Ponderbox

ADx_Wales · Post by **ADx_Wales** » 24 Nov 2010, 23:42

....once the official F1 Theme Park is ready......

.....

FullMetalJack · Post by **FullMetalJack** » 25 Nov 2010, 18:38

ADx_Wales wrote:....once the official F1 Theme Park is ready......

.....

Surely that means there should a GP circuit in Staffordshire surrounding Alton Towers.

JeanDenisAlcatraz · Post by **JeanDenisAlcatraz** » 25 Nov 2010, 19:04

redbulljack14 wrote:
ADx_Wales wrote:....once the official F1 Theme Park is ready......

.....

Surely that means there should a GP circuit in Staffordshire surrounding Alton Towers.

Bernie likes glitz...right?

Blackpool GP under the illuminations to end the season! It's no more tacky than Abu Dhabi.

ADx_Wales · Post by **ADx_Wales** » 25 Nov 2010, 19:19

JeanDenisAlcatraz wrote:
redbulljack14 wrote:
ADx_Wales wrote:....once the official F1 Theme Park is ready......

.....

Surely that means there should a GP circuit in Staffordshire surrounding Alton Towers.

Bernie likes glitz...right?

Blackpool GP under the illuminations to end the season! It's no more tacky than Abu Dhabi.

this one
and he'res the gallery

AndreaModa · Post by **AndreaModa** » 25 Nov 2010, 20:44

Somehow I highly doubt that's going to be finished by the end of 2010...I bet it's not even been started yet, Dubai is in ruins at the moment with hardly any money available. Their economy is built on tourism and no-one in America or Europe has the megabucks to blow on a holiday to Dubai now.

ADx_Wales · Post by **ADx_Wales** » 26 Nov 2010, 22:42

I want to see HRT complete the 2011 season.

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 26 Nov 2010, 22:54

You know what?

I believe that Force India's 2010 performance was far less impressive than their 2009 heroics.

AndreaModa · Post by **AndreaModa** » 27 Nov 2010, 00:04

Wizzie wrote:You know what?

I believe that Force India's 2010 performance was far less impressive than their 2009 heroics.

I agree! It was dull, boring and quickly forgettable, the complete opposite to the magic of Spa and Monza in 2009.

IdeFan · Post by **IdeFan** » 27 Nov 2010, 00:40

Wizzie wrote:You know what?

I believe that Force India's 2010 performance was far less impressive than their 2009 heroics.

I disagree.

2009 was more exciting and heart warming, but in terms of performance they were far more impressive in 2010. Spa and Monza were the Force's only two points finishes in '09, and given their reletive lack of performance almost everywhere else, it is at least partly down to blind luck that their car worked well there.

In 2010, particularly the first half, they were quick. Even under the 2009 point system, Force India would have scored eight points finishes, and would have ended up with 20 points compared to the 13 for 2009. In addition to being quick, they were quick almost everywhere, from the Tilke-Dromes of Bahrain and Malaysia to the street circuits of Melbourne and Monaco, the VJM03 was a genuinely good car. Unfortunately they proved that they still don't have the technical base to keep up with the likes of Williams and Renault in the development race, but its a vastly improved all round performance.

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 27 Nov 2010, 00:55

IdeFan wrote:
Wizzie wrote:You know what?

I believe that Force India's 2010 performance was far less impressive than their 2009 heroics.

Even under the 2009 point system, Force India would have scored eight points finishes, and would have ended up with 20 points compared to the 13 for 2009.

That's the thing. Even though they scored more points there was very little good publicity coming from it since it was always in the 5th-10th region... infact it was pretty much doom and gloom for Vijay's men in the second half of 2010 with court cases, the technical brain drain, Tonio's continued ineptness and losing 6th in the constructors standings to Williams and everyone was either unable or unwilling to stop the problems.

FullMetalJack · Post by **FullMetalJack** » 27 Nov 2010, 13:18

Wizzie wrote:
IdeFan wrote:
Wizzie wrote:You know what?

I believe that Force India's 2010 performance was far less impressive than their 2009 heroics.

Even under the 2009 point system, Force India would have scored eight points finishes, and would have ended up with 20 points compared to the 13 for 2009.

