The Fastest F1 cars of all time

[Bruce D]

I realise this is very subjective and is open to criticism but I thought it could be an interesting topic. I decided to try and compare all the cars over the years and then make a figurative lap time and see what would have been the quickest over time. I've compared what I considered to be the best cars of each season (that's open for discussion but the fact is what you may think was a quicker car may only have been a few tenths quicker so for the point of the exercise it doesn't really matter), I've compared each car against the car best car from the previous season on the same track, therefore getting the difference in percentage time of each other. Then I've kept a running percentage total which this is multiplied against, therefore eventually comparing the 1950 Alfa Romeo 158 against the 2011 Red Bull RB7 Renault.

So in year order:

CAR YEAR FIG LAP TIME
Alfa Romeo 158 -1950 2:00.000
Alfa Romeo 159 -1951 1:55.410
Ferrari 500 -1952 2:03.998
Maserati A6SSG -1953 1:58.519
Mercedes W196 -1954 1:56.603
Mercedes W196 -1955 1:55.046
Lancia Ferrari D50-1956 1:53.824
Maserati 250F 1957 1:53.935
Vanwall 1958 1:52.259
Cooper T51 Climax 1959 1:51.109
Lotus 18 Climax 1960 1:47.888
Ferrari 156 1961 1:50.074
BRM P57 1962 1:46.508
Lotus 25 Climax 1963 1:45.358
Lotus 25 Climax 1964 1:45.013
Lotus 33 Climax 1965 1:44.668
Brabham BT19 Repco 1966 1:41.332
Lotus 49 Ford 1967 1:37.307
Lotus 49 Ford 1968 1:36.432
Lotus 49B Ford 1969 1:32.993
Lotus 72 Ford 1970 1:30.290
Tyrrell 003 Ford 1971 1:29.301
Lotus 72D Ford 1972 1:27.450
Tyrrell 006 Ford 1973 1:28.294
Ferrari 312B3 1974 1:26.849
Ferrari 312T 1975 1:26.395
Ferrari 312T2 1976 1:28.211
Lotus 78 Ford 1977 1:26.956
Lotus 79 Ford 1978 1:24.404
Ferrari 312T4 1979 1:22.669
Williams FW07B Ford 1980 1:19.688
Williams FW07C Ford 1981 1:22.871
Renault RE30B 1982 1:16.245
Brabham BT52 BMW 1983 1:18.112
Brabham BT53 BMW 1984 1:15.185
Lotus 97T Renault 1985 1:14.174
Williams FW11 Honda 1986 1:12.681
Williams FW11B Honda 1987 1:13.001
McLaren MP4-4 Honda 1988 1:14.022
McLaren MP4-5 Honda 1989 1:13.055
McLaren MP4-5B Honda 1990 1:10.685
McLaren MP4-6 Honda 1991 1:09.545
Williams FW14B Renault 1992 1:09.515
Williams FW15C Renault 1993 1:09.709
Williams FW16 Renault 1994 1:09.265
Williams FW17 Renault 1995 1:10.121
Williams FW18 Renault 1996 1:09.062
Williams FW19 Renault 1997 1:07.873
McLaren MP4-13 Mercedes 1998 1:08.037
McLaren MP4-14 Mercedes 1999 1:10.174
Ferrari F1-2000 2000 1:08.675
Ferrari F2001 2001 1:06.284
Ferrari F2002 2002 1:05.384
Ferrari F2003-GA 2003 1:06.350
Ferrari F2004 2004 1:04.432
McLaren MP4-20 Mercedes 2005 1:05.155
Ferrari F2006 2006 1:05.223
McLaren MP4-22 Mercedes 2007 1:04.948
McLaren MP4-23 Mercedes 2008 1:05.381
Brawn GP Mercedes 2009 1:06.093
Red Bull RB6 Renault 2010 1:05.384
Red Bull RB7 Renault 2011 1:04.440

What this list means is that if the 1950 Alfa Romeo 158 could do a lap time around a circuit of 2min, then the current 2011 Red Bull would do it in 1:04.440.

It's interesting from this chart to note the changes in regulations over the years and how that effected the figurative lap time and how development improved rapidly in the 70s and 80s.

So in theory the fastest F1 cars ever were the 2004 versions, followed by the current cars.

[Rollo]

It might depend on what your definition of fastest is.

The Benetton B186 in qualifying trim was speed trapped 351.22km/h at Monza in 1986. The car had an explosive 1750bhp on tap.
Montoya was clocked at Monza in 2005 doing 372km/h in the McLaren.

