| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
McLareanNUMBA1
F2 Racer
Joined: 03 Jul 2004
Posts: 413
Location: McLaren garage
|
 Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2004 15:11 Post subject: F1's Best ever cars? |
 |
|
I don't mean what was the best looking car or your favourite car, I mean the most successful F1 cars over the years.
I have 10 but i haven't ranked any of them except what I think was the best.
Here they are:
Ferrari 312T
Niki Lauda won the world championship in this in 1975 I think.
Lotus 25
This was the first Lotus to win a World champinship.
Also winning Indianapolos 500. The best car in 1962 and '63 where Jim Clark won 7 races in a season (A record at the time I think.)
Lotus 72
The 72 won two world titles and raced for six seasons.
Lotus 79
The best looking car ever in my point of view.
The last Lotus to ever win the World title.
Mercedes W196
I don't know very much about this car.
It won 9 out of the 12 races that it contested in 1954 and '55.
Williams FW07
First Williams to win a grand prix in only 2 years in the sport.
Fastest car at the end of 1979
Williams FW14B
Most dominant of all the Williams cars.
1992 World championship with Nigel Mansell
Ferrari F2002
Any need to explain? won the 2002 Champ, the most boring season ever.
Ferrari F2004
this season ferrai is the most dominant ferrari ever.
so far winning 12 of the 14 races (Schmacher has.)
And the best ever-
McLaren MP4/4
The most successful car of all time. McLaren's 1988 MP4/4 won 15 of the 16 races in the championship.
The best had to be a McLaren didn't it?
(I know that I don't know very much about thease but I'm only 18 so most were before I was born. I've either read about them or seen them on TV. Apart from the F2002 and F2004 of Course0
Let's hear some of yours.
_________________
Kimi Raikkonen 2004 Spa winner!!
2003 Malaysia Winner
2005 World Champ!!
BAR PLEASE GIVE DAVID COULTHARD A DRIVE NEXT YEAR!
DC WILL BE BACK ON THE PODIUM THIS SEASON!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
tiggers
Site Admin
Joined: 23 Feb 2004
Posts: 5210
Location: Alderaan
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2004 15:35 Post subject: |
|
|
Always difficult this as you can't simply apply stats as that doesn't take into account how good the drivers were or how weak/strong the opposition was.
In my mind for instance the F2002 is probably better (relatively speaking obviously) than the F2004 as in 2002 Barrichello was consistently faster than much of the opposition whereas this season it really has been only Michael.
Looking back to the 1988 McLaren I would have to say that although it was a great car I could not see 15 wins out of 16 starts without Senna and Prost as the drivers.
Personally I think the early Lotus cars were the best as they had more groundbreaking ideas in them than on any F1 car before or since in my opinion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vipernoir
Kart Novice
Joined: 01 Sep 2004
Posts: 20
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2004 20:36 Post subject: |
|
|
The ENGINE in the MP4/4 was one of the all time greats as Honda were cheating. The chassis was reasonable, but enormous power will always overcome crap handling.
The M23 was a Greater car in the overall scheme of things than the MP4/4 - come to think of it, all the good McLarens of recent times have had a marked power advantage...
When it comes to best looking car, it is down to personal choice, but in the wing era the BT52B, 126C5, P34, FW11B, WR1, 191 have got to be in any discerning pundits top 10. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shant F
F1 Driver
Joined: 04 Mar 2004
Posts: 941
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 03, 2004 14:44 Post subject: |
|
|
| Vipernoir wrote: | | The ENGINE in the MP4/4 was one of the all time greats as Honda were cheating. |
Care to substantiate that?
In any case, as good as it was, McLaren's dominance wasn't purely down to the Honda. After all, look at what Lotus did with it. No, as much as anything, it was down to McLaren's rivals not having their act together. Ferrari had a decent package but an engine which drank Agip like a fish, Williams were having a transition year with a Judd engine, Lotus were in terminal decline and Benetton had a normally-aspirated Cosworth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Sentinel
Kart Champion
Joined: 19 Jul 2004
Posts: 86
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 09, 2004 13:08 Post subject: |
|
|
I'd opt for one of the Lotus cars too. The 72 or 79.
