Senna vs. Schumacher

[Down F0rce]

if it was possible...

Ayrton Senna, in a 1988 McLaren - Honda MP4/4

vs

Michael Schumacher, in a 2002 Ferrari F2002

who would win?

[Gt_R]

Which is the faster car if put together? That's the answer.

[freud]

Senna, by miles.

[Adam43]

It could depend on the circuit, but I imagine that this years Ferrari is quicker.

[DNQ]

Schumacher, no sweat, he'd SMASH Senna in those cars. Things would be different in equal machinery.

Look at each drivers respective laps from the 1988 and 2002 Monaco Grand Prixs, remembering that weather conditions in each case were mild and dry, and that the track has not changed dramatically, other than a few changes to kerbs and run off, that have actually marginally lenghtened the track since 1988, giving Ayrton a slight advantage.

FASTEST LAPS
Michael Schumacher, Ferrari F2002, 1'18.652
Ayrton Senna, McLaren MP4/4 Honda, 1'26.321

Very interesting, shows the progress made since 1988, even with grooved tyres, and smaller motors - amazing really, there is a hell of a lot of difference their, even without needing to stop for fuel, the Mac would be left eating TGF's dust.

[Adam43]

I agree with you DNQ. In 1988 Senna's car was also compromised by having to set it up to cope with full tanks whereas Schumacher could just use a light car set-up. This is a reason why the car advantage helps Schumacher in this comparison. What was the qualifying difference?

As for the circuit: Didn't the circuit changes (into Swimming pool) make that corner much faster?

This probably doesn't account for all the lap time though.

[Adam43]

Has Suzuka changed since 1988? I think this is the only circuit that could be used for comparison and the F2002 hasn't been there yet!

Or Hungary might do. All the others have gone or been altered.

Hungary and Monaco would favour a normally aspirated car even more.

I think Suzuka would be a good comparison and could test all the aspects of the cars. It has fast corners (aero), long straights (engine) and some tighter stuff (mechanical).

[R]

Originally posted by AdamAshmore
What was the qualifying difference?

Senna set pole in 1988 with 1.23.998 (that was a cool 1.4 secs faster than team mate Alain Prost), while Schumacher's 3rd on the grid this year was achieved with the time 1.17.118.

There's no doubt that the F2002 would outclass the MP4/4, I dare say at any circuit. Put them in equal cars, however, and you have a different scenario...

[Red]

Suzuka has changed, a couple of times but minor alterations. Basically it's length increased by 5 m in 1989 and came back to same length last year. The pole1'41.853 (that is without full tanks) in 1988 was Sena's. Schumacher's (in a F1-2001, I mean "less performant" than a 2002) was 1'32.484.....

[Adam43]

Suzuka.

In 1988 Senna completed 51laps in 1h33m26.173s (after a poor start). In 2001 (in the F2001) Schumacher completed the race in 1h27'33"298 (53laps)

1988 Pole: Senna 1'41"853
2001 Pole: Schumacher 1'32"484

Ha! However there have obviously been some slight changes, the circuit got shorter. I don't remember this, what did they do. Did they move the chicane?

Hungary.

1988 Pole: 1'27"635
2001 Pole: 1'14"059

Again there appears to be slight changes to the circuit.

But it seems that the current Ferrari is 6 to 10s quicker at most circuits! Wow.

In the same cars, in qualifying trim. I go for Senna. In the McLaren in a race: Senna. In the Ferrari, er, oh I might as well, Senna again (but it wouldn't be as much fun as with the McClaren). Not that Schumacher would be disgraced.

[Jordi]

Well, Senna was in an inferior car at the start of 1994, qualified always ahead and most of the time could stay ahead of Schumacher. He was at the front, but Senna was at the limit, and Schumacher wasn't so...

[bastinscully]

senna

[Inigo Montoya]

Schumacher. In equal machinery, Gilles would have taken either of them to the cleaners.

[Speedworx]

Senna would win by miles, as he actually has talent.

[JGM]

I think we're assuming that they're both in equally ideal cars, perfectly set up etc. Senna would be faster over one lap for pole. Schumacher, like Prost, would be faster than Senna over a race distance.

[freud]

When I said 'Senna, by miles' I meant if they are in equal machinery. However if both are starting a race on front grid with Schu in a F2002 and Senna in a Mac MP4/4, by the time Schu reaches the first corner he would be 2 seconds ahead of the MP4/4.

[Miss Hardt]

Originally posted by freud
Senna, by miles.

[Jonny Apex]

How on earth can you compare these two cars.

Moden day F1 cars have a poliferation of aerodynamics, massive downforce, a myriad of electronic gizmos, traction control, auto gearhifts and far torquier and higher revving engines.

In its day, the McLaren was the clss of the field but by modern day standards primitive at best.

Senna, as did all the drivers then, had to balance the car so it worked on heavy and light tanks. Not only that, but of course the turbo cars - apart from the lag out of corners - were limited to 150 litres of fuel so part of the race was spent cutting back on revs and conserving gas.

Adam Ashmore: Suzuka 88 - a fair chunk of the race was held in the rain. It is in these conditions tha Senna made up huge amounts of ground on Prost before getting the better of him in traffic. Just see the overhead shot of him passing Prost through turn one - how big a moment!

I agree with you though that Senna would beat Schumacher. He just had that extra something.

Maybe for a fairer comparison we could look at 1993, when Schuey in the Benetton had a latest spec Ford engine and Senna in the McLaren did not.

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Jonny Apex

Maybe for a fairer comparison we could look at 1993, when Schuey in the Benetton had a latest spec Ford engine and Senna in the McLaren did not.

But then it would be argued that TGF lacked the experience of Senna.

The fact of the matter is that TGF in the Ferrari would beat Senna in the McLaren, but then swap the cars over and Senna in the Ferrari would beat TGF in the McLaren.

As this comparison is obviously an impossible task how about going one stepp further and put TGF, Senna and JPM all in the same car!

(oh no....here we go again!! hehehehe!)

[Inigo Montoya]

JPM in the same breath as Senna? Now you really are getting carried away!

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Inigo Montoya
JPM in the same breath as Senna? Now you really are getting carried away!

Not at all, Sennas the past, TGF's the present and JPM's the future!!

[Inigo Montoya]

You think JPM is really that good eh? What about Kimi? Could he be the future?

[Sato san]

I dont think talking about JPM is such a mad thing.

Ok he is not of the pace or consistency of Senna yet , but he is the future IMO , and is already a match if not better than TGF. .

Senna would surley win .
TGF isnt as good IMO , but hes still bloody good though .

Tough one .

[Inigo Montoya]

Are mr v and sato san the same person?

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Inigo Montoya
You think JPM is really that good eh? What about Kimi? Could he be the future?

i do as it goes, i was talking about this with my best mate today and i was saying that i'm very excited about the future of F1. I see JPM in the TGF role (as we have it today) but the likes of Kimi (who will dominate if JPM doesn't) Nick, Jenson, Massa, Taku (hopefully) all drivers who will be able to get the job done, the future of F1 is looking very good to me, as good as the late eighties when we saw the likes of Senna, Prost, Mansell, Piquet etc. Although i love F1, TGF's had it easier imo, Although Hill, Hakkinen, JV are good drivers, they aren't in the Senna, Mansell mould!