What kind of F1 cars you would want?

[krt917]

Originally posted by Andrew2001
Villeneuve could rip him to pieces given the same car, Hakkinen could show him how to take pole after pole after pole, and Fisichella could show him pure pace, lap for lap, race for race, season for season.

I share SOME of your misgivings about the modern Ferrari team, but this is going over the top. Michael almost beat both Hakkinen and Villeneuve when THEY had better cars. Although you're right to say we'll never KNOW, I think we can guess that in EQUAL cars, Schuey would come out on top. And I think you overestimate the impact of Ferraris complaints, such as the whole Michelin thing last year. Yes, their moaning is irritating (the McLaren brake in 1998 really shouldn't have been banned), but I don't think that it has been the factor that has made the difference. Even Williams and McLaren said that the tyre clarification had affected them very much.

In any case, I don't think Ferrari's form is what is wrong with F1 at the moment. The lack of overtaking - for reasons already mentioned - is.

[Andrew2001]

The problem with current F1 is not the lack of overtaking I believe. The problem is Ferrari's way of running the best two cars on the grid. It is pure boredom at the very front, simply because we are constantly denied seeing Barrichello carry out some brilliant challenges at beating his team mate, and when he is in the position to win he is always denied unless its the last race of the season or Schu is out of the race.
McLaren never ever allowed one driver to call the shots when they dominated the late 80s, early 80s, and early 90s and late 90s. Even when Hakkinen was clearly the better driver when it was him VS DC, DC still managed to beat him on several occasions, when the championship was far from decided.
We witnessed the same with Williams too, Villeneuve had no respect for Hill in 1996 and damn well nearly beat him in his first season.
that's the excitment we are missing from modern F1, that kinda of uncertainty of not knowing WHO is going to win the championship.
Schumacher always regarded Mika as his biggest, and only threat in F1. He would never allow a driver of Mika's ability in as his team mate because Schu himself would be very much denied number 1 status, because an on-song Hakkinen was damn near unbeatable.
Schumacher's biggest attribute in my view, is, bluntly, his arrogance and single minded ability to create the situation for himself, which in turn, has made F1 so incredibly predictable. I do not however, rate Schumacher as the fastest, not even one of the top 5 fastest in f1 history. He is very much smarter than many of them, and, at the cost of the image of F1, he has been able to win so much by picking a reasonable team mate, that, car for car, would never be able to realistically beat him especially when he has got team orders in his favour race after race.
THAT is the problem with F1, not the cars, or tyres or engines or points system.
Ferrari's way of doing things has ruined f1 in the short term.

[Schummy]

My point is F1 is mostly boring not just in these last years, but since more than a decade. So, the Ferrari-Schumacher-are-guilty-left-cars-unchanged theory doesn't fit me.

In fact last season had been really good if Mac, Will or Ren had been a little bit faster. In 2003 we had 4 teams able to fight for wins, but the ultimate problem is they are not able to overtake, it is technically difficult to do, and , thus, the *racing* side of F1 is absent.

If they are not able to overtake it is not a *race*. Point. It is more a high tech parade of things with four (threaded) wheels. I personally don't like it, and I suppose there people like it, and I respect it.