That's the thing. Even though they scored more points there was very little good publicity coming from it since it was always in the 5th-10th region... infact it was pretty much doom and gloom for Vijay's men in the second half of 2010 with court cases, the technical brain drain, Tonio's continued ineptness and losing 6th in the constructors standings to Williams and everyone was either unable or unwilling to stop the problems.

Even Adrian Sutil couldn't keep it up and score regular points finishes.

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 27 Nov 2010, 19:57

Although Force India's 2009 seemed more impressive, the fact is that theory is just pure apparency, on the back of these factors:
-The fact they're named Force India to begin with.
-Their poor 2008 season.
-How they began being the worst team of the grid last year.
-The fact their two points-scoring finishes were a 2nd and should-have-been victory and a 4th and should-have-been podium, and they scored a pole in Belgium.
But in truth and as a whole Force India has been more impressive this year. First, in 2009 there were only two teams (three after mid-season) in the hunt for victories, while the rest of the field was pretty bunched up. Second, Force India's VJM02 was a very radical car that only worked really well in fast tracks (albeit there are those 4th that would become 8th and 3rd in the grid for Sutil at both Japan and Brazil, though these were achieved in extenuating circumstances). Third, they, as I said, were tail-enders before mid-season. This year, they have achieved a very consistent level of performance (no podiums or poles but a swag of points finishes, especially with Adrian Sutil), and were it not for them dropping their game towards the end of the season, they would have been a solitary 6th in the Constructors Championship. And even more would have been achieved without Vitantonio Liuzzi, arguably. So there. Make of this what you want.

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 03 Dec 2010, 05:26

I don't know about you but I believe that Helio Castroneves' new Shell-Penske livery would look brilliant on an F1 car.

Jeroen Krautmeir · Post by **Jeroen Krautmeir** » 03 Dec 2010, 05:36

Wizzie wrote:I don't know about you but I believe that Helio Castroneves' new Shell-Penske livery would look brilliant on an F1 car.

I prefer Will Power's Verizon one.

midgrid · Post by **midgrid** » 03 Dec 2010, 18:00

Wizzie wrote:I don't know about you but I believe that Helio Castroneves' new Shell-Penske livery would look brilliant on an F1 car.

Looks like a Lola T93/30 to me.

fjackdaw · Post by **fjackdaw** » 06 Dec 2010, 12:35

As someone who loves an interesting and unusual helmet design, I hope Lewis Williamson makes it into F1 sometime soon:

F1000X · Post by **F1000X** » 06 Dec 2010, 20:22

Why wouldn't the FIA give Sebastian Loeb a super licence? He had only won the WRC 6 times in a row. He's raced at Le Mans in an LMP1 car. The FIA are idiots. Here is a man who may truly be the greatest driver of all time, and they won't let him take to the circuit, where he belongs. If he had to do a season in GP2 just to prove himself, would it be worth it? I think the FIA made an extremely poor choice. We will let Jaime Algersuari race because he's got money, but we won't let the guy who's fast in everything he touches. What bullsh*t.

Cynon · Post by **Cynon** » 06 Dec 2010, 20:34

F1000X wrote:Why wouldn't the FIA give Sebastian Loeb a super licence? He had only won the WRC 6 times in a row. He's raced at Le Mans in an LMP1 car. The FIA are idiots. Here is a man who may truly be the greatest driver of all time, and they won't let him take to the circuit, where he belongs.

Wizzie wrote:I don't know about you but I believe that Helio Castroneves' new Shell-Penske livery would look brilliant on an F1 car.

Attention! Renault! That's how you do red, yellow, and white, okay? Okay.

F1000X · Post by **F1000X** » 06 Dec 2010, 20:37

Cynon wrote:
F1000X wrote:Why wouldn't the FIA give Sebastian Loeb a super licence? He had only won the WRC 6 times in a row. He's raced at Le Mans in an LMP1 car. The FIA are idiots. Here is a man who may truly be the greatest driver of all time, and they won't let him take to the circuit, where he belongs.

Care to explain yourself?

