What the hell are people talking about? I'm the only person who is always right on here....
Last edited:
Head To Head Sebastian Vettel vs Daniel Ricciardo
- Thread starter Greenlantern101
- Start date
Kewee
Race Winner
FB..... I chose the word leveller rather than equalling. Drivers like Hamilton, Vettel and Alonso are always going to be way better than the tail end of the grid in the wet, though I think we agree the wet is a great leveller of technology. Even the best drivers are limited in drawing performance from their cars in the wet but to a slightly lesser degree the cream still rises to the top.
teabagyokel ..... I'm confused teabag. I was referring to Vettel's pole in 2008 at Monza.
teabagyokel ..... I'm confused teabag. I was referring to Vettel's pole in 2008 at Monza.
A good car in the dry will be a good car in the wet and a bad car in the dry will be an even worse car in the wet, in my opinion...
Kewee
Race Winner
Mephistopheles ..... Your right Meph but the gap between good and bad can close up sometimes dramatically in the wet. As an extreme example, in severe conditions grip can depend on tyres almost totally and that is a total equaliser. All the technology in a race car is dependant on four small patches of rubber. As soon as a car loses that grip the technology in a top car becomes almost meaningless, it can do nothing if the tyres let it down.
soccerman17
Race Winner
Good lord what is happening here. I could go through so many posts and nitpick things that may be right but don't actually contribute to the argument either way, or things that or just straight up wrong. But instead of making this worse I'm just going to leave it at this: Vettel is a four-time World Champ.
This year:
Ricciardo 131
Vettel 88
This year:
Ricciardo 131
Vettel 88
I think thats what we are all trying to say soccerman17
I thought Vettel would beat Ricciardo this season but so far I was wrong about that and good for Danny.
Just urks a bit that a certain section are trying to suggest that Vettel issues mechanically this year are his own doing or that his previous achievements were down to 'the car'. Something being down to 'the car' has always been a line people have pulled out against a driver they don't like. Having a great car is one thing but being able to do what Vettel did with it is another. Don't believe me then ask Mark Webber.
As for Vettel's win at Monza in a car that was basically a Minardi being 'easy'. I don't really know where to start on that one.
I thought Vettel would beat Ricciardo this season but so far I was wrong about that and good for Danny.
Just urks a bit that a certain section are trying to suggest that Vettel issues mechanically this year are his own doing or that his previous achievements were down to 'the car'. Something being down to 'the car' has always been a line people have pulled out against a driver they don't like. Having a great car is one thing but being able to do what Vettel did with it is another. Don't believe me then ask Mark Webber.
As for Vettel's win at Monza in a car that was basically a Minardi being 'easy'. I don't really know where to start on that one.
Kewee
Race Winner
Kewee
Race Winner
I don't think anyone has suggested Vettel's win at Monza was easy. This is not a criticism of Vettel but the fact he was able to win in what was basically a Minardi proves the point I was trying to make, that rain is a great leveller. Surely you don't believe he could have won in the same car in the dry?
Last edited:
Corrected that for you!
That years Toro Rosso was the same chassis as the Red Bull, the rules saying that each team must design their own chassis came after.
Kewee
Race Winner
F1Yorkshire ..... It was RasputinLives that made the comment it was a Minardi, which prompted my posting. RasputinLives was right pointing that out and I'll add to my comment by saying the Minardi never won in the dry, EVER!!!! 
The 2008 chassis was the starting point for the all conquering chassis from 2009 onwards. Only the Brawn DD hypercar stopped Red Bull dominating for 5 years in a row not 4.
Kewee
Race Winner
F1Yorkshire ...... I don't doubt and wouldn't disagree with anything you say in your last posting F1Yorkshire, though your comments are a complete move away from any of the postings I've made on this thread. 
Indeed, the mighty Red Bull, finishing 7th in the WDC.
2008 was the tail of the old Reg's, the changes coming in to 2009 were significant enough to drop McLaren and Ferrari right off the pace.
