‘In our day we got paid to drive’ – Mansell and Piquet on modern F1

2013 F1 season

Felipe Massa, Nelson Piquet, Interlagos, 2012Nelson Piquet and Nigel Mansell had plenty to say about their famous F1 rivalry during their recent interview on Brazilian television.

The pair also discussed the state of the sport today including the challenges facing young drivers trying to get into F1, balancing sport versus entertainment, and motor racing in Brazil.

Piquet on the podium

Mansell’s most recent involvement with modern F1 has been as an FIA steward. And Piquet made an appearance at last year’s season finale where he conducted the podium interviews.

Shortly before he stepped out to talk to Jenson Button, Fernando Alonso and Felipe Massa, Piquet was surprised to be told he wasn’t allowed to talk about the the championship, which had just been won by Sebastian Vettel.

“They said the championship was not decided in that moment,” explained Piquet. “You have to wait for maybe February to see if the car was not out of regulation.”

“The thing is too complicated. I said ‘Come on, everybody knows the guy won the championship, everybody knows Alonso lost the championship’. And the guy was screaming in my ear ‘don’t talk about the championship!’.”

“They don’t let you tell nothing,” he continued. “You cannot talk about the championship, you cannot talk about anything, you cannot swear, you cannot say nothing… and I said ‘shut up’ and ask what I want’.

“I want to really interview Hamilton, talk about his new earrings, but he didn’t give me chance. Button I said ‘you must be very happy that Hamilton left the team…’”

“To be popular is something but you have to win”

Both Mansell and Piquet have children who’ve competed in motor racing but Mansell admitted he was “disappointed” when his sons Leo and Greg wanted to give it a try.

“It’s very difficult, today is so different because the money involved today… people are paying millions to be a Formula One driver. In our day we used to get paid money to race in Formula One. And the dynamics have changed so much.

“We had a decision three, four years ago where what money we were spending in motor racing we would spend on the charity [UK Youth] to help children. And this is much better feeling.”

Nelson Piquet Jnr has been racing in NASCAR Trucks since his controversial departure from Formula One four years ago. “After the big problem we had with Renault the first two years he spent the money he got in the court case,” his father explained. “And now he got some sponsors and he’s continuing in America and he’s happy there.”

The young Piquet won twice last year and also came top in a fan vote to find the most popular driver. But his father is more interested in his success on the track.

“I hope he’ll be the champion, that’s the main thing,” said Piquet. “To be popular is something but you have to win races and win the championship.”

Piquet was characteristically blunt when asked whether he felt popular when he was racing: “No. I don’t give a shit for that!”

“A logjam of good drivers”

Nigel Mansell, Patrick Head, Williams, Spa-Francorchamps, 1987The pair praised the current generation of F1 stars but also pointed out they face different challenges as drivers: “I think they are very good, I’m not in doubt of that,” said Piquet.

“Of course they change a little bit, a lot. Before we need to – how can I explain – you need to know more about the car and work more about the engineers.

“Me and Mansell we were working in a time with no telemetry and had to explain how the cart is doing. Today you need to be very quick and don’t make mistakes for 70 laps. That’s it. If you can do that, it’s OK. But in those times you need to set up the car… it was more complicated.”

The risk of injury has also fallen since they left F1, and Mansell pointed out this has affected the sport in different ways:

“I think that the biggest thing to explain – it is a problem with the system of to in some ways, which is a good problem – is when Nelson and I were driving every year, unfortunately, someone died or was injured out the sport because when there was accident when we were racing you got a bad injury.

“And you didn’t necessarily have to die but you weren’t fit enough to drive – because there was no run-offs. Today you can have the cars going all over the circuit and come back on the circuit and no one gets injured which is fantastic from a safety point of view.”

“It’s less challenging,” Piquet interjected. “It’s a little bit less challenging,” Mansell concurred, “but most importantly there’s a logjam of really good drivers now in GP2 and other series which can’t get into Formula One because of the longevity of drivers in Formula One.”

