HampusA wrote:Reality is he got his has whooped in F3 by Di Resta and Hamilton.
So you seem to think drivers are static beings that can never develop themselves, forgets that Hamilton was driving for the best team in his second year when he 'whooped their asses', and forgets that Vettel was dividing his attention between Formula 3, Formula Renault 3.5 and Formula One, almost lost his finger in a crash, all the while only finishing one race win behind 'ass whooper' di Resta? Really? One win is an ass whooping?
Setting aside such annoying contexts, does this mean you consider Heinz-Harald Frentzen a better driver than Michael Schumacher?
n smikle wrote:PNSD wrote:n smikle wrote:
Vettel has only driven against Journeyman Webber. When you have 33% percent more downforce
This is a technical forum after all so do you mind providing the mathematics for that conclusion?
Three words.
Barcelona. Turn 16. DRS activated!
Yes 33% is an exaggeration but I calculated it before. All you need to know is how much points of downforce DRS drops and what speed the car is traveling at. We have onboard evidence that the RedBulls were DRS'ing through turn 16 Barcelona and also DRS through almost 75% of parabolica in Monza.
I think the Mclaren guys (whitmarsh or was it Hamilton) also did a rough calculation at the time. I remember it as very significant - don't know how much more it is now though - but it's too damn high for the competitors.
How is having more downforce any excuse?
More downforce = less straight line speed.
If it was all about downforce, everyone would just take a Monaco-wing every race. Taking turn 16 flat-out means nothing if you loose 10mph on the straight.
It's all down to the car.
I think it's a combination of things. 'A clearly better car' usually comes by every few years -McLaren '98, Ferrari early '00s, Renault and McLaren '05, Brawn GP, RB7- but the difference is made by whether you have a decent, a good or a great driver in that car. Consider 1998, where Hakkinen was able to keep the McLaren ahead of Schumacher's improving speed as the season progressed, while Coulthard was nowhere near the German in the end. Consider '02, where Schumacher was miles and miles ahead, and Barichello finished second in the championship by just a few points, and not even second in '00, '01 and '03. Consider the Renault and McLaren in 2005, where Alonso was miles ahead, yet his team mate finished behind Schumacher in his abysmal F2005. And now you see it again, with Vettel ready to wrap up the championship while Webber has never looked solid in 2nd place in the championship, and is even 4th now.
Were these cars seconds faster every lap, as was sometimes the case in the 50's - 80's? No, they're usually just a few tenths faster, and sometimes actually not the fastest car out there. But a great driver is driving it, taking the car to the limit lap after lap, keeping their head cool and not wasting any time on mistakes. The RB7 has often been just 0.2 faster in qualifying, and in some races many considered the McLaren to be the faster car on sunday, but Vettel (pretty much) never set a foot wrong, and dominated because he is able to turn out blistering performances without ever letting down.
That's the difference between a great driver in a great car, and a good/average driver in a great car. The 1997 Williams was so much faster than the Ferrari, but with 'only' a good and an average driver, Schumacher was taking it down to the last race. The 2005 Renault was blisteringly fast, but with a good/average second driver, there was only one Renault dominating. Look at 2009, where alas Barichello again showed he does not have what it takes to make a good car a dominating one. (yes, the RB was often on par/sometimes faster in the second part, but that was way to late for RB)
That consistency in always performing on your top is what enabled Kimi to take the title in 2007 (being more consistent than the McLaren drivers), and that's what will enable any extremely talented driver in the future to 'dominate' given the right circumstances, but that is all down to a driver being ready for it when that chance presents itself, when they find themselves in a car marginally but regularly faster than the rest. While the ability to drive at the top is much down to the car, the ability to dominate is much more so down to the driver. The Ferrari F2002 and F2004 were very fast cars, Schumacher was a dominating driver. The Renault R25 was a very fast car, Alonso was a dominating driver. The Red Bull RB7 is a very fast car, Vettel is a dominating driver.
A dominant car without a dominant driver does not generate dominant results.
Are we seeing a Vettel era?
It very much depends on one's definition of era. If Vettel keeps fighting for the championship for another 5 or so years, or wins two more championships in the next two years, then I'd say yes, but right now, it's too early to say. The basis is laid, but it depends on how it continues from here.
. 