There is little evidence to say that the Red Bull of 2008 was particularly special.
2008 was the tail of the old Reg's, the changes coming in to 2009 were significant enough to drop McLaren and Ferrari right off the pace.
There is little evidence to say that the Red Bull of 2008 was particularly special.
Also Kewee doesn't thecfact that Vettel was able to win in a car in the wet that could never win in the dry just add to the point that it was the driver that produced the performance.
Are we all wearing "wins in Newey cars don't count" T-shirts again? The fact remains that neither the 2008 Torro Rosso or the 2008 Red Bull were especially great cars so it doesn't really matter if they were the same chassie or designed by Adrian Newey or Leonardo Da Vinci.
Are we all wearing "wins in Newey cars don't count" T-shirts again? The fact remains that neither the 2008 Torro Rosso or the 2008 Red Bull were especially great cars so it doesn't really matter if they were the same chassie or designed by Adrian Newey or Leonardo Da Vinci.
Il_leone
World Champion
RasputinLives 2008 Toro Rosso was better than 2008 Red Bull - same chassis - a Ferrari engine vs a Renault engine - one with more power than the other and was pretty much 3rd / 4th quickest car at the time
Il_leone based on what?
Works Ferrari were ahead of STR, works Renault were ahead of Red Bull.
Force India Ferrari were way behind, and there were no other Renault cars to factor in.
Oh, and in 2007, STR were a way behind the inferior Red Bull cars.
The engine freeze would mean that all engines from 2008 would be the same through to 2013, the Renault not so bad through that period, with Ferrari and Mercedes being all there or thereabouts.
I await the next logical reason why the 2nd tier of the Red Bull stable was better than the first for one season only.
Works Ferrari were ahead of STR, works Renault were ahead of Red Bull.
Force India Ferrari were way behind, and there were no other Renault cars to factor in.
Oh, and in 2007, STR were a way behind the inferior Red Bull cars.
The engine freeze would mean that all engines from 2008 would be the same through to 2013, the Renault not so bad through that period, with Ferrari and Mercedes being all there or thereabouts.
I await the next logical reason why the 2nd tier of the Red Bull stable was better than the first for one season only.
Il_leone
World Champion
The Pits The 2nd half of 2008 Toro Rosso were the team that made the big improvements and they were battling with BMW, Toyota , and Renault for the placings behind the top 2 - Mclaren and Ferrari
The Toro Rosso started with the 2007 Red Bull chassis at the beginning of the season and they were using the 2008 Red Bull chassis from Monaco onwards
Where as other teams including Red Bull decided to concentrate on 2009 new rules , STR focused on 2008 and kept moving forwards
The Renault engine was still down on power to the Ferrari engine because they mistook the engine freeze as no development and got caught napping much to Flavio chagrin
It should not have come as a suprise STR were very good because it was a Newey chassis with a powerful Ferrari engine
The Toro Rosso started with the 2007 Red Bull chassis at the beginning of the season and they were using the 2008 Red Bull chassis from Monaco onwards
Where as other teams including Red Bull decided to concentrate on 2009 new rules , STR focused on 2008 and kept moving forwards
The Renault engine was still down on power to the Ferrari engine because they mistook the engine freeze as no development and got caught napping much to Flavio chagrin
It should not have come as a suprise STR were very good because it was a Newey chassis with a powerful Ferrari engine
Kewee
Race Winner
This thread has wandered of course completely. Up until now we were comparing Vettel with Ricciardo and Vettels past wet weather performances, which lead to the discussion on the effect of a very wet track on the performance of a F1 car.
No, not at all Ras and please don't think I'm having a go at Vetel or Newey or anyone else. My comment was very general and possibly the best way of explaining would be to point out that Vettel's Minardi was not as good as the cars being fielded by the top teams. The effect heavy rain and a very wet track had was to drag the top cars back down to a lower common denominator which obviously lessens their advantage which then handed a golden opportunity to Vettel in a lesser car.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
- Article