Cynon · Post by **Cynon** » 06 Dec 2010, 20:55

How has Loeb done when he's actually had to race against more than six or seven cars? Has his competition been particularly competent (aside from the Le Mans venture)? Yes, he might be the greatest WRC driver of all time, but to say he's the greatest driver of all time is ridiculous. I might as well say Funny Car driver John Force or Steve Kinser deserves that title because between them they've won something like 35 championships, but I don't think either had the greatest competition available either.

F1000X · Post by **F1000X** » 06 Dec 2010, 21:30

Cynon wrote:How has Loeb done when he's actually had to race against more than six or seven cars? Has his competition been particularly competent (aside from the Le Mans venture)? Yes, he might be the greatest WRC driver of all time, but to say he's the greatest driver of all time is ridiculous. I might as well say Funny Car driver John Force or Steve Kinser deserves that title because between them they've won something like 35 championships, but I don't think either had the greatest competition available either.

No, I'm sorry, you can't make the argument John Force is the greatest driver ever, because you know just as well as I do drag racing is as much if not more a competition of engineering and not driving skill, and thats all John Force does. Kinser is another story. That aside, they are both great at what they do, but not the greatest.

Loeb is different. Have a read, and keep in mind he hasn't extensive practice for any of this. http://www.wrc.com/news/loeb-and-sordo-take-to-the-race-track/?fid=13873
If you still think he doesn't have a shot at it, watch this. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5686304066311959979#

And he's won the race of champions 3 times.

watka · Post by **watka** » 06 Dec 2010, 21:52

Michael isn't even necessarily the best Schumacher in motor sports: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Wo3ohXG ... re=related

Post by **mario** » 06 Dec 2010, 22:07

Cynon wrote:How has Loeb done when he's actually had to race against more than six or seven cars? Has his competition been particularly competent (aside from the Le Mans venture)? Yes, he might be the greatest WRC driver of all time, but to say he's the greatest driver of all time is ridiculous. I might as well say Funny Car driver John Force or Steve Kinser deserves that title because between them they've won something like 35 championships, but I don't think either had the greatest competition available either.

When taking part in closed circuit racing, Loeb has shown that he wasn't too shabby - at Le Mans, in 2005 he was part of the Pescarolo team, and was at least as quick as his team mates in the hybrid C60 LMP1 car, although the car was hit by repeated technical problems and was eventually retired from the race. In 2006, again driving a hybrid C60 for the Pescarolo Sport works outfit, he was pretty fast and his team eventually finished in 2nd place, four laps down on the winning Audi R10, but nine laps up on the second works R10. Connected to this are the post season tests that he did for Red Bull at the end of 2008 - although about a second off Coulthard, he impressed the Red Bull team with his consistency, and was improving as the session went on.

However, with regards his success in rallying, in recent years the competition has been a little muted at times - whilst in the earlier years, there were a much wider range of competitors, over the past few years, the number of manufacturers has dropped significantly, as have the number of competitive drivers. This year was particularly dire in that respect - there were only two works teams (Citroen and Ford), with Citroen having a clear advantage, and to be honest, in recent years Citroen have generally had the best car. How Loeb will do next year, since the regulations have changed significantly and Citroen may no longer have the upper hand, is still unclear.

So, in terms of closed circuit racing, he does seem to be reasonably competitive, based on his forays at Le Mans, although there isn't a conclusive amount of evidence to access his skills as a closed circuit racing driver.

As to why Loeb was not given a Super Licence, that was never quite made clear. Traditionally, you have had to hold a Grade A competition licence, and be a high placed finisher or the champion elect in a lower open wheeled series, like GP2, Formula 3 or the Indy Car Series. Alternatively, if the driver does not quite match that specification, they can still be given a licence if the other teams unanimously agree to it, and the driver in question has covered at least 300km in testing mileage.
Now, Red Bull were hoping that Loeb would be eligible under the latter option, hence the post season tests in 2008, and there is a precedent - Kimi Raikkonen famously received a Super Licence under that clause, as I believe that initially he was ineligible (Formula Renault 2000 isn't the highest Formula Renault Series, and technically below that of Formula 3, normally considered the lowest series at which one can earn a Super Licence).