In 1988 Honda found a way around the boost limit so that the 'pop off valve' was located in a low pressure area and the engine was seeing a lot more boost than the regulations stipulated.
As soon as Ferrari discovered this little trick they did the same. 
Another case of bending the rules s guess!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
D-Type
World Champion
Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 2562
Location: Coulsdon, UK
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 09, 2004 23:00 Post subject: |
|
|
Let's set the record straight: The Lotus 25 never won Indianapolis - it was the Lotus 38
Most successful Formula 1 car - the Alfa Romeo 158/159 which was totally dominant in the first two years of Formula 1, 1947 and 1948, didn't compete in 1949 as there was no opposition, Then the winner's car for the first years of the championship in 1950 and 1951.
Joint runners up
The McLaren MP4/4 - Honda Turbo which won everything in 1988 it's one year, and
The 1991 to 1997 Patrick Head/Adrian Newey Williams-Renaults. The successive evolutions of the car set a record for the number of years as a top contender with 4 WDC's and 5 constructors' championships
_________________
The more you learn, the more you realise how little you know.
Last edited by D-Type on Tue Jun 28, 2005 20:37; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tiggers
Site Admin
Joined: 23 Feb 2004
Posts: 5210
Location: Alderaan
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 01:23 Post subject: |
|
|
| D-Type wrote: | | The 1991 to 1997 Patrick Head/Adrian newey Williams-Renaults. The successive evolutions of the car set a record for the number of years as a top contender with 4 WDC's and 5 constructors' championships |
In that case what about the Ferraris from 1999 - 2004 - 5 WDC's and 6 constructor's championships? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chrisledger
F3 Racer
Joined: 08 Apr 2004
Posts: 254
Location: Liverpool, England
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 10, 2004 04:42 Post subject: |
|
|
| Vipernoir wrote: | | The ENGINE in the MP4/4 was one of the all time greats as Honda were cheating. |
Cheating is a bit strong, however, Honda may have been doing something along these lines to circumvent the pop off valve boost pressure limit:
http://www.cartracingupdate.com/News01/61601generalpopoff.htm
There was a big fuss about it in CART (where Honda and Ford where both accused of it) a few years back, and maybe it happened in F1, too.
It was said that several engine manufacturers used Bernoulli principles (air speeds up in a narrow aperture that widens) to design plenum chambers to speed up the intake of air to create pressure above the pop off limit. All highly technical stuff, that, to be honest, I don't quite fully understand.
_________________
That which is static and repetitive is boring. That which is dynamic and random is confusing. In between lies art.
- John A. Locke (philosopher). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
D-Type
World Champion
Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 2562
Location: Coulsdon, UK
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2004 22:48 Post subject: |
|
|
| tiggers wrote: | | D-Type wrote: | | The 1991 to 1997 Patrick Head/Adrian newey Williams-Renaults. The successive evolutions of the car set a record for the number of years as a top contender with 4 WDC's and 5 constructors' championships |
In that case what about the Ferraris from 1999 - 2004 - 5 WDC's and 6 constructor's championships? |
By my reckoning that's current and isn't yet history.
_________________
The more you learn, the more you realise how little you know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
D-Type
World Champion
Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 2562
Location: Coulsdon, UK
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2004 22:55 Post subject: |
|
|
| chrisledger wrote: | | Vipernoir wrote: | | The ENGINE in the MP4/4 was one of the all time greats as Honda were cheating. |
Cheating is a bit strong, however, Honda may have been doing something along these lines to circumvent the pop off valve boost pressure limit:
http://www.cartracingupdate.com/News01/61601generalpopoff.htm
There was a big fuss about it in CART (where Honda and Ford where both accused of it) a few years back, and maybe it happened in F1, too.
