Driving Skills: WRC vs F1

Mpower · 5th November 2005, 04:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by killjoy

are you sure that the speeds are lower?

Ya man. you cant drive 345 clicks on loose dirt.

killjoy · 8th November 2005, 20:58

alright then

got nothing more to say

jkdas · 8th November 2005, 21:44

yahooooo my side leads.

wrc rules

why? see the tracks they do!

end of story.

Steeroid · 8th November 2005, 22:07

My personal opinion is that WRC is much much more demanding - you dont go round and round the same flat, smooth circuit in WRC, you have to watch the road, shift gears, execute spectacular and tight turns AND listen to your navigator all at the same time. Timings are as important, and reflexes have to be sharper EVEN IF speeds are slower because there are dips, turns, potholes, et al coming up every now and then unlike the predictable F1 circuit where you know exactly when to shift down to take that corner. F1 is too predictable, unless there is an overtaking manouvre which happens about once in a year or unless you have Takuma Sato within a few hundred meters of you...

Driver strain is also much more in WRC - just see the pounding they take while keeping the vehicle on the road.

F1 is more TV-friendly, but WRC is definitely the more demanding of the two. At least in F1 you dont get penalised for arriving too early!

Tom · 9th November 2005, 10:59

F1 makes a good spectator sport.
Well marketed too...IMO a little over-hyped.

tsk1979 · 9th November 2005, 11:27

WRC is more difficult. the amount of "unexpected" is huge. For example, remeber the TV grab in which the navigator swats down a bird which got in through the roof vent? The navigator says "Did you see that", the driver asks "what"!

Rtech · 9th November 2005, 11:32

Tom, you'd be surprised at the number of spectators for most WRC's. Where the WRC loses out is television viewership, and consequently the hype that goes into building it up in the press.

However the FIA has pumped in so much money into its coverage, that its amazing to watch now, far better than F1. But, there will never be live coverage of WRC.

Tom · 9th November 2005, 16:25

well i what i meant was that F1is a more spectator 'friendly' sport.
I think one of the stages of rally of GB was aired live once

Mpower · 2nd December 2005, 08:03

Not to downplay WRC, but they do get pacenotes that tell them exactly what kinds of events are coming ahead and what speed they should be doing.

RacingForIndia · 31st December 2005, 12:53

Difficult to compare, but I think it would be easy for a WRC driver to switch to F1 but for a F1 pilot to switch to WRC would be very difficult simply because the attributes are very different.
I presonally prefer F1 because of the shape of the cars, the engine noise (pity they are changing to 2.4 L V8's from 06) and the glamor (grid gals included).

turbolader · 1st January 2006, 19:06

On a given new circuit,a WRC driver will get to his best lap times faster than a F1 driver.But a F1 driver always improvises every lap,so after a numer of laps im sure the F1 driver would be about 3-4secs fater than the WRC driver.But that dsnt mean F1 drivers are better than WRC or vice-versa.People say WRC driving is more involving,but what bout a F1 driver pressing one button out of somany at the right time at 300+kmph?Its like 2 really good drivers,just that one likes a lot of gravel and the other speed.

balenopower · 1st January 2006, 22:54

rally drivers...i mean its tedious to drive f1 cars as well but just looking at the condition the wrc cars race in and the extreme conditions made me vote fer the wrc drivers.

Fuelled · 2nd January 2006, 00:37

i think the skills are equal. but the mindset of the drivers must prob be v diff.

though i'm hooked more on to f1, still wrc gets my vote.. cos a mistake in f1 means u'l be slow. in wrc ur off the road.. BANGED into a tree or flipped over lotsa times.

PS: offtopic.. but i wish some sports channel covers wrc better than its done now

tifosikrishna · 2nd January 2006, 09:34

hey, its strange to see a lot of auto buffs voting for wrc. i personally feel the skill sets required and different and are hard to compare.

wrc looks more spectacular with hand brake turns and acrobatic displays, but kind of pressure and g forces experienced by f1 drivers are less apparent. imagine running over a kerb at 300kmph without any suspension, and doing it again and again for over 60 to 70 laps. when f1 drivers are compared with fighter pilots, i guess its not that hard to imagine.

secondly, a f1 driver is put to test over 300kms for more than an hour. i think concentration levels of these drivers are in a different league than any others in the sport. staying focussed for such long periods of time requires very high level of energy and practice. f1 is like running a marathon at the speed of a 100m sprint.

when it comes to risk taking, f1 are equally gutsy as their wrc counterparts. driving around monaco or taking eau rouge at 250+ kms (at spa) may look less spectacular, but they are as daring as any manuever in wrc.

hats off to f1.

rapideffect · 2nd January 2006, 11:36

My Vote is for WRC.

F-1 is maneuvering the high end machine at high speeds on a well laid track.WRC is maneuvering the normal car enabled with rally sport kits at variable speeds on a tough/rough terrain.