However, it seems that the FIA struck Loeb's application down because Loeb had not driven in any other open wheeled series, and therefore considered him too inexperienced to compete in Formula 1, even though Loeb went on to test a GP2 car in an attempt to prove that he was capable of making the switch. After all, there was a huge fuss when Kimi first drove, as most observers, and even Mox Mosely, thought that he was far too inexperienced, having only driven 23 competitive open wheeler races at that point. Even though he is highly regarded, I imagine that most rival teams would have been concerned about letting somebody who would have been a complete novice in open wheelers loose in a Formula 1 car, and if the FIA hadn't turned down the application, I suspect that one or other of the teams might have voted against giving him a Super Licence.

F1000X · Post by **F1000X** » 06 Dec 2010, 22:22

watka wrote:Michael isn't even necessarily the best Schumacher in motor sports: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Wo3ohXG ... re=related

They are loosely related, actually.

Cynon · Post by **Cynon** » 07 Dec 2010, 16:42

F1000X wrote:
Cynon wrote:How has Loeb done when he's actually had to race against more than six or seven cars? Has his competition been particularly competent (aside from the Le Mans venture)? Yes, he might be the greatest WRC driver of all time, but to say he's the greatest driver of all time is ridiculous. I might as well say Funny Car driver John Force or Steve Kinser deserves that title because between them they've won something like 35 championships, but I don't think either had the greatest competition available either.

No, I'm sorry, you can't make the argument John Force is the greatest driver ever, because you know just as well as I do drag racing is as much if not more a competition of engineering and not driving skill, and thats all John Force does. Kinser is another story. That aside, they are both great at what they do, but not the greatest.

Loeb is different. Have a read, and keep in mind he hasn't extensive practice for any of this. http://www.wrc.com/news/loeb-and-sordo-take-to-the-race-track/?fid=13873
If you still think he doesn't have a shot at it, watch this. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5686304066311959979#

And he's won the race of champions 3 times.

I'm not arguing Loeb isn't the god of rallying.

I don't think John Force is that great either, I'm just using him as an arguing point. Steve Kinser is definitely another story. If you leave out how shite he was in NASCAR and how wonderfully rejectful he was in the 1997 Indy 500. Honestly, if you were to ask me, the greatest driver of all time would probably be either Mario Andretti or A.J. Foyt.

I don't hold the Race of Champions that highly because I think there are a lot of drivers that don't get invited that should get invited and a few who do that shouldn't have had a chance at it (but if they would actually invite Jimmie Johnson some more so he can fail epically I would love it), and I only held IROC highly when someone not a NASCAR driver was winning.

Come to think of it, Rick Mears came from a rallying background and I think we all (should) know how his career went. Personally I think Loeb should make a move to IndyCar if he can't get an F1 seat, see how he fares over there.

JohnMLTX · Post by **JohnMLTX** » 07 Dec 2010, 18:24

Greates driver of all time: Graham Hill.
No one else has won the world championship, the monaco grand prix, the indy 500, and le mans.
Or been nearly as classy doing any of those things.

Salamander · Post by **Salamander** » 07 Dec 2010, 19:29

Personally I always thought Jim Clark was the greatest driver of all time.

F1000X · Post by **F1000X** » 07 Dec 2010, 19:53

Cynon wrote:I'm not arguing Loeb isn't the god of rallying.

I don't think John Force is that great either, I'm just using him as an arguing point. Steve Kinser is definitely another story. If you leave out how shite he was in NASCAR and how wonderfully rejectful he was in the 1997 Indy 500. Honestly, if you were to ask me, the greatest driver of all time would probably be either Mario Andretti or A.J. Foyt.

I don't hold the Race of Champions that highly because I think there are a lot of drivers that don't get invited that should get invited and a few who do that shouldn't have had a chance at it (but if they would actually invite Jimmie Johnson some more so he can fail epically I would love it), and I only held IROC highly when someone not a NASCAR driver was winning.

Come to think of it, Rick Mears came from a rallying background and I think we all (should) know how his career went. Personally I think Loeb should make a move to IndyCar if he can't get an F1 seat, see how he fares over there.