It was said that several engine manufacturers used Bernoulli principles (air speeds up in a narrow aperture that widens) to design plenum chambers to speed up the intake of air to create pressure above the pop off limit. All highly technical stuff, that, to be honest, I don't quite fully understand. |
That isn't cheating that's good engineering! The rules said you had to fit the FIA-supplied pop-off valve at a particular point on the inlet manifold and Honda did so. The rules did not limit the inlet pressure as such a rule is unenforceable.
This is not the same as the XXXX rally cars that were disqualified for having leaking gaskets that bypassed the inlet restrictor. That was cheating and the disqualification was justified.
_________________
The more you learn, the more you realise how little you know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chrisledger
F3 Racer
Joined: 08 Apr 2004
Posts: 254
Location: Liverpool, England
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 11, 2004 23:37 Post subject: |
|
|
| D-Type wrote: | That isn't cheating that's good engineering! The rules said you had to fit the FIA-supplied pop-off valve at a particular point on the inlet manifold and Honda did so. The rules did not limit the inlet pressure as such a rule is unenforceable.
This is not the same as the XXXX rally cars that were disqualified for having leaking gaskets that bypassed the inlet restrictor. That was cheating and the disqualification was justified. |
Indeed.
In case anyone wonders what D-Type is referring to, it is here, talk about a blatant way of trying to exploit the rules:
http://freespace.virgin.net/shalco.com/tte_ban.htm
That has to be one of the most blatant things in recent years. There is indeed a very big difference between exploiting a loophole, seeing a creative opportunity in the framework of the rules and actually doing something not permissible by the rules and having mechanisms to hide it from being detected.
_________________
That which is static and repetitive is boring. That which is dynamic and random is confusing. In between lies art.
- John A. Locke (philosopher). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
classicsincamera
Karter
Joined: 08 Feb 2005
Posts: 45
Location: nr Nurburgring / Germany
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 03:12 Post subject: |
|
|
my choice:
Ferrari 312T
Matra V12 Ligier
Lotus JPS
_________________
Helmut S. - Classics in Camera
images of Historic Automobiles & MotorSport |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
benjabulle
Kart Novice
Joined: 04 Nov 2004
Posts: 2
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 08, 2005 20:54 Post subject: |
|
|
| The Sentinel wrote: | I'd opt for one of the Lotus cars too. The 72 or 79.
In 1988 Honda found a way around the boost limit so that the 'pop off valve' was located in a low pressure area and the engine was seeing a lot more boost than the regulations stipulated.
As soon as Ferrari discovered this little trick they did the same.
Another case of bending the rules s guess! |
Wrong, this trick was used, maybe, in 1987. Honda revealed all its technical secrets at the end of 1988 and it had nothing to do with that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
D-Type
World Champion
Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 2562
Location: Coulsdon, UK
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 08, 2005 22:55 Post subject: |
|
|
Of course the most dominant Grand Prix car ever was not a Formula 1 car at all. It was the Ferrari 500 of 1952 and 1953 which won every World Championship GP bar one and a goodly proportion of non-championship GP's as well. But, in those two years the World Championship was run for Formula 2 cars (+Indianapolis of course)
_________________
The more you learn, the more you realise how little you know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Sentinel
Kart Champion
Joined: 19 Jul 2004
Posts: 86
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2005 16:48 Post subject: |
|
|
| benjabulle wrote: | | The Sentinel wrote: | I'd opt for one of the Lotus cars too. The 72 or 79.
In 1988 Honda found a way around the boost limit so that the 'pop off valve' was located in a low pressure area and the engine was seeing a lot more boost than the regulations stipulated.
As soon as Ferrari discovered this little trick they did the same.
Another case of bending the rules s guess! |
Wrong, this trick was used, maybe, in 1987. Honda revealed all its technical secrets at the end of 1988 and it had nothing to do with that. |
I think you will find it is correct and it is YOU that is wrong.
It is a well known fact.
Next time do a bit of research BEFORE making silly comments.
There is a complete book on the MP4/4 which might be a good place to start. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Memberlist 
Usergroups
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in
Click here for the Pitpass Home Page
