Is Hamilton desperate or what?

[Just_a_fan]

Comparing Hamilton today to Fangio in 1955 makes about as much sense as comparing Hamilton and Rossi. Modern F1 is so different to Fangio's day that no sensible comparison can be made.

All you can do is carry out a thought experiment and try to imagine each in the other's cars. Would Hamilton (or Alonso, Vettel etc) be as quick as Fangio in a Maserati 250F? Almost certainly they would. Would Fangio be as quick in a MP4-25? Of course. Would he be able to drive one for 90 minutes? No way - he'd need to train up to the physical side but his inherent skill would still be relevant.

One thing for sure though - Schumacher wouldn't have tried his infamous crash-to-win tactics in 1955. Not if he'd wanted to live to see his next birthday anyway...

[lebesset]

fangio not able to race for 90 minutes ?

anyone who saw moss drive for 10 hours non stop in the mille miglia at speeds up to 180mph on pre motorway ,tree lined public roads AND average almost 100mph would wonder what you were talking about ; fangio finished behind him

and this was in the technology of 55 years ago

[autogyro]

Comparing Hamilton today to Fangio in 1955 makes about as much sense as comparing Hamilton and Rossi. Modern F1 is so different to Fangio's day that no sensible comparison can be made.

All you can do is carry out a thought experiment and try to imagine each in the other's cars. Would Hamilton (or Alonso, Vettel etc) be as quick as Fangio in a Maserati 250F? Almost certainly they would. Would Fangio be as quick in a MP4-25? Of course. Would he be able to drive one for 90 minutes? No way - he'd need to train up to the physical side but his inherent skill would still be relevant.

One thing for sure though - Schumacher wouldn't have tried his infamous crash-to-win tactics in 1955. Not if he'd wanted to live to see his next birthday anyway...

Neither Hamilton or any other modern driver would be allowed to race a
Maserati 250F, far to dangerous for the promotional and marketing boys.
Would they have had the 'guts' needed to do so back then, I doubt it.
Driving such a car slowly for demo purposes cannot be compared.
I could do that as easily as Martin Brundel.

[autogyro]

fangio not able to race for 90 minutes ?

anyone who saw moss drive for 10 hours non stop in the mille miglia at speeds up to 180mph on pre motorway ,tree lined public roads AND average almost 100mph would wonder what you were talking about ; fangio finished behind him

and this was in the technology of 55 years ago

I think they are bowing down to their god of downforce again.
It makes driving the cars much easier than in Fangio/Moss' day but to be fair it adds G force, so the driver has to be mega fit. So what? To me that is only a part of driving a race car.
Halve DF and we might even see some better drivers, think about it.

[marcush.]

fangio not able to race for 90 minutes ?

anyone who saw moss drive for 10 hours non stop in the mille miglia at speeds up to 180mph on pre motorway ,tree lined public roads AND average almost 100mph would wonder what you were talking about ; fangio finished behind him

and this was in the technology of 55 years ago

I think they are bowing down to their god of downforce again.
It makes driving the cars much easier than in Fangio/Moss' day but to be fair it adds G force, so the driver has to be mega fit. So what? To me that is only a part of driving a race car.
Halve DF and we might even see some better drivers, think about it.

comeon ...i don´t want to talk down the likes of Chandhok or di Grassi ..they did not have much seat time and they have not the quickest mount,but still they can jump in and handle the things to its limit .
most drivers state pure driving is the best workout for a driver ....so you can only conclude the physical shape you are in is not something you would have to build up over along time it is possibly the other way round the cars will beat the --- out of you and this will put an end to your ability to sustain those loads over long years.

[autogyro]

It would be interesting if someone did a research project on comparing the fitness of past drivers over the years and the changing inputs from the cars.
I would guess the pounding from the car and the strength needed to drive them was harder and larger the further back you go.
It is the G force that has increased and IMO that is solely countered by fitness. Its effect is to drain stamina and mental reaction.
The strength, guts and skill to drive the car was higher in past eras.
I think little guys like Hamilton would have their work cut out in a bi moteur Alpha for instance.

[timbo]

Its effect is to drain stamina and mental reaction.
The strength, guts and skill to drive the car was higher in past eras.

Drain stamina and mental reaction?
Won't agree with you on that.

