The idea that you can hear traction control is a deceiving argument. The full blown systems of 92-93, as well as 2001-2007 were very obvious, but that is not the only system that can be used. We know for a fact that at least one team used it in 99, yet no one picked it up through hearing the cars. This is why we ended up with mid year rule changes in 2000, followed by the return in 2001, and a standard ECU in 2008 when it was banned gain.

Teams were using it undetected for several years, so it is not impossible that it could be used silent in 94. That does not mean that it was used, just that it is not technically impossible as some would suggest.

(Does anyone have that quote from MS where he says something a long the lines of...'We have something like traction control, but it is not traction control'? I believe it was in reference to the variable engine maps that Ferrari were using in the late 90's to smooth power delivery.)

Yes engine maps (and many other things) can to various extents mimic traction control (and would have been completely legal in 1994)

The point is that there isnt any real evidence and you do need that to make a claim stick that something was done.

I think it is pretty implausible that Benetton were able in 1994 to do any kind of real traction control undetectably.. and I also think if it were detectable AT ALL they would most certainly have been caught, because everyone desperately wanted to catch them. Everyone got caught out with their various shenanigans that year, automatic gearboxes at one team, launch control at benetton, tc of a sort at ferrari, others too.. all covered with horrible excuses.

Who said it was technically impossible? They used it the year before.

Engines can be mapped to understand acceleration time in certain gears and retard the timing if it senses the engine is going to spike quickly but doubtful in '94 but possible what MS was refering to late 90's. This is engine monitoring not wheelspin control and impossible for the FIA to declare illegal as TC.

Having just watched a bunch of starts from first half '94 again as I'm also trying to resolve this in my mind, I am in no way surprised that Ferrari were called out because of their starts, MS's French GP start was perfect (but they seemed to ignore his other 6 bad ones up till then) McLarens were also consistently too good but for the life of me I can't understand why weren't Williams called out??

You can see in the Brit GP start above what I mean, most every one of Hill's starts for the year was like that including in the wet, it's not just that they were fast starts but every one of them is dead straight with little rubber being laid.

Now lets see, Briatore called out the French FIA for what they were and Williams were using French Renault engines - hmmmmmmm

All the 1994 cars were difficult to drive thats why Briatore had meetings with all the teams and wrote an official letter complaining to the FIA and their incompetence, that the '3 poles in a row' Williams was the only problem car is rubbish but goes nicely as an excuse along with "Benetton having TC" for Senna not to face that there was a driver who could take it to him. I don't ever recall Hill complaining about the Williams in 94.

Saying Senna pushed too hard is utter nonsense, it is well proven that the William's steering column severed and was nothing to do with Senna.

Yes but you could hear it very clearly the year before. Some on this thread were saying that it is impossible to have silent traction control. I was not saying that Traction Control was technically possible in 94, but that it is technically possible to have silent Traction Control in 94. We know that a team used traction control in 99, yet no one heard it. So it is not impossible that it could have been used in 94 yet still be unnoticeable.

(Of course it was technically possible to make an iphone in 1000BC but no one had done it then. Maybe no one had made a silent form of traction control until 99, and in 94 it was still unthinkable. We just know from 99 that it possible to have an illegal from of traction control that can go undetected. Who knows if they knew how to in 94 or not. But saying that it is impossible to have silent traction control is incorrect.)

Well this thread is about MS and it covers 1994 and TC from the perspective of did the Benneton have TC or not so I suggest you offer an opinion on topic or pop over to the Tech forum.

One way to have silent TC is to turn the engine off otherwise it is impossible to hide TC from an oscilloscope if you know what your looking for - the human foot in no way can match the speed and accuracy of a computer control.

Since when is being in a discussion forcing someone to have an opinion? No wonder this forum (and this thread in particular) is such a war zone at time. Choose sides or get out



People in this thread were claiming that it would be easy to hear the difference from the side of the track. Thats simply bull crap. There are other systems that can be used to hide it that a human ear won't notice.

As for humans matching computers being a give away, it depends on how efficient you have the system set up. You could easily have a traction control system that simply helps the driver by reducing power on any major spike, as opposed to completely controlling every aspect in a computerized fashion. It would still sound human and make it near impossible to detect, but the side effect would be that it would be less efficient than a full system.

how much would that really help though?
not a road driver, but a professional one

Well Schumacher himself says he often looks back on 1997 and says its his biggest regret and something he would love to do differently. Removing him from the standings was the only thing they could do and to be honest it could have been alot worst for him. The FIA have been spineless in many instances but their punishment for Michael in 1997 was something they got right.

