If regulations such as 6 allowable changes per season were enforced in that era, you don't think it changes the permutations in dominance?Diesel wrote:That's part of the regulations, it was the same for every car on the grid, so it doesn't affect how dominant the W05 was.FoxHound wrote:It should be noted that the W05 was also hampered by having limited engine usage for a season.
Sure, but the point is that those are the regulations, and that's what everyone was driving to. If you changed the regulations so that they said "normally aspirated V8", then Renault's engine dominated due to it's small size and other aero benefits. The point being that that too is irrelevant. It doesn't matter who would have dominated if the regulations were different. The regulations weren't different.FoxHound wrote:If regulations such as 6 allowable changes per season were enforced in that era, you don't think it changes the permutations in dominance?Diesel wrote:That's part of the regulations, it was the same for every car on the grid, so it doesn't affect how dominant the W05 was.FoxHound wrote:It should be noted that the W05 was also hampered by having limited engine usage for a season.
I'm not sure what your point is? You're saying the W05 would be more dominant if it didn't have restricted engine usage? Sure... it may also have been more dominant if there was no fuel flow restriction, and blown diffusers were made legal, and flat floors were legal, etc. etc.FoxHound wrote:I think some regulations are more pertinent than others.
Especially in a new engine formula as complex as we have now.
I very valid point IMO. It is harder in the modern era to generate that kind of advantage than it was in the past.FoxHound wrote:My point clearly is that the McLaren was not subject to as stringent rules as the Mercedes.
That's completely irrelevant - all of the other cars on the grid at the time were subject to the same rules as the MP4/4 so they all had the same opportunities to be fast. If you're going to compare rules then you could equally say that the MP4/4 was at a disadvantage to the W05 because it didn't have ERS.FoxHound wrote:My point clearly is that the McLaren was not subject to as stringent rules as the Mercedes.
More constraints in the rules, yes. But also far better development tools and bigger design teams. The point is that each car was dominant in it's own time, against cars designed with the same tools to the same ruleset. To say that one car is more or less dominant than another because of the ruleset or technology on the car is ridiculous.FoxHound wrote:You mean ERS, another component that can fail?
Comparing them equally is a fools errand, especially when hiding behind the 'rules were the same for everyone' argument.
There are more constraints in 2014 than there ever were in '88. That is not to say the W05 is better. Its to give some scope in the comparison.
That knife cuts both ways, man. For all the relative regulatory freedom enjoyed by previous dominant cars, you have to consider that it also gave rivals more of an opportunity to mount a serious challenge. The current regulations anoint a winner before the season even starts.FoxHound wrote:You think ridiculous, and the only evidence you are putting forward is bigger design teams?
I say, in the very first season of V6 turbo's and its accompanied auxiliaries like the energy recovery systems, in a limited testing season...is an achievement equal to that of what's gone before.
These engines did not run in the back of a car until earlier this year...limited to 3 tests. With engines that should last on average 4 races a piece.
In comparison to unlimited testing, with far greater known quantities and a one race engine shelf life.
Yes, ridiculous
Not quite, the FW15C "only" had an advantage of 1.179 seconds over it's nearest rivals. The FW14B had an advantage of 1.307 seconds.TzeiTzei wrote:Looking at the time gaps the 1993 Williams might have been even more dominant in qualifying than the 1992 car.
This to me is domination. Simply looking at how many seconds and tenths car X could put on it´s competitors over one lap when the car works.Kingshark wrote:The 14B was never beat on merit, every race it lost was because of either reliability, driver incompetence, or just plain bad luck. In terms of the advantage it had over the competition (average 1.3 seconds, occasionally more than 2.5 seconds) I don't think it'll ever be replicated again.