“When Nelson and I were driving if you had 180-something Grands Prix or upwards of 200 Grands Prix was the most fantastic career. And now you have drivers, Rubens Barrichello has over 300 Grands Prix. And Jenson Button has well over 200 Grands Prix. So the whole dynamics have changed in a big way.”

Entertainment value

Michael Schumacher, Mercedes, Circuit of the Americas, 2012The sport has also become more focussed on entertainment and both drivers expressed reservations about changes that have been made for that reason. “The regulations now are so different with the Drag Reduction System,” said Mansell.

“When you were slipstreaming years ago you had to pull out and then you were sort of creeping past. But now with the drag reduction you just go like that,” he said, swiping the air with his hand. “It’s a bit easier.”

“It is not exactly natural but it is what it is,” Mansell concluded, “but it makes it exciting for the fans.”

Piquet was less positive, calling it “showbusiness”. Asked if he liked having DRS and KERS in F1 he said, “well… no.”

Mansell believes making overtaking easier was necessary because the cars had become easier to drive: “They have to do something because all the gearbox is all automatic up and down,” he said.

“Nelson and I we had some races where Nelson won or I beat him with only one mistake, one gear change. It was the only difference between winning and losing.”

Piquet added he would like to see F1 allow more than one tyre supplier. “I think if the competition’s for the cars, the competition’s for the engines, they should have the competition for the tyres also. Having only one set of tyres is making the things much easier.”

Brazilian motor sport “a disaster”

Felipe Nasr, DAMS, GP2, Jerez, 2012Piquet had plenty to say about the future of motor racing in Brazil, warning that the country’s F1 heritage is in jeopardy: “We have big disorganisation.

“Nobody is capable that is in motor racing today and we’re getting worse and worse. In a few years we don’t have nobody from Brazil going out to Europe to race in any categories that can go to Formula One afterwards.”

“I’ve been saying for many years that the people involved with motor racing have to understand a little bit about motor racing to be president of CBA [Confederacao Brasileira de Automobilismo - Brazilian automobile club] and a lot of things have to change,” he added.

“Motor racing in Brazil is a complete disaster. And not now but the last 20 years has been the same.”

But he doesn’t see himself as the person to change it: “Not really. Because there’s too many things to change, and maybe it’s impossible to change.”

Read more from the interview here:

The full interview was originally published here but appears to be unavailable at present.

2013 F1 season


Browse all 2013 F1 season articles

Images ?? Ferrari/Ercole Colombo, Renault/LAT, Williams/LAT, Daimler/Hoch Zwei, GP2/Kalisz

Advert | Go Ad-free

51 comments on ‘In our day we got paid to drive’ – Mansell and Piquet on modern F1

  1. They both raise some very good points, most of which I agree with. Regarding DRS, for sure drivers are much less likely to make mistakes now and so perhaps that increases the difficulty in overtaking but to see drivers cruise by is not “good for the fans”. DRS definitely works on some tracks (Catalunya for example) but it is not necessary on most and KERS is perfectly sufficient (and much fairer as both drivers have the same amount for use per lap).

    As for young drivers, I definitely think talented people paying for a drive is a flaw in the sport and it is not good to see promising drivers denied the chance of a drive for purely financial reasons. That is an issue that definitely needs resolving in my point of view. This surprised me though:

    Piquet added he would like to see F1 allow more than one tyre supplier. “I think if the competition’s for the cars, the competition’s for the engines, they should have the competition for the tyres also. Having only one set of tyres is making the things much easier.”

    What does he mean by easier? That the teams are finding it easier to compete with each other or the drivers are finding it easier to use to tyres? On both accounts I think that statement is flawed: having a more level playing field increases the role the drivers and engineers play which can only be good in my point of view. As for the drivers, the Pirelli’s appear notoriously difficult to consistently extract the maximum out of so actually it is increasing the difficulty for the drivers, something which I am in support of.