Rick Mears, now there's a man everybody should love.

I can respect your choice of Andretti or Foyt, they certainly have a history of success across enough categories of racing to make themselves eligible.

I HATE JIMMY JOHNSON SO MUCH.

Loeb in an Indycar would be interesting to watch, but I can't see it happening. I just don't see why he'd want to relocate to the United States and race on ovals, unless he thought he could dominate and/or land him a seat in F1 shortly thereafter.

Post by **mario** » 07 Dec 2010, 19:58

JohnMLTX wrote:Greates driver of all time: Graham Hill.
No one else has won the world championship, the monaco grand prix, the indy 500, and le mans.
Or been nearly as classy doing any of those things.

Just going on pure results, then, logically you would rank Jacques Villeneuve second, based on the fact that he has won the F1 WDC, the Indy 500 and 2nd at Le Mans. However, were you to do that, I suspect that there would be many who would vocally criticise you for that decision...
By the way, that is not to say that Graham Hill was not a good driver - he most certainly was, although I might just be inclined to say that his great rival and best friend, Jim Clark, might have had the edge on him. Speaking of which:

BlindCaveSalamander wrote:Personally I always thought Jim Clark was the greatest driver of all time.

I do feel that Clark has been undeservedly underrated as a driver - twice winner of the Indy 500, twice the WDC (which could easily have been at least four but for reliability problems) and 3rd at the 1960 Le Mans, and a BTCC champion, he earned a very strong and deserved reputation as one of the most versatile drivers ever. He even once drove the trucks used to transport the cars from one race to another (with the regular driver saying that he has never seen anybody drive a truck as delicately, or with such finesse, as Clark did) - I can't exactly imagine any of the current drivers wanting to do that.

All that, and yet he was an incredibly humble gentleman - this is a man whose epitaph accredits him firstly as a farmer, and only after that does it list his achievements in F1 and the Indy 500.

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 07 Dec 2010, 21:52

Agree. Either Jim Clark or Juan Manuel Fangio (even though Fangio never won in Le Mans or in Indianapolis).

Aerospeed · Post by **Aerospeed** » 07 Dec 2010, 22:32

According to Franchitti, who I rarely care for, Di Resta is better than Vettel.

No offence, but being that Di Resta and Franchitti are cousins, I think this statement is biased.

Post by **mario** » 08 Dec 2010, 00:05

Phoenix wrote:Agree. Either Jim Clark or Juan Manuel Fangio (even though Fangio never won in Le Mans or in Indianapolis).

Had Paul Levegh not crashed at the 1955 Le Mans, resulting in Mercedes pulling out of the race, there is a good chance that Fangio could, along with Moss (who was his team mate for the race) could have won the race. At the time, Fangio and Moss had a one lap lead, and out of Jaguar's drivers, only Hawthorn was capable of keeping up the same sort of pace that the Mercedes team could manage.

Curiously, it seems that Fangio did once enter the Indianapolis 500 in 1958 - he is listed as an official entrant, http://www.statsf1.com/en/1958/indianap ... gages.aspx but it seems that he failed to qualify (perhaps not a bad thing, considering that there was a major accident which cost one driver, O'Connor, his life, and injured several others).

JeremyMcClean wrote:According to Franchitti, who I rarely care for, Di Resta is better than Vettel.

No offence, but being that Di Resta and Franchitti are cousins, I think this statement is biased.

Of course, you would expect that Franchitti would be biased towards his cousin, so the statement should be taken with a pinch of salt. Franchitti's main point is that Di Resta was capable of beating Vettel in the Formula 3 Euroseries in 2006 when equipped with the same car and within the same team, so his comments are not totally without foundation. Still, as I've said elsewhere, although the veracity of Franchitti's statement is in question, Di Resta has performed well in his tests for Force India during the season, and post season in Abu Dhabi, so I would be inclined to give him a go if I was in charge of Force India.

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 08 Dec 2010, 23:26

I think you mean Pierre Levegh, but that's not the point. It would have been nice to see Fangio winning in Le Mans, shame it never get to happen. And it would have been interesting to see him try running the 500 while he was at his prime as a racing driver to see how he would have performed.