Agreed on guts and strength. But, that's different kind of strength, they had to have strong hands and legs, today you also need to have that but also train your neck. Apples to oranges. Skill? Once again apples to oranges. Different cars -- different skills.

Todays cars definitely require faster reaction, as yawing natural frequency reached the limit of what human can control.
Probably modern days F1 car is easier to drive than mid-80s turbo monsters, but expectation from drivers also increased today -- I remember a thread where somebody called Webber inconsistent because he had couple of laps slower by 0.2secs than others. Thats over 1:30 lap, mind you.

[autogyro]

Yes there is very little difference between drivers times over a lap.
Surely this is more to do with the cars setting the limit and not the drivers.
I also disagree with reaction times. True collecting a modern F1 car when it eventualy changes from being on rails to breaking away does take superb reaction time but the pre aero cars were constantly at the limit of breaking away in some extreem opersite lock and slide conditions, constant reactions needed then.

[timbo]

pre aero cars were constantly at the limit of breaking away in some extreem opersite lock and slide conditions, constant reactions needed then.

I don't think modern cars do not need constant reaction.
It's a shame that todays (and I mean 2010) cars have too little engine for such aero. Even without traction control they seem to be easier on acceleration.
But the view of a car taking corners @ 5G's is still amazing to me.

I dunno, with all due respect, how much of "drivers were better back then" thing comes from nostalgia of yours, older guys?
I'm still relatively young (not at my thirties yet) and as much as I enjoy watching older days footage, to me modern drivers are just fine .

[ringo]

Modern drivers are stronger and fitter, i don't see how the old drivers are physically superior.
The G forces experienced in the cars today is enough to suggest the loads are multiplied by factors of 3 or 5. I don't think an old time driver could drive a modern f1 car and not end up in hospital from mental and physical exhaustion.
Old time drivers were simple men, had no scheduled exercise routine, who probably drunk and smoke, things that are known to directly affect fitness and endurance. Not to mention the heart beats per minute the new drivers experience.
Now we have fitter drivers, closer competition, more races per year among other demanding things. Modern drivers to me are all better than any of the old ones; physically and competitively though they may not compare to each other the way fangio compared to his rivals back in the day. And i think that's what Jackie stewart and any other pundits mean when the say hamilton is like fangio or Senna; they are looking at how Hamilton compares to his rivals juxtaposed to how fangio or clark compared to their rivals. it's not a direct comparison between Lewis and Fangio.

[autogyro]

Bottom line is that we will never know if modern drivers are as good as let alone better than those of past times.
They will never be allowed to drive any of the old 'proper' racing cars as they are far to dangerous for modern drivers to risk driving.
Says it all.

[timbo]

They will never be allowed to drive any of the old 'proper' racing cars as they are far to dangerous for modern drivers to risk driving.

They were dangerous for older drivers too.

[Shrieker]

They will never be allowed to drive any of the old 'proper' racing cars as they are far to dangerous for modern drivers to risk driving.

They were dangerous for older drivers too.

And despite knowing that what they were doing was very dangerous, I think they didn't know how dangerous it was since they didn't have anything to compare to ( 2010 F1 safety levels for example). So, they were just going for it (I assume).

However, we have the ability to think in retrospect and compare today to 50-60 years ago. So I don't think back then they ever interpreted the dangers they were exposed to as we do for them today.

Will we ever have the opportunity to put Hamilton and Fangio side by side, first watch them race in a 50s car and then in a modern car ? No we won't, but if we did, I'd say Hamilton would beat Fangio in an mp4-25, and Fangio would beat him back in a Maserati 250F. Not because Hamilton would lack anything physically or strength-wise - the cars back then weren't near perfect (both design and production) as they are today - so they probably would have quirks needing to be addressed using some tricks (a la Biff and his car in Back to the Future ).

[Just_a_fan]

fangio not able to race for 90 minutes ?

It was only the issue with the sheer lateral and longitudinal accelerations faced by modern drivers. Of course old races in old cars were physical but they didn't try to rip the drfiver's neck off every time the controls were operated. That was the only issue being raised.

[Just_a_fan]

Would they have had the 'guts' needed to do so back then, I doubt it.
Driving such a car slowly for demo purposes cannot be compared.
I could do that as easily as Martin Brundel.

Total tosh. Hamilton would race hard in anything. As would some of the others. They're racers - it's what they do. It's all they do.