    • Hamilfan (@hamilfan) said on 27th January 2013, 15:26

      Great comment there . I side with you about the tyres which possibly rules out ferrari or red bull having made to order tyres . Nothing can be done about ” Pay drivers ” unless f1 goes towards cost cutting . There need not be a FOTA type of organization for cost cutting . It must be enforced . I think the trend should be to reduce the gap between cars in the front and cars at the back , which will increase closeness of racing and will bring all the bravado of racing like in the past . AND Sorry red bull , we don’t want another 2011 for any team no matter how big they are !

    • Giuseppe (@giuseppe) said on 27th January 2013, 15:50

      It’s easier in the sense that having a single tyre supplier takes a major variable out of the equation. You no longer have to worry about what progress the opposition is making in terms of this technology since everyone has access to the exact same specs. In the 80s there three, sometimes four different tyre manufacturers in Formula 1; in 1981 and 1982, for example, you had Michelin, Pirelli, Goodyear and Avon.

      I understand why they chose to have a single tyre manufacturer for F1, as a measure to cut costs and level the playing field. However I still am not sure if it’s a wise decision. What’s next? A single engine supplier? A single chassis? Yeah, that would be the ultimate field leveler and it would make races all about the driver and his race engineer. But it would be against the spirit of F1 and I think tyres are no different in this regard.

      • @guiseppe

        However I still am not sure if it’s a wise decision. What’s next? A single engine supplier? A single chassis? Yeah, that would be the ultimate field leveler

        I absolutely would not support F1 becoming a spec series in the name of costs. The tyres though are things which are out with the teams’ control and if we saw a “tyre war” likely again we would see the top teams giving a charitable contribution to the tyre manufacturers in exchange for preferentially designed tyres.

        That said though perhaps it wouldn’t be possible in these days of limited testing so indeed one team may not be able to have custom-made tyres. But again tyres are something which cannot be influenced by the smaller teams, which is why I am against multiple tyres suppliers. As for engines, the manufacturers supply the same product to all their customers and as the engines are so limited I don’t think that having one supplier would change anything.

          • **@giuseppe, I’m full of the typos tonight!

            @catracho504 I still don’t really see how having multiple tyre suppliers would be “harder” unless he is speaking from the point of view of the smaller teams incase F1 were to return to tailored tyres. Apart from that though I think that Pirelli’s designed-to-degrade tyres are much “harder” than what otherwise would be.

          • JB (@) said on 27th January 2013, 21:47

            @vettel1
            That all depends on how you see things Max… I for one… feel that the Pirellis are tailored to suit some… Not gonna name names but you know what I mean. It just baffled me how in 2011 a team knew how to make em work and breezed to a championship… in 2012, it semed that they opened up the window a bit more for others to use… still, it was hard to understand them but, at least others could compete with them and that team that has a breeze with them in 2011, had a harder time in 2012… not only because of the EBD but because the tyres were different too. So by 2013, I guess it´s gonna be an open door for all to understand them a whole lot better!
            You know how I feel about the tyres Max… I´m not really a big fan of Pirelli.

          • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 27th January 2013, 22:11

            I for one… feel that the Pirellis are tailored to suit some… Not gonna name names

            If Pirelli were tailoring the tyres to suit a particular driver there would be absolute uproar from their rivals. We would never hear the end of it. There hasn’t been so much as a murmur this has been going on.

            This is nothing more than a fifth-rate excuse for why Red Bull’s rivals got beaten.

    • JB (@) said on 27th January 2013, 16:55

      @vettel1
      “What does he mean by easier?”

