Gilles Villeneuve

[Andres125sx]

Well, this thread goes about Gilles and if he was as good as his legend.

So people was describing his point of view, some of us pointed the Dijon battle as a good example of how competitive and clean driver he was, and they you entered saying this

Villeneuve pushes Arnoux off twice during it, once successfully, once they bang wheels, and Villeneuve comes off worse.

What is false as I proved, no driver will ever try to push off any car at his inside, but you ignored it, and then continued saying this...

For me, there's no question, the recent battle at Bahrain easily surpassed the battle at Dijon.

In my book that´s trying to put down Dijon battle and Gilles. The discussion was not if that was the best battle ever, in that case I would agree with you. But the discussion was if Gilles was really great or not, so it actually doesn´t matter at all if there have been better battles or not. If that was a good battle that shows Gilles talent that´s more than enough for the point of this thread, but you insisted to put it down, and repeteadly

And not very kindly exactly...

Have you actually watched that battle?

Villeneuve pushes Arnoux off twice during it, once successfully, once they bang wheels, and Villeneuve comes off worse.

And then ignoring my reply where I did explain how wrong your statement was... then you changed your argumentation to talk about current tight tracks, I replied that too and you again ignored it...

Sorry but IMHO it´s you who lost perspective here, you´ve been trying to dismish this battle from the beginning and trying to be polite now doesn´t change your first replies on this thread....

[Andres125sx]

Thanks guys, I will add though, because the cars are easier/harder to drive shouldn't make a difference to how good the drivers are. You shouldn't call current driver poor or lesser because they drive better cars.

I think old cars with low grip where a lot easier to control than current cars with tons of grip. The higher the grip, the harder to control an slide.

Driving at the limit with old cars with low grip must be a breeze compared to driving at the limit with current cars with tons of downforce, sticky tires, etc.

If you don´t need to push hard then no, as higher grip makes the car to go on rails (see Vettel last seassons), but if you need to push hard and go to the limit, any slide will be a lot harder to control now than 40 years ago.

[timbo]

I think old cars with low grip where a lot easier to control than current cars with tons of grip. The higher the grip, the harder to control an slide.

Driving at the limit with old cars with low grip must be a breeze compared to driving at the limit with current cars with tons of downforce, sticky tires, etc.

If you don´t need to push hard then no, as higher grip makes the car to go on rails (see Vettel last seassons), but if you need to push hard and go to the limit, any slide will be a lot harder to control now than 40 years ago.

No power steering, manual gearbox, turbo-lag measuring seconds? Yeah, the cars must have been a breeze to drive.

I'm always defending current drivers and I'm always saying that the skillset required is different and can't be directly compared with older cars but IMO you're way way off the mark with your assertion here.

[NathanOlder]

just on power steering, the old cars didnt have it so physically they were tough cars to drive, but physically the likes of Moss, Fangio Ascari are nowhere near the likes of the current drivers. The current drivers are just muscle and power. Drivers now are more like Ball sport athletes. So the old cars were nowhere near as hard physically to drive. Today its the G-Forces that must be hard to deal with. Every fast corner, every braking zone, every lap.
Drivers today can compete to a high level in marathons and other sporting events. There is no way on earth the likes of Fangio and Co could have done the same. So physically todays cars are harder to drive.

[timbo]

just on power steering, the old cars didnt have it so physically they were tough cars to drive, but physically the likes of Moss, Fangio Ascari are nowhere near the likes of the current drivers. The current drivers are just muscle and power. Drivers now are more like Ball sport athletes. So the old cars were nowhere near as hard physically to drive. Today its the G-Forces that must be hard to deal with. Every fast corner, every braking zone, every lap.
Drivers today can compete to a high level in marathons and other sporting events. There is no way on earth the likes of Fangio and Co could have done the same. So physically todays cars are harder to drive.

Apples and oranges. You compare stamina to force. Modern cars are not harder to drive. They are different/

[NathanOlder]

Current drivers have more force and stamina.