A 1994 Benetton B-194-8 anyone??

http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2010/10...-2-million.html

reading this topic one thing is clear....the car did have LC software in it. Used or not, that's a pretty strange argument from the team....
but what I can't see is any proof of TC

Confidence for one. Push as hard as you want, but if you over do it the computer will kick in. All professional divers race at 99%. You can't push flat out all race in every corner without stuffing up. It's why rookies are often fast and erratic until they learn to calm down. If you have the confidence to give it everything knowing that you have a safety net you can push closer to the limit.

Secondly, when you do stuff it up, you don't loose time or put it in the wall.

Doing flat out laps every lap with consistent times could easily be worth several seconds over a race. Something that you can do if human error gets ironed out by an electric aid.

Yourself sound like a stuck record.
FIA had the source code, they knew what it was if used and sounded like if used. They looked at the footage, listened and concluded it was not used.

Do not twist the facts , FIA had the source code.

Really? Hill BITCHED about the car the entire first part season. The fact it was difficult to drive is underscored by the way he was lapped by half distance by Senna in Brazil. Hill's complaints were ignored until Mansell came and did his guest appearance and complained about he SAME issues at which time, Williams started to make changes and the car started to improve.

You either did not watch F1 at the time or have selective memory.

For Bridgestone, Michael is still the Only one. Michael visiting Bridgestone headquarter:
http://photofile.ru/photo/nika_f1news/1158...0/140348347.jpg
http://photofile.ru/photo/nika_f1news/1158...0/140348367.jpg
http://photofile.ru/photo/nika_f1news/1158...0/140348391.jpg
http://photofile.ru/photo/nika_f1news/1158...0/140348323.jpg
http://photofile.ru/photo/nika_f1news/1158...0/140348335.jpg
Who is the younger brother from this picture?
http://photofile.ru/photo/nika_f1news/1158...7/140352600.jpg

Is that a serious question?

Its certainly not "well proven".
I don't believe it was Senna's fault but the cause of the crash has never been determined.

Who looks younger?

Ay ok

I thought you were actually asking who he was. Sorry

Indeed so, and its hardly likely we will ever know for sure.

One thing IS certain though, that those who seek to somehow hang it on Michael and Benetton (that's the point of the 'benetton cheated therefore Senna had to push harder than he should have so crashed' narrative) are pretty cheap and shameful.

I totally agree with that.

Agreed, IF that's indeed the chain of argument. But that's not the case for everyone - I don't blame Schumacher/Benetton for Senna's accident at all (what a silly idea), but I still think they cheated in 1994.

I don't see how you come to that conclusion, what did he do wrong for the other 15 races in 1997?

Anyway, I predict he will be disappointed in Korea, MS says it will be good to have a level playing field with the other drivers (brand new circuit for all) but as I have posted on more than one occasion now, the younger "Extreme Gen" will be full on from the first lap and he is the one who will be playing catch up. Expect some poor P1 and P2 times IMO.




Really, you mean to say a driver who gets lapped at halfway by his teammate bitched about his car?



Oh you mean Mansell getting in at the French GP and putting that evil, difficult to drive car second on the grid 0.10 behind Hill on pole?

Improve to what? The Williams was the fastest car all year from race one. Maybe it was having the most powerful engine on the grid that made it bad? I'm sure the Guys in the Minardi's were much happier with their cars and constantly pointed and laughed at the idiots who put up with that bad evil Williams




A weld around a modification on the steering column shaft failed, thats known and consistent with the car going straight at that point - irrelevent really.

What Prost has said about him in the French sport newspaper "L'Equipe" :

“He should have said he was coming back to help Rosberg, or Mercedes in its first year, or his friend Ross Brawn — it would have been easier for him,”

“It may have been a lack of humility,” added the winner of 51 grands prix, “but I think he saw himself as more powerful than that. For me, it’s just a question of age,” Prost continued. “I think the tyres are just an excuse, because Schumacher always adapted to any sort of car.”

“It was his great strength,” said the Frenchman. “It’s just not possible to return to the top after being away for three years at that age. It’s a matter of physiology.”

Yes Michael looks younger. Michael is smaller and thinner than Ralf and has had his teeth done (surprisingly small in real life compared to how he looks on TV, but thats the way Karters are born ;) )

I'm guessing to improve the design faults that Adrian Newey later admitted existed You sound like someone who plays top trumps. The Renault engine wasn't all about more power IIRC Ferrari had the most power.

