FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Big Azza]

No way its 50-50.

Regarding the earlier questions about Alonso in a HRT. He did very well in a Minardi. Vettel did quite a bit for Toro Rosso. Early on his team mate was at the back-end of the field (and so was Vettel for his first 4 races) but then come Fuji and he could have - should have - finished on the podium. The car does not pick the line when overtaking. The car does not pick the strategy. The car does not make the call when variable conditions arise.

You're talking about specific races. Not "sustainable" performance. If it were anywhere near 50-50, those uber drivers would have gotten the same crappy cars into the good pts on at least 50% of the races.

"The car does not pick the strategy... make the call when variable conditions"
Neither does the driver. There's a ton of guys plus some computers working on that.

Some drivers are faster than others.
Some drivers' mothers are faster than other drivers' mothers.

OK point taken, I'll stick by my 70/30 then.

[bud]

Good car is easier to setup, Comparing Seb to Mark this year just shows Marks below par not Vettels putting the car where it shouldn't be. Last season Mark out qualified Seb many a time, he is just struggling with the new tyres.
Guarantee an Alonso or Hamilton in the RB7 would be doing just as good or not better a job as Seb. Today's day and age the realistic car/driver percentage would be 90 % car 10% driver.

[What's Burning?]

Good car is easier to setup, Comparing Seb to Mark this year just shows Marks below par not Vettels putting the car where it shouldn't be. Last season Mark out qualified Seb many a time, he is just struggling with the new tyres.
Guarantee an Alonso or Hamilton in the RB7 would be doing just as good or not better a job as Seb. Today's day and age the realistic car/driver percentage would be 90 % car 10% driver.

I think that's a stretch, but then again we'd be arguing about a 10 or 20% delta.. not huge in real world numbers.

[myownalias]

Good car is easier to setup, Comparing Seb to Mark this year just shows Marks below par not Vettels putting the car where it shouldn't be. Last season Mark out qualified Seb many a time, he is just struggling with the new tyres.
Guarantee an Alonso or Hamilton in the RB7 would be doing just as good or not better a job as Seb. Today's day and age the realistic car/driver percentage would be 90 % car 10% driver.

Arguing percentages really doesn't make sense; we also have to consider the difference in cars; for example driving a Red Bull is easy compared to driving a HRT or Virgin, you could argue it's 60/40 in favour of the driver, these drivers have to work much harder in a HRT to go 6 -7 seconds slower than the Red Bull drivers!

[bud]

But the difference is measured in the lap times. If a driver is doing 60% in an Hispania and a guy in a Redbull is doing 10% then the the guy in the HRT guy is the better driver I'd say. They are both giving the same amount of effort, the difference in the lap times comes to the cars differences.

[What's Burning?]

Good car is easier to setup, Comparing Seb to Mark this year just shows Marks below par not Vettels putting the car where it shouldn't be. Last season Mark out qualified Seb many a time, he is just struggling with the new tyres.
Guarantee an Alonso or Hamilton in the RB7 would be doing just as good or not better a job as Seb. Today's day and age the realistic car/driver percentage would be 90 % car 10% driver.

Arguing percentages really doesn't make sense; we also have to consider the difference in cars; for example driving a Red Bull is easy compared to driving a HRT or Virgin, you could argue it's 60/40 in favour of the driver, these drivers have to work much harder in a HRT to go 6 -7 seconds slower than the Red Bull drivers!

You could argue that, but that's not the real argument is it? The question is ultimately to compare the value of what a good driver brings to the performance of any car, not just a good one. By doing that, you'd also say that an HRT driver has the luxury of approximately 6 or 7 seconds of additional time added to making critical on track decisions.

[myownalias]

But the difference is measured in the lap times. If a driver is doing 60% in an Hispania and a guy in a Redbull is doing 10% then the the guy in the HRT guy is the better driver I'd say. They are both giving the same amount of effort, the difference in the lap times comes to the cars differences.

I don't agree that the RB driver are putting in the same effort; we don't see Vettel or Webber sawing away at the wheel that often to keep everything pointing forwards like a HRT driver would do; I'm not saying that one driver is better than another, Ricciardo and Webber might have the same level of talent but HRT doesn't almost drive itself like the RB!

You could argue that, but that's not the real argument is it? The question is ultimately to compare the value of what a good driver brings to the performance of any car, not just a good one. By doing that, you'd also say that an HRT driver has the luxury of approximately 6 or 7 seconds of additional time added to making critical on track decisions.

Stop with the logical thinking, it's against forum rules...

[bud]

No car drives itself, not even the RedBull!
what I'm saying is both sets of drivers are giving 100%. now in the athletic field your advantage over your opponent comes down to talent, in motorsport it's not so easy to judge. The fact is a lap from Seb is 4 seconds faster than Daniel is down to the car difference. Neither is driving above their cars performance in both cases it's 90/10 for if it were closer to 50/50 or 60/40 then we'd see no car advantages among the field.

[What's Burning?]