Post by **mario** » 09 Dec 2010, 00:05

Phoenix wrote:I think you mean Pierre Levegh, but that's not the point. It would have been nice to see Fangio winning in Le Mans, shame it never get to happen. And it would have been interesting to see him try running the 500 while he was at his prime as a racing driver to see how he would have performed.

You're right - for some strange reason, probably due to it being quite late, I appear to have translated Lavegh's first name into English (I believe that Pierre translates into English as Paul, although I might be wrong on that too). Still, the point is that in that particular race, the Fangio - Moss line up was probably the strongest driver pairing in the field, the car that they had at their disposal was quite competitive, and they happened to have eked out a narrow lead over their rivals at Jaguar before Mercedes chose to withdraw. Had Levegh not crashed, and the race proceeded normally, there is a good chance that Fangio and Moss would have gone on to win that year - and, moreover, Mercedes probably would have stayed in Formula 1 for a lot longer, leading to a very different post war motorsport scenario.

As for the Indy 500, again that would have been a quite interesting proposition if he had driven there at the beginning and not towards the end of the 50's. After all, he was 47 at the time he entered, and although it was common for drivers to continue racing until into their mid forties at the time (as was the case until the 1960's and even into the 1970's), even the fittest of men (and for all of his achievements, Fangio wasn't always the trimmest individual, to put it kindly) can't always fight off the effects of time and age.
Whether he would have been able to do well is hard to say - he was adaptable, but oval racing would be quite different to what he was used to, and requires a quite different set of skills compared to other forms of motorsport. Getting adjusted to the Offy engine and handling peculiarities of the Indy cars of the time would have taken some time too, which is something that Fangio might not have had available to him. Still, it's fun to speculate...

Phoenix · Post by **Phoenix** » 09 Dec 2010, 00:14

mario wrote:
Phoenix wrote:I think you mean Pierre Levegh, but that's not the point. It would have been nice to see Fangio winning in Le Mans, shame it never get to happen. And it would have been interesting to see him try running the 500 while he was at his prime as a racing driver to see how he would have performed.

You're right - for some strange reason, probably due to it being quite late, I appear to have translated Lavegh's first name into English (I believe that Pierre translates into English as Paul, although I might be wrong on that too). Still, the point is that in that particular race, the Fangio - Moss line up was probably the strongest driver pairing in the field, the car that they had at their disposal was quite competitive, and they happened to have eked out a narrow lead over their rivals at Jaguar before Mercedes chose to withdraw. Had Levegh not crashed, and the race proceeded normally, there is a good chance that Fangio and Moss would have gone on to win that year - and, moreover, Mercedes probably would have stayed in Formula 1 for a lot longer, leading to a very different post war motorsport scenario.

As for the Indy 500, again that would have been a quite interesting proposition if he had driven there at the beginning and not towards the end of the 50's. After all, he was 47 at the time he entered, and although it was common for drivers to continue racing until into their mid forties at the time (as was the case until the 1960's and even into the 1970's), even the fittest of men (and for all of his achievements, Fangio wasn't always the trimmest individual, to put it kindly) can't always fight off the effects of time and age.
Whether he would have been able to do well is hard to say - he was adaptable, but oval racing would be quite different to what he was used to, and requires a quite different set of skills compared to other forms of motorsport. Getting adjusted to the Offy engine and handling peculiarities of the Indy cars of the time would have taken some time too, which is something that Fangio might not have had available to him. Still, it's fun to speculate...

I'm now remembering Alberto Ascari's attempt at the 500 at the peak of his career, in 1952, but he was driving an specially built Ferrari 500 (the only time Ferrari has tried to run in the 500) and maybe his lacklustre actuation can be partly blamed to that...

thehemogoblin · Post by **thehemogoblin** » 09 Dec 2010, 10:10

mario wrote:
Phoenix wrote:I think you mean Pierre Levegh, but that's not the point. It would have been nice to see Fangio winning in Le Mans, shame it never get to happen. And it would have been interesting to see him try running the 500 while he was at his prime as a racing driver to see how he would have performed.