      I think in a way…Piquet seems to have my same view on the tyre situation. Remamber I mentioned it on the PM? By having one tyre supplier, yes you can argue that they are the same for everyone but, are they built with one goal in mind or are they built tailored to someone´s driving style a-la-Schumacher??
      Or maybe he just meant that it would be easier for others to win having tyres tailored to their needs… Either way, props to him for bringing that up! I said it before and I´ll keep saying it, bring on the tyre war once again but, with a certain degree of limitation on the way they are built…

    • Optimaximal (@optimaximal) said on 28th January 2013, 10:00

      @vettel1

      I definitely think talented people paying for a drive is a flaw in the sport

      I’ve got no problem with talented people paying for a drive. If anything, the money will help the churn.

      Agreed that some talent is being missed because it hasn’t he backing, but that’s not the only problem – F1 is full…

  2. craig-o (@craig-o) said on 27th January 2013, 11:59

    It’s not as if Piquet, Mansell and the rest of them had a magic button which allowed them to get past other drivers or anything… As for Piquet’s comment regarding getting paid to drive, it’s not as if any of the drivers from that era paid their way into F1 either. The sport has effectively always been the same, bar a few regulation changes here and there and the drivers and teams (except Ferrari) are different.

    • Bullfrog (@bullfrog) said on 27th January 2013, 12:37

      With the Honda turbos, they could whack the boost right up to get past someone – that made some passes as easy as DRS looks now, and I’m pleased to see the 2014 rules aren’t going down that route.

      I liked Mansell’s description of slipstreaming – “just creeping past” is how DRS should work.

      • @bullfrog – agreed, sadly the DRS power is actually increasing.

        Furthermore DRS is currently allowed to move the top flap from a gap of 10mm to 50mm from the mainplane, the 2014 regulations adjust this to between 10mm and 65mm (link).

        I find this highly unnecessary as the ERS rule changes should make for easier overtaking and the aerodynamic rule changes on a whole should reduce turbulent air, which was what DRS was brought in to combat in the first place. So actually increasing the effective power of it I fear is going to make overtaking alarmingly easy.

        • David-A (@david-a) said on 27th January 2013, 13:16

          @vettel1 @bullfrog – I even could’ve sworn that cars didn’t have a problem slipstreaming in a straight line before DRS. The problem was that cars couldn’t follow each other in corners, and since DRS isn’t for corners, it doesn’t fix that problem.

          • @david-a I think that DRS was more of a compensation for the inability to follow cars closely through corners: they will lose a bit through the corners which is the regained on the straight. The best way of course to fix that problem is to reduce overall downforce levels which was the intention of the 2014 rule changes, which makes DRS’ retention and in fact increased effect all the more baffling…

        • craig-o (@craig-o) said on 27th January 2013, 14:12

          @vettel1 Thing is though, as ERS will be more powerful, it will also help with defending, not just attacking.

          • @craig-o good point, I still maintain though that DRS is unfair as only one driver gets the use of it whereas both drivers have equal amounts of ERS. ERS I think is similar in that respect to P2P in Indycar which I support since it can be used tactically whereas DRS is just artificial.

  3. andae23 (@andae23) said on 27th January 2013, 12:17

    A lot of points they raise make sense to me. The bottom line of their interview is that Formula 1 has become much easier than it was in Piquet’s and Mansell’s time. DRS and run-off areas are points that have been raised many times in the past. The thing that really caught my eye was about the set-up work:

    Me and Mansell we were working in a time with no telemetry and had to explain how the car is doing. Today you need to be very quick and don’t make mistakes for 70 laps. That’s it. If you can do that, it’s OK. But in those times you need to set up the car… it was more complicated.

    To be honest, I have never looked at it that way before. As a Formula 1 driver pre-1990, you had to know everything about your car, understand why it behaves in a certain way and monitor certain parameters. Today with telemetry, the monitoring aspect drops out completely – you regularly hear the radio engineer saying “switch to engine mode 4 and fuel mixture 3″. Set-up work is partially done by the drivers in Friday and Saturday practice sessions, but a big portion of it (in the established teams) is done in the simulator, mostly by their test driver.