The question then is, how fast can you go without wings?
The BAR-Honda went 413.205km/h without wings, but fins in their place.
YouTube - ‪F1 Bar Honda 400 kmh‬‏ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xobuLNLrODs)
The 1937 Mercedes-Benz W125 Rekordwagen did a speed of 432.7 km/h but that wasn't exactly an F1 car on an F1 track either.

I think that the potential to go the fastest in an F1 car would be the Benetton provided you removed the wings and didn't really car about blowing the engine to pieces after you'd done it.

[Bruce D]

Ok well in terms of "fastest" I meant what it is capable of doing over a lap of a circuit. For instance I stayed away from comparing lap times over Hockenheim (the old proper one) or Monza because those are just power circuits, I tried to stick to medium speed circuits where possible to try and see the cars potential over a average circuit. You could compare high speed circuits only and like you say look at speed traps to see who is the fastest ever, but that is fairly pointless. You own example of the Benetton B186 vs the McLaren only really shows that the McLaren was more aero-efficient than the Benetton, as it was lacking about 800bhp but capable of a higher speed, and like you say a BAR with no wings went quicker, but would have sucked at trying to lap at the same speed as the McLaren around even Monza.

[Don Capps]

Ever heard of Cyril Posthumus? The Grand Prix Car, Volumes 1 & 2? Leonard Setright? The Grand Prix Car, Volume 3?

While I have never quite seen the point of this sort of thing, the technical geeks seem to get all dreamy-eyed over this sort of skulduggery.

[Bruce D]

Don, I haven't read those books, but I think it's just interesting to see how technology and development has improved these cars over time. I found some interesting little bits of information out of it, things I wouldn't have thought of at the time.

[Don Capps]

While I have rather little to no real interest in all the sorts of the technical things that people seem to slobber over, the books mentioned (which are, alas!, usually hideously if not criminally over-priced) were written which much the same notion and methodolgy in mind, Posthumus creating a coefficient of some sort for the cars and Setright ending his book with 1966 apparently due to the coeeficient for whatever GP machine it -- Ferrari 312? -- was hitting the mystical "200" number regarding the coefficient.

My orignals of the Posthumus books were not first editions, but bought new at some point in the Fifties; ditto the Setright volume which appeared around 1967 or maybe 1968, which was also bought new. The first two volumes were lost to water damage, but there was a CD-ROM of the books available some years ago which I managed to get a copy and suffices quite well for my purposes. I think that you would find them interesting, especially CP's methodolgy.

My friend Karl Ludvigsen has written pages and pages and pages on the sort of thing that interest you, being a fine technical writer and a great person to boot.

Also, Denis Jenkinson wrote a book at the end of the 1960 season, A Story of Formula 1, that does a review of all of the technical progess that took place from 1954 to 1960 within the GP ranks.

[Bob Riebe]

Ok well in terms of "fastest" I meant what it is capable of doing over a lap of a circuit. For instance I stayed away from comparing lap times over Hockenheim (the old proper one) or Monza because those are just power circuits, I tried to stick to medium speed circuits where possible to try and see the cars potential over a average circuit. You could compare high speed circuits only and like you say look at speed traps to see who is the fastest ever, but that is fairly pointless. You own example of the Benetton B186 vs the McLaren only really shows that the McLaren was more aero-efficient than the Benetton, as it was lacking about 800bhp but capable of a higher speed, and like you say a BAR with no wings went quicker, but would have sucked at trying to lap at the same speed as the McLaren around even Monza.You want the quickest, which is not the same as the fastest.

[Rollo]

Ok well in terms of "fastest" I meant what it is capable of doing over a lap of a circuit. For instance I stayed away from comparing lap times over Hockenheim (the old proper one) or Monza because those are just power circuits, I tried to stick to medium speed circuits where possible to try and see the cars potential over a average circuit. You could compare high speed circuits only and like you say look at speed traps to see who is the fastest ever, but that is fairly pointless. You own example of the Benetton B186 vs the McLaren only really shows that the McLaren was more aero-efficient than the Benetton, as it was lacking about 800bhp but capable of a higher speed, and like you say a BAR with no wings went quicker, but would have sucked at trying to lap at the same speed as the McLaren around even Monza.

The "quickest" by this definition would be the car which would hold the most lap records then, because that would give you the most capable car across a season.