Cheap and shameful, is causing a crash to win points the same year 2 drivers died in crashes, against one of the pallbearers

One thing is certain, in any other sport Benetton would have been thrown out of the competition. Ben Johnson is more deserving of his 100m Gold Medal IMO

About the welding of the steering wheel, it is true indeed, but, because there's a but...nobody knows whether it broke before or after the hitting the wall. Some also argue that the car's suspension went sooo low, that the car was transformed into a skidding dragster, the datas prove that Ayrton was pushing on the brakes to their maximum, and, and the welding of the steering wheel had been done during the night prior to the race upon Senna's request, because it was to high for him...

Well it's quite clear from his career that Prost was in the game for a different reason, he like many don't seem to get that Schumacher is actually foremost a racer who loves it and can't stay away from it (Bikes, Karts, ROC etc).

Adapt to what car? Schumacher only drove in 2 teams and as I mentioned before was a gradual build process of both team and car over years not just "jump in a car and go fast instantly" as Senna could or even Prost himself for that matter.

Your first part, I think everyone agrees, certainly after an audit between German & Swiss banks told that his fortune was evaluated (after retirement) to around 850 Mio €.

On second, you are one who says again that the car was built around him, right ?
Why was then the F60 so bad with a Raikkonen on top ?
Senna did not adapt to the Williams, he complained about it sveral times to Alain Prost, saying it was undrivable, and that he could not find the solution.
Engineers build cars according to the rules and the various technical possibilities and not to the pilots. They do follow pilot's advises, but end of the day, engineers are and will remain engineers.

By the way, he did drive for Jordan too, and was 6th in Spa at his F1 debut !

I guess you will not be very popular with Senna fans. Are you really saying that Senna didn't adapt to Williams car? This will make him look...... human.

Human in the race, super human qualifying?

You obviously did not read my signature...
I met Ayrton personally in Spa in 91 and talked to him for about 20 minutes (I was developing alloy wheels for Toyota Europe, and one of the supplier was O.Z.), I can tell you : 1. He was no machine, 2. I never forgot this meeting, and became his greatest afficionado !

WTF has the F60 or Kimi got to do with the price of fish?



I am so over that comment like you can't believe - the "undrivable car" that was on pole for the first 3 races, how the other 24 drivers would have loved to have such an undrivable car under them - have you been following this thread? All the 1994 cars had "undrivable" problems not just the Williams thats why the teams united and complained to the FIA, status quo - but Senna, as usual, mouthed off about his problems while most of the drivers like Schumacher just got on with resolving them.



Get a grip Mate, of course primarily a design has to comply and take every advantage of the rules criteria but the whole of Schumacher's career success was having the car and team tailored around him (as it is for many drivers), you obviously are ill informed on the subject which is ludicrous considering it's mentioned every second darn post in this thread.

Cheapracer hey ? You are the kinda guy I like, being immediately aggressive, don't know why, people strangly in this world have different opinions.
I don't understand, being French speaker, your first remark, sorry !
Your second : Senna did not mouth out to the medias if I remember correctly. It is only after his passing away, years later, that Alain Prost talked about his personal converstaion with him, and his worries (Senna's). I am not talking about the other pilots here, I am talking about Ayrton, so why compare ?
Your third sentence : than you should only read every two posts. Gosh, I had to look in the dictionary to know what "ludicrous" meant. You must be an English teacher ?
No hard feeling though "mate" (very British that one too), but, hey, aren't we here to talk about what we believe in, we, you and me, might be sometimes wrong, that's evidently why I am here in this Forum, to exchange, learn, tell myself : "hum, this guy is right, so change opinion". But usually it is done gentleman like, not spitting rage saying that 50% of us are morons. Or am I wrong ? I am the kind of guy who accepts critics when pragmatic and valuable...
Gear your weapons out, I am no enemy !

This pictures makes me think about someone more worried than ready to "mouth" at anything, look at his eyebrows :

The Secret Life of Michael Schumacher
http://www.formula1.com/news/interviews/2010/10/11393.html

That`s BS, like usual when you make a comment about Senna, St. Schumacher, Williams and 94.

Pat Symonds himself stated (In the F1Racing magazine IIRC) that the `94 Benetton was a very good and smooth car, that adapted very well to setup changes and new parts, even after the rule changes during the season.