    I think Piquet and Mansell are right to question whether this is a good thing for Formula 1. In my mind, a perfect solution would be to cut the data that the pit wall receives to a bare minimum: so track position, velocity and that’s it. The most important things like amount of fuel, engine temperature, will have to be monitored by the drivers themselves. It would add a ‘new dimension’ to the sport as it will create a technical challenge as well as the challenge to drive the car as fast as possible.

    On a different note: I think that the most points that Mansell and Piquet raise are all symptoms of the sport being too ‘big’. I have said it many times before, but in my mind the sport would be better off if the teams, the organizaton, the media coverage and subsequently the crowd becomes smaller.

    • @andae23

      As a Formula 1 driver pre-1990, you had to know everything about your car, understand why it behaves in a certain way and monitor certain parameters.

      There was also much less to monitor though. Pretty much everything in the old cars was mechanical whereas now everything is governed by electrics, even down to the pedals. For sure drivers do have it easier now but from the telemetry respect I don’t think that was really a huge challenge, considering testing was much more frequent then and Mansell usually buggered off to the golf course!

      Run-offs though I do feel are getting a bit ridiculous now: almost every corner is bordered by tarmac or concrete which is good from a safety perspective but bad from a skill perspective. One could say that it encourages drivers to push the limits on a qualifying lap without much fear of losing out but is that really a good thing? I would much prefer if drivers who pushed too hard were punished but drivers who were right on the limit were rewarded.

      • andae23 (@andae23) said on 27th January 2013, 12:45

        @vettel1

        There was also much less to monitor though. Pretty much everything in the old cars was mechanical whereas now everything is governed by electrics, even down to the pedals.

        I agree with you that the amount of things that should be monitored is much higher today and that it would not have been the biggest work load for drivers back then, but that’s not the point I’m raising. Formula 1 anno 2013 is basically heart surgery on wheels: every little detail is monitored, and if something goes slightly outside its parameters, alarm bells sound, it gets corrected and we’re back where we were. Cutting the amount of telemetry the teams receive forces them to make the cars much simpler, more ‘harmonious’. The driver keeps an eye on the most important gauges and that’s it. May I use 2011 Valencia as an example: Formula 1 is synonymous with cutting edge technology, the art of touching borders without crossing them. It’s a bit contradicting then that all 24 cars that started the race are able to complete the entire racing distance, right?

        Regarding run-off areas: the biggest problems I have with them is the way Formula 1 drivers learn a circuit. In the 1980s, drivers took a corner very slowly at first and gently started increasing their pace until they noticed they are on the limit. Nowadays a driver simply takes the corner at a random speed and it is irrelevant if he went too slowly or too fast.

        • andae23 (@andae23) said on 27th January 2013, 12:46

          sorry for the blockquote fail

          • @andae23 It would be better to see drivers having more of a technical influence for sure I agree. The example you’ve used for it though I think is more of a reflection on the cost-cutting measures though rather than the cars no-longer being on the cutting edge.

            I would like to see the regulations being altered to encourage “pushing the boundaries” in aspects other than holes in the floor and the drivers having a greater technical influence, but I fear that may drive up costs which may spell the end of several teams.

    • BasCB (@bascb) said on 27th January 2013, 12:59

      Reading what they say, its not as if they say its easier. In a way its even tougher for a driver. Just look at what they say:
      - We passed each other with one gearshift mistake – nowadays there’s no opportunity for that with automatic gearboxes
      - setup was far more complicated – nowadays simulation etc. helps everyone get a good setup, or even a great setup. Means the driver has less scope to be better than others there too.

      So then it comes to being inch perfect for the whole race, because even the slightest mistake can change the results, and theirs not that much opportunity to ever get it back. So that means its not easier, but its tough for different reasons.

      I do agree with you, that it does make sense to look at what we want the sport to do. I for one would be perfectly fine with manual or semi automatical gear shift, doing away with power steering even and other things. After all, its not about what is possible with technology as such, but about what can be done within the rules to make it a good sporting event, something inherently constructed.

