread

Basically because the Toleman was the worst car on the grid.

You've still missed what raymondu was saying though – it was the worst car on the grid, for the rest of the season, when it was drier. How do you know it was still the worst car on the grid at Monaco (a very individual circuit) while it looked like a river (a very individual event)?

[izybluffen]

That's deflecting the question again. How do you know the Toleman wasn't super quick in the wet? How do you know the 96 Ferrari was actually slow? That's the whole point of the thread

Basically because the Toleman was the worst car on the grid.

You've still missed what raymondu was saying though – it was the worst car on the grid, for the rest of the season, when it was drier. How do you know it was still the worst car on the grid at Monaco (a very individual circuit) while it looked like a river (a very individual event)?

Well the best way to judge it is the team mate factor. How did the team mate do in that situation. You usually get a consistent analysis from it. Maybe I'm wrong, I'm just trying to through this one out there, get a bit more concrete standing point on the subject.

[Richard]

Regrading poor cars excelling in the wet, we can never be sure how much of it is due to the car and/or the set up.

For all we know the Tolman may have been poor in the dry because of terrible balance and a terrible mechanic doing the set up, but the eccentricities of the car and mechanic were perfectly suited for eccentric track conditions at an eccentric circuit?

ps - the Toleman wasn't actually that bad. Senna's record was 6, 6, 2, 7, 3, 3. That's 3 podiums out of 6 races. Trouble is that he failed to finish 8 times, plus 1 DNQ and was substituted by Pierluigi Martini at Monza. His teamates finshed 9, 4, 11.

[raymondu999]

Yep, I've wondered about this quite a bit lately... Is the RB7 *really* faster than the MP4-26?

Is it that the car is faster and webber is doing a mediocre job, or is it that vettel is super fast and he's making it look like the car is faster than the McLarens.

The only hint I can get towards the answer is comments like "wow, you must have 30 points more downforce, you were disappearing through the last corner" after the race. What that doesn't say though is... how much more grip did the chasing driver have in the slow parts? How stable/unstable is each car, etc.

So really, the only way we ever see the car difference is if a driver says to another "wow, we simply couldn't do that in our car, we'd crash".

Thank you bob (should I call you that, or beelsebob?); you've hit the nail on the head.

[Dragonfly]

Even teammate comparison is not absolute. A small difference in driving styles combined with car's features may lead to a significant domination and flip the score the next year.
All drivers adapt but some faster than another, some take more risks, some need more confidence in the car to drive it to the limit. Finally some simply have more luck.

[raymondu999]

Even teammate comparison is not absolute. A small difference in driving styles combined with car's features may lead to a significant domination and flip the score the next year

Case in point; Mark Webber vs Sebastian Vettel; they were (kind of) neck and neck in 2010; but in 2011 Seb has absolutely crushed Mark