[timbo]

Current drivers have more force and stamina.

So, you argue Guttierez has more force than Fangio?

[beelsebob]

Current drivers have more force and stamina.

So, you argue Guttierez has more force than Fangio?

Yes. That really is the kind of factual thing that it's very hard to argue with. Modern F1 drivers are far far far fitter even than drivers from the 80s, let alone the 50s. Schumacher woke the field up to the fact that you needed to be fit. He was the first driver who could actually drive a full race flat out, qualifying lap after qualifying lap. That wasn't even true of Prost and Senna, let alone Fangio.

[timbo]

Current drivers have more force and stamina.

So, you argue Guttierez has more force than Fangio?

Yes. That really is the kind of factual thing that it's very hard to argue with. Modern F1 drivers are far far far fitter even than drivers from the 80s, let alone the 50s. Schumacher woke the field up to the fact that you needed to be fit. He was the first driver who could actually drive a full race flat out, qualifying lap after qualifying lap. That wasn't even true of Prost and Senna, let alone Fangio.

Once again, I'm not talking about fitness. I'm talking about pure muscle strength. The cyclist might look more fit than powerlifter but he wouldn't be able to lift the same weight.
And if you heard anything about German GP 1957 you would not say Fangio wasn't able to drive the whole race flat out.

[Andres125sx]

No power steering

That does not add any complexity to the driving, you just get more tired

manual gearbox

Yes that added some difficulty, but not much more than what they do today changing differential settings, brake bias, ERS settings, mappings....

Today they need to be a lot more focused on the hugh list of settings they have to continuously change, so I´d say it must be quite similar

turbo-lag measuring seconds?

Well, that was just some seassons, we were talking about differences between todays drivers and old drivers. I don´t think you can consider turbo engines as the usual for old drivers, turbo engines were used since the 80 and were banned for the 89 seasson, so only 9 seassons, and first seassons only some teams used turbo engines

When used, yes, that actually added a lot of complexity, but turbo engines cannot be considered the usual engines for old drivers, because they´re not

Yeah, the cars must have been a breeze to drive.

I´m not sure what´s your experience driving, but the grip is the biggest factor that determines how dificult a slide will be to control, and by far. Controlling a slide when raining is quite easy. Controlling a slide on dry tarmac is a lot more difficult. It´s always been this way, nothing new, so if old cars had lower grip, they were easier to control. Rule of thumb nº1 for anything with an engine and wheels, the reason people like myself enjoy driving on the wet and love to go to a big parking zone when snowing to do some spins. The difficulty to control a car decreases with the grip. This is valid even for bikes

Also speed is another hugh factor to control an slide. The fastest you go, the harder to control. You need to react quicker to control a slide at high speed, and your movements need to be a lot more precise, so the faster the cars go from seasson to seasson makes them harder to control

The development in tires, suspensions, downforce... any development increasing cornering speeds make the car harder to control

Just the tires evolution must be night and day difference. With old tires the grip was so low they were sliding continuously, that was the pre-aerodynamics driving technique. Once they started using ailerons they stopped sliding (so much).Today any slide is a scare because they can spin much easier, they´re much more difficult to control

IMO of course

[NathanOlder]

So, you argue Guttierez has more force than Fangio?

I dont know exactly what the fitness regimes were for drivers in the 50's but I guarantee the work the drivers put in now is on a different planet compared to the guys from the 50s 60s 70s and maybe even 80's. The upper body work these guys do today is unreal. Today they are finely tuned athletes. 60 years ago it was more of a hobby.
As for Gutierez, I would say he will be physically stronger than Fangio in any way.

Its no different to other sports. Example, David Haye would destroy Ali if we had a time machine.
or Example 2, Danny Welbeck would run rings round George Best. Same goes for every sport IMO

[timbo]

No power steering

That does not add any complexity to the driving, you just get more tired

That won't make it easier.

manual gearbox

Yes that added some difficulty, but not much more than what they do today changing differential settings, brake bias, ERS settings, mappings....