    • On a different note: I think that the most points that Mansell and Piquet raise are all symptoms of the sport being too ‘big’. I have said it many times before, but in my mind the sport would be better off if the teams, the organizaton, the media coverage and subsequently the crowd becomes smaller.

      Uhhh, I tend to think anyone trying to EARN A LIVING through the sport would disagree with you. Sheesh. Please explain how a smaller sport with less media coverage, leading to less fan interest, and less sponsorship, lower revenues, reduced prize money and impaired economic/financial viability would be a GOOD thing?

  4. GeeMac (@geemac) said on 27th January 2013, 12:59

    That Renault R29 is like a bad penny: it keeps on popping up again and again and again! And it never gets better looking! :p

  5. ” In our day we used to get paid money to race in Formula One. And the dynamics have changed so much.”

    Didn’t Mansell re-mortgage is house so he could remain in the sport… ?

  6. depalm said on 27th January 2013, 14:10

    I like when Mansell said Prost was good but “too political” for his taste. Hahaha!

    And also when Piquet said that after the accident in Imola, he lost the sense of deepness to race and told nobody about that. I wonder if anyone on the team realized that.

    Mansell forgot to say that he drove the “magic” FW14, with semi automatic gearbox, active suspension, traction control and anti-lock brakes. That was a very easy car to drive.

    • Optimaximal (@optimaximal) said on 28th January 2013, 10:14

      I thought all the drivers who drove the FW14 and 15 were agreed that whilst for the majority of the time they were peaches, both could suddenly just dump itself off the track and all the drivers had to know to compensate without notice.

  7. KaIIe (@kaiie) said on 27th January 2013, 14:23

    Very interesting to hear the “rules” regarding the podium interview. Might explain why we got so horrible interviews for most of the season?

    • F1Yankee (@f1yankee) said on 27th January 2013, 18:14

      i don’t expect any sport to provide a platform for hard-hitting journalism. the only thing management wants to hear is the same old “the fans are great and thanks to my team blah blah blah”

  8. William Brierty said on 27th January 2013, 16:18

    I love the way there is a picture of Felipe Nasr next to the headline “Brazilian motorsport a disaster”. Well they say a picture says a thousand words!

    • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 27th January 2013, 20:31

      Interesting point on this – around this part of the interview when Piquet was talking about the problems in Brazilian motor racing the host asked him “what about Felipe Nasr?”. Piquet clearly misheard him and started talking about Felipe Massa, and the host didn’t pursue the point.

      And whoever wrote the Portuguese subtitles also didn’t realise who the host was referring to, and put ‘Felipe Massa’ in the text. But if you listen to the audio I’m sure the host says ‘Nasr’.

      It’s a shame he didn’t point out to Piquet who he was referring to, because Nasr looks pretty handy and I reckon he could make it to F1. It’ll be confusing if he does and Massa’s still there, though!

  9. Renato Oliveira said on 27th January 2013, 17:14

    Seriously?
    You guys spend that amount of time listening to piquet?
    He is a disgrace as a person and far most by his opinions.
    At some point on the interview, he claim that when asked who was better driver, him or senna, the characther says “ME, Im alive”.
    Shamefull

  10. Standard Mansell interview. Every time he talks its about how it’s easier now
    Than in
    His day. The guy is such an ******* he gets questioned by interviewers what he thinks of
    Today’s f1 and everything becomes about how it was harder for him. Ridiculous

    • JB (@) said on 28th January 2013, 2:47

      @aledinho
      I hate to burst your bubble sir but… he´s just telling it as it is… Back then, you needed HUGE testicles…. Or have you seen any other two drivers in the modern era F1 go wheel to wheel in a straightline the way Senna and Mansell did?? Or how about Piquet´s drifting pass on Ayrton?? Yeah… it was so much easier back then! Mansell is just talking poo….

      • David-A (@david-a) said on 28th January 2013, 9:01

        @catracho504

        Or have you seen any other two drivers in the modern era F1 go wheel to wheel in a straightline the way Senna and Mansell did??

