PERFORMANCE
What variations in driving style and tactics do you need to consider when you are faced with racing a bad or slow F1 car, and how does that compare with a fast one?
How different is driving a bad F1 car compared with a good one?
When you consider Formula 1 comprises 20 of the best drivers in the world, it’s natural most of them have won championships during their ascent to the top, or at least won races during that climb. They are all used to winning, but as soon as they hit F1, rookie drivers must, at least usually, contend with something new to them: a bad racing car.
Last season, British driver George Russell won seven races on his way to the Formula 2 title. But now, in a Williams rooted to the back of the grid, he finds himself regularly being lapped. The hunter has become the hunted…
“Russell isn’t designed to be looking in his mirror, getting out of the way efficiently,” says former F1 driver Anthony Davidson. “It’s not the reason he’s in F1, he’s here because he’s a winner. That’s what he’s trained to do. But now, as he’s being lapped – and I’ve felt it too – you feel like a spare part at one of the most exclusive sporting events in the world. It’s unjustified and unfair.”
Switching from a decent car to a recalcitrant one brings a new set of challenges for the driver. If a machine is difficult to pilot, usually the first step is to engineer a little more understeer into the car. While that won’t make it faster over one lap, it will reduce the chances of making an error, therefore costing less laptime over the course of a race.
“Also, in a bad car, you have to focus on the mirrors more,” continues Davidson, who started 24 F1 races – two for Minardi, one for Bar-honda and 21 for Super Aguri. “In a fast car your eyes are only facing forwards. It’s rare you have to look in the mirror, except in a racing situation.
“In a bad car you have a responsibility to not hold up the leaders and get into trouble with the stewards, while also not losing time yourself when getting lapped.”
In principle, backmarkers would prefer to yield under braking for a corner, as to ease off on the exit compromises their speed for the duration of the following straight. Equally, drivers need to consider that some circuits have excessive tyre marbles offline, which can cause extra punishment when they move aside for quicker cars.
As well as managing the pressures of running at the tail of the field, drivers must also combat the difficulties in controlling ill-handling cars. But how exactly how does a bad car differ compared to being in the cockpit of a good one?
“The biggest issue with a slow car is stability under braking,” says Johnny Herbert, who drove a variety of machinery – from tail-enders to race winners – across his decade-long F1 career. “When you brake, normally the downforce compresses the tyres into the track, so you can lean on it and turn in very, very hard. But actually, with a bad car what happens is the rear of the car starts to move around and you get oversteer. Then you slide, there’s a lack of grip and then poor traction when you pull out of a corner.
“You are always on that fine line of making a mistake. They are bad because they are not forgiving. The Jaguar R1 I drove at the end of my career was nasty piece. It used to
“A GOOD CAR IS ONE THAT WORKS AT EVERY TRACK, NO MATTER WHAT THE TEMPERATURE, OR THE TYPE OF ASPHALT, BE IT LOW OR HIGH GRIP – AND ON EVERY COMPOUND OF TYRE” KARUN CHANDHOK
battle you and was nervous all the time. As soon as you went to steer it, the back wasn’t connected with the front. When you put any yaw through the car and a bit of load through the tyre, it became edgy and you carried that through the corner, so you couldn’t get on the power.”
An unbalanced car not only depletes a driver of confidence, so they can’t brake or accelerate in the ideal parts of a circuit, it’s also more susceptible to other environmental factors such as crosswinds, bumps on the track or kerbs. In addition, poor cars are likely to suffer a lack of tyre grip. In a championship with a control tyre, the rubber will be designed to withstand the loads and forces put through it by the best cars on the grid with greater downforce. That means the tyre will be more durable than necessary for the weaker car, thereby offering less peak adhesion.
“A good car is one that works at every track, no matter what the temperature, or type of asphalt, be it low or high grip – and on every compound of tyre,” says Karun Chandhok, who raced briefly for back-ofthe-grid F1 teams such as HRT and Team Lotus/caterham. “A bad car is just unpredictable – when you arrive at the track on Friday for first practice you don’t know what you’re going to get. You can change springs, ride-heights, the aero map, but, as the car is fundamentally poor, there is little you can do.”
After a number of years driving for Lotus in the early 1990s, Johnny Herbert got the opportunity to drive the race-winning Benetton B194, the car in which Michael Schumacher secured the 1994 championship.
“It was different to everything else I drove because there was a buzz in the monocoque itself,” Herbert says. “There was a direct connection between myself and the road – it was like an extension of myself. It was probably the only car that gave me a feeling that it was alive. It was like a little Jack Russell Terrier dog, tail-wagging, asking to be driven. It was exciting and that instantly fills a driver with confidence.”
In his work for Williams’s heritage department, Chandhok has experienced driving the 1992 title-winning FW14B and describes the car as “flawless”.
“When you turn the wheel, it turns – instantly. Mid
“ON THE OUT-LAP THIS THING WAS INCREDIBLE. IT FELT LIKE WE WERE RUNNING ON 10KG OF FUEL AS OPPOSED TO 70KG. IT WAS THAT DIFFERENT” ANTHONY DAVIDSON’S FIRST IMPRESSION OF THE BAR 005
corner, it’s got grip. It’s got great traction. The only limitation is how much the tyre can load, that’s the point at which the car says, ‘I can’t go any faster’.”
From year to year, F1’s development cycle to create a car better than its predecessor requires a driver’s input to help guide the technical team and explain where a poor car is lacking. But ultimately the driver is at the mercy of the technical team for the car he races in. Former BAR test driver Davidson recalls a significant shift in performance from one year to the next as suddenly, a series of bad cars turned good.
“The BAR 004 was very boxy,” he explains. “It had a high centre of gravity, unsophisticated aero and hadn’t progressed from the car before. Then, in the winter of 2003, the 005 appeared, designed by Geoff Willis.
“On the out-lap it was incredible. It felt like we were running on 10kg of fuel as opposed to 70kg. It was that different. “It stopped better, it had better traction, stability at high speed and change of direction. You could feel it had more downforce, a lower centre of gravity and a better weight distribution. At the limit, it was just calmer, you were fighting it less – it just had more grip. I came into the pits after the first five-lap timed run and said to my engineers, ‘guys, we’ve got a good car.’ They knew, after years of driving slow cars, that I knew what I was talking about.”
While Davidson recalls with clarity the night and day transformation between those two F1 cars, the best way to sum up the difference, he says, is with a road-going example.
“In a good road car, like a Mercedes or Porsche, you feel like the boss. Every pothole vanishes and drivers get out of your way on the motorway. In a clapped out old banger it’s the opposite – you’re constantly looking in your mirrors, feel you’re in everyone’s way, and have to work a lot harder at the wheel. It’s a different world, and that’s exactly the same in F1.”