No car drives itself, not even the RedBull!
what I'm saying is both sets of drivers are giving 100%. now in the athletic field your advantage over your opponent comes down to talent, in motorsport it's not so easy to judge. The fact is a lap from Seb is 4 seconds faster than Daniel is down to the car difference. Neither is driving above their cars performance in both cases it's 90/10 for if it were closer to 50/50 or 60/40 then we'd see no car advantages among the field.

That's flawed though, or we'd see little to no difference all the time in a team's driver pairing so clearly drivers bring something to the table. If I drove an F1 car I'd give it my 100% as well... I promise, but that wouldn't put me into Q3.

[darwin dali]

But the difference is measured in the lap times. If a driver is doing 60% in an Hispania and a guy in a Redbull is doing 10% then the the guy in the HRT guy is the better driver I'd say. They are both giving the same amount of effort, the difference in the lap times comes to the cars differences.

I don't agree that the RB driver are putting in the same effort; we don't see Vettel or Webber sawing away at the wheel that often to keep everything pointing forwards like a HRT driver would do; I'm not saying that one driver is better than another, Ricciardo and Webber might have the same level of talent but HRT doesn't almost drive itself like the RB!

A not so crafty driver could set up a good car quite badly and not get the performance out of it. So, it's the car (designer and all), but also the driver setting it up properly (which should count towards the driver's percentage) and then the driver's race craft - and we know that there are quite a few of them who crash or do other stupid stuff while others rarely put a wheel wrong (obviously counts towards driver's percentage).

[What's Burning?]

But the difference is measured in the lap times. If a driver is doing 60% in an Hispania and a guy in a Redbull is doing 10% then the the guy in the HRT guy is the better driver I'd say. They are both giving the same amount of effort, the difference in the lap times comes to the cars differences.

I don't agree that the RB driver are putting in the same effort; we don't see Vettel or Webber sawing away at the wheel that often to keep everything pointing forwards like a HRT driver would do; I'm not saying that one driver is better than another, Ricciardo and Webber might have the same level of talent but HRT doesn't almost drive itself like the RB!

A not so crafty driver could set up a good car quite badly and not get the performance out of it. So, it's the car (designer and all), but also the driver setting it up properly (which should count towards the driver's percentage) and then the driver's race craft - and we know that there are quite a few of them who crash or do other stupid stuff while others rarely put a wheel wrong (obviously counts towards driver's percentage).

We're discussing Q since there are FAR too many variable come race day.

[bud]

No car drives itself, not even the RedBull!
what I'm saying is both sets of drivers are giving 100%. now in the athletic field your advantage over your opponent comes down to talent, in motorsport it's not so easy to judge. The fact is a lap from Seb is 4 seconds faster than Daniel is down to the car difference. Neither is driving above their cars performance in both cases it's 90/10 for if it were closer to 50/50 or 60/40 then we'd see no car advantages among the field.

That's flawed though, or we'd see little to no difference all the time in a team's driver pairing so clearly drivers bring something to the table. If I drove an F1 car I'd give it my 100% as well... I promise, but that wouldn't put me into Q3.

The difference lies in that 10% they say in motorsport it's always that 2 tenths that is hard to get, 1% is all it takes to win in this game especially in a field of drivers F1 has.

[Jabberwocky]

I think it depends if we are talking about F1 drivers or normal road users?!?! I assume we are talking F1 drivers.

The only way I can think is to compare 2 F1 drivers, one who is good and one that is bad (by F1 standards) so 2009 European Grand Prix.

Qualifying

Kimi - 1:38.843
Badoer - 1:41.413

That means Badoers time was 3% slower than Kimi. I know that this is not a complely fair comparisson, but it shows that 70/30 ratios are well off spectrum. I would say (if we are going for multiples of 5)

95% car to 5% driver

[acosmichippo]

I think it depends if we are talking about F1 drivers or normal road users?!?! I assume we are talking F1 drivers.

The only way I can think is to compare 2 F1 drivers, one who is good and one that is bad (by F1 standards) so 2009 European Grand Prix.

Qualifying

Kimi - 1:38.843
Badoer - 1:41.413

That means Badoers time was 3% slower than Kimi. I know that this is not a complely fair comparisson, but it shows that 70/30 ratios are well off spectrum. I would say (if we are going for multiples of 5)

95% car to 5% driver

But you're comparing the difference in Q time to the WHOLE lap, which is not accurate. The data needs to be "normalized" against some kind of baseline before you make comparisons like that.

In other words, it's not possible for the fastest car with the fastest driver to get a 0:00.0 lap time.

[Jabberwocky]

I am just saying that the difference a driver can make (I choose Kimi and Luca, because that is the biggest difference in drivers ability that I could think of in the same car)

People are saying that a driver can make 30% of how fast a car is where I have just shown that a driver will make a lot less difference than that. If a driver could make almost 1/3 of a cars speed. that would mean that if Luca was 30% slower than Kimi his Q time would of been, 2:08.486 which it was not.