Today they need to be a lot more focused on the hugh list of settings they have to continuously change, so I´d say it must be quite similar

That's a different level of difficulty. Drivers today do control a lot different things, but they don't have to do it all at the same time while braking and cornering. Modern drivers dial things on straights when they can spare time to do so. And older cars did have adjustmets too -- brake bias, anti-roll bar, fuel mixture were not uncommon.
It's not something out of this world to master heal and toe, but to do it FAST for the entire race is a real skill. And there is always a risk to put a wrong gear, which is impossible today. There's also some tricks in the driving technique like putting too low a gear deliberately to spin up rears on entry.

turbo-lag measuring seconds?

Well, that was just some seassons, we were talking about differences between todays drivers and old drivers. I don´t think you can consider turbo engines as the usual for old drivers, turbo engines were used since the 80 and were banned for the 89 seasson, so only 9 seassons, and first seassons only some teams used turbo engines

When used, yes, that actually added a lot of complexity, but turbo engines cannot be considered the usual engines for old drivers, because they´re not

We were talking about Villeneuve, and some of the most impressive drives he did was in 126CK with horrible driveability.
And even without turbo, without engine mappings many athmo engines were having wild character.

Yeah, the cars must have been a breeze to drive.

I´m not sure what´s your experience driving, but the grip is the biggest factor that determines how dificult a slide will be to control, and by far. Controlling a slide when raining is quite easy. Controlling a slide on dry tarmac is a lot more difficult. It´s always been this way, nothing new, so if old cars had lower grip, they were easier to control. Rule of thumb nº1 for anything with an engine and wheels, the reason people like myself enjoy driving on the wet and love to go to a big parking zone when snowing to do some spins. The difficulty to control a car decreases with the grip. This is valid even for bikes

Also speed is another hugh factor to control an slide. The fastest you go, the harder to control. You need to react quicker to control a slide at high speed, and your movements need to be a lot more precise, so the faster the cars go from seasson to seasson makes them harder to control

The development in tires, suspensions, downforce... any development increasing cornering speeds make the car harder to control

Just the tires evolution must be night and day difference. With old tires the grip was so low they were sliding continuously, that was the pre-aerodynamics driving technique. Once they started using ailerons they stopped sliding (so much).Today any slide is a scare because they can spin much easier, they´re much more difficult to control

IMO of course

You're talking different things. A car that is forgiving might not be easier to get it to the max.

[timbo]

Its no different to other sports. Example, David Haye would destroy Ali if we had a time machine.
or Example 2, Danny Welbeck would run rings round George Best. Same goes for every sport IMO

Apples to oranges. You're talking sports where basic principles didn't change. Driving in F1 changed tremendously.
I agree that overall fitness levels improved, but different demands are put nowadays.
You would not compare David Haye to George Best on the football field and Danny Welbeck against Ali on the boxing ring.

[strad]