View Poll Results: Who do you think has better driving skills ?
World Rally Championship drivers	109	67.70%
Formula 1 drivers	16	9.94%
They're both equal	36	22.36%
Voters: 161. You may not vote on this poll

8th November 2005, 20:58	#32
killjoy BHPian Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Bangalore Posts: 753 Thanked: 317 Times View My Garage	alright then got nothing more to say
	() Thanks

8th November 2005, 21:44	#33
jkdas Senior - BHPian Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Thiruvananthapu Posts: 9,687 Thanked: 1,492 Times View My Garage	yahooooo my side leads. wrc rules why? see the tracks they do! end of story.
	() Thanks

8th November 2005, 22:07	#34
Steeroid Senior - BHPian Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: N.A Posts: 7,046 Thanked: 2,751 Times	My personal opinion is that WRC is much much more demanding - you dont go round and round the same flat, smooth circuit in WRC, you have to watch the road, shift gears, execute spectacular and tight turns AND listen to your navigator all at the same time. Timings are as important, and reflexes have to be sharper EVEN IF speeds are slower because there are dips, turns, potholes, et al coming up every now and then unlike the predictable F1 circuit where you know exactly when to shift down to take that corner. F1 is too predictable, unless there is an overtaking manouvre which happens about once in a year or unless you have Takuma Sato within a few hundred meters of you... Driver strain is also much more in WRC - just see the pounding they take while keeping the vehicle on the road. F1 is more TV-friendly, but WRC is definitely the more demanding of the two. At least in F1 you dont get penalised for arriving too early!
	() Thanks

9th November 2005, 10:59	#35
Tom BHPian Join Date: May 2004 Location: Bangalore, India. Posts: 401 Thanked: 0 Times	F1 makes a good spectator sport. Well marketed too...IMO a little over-hyped.
	() Thanks

9th November 2005, 11:27	#36
tsk1979 Team-BHP Support Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 23,717 Thanked: 22,825 Times View My Garage	WRC is more difficult. the amount of "unexpected" is huge. For example, remeber the TV grab in which the navigator swats down a bird which got in through the roof vent? The navigator says "Did you see that", the driver asks "what"!
	() Thanks

9th November 2005, 11:32	#37
Rtech Team-BHP Support Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Bombay Posts: 5,770 Thanked: 359 Times View My Garage	Tom, you'd be surprised at the number of spectators for most WRC's. Where the WRC loses out is television viewership, and consequently the hype that goes into building it up in the press. However the FIA has pumped in so much money into its coverage, that its amazing to watch now, far better than F1. But, there will never be live coverage of WRC.
	() Thanks

9th November 2005, 16:25	#38
Tom BHPian Join Date: May 2004 Location: Bangalore, India. Posts: 401 Thanked: 0 Times	well i what i meant was that F1is a more spectator 'friendly' sport. I think one of the stages of rally of GB was aired live once
	() Thanks

2nd December 2005, 08:03	#39
Mpower Senior - BHPian Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Bangalore Posts: 10,409 Thanked: 1,730 Times View My Garage	Not to downplay WRC, but they do get pacenotes that tell them exactly what kinds of events are coming ahead and what speed they should be doing.
	() Thanks

31st December 2005, 12:53	#40
RacingForIndia BHPian Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Pune Posts: 482 Thanked: 36 Times View My Garage	Difficult to compare, but I think it would be easy for a WRC driver to switch to F1 but for a F1 pilot to switch to WRC would be very difficult simply because the attributes are very different. I presonally prefer F1 because of the shape of the cars, the engine noise (pity they are changing to 2.4 L V8's from 06) and the glamor (grid gals included).
	() Thanks

1st January 2006, 19:06	#41
turbolader BHPian Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: andheri Posts: 138 Thanked: 0 Times	On a given new circuit,a WRC driver will get to his best lap times faster than a F1 driver.But a F1 driver always improvises every lap,so after a numer of laps im sure the F1 driver would be about 3-4secs fater than the WRC driver.But that dsnt mean F1 drivers are better than WRC or vice-versa.People say WRC driving is more involving,but what bout a F1 driver pressing one button out of somany at the right time at 300+kmph?Its like 2 really good drivers,just that one likes a lot of gravel and the other speed.
	() Thanks

1st January 2006, 22:54	#42
balenopower BHPian Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Bombay Posts: 957 Thanked: 465 Times View My Garage	rally drivers...i mean its tedious to drive f1 cars as well but just looking at the condition the wrc cars race in and the extreme conditions made me vote fer the wrc drivers.
	() Thanks

2nd January 2006, 00:37	#43
Fuelled BHPian Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: delhi Posts: 252 Thanked: 2 Times	i think the skills are equal. but the mindset of the drivers must prob be v diff. though i'm hooked more on to f1, still wrc gets my vote.. cos a mistake in f1 means u'l be slow. in wrc ur off the road.. BANGED into a tree or flipped over lotsa times. PS: offtopic.. but i wish some sports channel covers wrc better than its done now
	() Thanks

2nd January 2006, 09:34	#44
tifosikrishna BHPian Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: chennai Posts: 827 Thanked: 383 Times View My Garage	hey, its strange to see a lot of auto buffs voting for wrc. i personally feel the skill sets required and different and are hard to compare. wrc looks more spectacular with hand brake turns and acrobatic displays, but kind of pressure and g forces experienced by f1 drivers are less apparent. imagine running over a kerb at 300kmph without any suspension, and doing it again and again for over 60 to 70 laps. when f1 drivers are compared with fighter pilots, i guess its not that hard to imagine. secondly, a f1 driver is put to test over 300kms for more than an hour. i think concentration levels of these drivers are in a different league than any others in the sport. staying focussed for such long periods of time requires very high level of energy and practice. f1 is like running a marathon at the speed of a 100m sprint. when it comes to risk taking, f1 are equally gutsy as their wrc counterparts. driving around monaco or taking eau rouge at 250+ kms (at spa) may look less spectacular, but they are as daring as any manuever in wrc. hats off to f1. Last edited by tifosikrishna : 2nd January 2006 at 09:35.
	() Thanks

2nd January 2006, 11:36	#45
rapideffect BHPian Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: mumbai Posts: 147 Thanked: 4 Times	My Vote is for WRC. F-1 is maneuvering the high end machine at high speeds on a well laid track.WRC is maneuvering the normal car enabled with rally sport kits at variable speeds on a tough/rough terrain.
	() Thanks