The F2004 still holds 7 lap records some 7 years later. The Williams FW26 also of 2004 holds 2 and the McLaren MP4-20 of 2005 also holds two.
The F2004 has a dominance record over a season only bettered by the McLaren MP4/4 of 1988, and since every record set by the MP4/4 was eclipsed in the following seasons, it's safe to assume that the F2004 was also faster than that.

Being "fastest" or "quickest" IS something that can be empirically measured, and the only way to do either is with either a speed test or a time test.

[Mark]

Very interesting analysis! To say that a 2011 F1 car is effectively twice as fast as a 1950's F1 car does sound about right to me.

Out of interest, I expect you achieved this as there was always at least one track on the F1 calendar which also featured in the following year. Did you just use a single track comparison between years? If so which ones did you use?

[D-Type]

A clear case of "Great minds think alike". This analysis appears to address the same issue as Posthumus and Setright using what is essentially the same methodology.

Clearly there's two aspects to a Grand Prix car's average speed - speed in a straight line and speed through the corners. At different times different factors have come into play - engine power increased dramatically and weights reduced in the 30's with the advent of the 750kg formula and the 3 litre sc / 4.5 litre us formula. And again in the 50's and early 60's with the advent of the 2-litre Formula 2, 2.5 litre Formula 1 and 1.5 litre Formula 1 power per litre increased. Slightly later the introduction of lighter rear-engined cars increased mechanical grip to the extent that the 1965 1.5 litre cars were lapping as fast as the 2.5 litre cars of 1960. Then came wings which increased cornering power but reduced straight line speed and cornering power won so lap speeds increased. Next came turbo engines: more power meaning more straight line speed and/or more aerodynamic grip as there was enough power to overcome the increased drag. Ground effects again increased cornering power. And since then, we have seen an increase in engine power together with improved aerodynamics reducing drag while maintaining downforce.

To get back to the theme of this thread, Don could you possibly post Pomeroy and Setright's performance indices. It would be interesting to compare them with Bruce D's analysis. I think I have seen these indices extrapolated to the current era, but i can't remember where.

And do we have anybody sufficiently computer-literate to plot them graphically for us? That would be the easiest way to compare them.

[Bruce D]

Out of interest, I expect you achieved this as there was always at least one track on the F1 calendar which also featured in the following year. Did you just use a single track comparison between years? If so which ones did you use?

Yeah that is the case, I did compare over a single circuit on adjacent seasons, but the circuit changed according to situations like circuit configuration changing, weather, etc. I included tracks like Zandvoort, Nurburgring, Imola, Magny-Cours. I tried where I could to stick to the same circuit over the longest period so as to get a more accurate figure. So for instance I used Imola from 1982 through to 1994 because it never changed in configuration over that time. If I knew that weather was bad I either took the fastest practice time or compared lap times, but I focused mainly on qualifying times. In the case of 2006-onwards qualifying format I used the quickest time set in any of the 3 sessions.

[Bruce D]

And do we have anybody sufficiently computer-literate to plot them graphically for us? That would be the easiest way to compare them.

I could plot my data into a graph fairly easily, as my calculations are Excel based. However, comparing between my version and that found in the book would probably be difficult, as the way Don describes it sounds like a much more complicated way of getting it.

[Bruce D]

For what it's worth, here's my graph:

http://i54.tinypic.com/ienz47.jpg

[chuck34]

How much has Monaco changed over the years? Could you use that track for comparisons sake?

[D-Type]

There have been quite few changes to Monaco over the years - from Ste Devote to Portier has hardly changed; the Tunnel is longer but the alignment of the road is much the same. The chicane has regularly changed in position, width and severity. The loop round the swimming pool was added in 1973 or so. The; layout of what was the Gasometer Hairpin which is now the La Rascasse - Anthony Noghes section was changed when they somehow managed to squeeze a pit lane in. The roads will have been resurfaced and possibly re-cambered. Tramlines, lamp posts and some of the trees have gone. So, the same but not the same. There's a French language website with loads of photos from1927 to now - but I've lost the bookmark.

Thanks for the graph, it shows how progressive the increase in speed has been.

[555-04Q2]

In terms of best lap times, I would think the 2004 cars were quickest. In terms of outright speed, the turbo era of the 80's saw some rediculously fast cars doing almost 400 km/h at Monza!

[steveaki13]

In terms of best lap times, I would think the 2004 cars were quickest. In terms of outright speed, the turbo era of the 80's saw some rediculously fast cars doing almost 400 km/h at Monza!

I only started watching F1 in 91, but if thats true then thats fantastic going to be pushing 400km/h at Monza. Bring that back.