        I agree. In this DRS-era, one would have simply flown past the other as if on a highway.

        • @catracho504 @david-a point taken! not really what I meant though! My point was that every time I see an interview with Mansell, he makes sure he tells everyone how great he was and how todays drivers do nothing.

          Different era’s, different drivers. Just irritates me how Mansell has to belittle every driver that races nowadays because they didn’t race in the 80′s early 90′s. Difference was back then often the car on pole would be over a second ahead, nowadays the whole top 10 is within that range so the margin for error is smaller and the difference between the cars much smaller.

          • JB (@) said on 30th January 2013, 6:41

            @aledinho

            Different era’s, different drivers. Just irritates me how Mansell has to belittle every driver that races nowadays

            I agree with the different eras part but I don´t agree with Mansell belittleing todays drivers… hes just stating facts man.. The cars in the 90´s and 80´s did not have the downforce the cars of today enjoy. Every F1 driver has to have balls because they travell at over 300 kph BUT, it´s different. Back then you had to have massive balls mainly because of the downforce issues and because back then you could die easier than you could nowadays and to prove that you have ratzemberger, senna, etc… And I´ll give you the one second arguement but todays f1 seems more like an overpowered kart league… in which the one that makes a mistake loses… Back then you had to create your oportunities and relly more on balls than anthing else… A case that comes to mind is Villeneuve and arnoux!!! MASIVE BALLS!!! So yeah… Mansell isn´t doing anything wrong, it´s just facts… and I think @david-a would agree on this!

  11. zootrees said on 27th January 2013, 19:05

    To me it read like two old guys remembering the glory days, and talking about “kids theses days”.
    Good point about Mansell and the Williams.
    The world turns and things change. As far as limiting telemitry data, I doubt it would ever happen, and why should they? The team still has to use it, it’s not cut and dry. They have to collect it with proper runs by the driver and figure out what it all means.
    Plus why throw motor racing into the past? Isn’t that one of the whole points of motorsport?…advancement?
    I see both sides of the tyre issue. But I don’t think it’s anywhere near having the same chassis or engine. I mean there are drivers and constructors championships, for a reason that’s what counts. That is F1. There will never be a Tyre Manufactures championship. Multiple manufactures is a variable no one really really cares about and can have ill effects.

  12. Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 27th January 2013, 23:24

    “In our day we used to get paid money to race in Formula One.”

    And in their day, teams were spending a fraction of what they are in 2013.

    • JB (@) said on 28th January 2013, 2:49

      @prisoner-monkeys
      “And in their day, teams were spending a fraction of what they are in 2013.”

      True, and yet the racing was infinitely better back then…

      • Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 28th January 2013, 8:57

        @catracho504 – Because the cars required considerably more skill to drive. There was much less reliance on aerodynamic grip, which is what the teams spend their moeny on these days.

      • “True, and yet the racing was infinitely better back then…”

        Was it?

        The gap between the quickest and slowest cars was enormous ‘back in the day’. With the likes of Williams or Mclaren being a few good seconds ahead of anyone else and disapereing into the distance. Thats my memory Mansells era, anyway.

        • +1 Exactly, they say about cars cruising past these days because of DRS….back then a williams/mclaren would breeze past a toleman. not that im a huge fan of DRS mind..

          Not necessarily saying the racing is better now than it was then, but some people need to take the rose tinted glasses off

  13. zootrees said on 28th January 2013, 10:09

    IMHO I think that the skill level needed or judging what was harder is impossible, it’s apples and oranges.
    The cars back then required more skill to operate, now the focus has shifted a bit. The drivers have to implement now, and the team needs to get the car practically prefect to win. That’s how I think of it at least, but I have no idea which is harder.
    I would love to see an ex-driver in a new car compare lap times with a current driver in an car of the ex-driver’s era. That would be a fun weekend!

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.