You're right - for some strange reason, probably due to it being quite late, I appear to have translated Lavegh's first name into English (I believe that Pierre translates into English as Paul, although I might be wrong on that too). Still, the point is that in that particular race, the Fangio - Moss line up was probably the strongest driver pairing in the field, the car that they had at their disposal was quite competitive, and they happened to have eked out a narrow lead over their rivals at Jaguar before Mercedes chose to withdraw. Had Levegh not crashed, and the race proceeded normally, there is a good chance that Fangio and Moss would have gone on to win that year - and, moreover, Mercedes probably would have stayed in Formula 1 for a lot longer, leading to a very different post war motorsport scenario.

As for the Indy 500, again that would have been a quite interesting proposition if he had driven there at the beginning and not towards the end of the 50's. After all, he was 47 at the time he entered, and although it was common for drivers to continue racing until into their mid forties at the time (as was the case until the 1960's and even into the 1970's), even the fittest of men (and for all of his achievements, Fangio wasn't always the trimmest individual, to put it kindly) can't always fight off the effects of time and age.
Whether he would have been able to do well is hard to say - he was adaptable, but oval racing would be quite different to what he was used to, and requires a quite different set of skills compared to other forms of motorsport. Getting adjusted to the Offy engine and handling peculiarities of the Indy cars of the time would have taken some time too, which is something that Fangio might not have had available to him. Still, it's fun to speculate...

Paul --> Paul

Pierre --> Peter

And old drivers are still successful in NASCAR to this day, and I think the cars there are far more of a fitness challenge than driving a Formula One car. I think the F1 cars are definitely more of a reflex challenge, however.

I don't know what Fangio would have done if he were forced to drive 500 miles by himself. After all, didn't he split a decent number of drives in his career as it was?

RAK · Post by **RAK** » 09 Dec 2010, 20:50

mario wrote:
Phoenix wrote:I think you mean Pierre Levegh, but that's not the point. It would have been nice to see Fangio winning in Le Mans, shame it never get to happen. And it would have been interesting to see him try running the 500 while he was at his prime as a racing driver to see how he would have performed.

You're right - for some strange reason, probably due to it being quite late, I appear to have translated Lavegh's first name into English (I believe that Pierre translates into English as Paul, although I might be wrong on that too). Still, the point is that in that particular race, the Fangio - Moss line up was probably the strongest driver pairing in the field, the car that they had at their disposal was quite competitive, and they happened to have eked out a narrow lead over their rivals at Jaguar before Mercedes chose to withdraw. Had Levegh not crashed, and the race proceeded normally, there is a good chance that Fangio and Moss would have gone on to win that year - and, moreover, Mercedes probably would have stayed in Formula 1 for a lot longer, leading to a very different post war motorsport scenario.

There was a show on the BBC quite a while back, dealing with the 1955 Le Mans disaster - apparently, Jaguar's strategy was to get Hawthorn to basically wring everything he could out of his car in order to make the Mercedes team respond likewise. The straight-six engines in the Jaguars were proven technology in long-distance racing, unlike the Mercedes straight-eight. If I'm not mistaken, the longer crankshafts of straight-eights make them more prone to breakage anyway, due to vibrational stresses, and the camshaft and gearbox in the W196 and 300SLR were run from the middle of the crankshaft.

Clearly, Bueb wasn't a match for Hawthorn, Fangio or Moss, but it would have been interesting to see whether the Mercedes engine, Formula One-worthy as it was, could take the stress of another twenty hours of racing.

F1000X · Post by **F1000X** » 10 Dec 2010, 04:03

What if Button had gone to Williams?

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 10 Dec 2010, 05:17

F1000X wrote:What if Button had gone to Williams?

Well for starters Nico Rosberg would have made his debut a year later, Takuma Sato would have been at Honda and Super Aguri would never have left the drawing board... maybe Rubens Barrichello would have finally become a World Champion in 2009 and retired on the spot...

TomWazzleshaw · Post by **TomWazzleshaw** » 10 Dec 2010, 05:26

Before I forget I have another question for you all:

Why was Robert Kubica so crap for the first half of 2009? (And this is coming from someone who's been a fan of Kubica since 2006)