Edit: I don`t know how many of you were around in the early nineties, but Williams always had very aggressive and sometimes undriveable cars during that time.

No comment !

Forums » Grassroots Motorsports » Schumacher's Benetton B194 for sale! Nov. 10, 2009 7:58 a.m. DukeOfUndersteer Dork
I remember watching him hit Damon in Australia.

Ebay Listing said:

This is your unique opportunity to own a peace of Formula One history!

For sale is the F1 race car, with which Michael Schumacher won his first Formula One Driver’s Championship at the Adelaide GP of Australia.

Most remembered are the scenes were Michael Schumacher had a collision with Damon hill and his Williams-Renault ending up both had to retire the race and Michael Schumacher could use his one point advantage to be the 1994 F1-Driver’s Champion.

This is a B194 made by Benetton equipped with a Ford-Cosworth Zetec-R 3.5 litres V8 engine.

The car is in condition as in the 1994 Formula One season with paddle shift and traction control. The car is in racing condition, with the painting and sponsoring scheme as in 1994.

The engine was overhauled by Langford Performance Engineering / Wellingborough (UK) and was since then just running a few minutes for test and check reasons.

from : http://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm...le/15945/page1/

It's also on wet weather tyres. Does that mean it always had those?

Iirc that's one of the cars that's been run in the EuroBOSS Championship. A championship for rich jetset enjoying the drive of old F1 cars. They're not for racing drivers. It's a championship with very loose technical regulations. I think it's highly plausible (if not probable) that the owner has had traction control installed, or otherwise activated.



You can actually see some pictures of it on www.euroboss.com

Says a lot of how low this thread has sunk, when an ebay ad is used to show "proof" for weird conspiracy theories.

Zoe

I've never heard someone referring to an FW14 or FW15C, or even their less succesful predecessors from 1990 and early 1991 as undriveable. The fact that they had the most electronic gizmos on board also makes it highly unlikely that they were even as hard, let alone harder to drive than other cars on the grid. The FW16 may have had some design flaws, notably in the period Senna was alive to drive it, but once these were worked out it turned out to be just another rocketship.

Damon Hill practically won the championship in it for crying out loud.

I didn't mean to sink the thread, sorry if I did, wasn't meant at all.
I had in the back of my head the reading of this article in another Forum and I did say "no comment"
Who will in any case know what was ?
Sorry if you felt I was not reasonable, again it was not meant that way.

nom.

For all the bashing Mansell and Hill got for winning their championships in dominant cars, they were bloody good development drivers and deserved those cars. Mansell went through a lot of failures before williams got it right. As was Michael Schumacher a good development driver and bloody hard worker (before I get accused of something).

Mansell, great driver all round, a legend, but I wouldn't place him among the better development drivers, unless he contributed by simply butting out. Wasn't he notoriously uninterested and uninvolved in testing and such, or was that earlier in his career?

Hill may have been a great development driver, I don't know, but definitely not one of the best "drivers" per se, in terms of speed, pace, nerves, ... I was happy for him when he finally got his championship, yes, but I'll always remember him as a bit "ordinary".

Prost thinks MS faillure is a matter of aging and the tire thing is just an excuse.

http://www.marca.com/2010/10/19/motor/form...1287497844.html

Hill had good days and bad days which wasnt really good enough to be world champion if youre going to be super critical. But his good days (look them up on youtube) leaving prost for dust, forcing the 'great one' into several mistakes , taking him off pole at Monaco, and second to Senna at Donnington in the wet. If you watch those races and didn't know it was Hill youd have thought he must have been some great from the past, certainly not mr ordinary. His handling of the pressure at Japan 96 was faultless after making a bit of a meal of previous races and me being someone who gets nervous before races, would say Hill was way above ordinary in Japan (he has the DNA of his father after all)
Hamilton could do with a finish like Japan 96 to help his credentials IMO.

Add Hungary, 1997 to that list. I rate it as his best drive, ever. If it was Michael Schumacher in his place people would still be using that one Sunday afternoon to justify his presence in F1.

Too true
A much as I stick up for Hill, his drive was such that I always still wonder what the hell he had under the bonnet that day. But IIRC, he took Schumacher under braking?
It was nice to see the hug between him and Jacques at the end after an era devoid of hugs.

Are you aware Alain Prost won his last motorsport title only two years ago at the age of 53? I think he is well aware what it feels like to crave a racing environment after he had retired from F1.