Gilles hated the breed of Grand Prix car spawned by the rules of the time.
As with todays cars those of the early 80s had a tremedous amount of downforce, but back then much of it was generated by ground effects, by shaped underbodies and all the cars had skirts to create a seal with the ground. Problem was, while these ha previously been of the sliding variety now they had to be fixed and the only way to keep them from instantly being destroyed was to create a car effectively without suspension.
This made them hellish to drive. "I probably enjoy driving for its own sake more than alot of drivers. Gilles said "but I hate these cars. Two or three years ago I used to enjoy myself 15 times a lap. Now its once every 15 laps! No one outside of F1 can know what shìt these things are to drive.
There is a moment going over a bump and turning into a corner at the same time when you lose vision. Everything goes blurred. The G forces are unblievable and the steering is ridiculously heavy, like being in a big truck with the power steering not working. Sometimes you feel you don't have the strength to pull it around the ccorner. And of course we have no suspension. You go over a bump and its like someone is kicking you in the back. Your legs are flung around against the steering rack. Your head constantly hits the back of the cockpit or the roll bar. After awhile your sides ache, your head aches, and you become aware of not enjoying driving a racing car.
I asked where a drivers most important quality was his physical strength, his stamina?"
Yes, Absolutely. The days of driving with your fingerstips are gone.Now you have to grip the wheel, simply to hold on, to get the car to turn through the corner. A lot of the art has gone out of it - nearly all, in fact." . . . . All right then, I said, define your ideal F1 car. "For me it is very simple" Gilles said. "I lover motor racing. To me it is a sport, a spectable, not a technical exervise. My ideal F1 car would have no ground effect - in fact, very little down force at all. It would have a 5-litre normally-aspirated engine., at least 800 hp, with 21 in. rear tyres. Some saw we should have narrower tyres, but I'm not in favour of that because you need big tyres to slow you down if you spin. And you need a lot of horsepower to unstick big tyres, to make the cars slide. " That would be a fantastic spectacle, I can tell you.

[strad]

A what if article by Alan Henry

Gilles Villeneuve... what if?

By Alan Henry -

It wasn’t too long ago that the Formula 1 circus’ visit to North American was something of a mid-season double-header, feasting on two fantastic races in Montreal and Indianapolis.

Now, it’s a quick four-day jaunt across the Atlantic – and at a time when it feels like the season has still to find its groove, let alone be headed for the mid-point and beginning its sprint towards the finish-line.

But the Canadian Grand Prix – especially at Montreal’s fantastic Circuit Gilles Villeneuve – has developed into one of grand prix racing’s marquee events, developing as it has from a cold, end-of-season affair into a summer spectacular. In many ways, it’s the race that kickstarts the championship – it’s an explosive, often unpredictable affair, and very often a place that gives you an idea of the intent of the championship protagonists. After all, a year-long campaign is very often less about the size of the dog in the fight, and more about the size of the fight in the dog.

Lewis Hamilton often used the weekend in Montreal as the springboard for his year. He was truly energised by the buzz, vibe and atmosphere that inhabit this great city, and it propelled him to some of his most stratospheric performances. It’s no surprise that he won his very first grand prix here back in 2007; he won in 2010 and, magnificently, in 2012, too. And in ’08 and ’11, he failed to finish – possibly due to the fact that there was simply too much fight in the dog on those particular weekends!

If Hamilton was very much in the right place at the right time to record those wins, he’s very much in the pound seats for this year’s race, too. Call it luck, call it judgment – but manoeuvring oneself into the best car is very much part of the art and armoury of an grand prix driver.

Sometimes, it can seem like a lucky break when a much-fancied driver – or a wild and impressive outsider – gets their backside firmly installed in the car of their choice. Equally, you would have to say that McLaren has, taken as a whole over the past few decades, not missed too many worthwhile driver choices either.

Yes, I know that Teddy Mayer’s decision to hire Patrick Tambay for 1978 instead of the dazzlingly skilled Gilles Villeneuve now looks like a mistake, but at the time we racing scribes all reported it as a pretty sound move, simply because Patrick had been so impressive in the Ensign in the latter half of 1977.

Now, of course, hindsight tells us that, although Patrick was no mean pedaller, he wasn't in Gilles' league. But the fascinating aspect of it is that McLaren's mistake need never have been made.

For why? Because Mayer had been given an unequivocal heads-up about Gilles’s talent after James Hunt’s brilliant showing in 1976’s non-championship Canadian Formula Atlantic race at Trois-Rivieres, a street circuit through the rural riverside city in Quebec. Afterwards, Hunt told Mayer to immediately sign Gilles, who had dominated the race, winning from 1980 world champion Alan Jones and Hunt himself.

Hunt’s was a piece of advice Mayer willingly and singularly ignored, much to James’s fury and frustration. James always said that Teddy’s specialty was making sure he always ignored any idea that came his way – on the basis that it had not been conceived by him.

This trait somehow managed to wind up his McLaren colleagues to an intense level of irritation – particularly on this notably baffling occasion.

At least Teddy partly saw sense, choosing to grant Gilles his Formula 1 debut by offering him a third works McLaren M23 at the 1977 British Grand Prix at Silverstone – a tale that has been widely and often discussed.

To cut a long story short, he drove brilliantly, looking immediate as though he were born to life in an F1 cockpit. Yet, when the negotiations got into top gear, Villeneuve ended up at Ferrari, alongside the great Carlos Reutemann. Like Gilles, Carlos would end his grand prix career without winning the world championship, but Gilles was a dynamic star right up until the last day of his life – that fateful afternoon at a bleak Zolder circuit when he somersaulted over the back of Jochen Mass’s March-Ford. He was killed instantly.

While Gilles’ battling performances in a string of box-like Ferraris rightly became the stuff of legend, one must wonder what Gilles would have been like had he got his hands on a more malleable car. His turbo-powered Ferraris may have been prodigiously powerful, but those big flat-12s had terrible throttle lag, and the big burly chassis were far from what you’d call nimble.

So while messrs Rosberg, Piquet et al were tearing it up in svelte and nimble Cosworth DFV-engined British garagiste entries, Villeneuve was lugging huge red buckets around with the sort of dexterity you’d more commonly associate with the driver of a Peterbilt haulage truck, far less a legendary Italian sportscar manufacturer.

It’s tantalising to consider what might have been had Gilles got his hands on a chassis truly worthy of his talents. Indeed, there were rumours swirling round the paddock in the summer 1982 to the effect that Gilles would have signed to drive one of Ron Dennis’s upcoming McLaren-TAGs – alas, had he lived to ink the deal.

Had the contract been signed, it’s fascinating to consider what might have been. If we assume that Gilles had joined for 1984, the first year of the TAG-Porsche deal, one wonders what would have become of Alain Prost, opportunistically signed at the end of ’83 after acrimoniously parting company with Renault after the pairing failed to secure the world championship together.

One also wonders what might have been had Gilles been paired against Niki Lauda, who went on to win that ’84 championship by just half a point from team-mate Prost.

Lauda/Villeneuve would have been a real fire and ice combo. While Prost and Lauda enjoyed a largely harmonious relationship, doubtless due in part to their sharing the opinion that the car was the tool that needed refining to a sharp point in order to allow them to get the best from it, Villeneuve was merely happy to use the car as a blunt instrument, pulling the laptime from it with a sheer, brutal physicality that has never been seen before or since.

While it’s easy to imagine that, such was his raw speed, Gilles would have sailed to the 1984 championship, there’s a part of me that also wonders (and fears) what might have been had he failed to find the sweet-spot of a John Barnard-penned car that famously required the lightest of touches to get the best from it.

The closest we got to see a McLaren-TAG being ragged was when Keke Rosberg got behind the wheel of 1986’s MP4/2C, but, even then, famous Flying Finn conceded that there simply wasn’t enough inherent oversteer in the car to satisfy his need to fling it about. He retired at the end of that season having failed to win a race; Prost, meanwhile, won four and his second world title – an achievement that caused Rosberg to graciously concede that Prost was simply the best man out there.

As the circus heads to Montreal next week, Gilles will never be far from our minds. The circuit itself remembers his legacy, and images of his red, tank-like Ferrari – its tyres pushed beyond screaming point and its steering cocked at a seemingly impossible angle as it careened like a snowmobile towards the apex – will adorn shops, restaurants and hotel lobbies throughout the entire city.

It’s an absolutely unforgettable image – one seared into the consciousness of every red-blooded Formula 1 fan – yet I do sometimes wonder what might have been if he’d done the same with one of those immortally famous red and white McLarens.

He would have changed history.
]