Video of Team Mansell racing in the LMS series
http://www.grid1.tv/videos/featured/the-mansells
Come on Nigel!!!
Printable View
Video of Team Mansell racing in the LMS series
http://www.grid1.tv/videos/featured/the-mansells
Come on Nigel!!!
Nigel looks wrong without the moustache.
I think that they should put the moustache on the car somewhere. As far as I know, there's only been one car with a moustache on it and that was called "Geoff - the Hammerhead Eagle iThrust".
Nigel a legend? Well we know that :-]
And I also recall the Nigel Haters. Back then there was no Internet but there were those who constantly attacked and criticized him.
And they too were proven wrong over and again. They never learnt - they're still too dumb!!!!
Nige was special. A Legend? ya...I think so...
rofl henners. It is that obvious isn't it?
Of course. For any personality such as him, there are the detractors, as well as the fans. Cheif among the detractors are everyone who worked for McLaren in 1995 :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Saint Devote
Not watched the video but from what I understand he's one of the biggest bellends going. He used to own a golf course down my way and not a single person I know has a kind word to say about him, apparently very arrogant and not a particularly nice chap.
I personally lost respect for him when I found out that he would throw people off the golf course whenever he felt like having a round on his own. Fair enough that it's his course but don't chuck people off when they're in the middle of a game.
Nigel is a racing Legend - fact. End of story. Bosh!
Of course Henners is right, but I cannot resist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Devote
Mansell was one of the most overrated drivers of all time, most of the time he was beaten by his teammates and a better driver would have taken at least 4 titles with the cars he had. Aside from that, he was a massive prick and a crybaby. :D
LOL :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
put the moustache on the car ahhahahahahahaha LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
Even if every word of the above is true, he's still an absolute legend in my eyes. I base this on absolutely no logic or reasoning, that's just the way it is and I'm not in the slightest bit ashamed :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
Bah! You're just some young whippersnapper! What would you know? You just know a few people who know nigel. Nigel is the pervian jellybean eating snake of the F1 world and if you don't know what that means then I hope all of your hair falls out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jan Yeo
As Hitlers one testicle once said "I like cheese"
Never mind titles - Stirling Moss never won a single title and was considered by Fangio to be his toughest opponent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
Nigel is only fourth on the alltime winners list, behind Schumacher, Prost and Senna at 31 grands prix and 32 pole positions - versus the pole position god Senna's total of 41 or that other slow coach Prost with 33 pole positions!
Of course Schumacher makes them all look weeny so whence Nigel?
Mansell? Underachievers like him should NOT be allowed in F1 :rolleyes:
Thus spake Gaaaaaarwee....!
Now back to rational programming.
Nigel was/is a legend in F1, and open wheel racing in general...'nuff said :D
I don't care much for how he runs his Country Golf Club. As an F1 fan, all I cared about was that, when in an F1 car, be it the Williams Judd in '88, the Lotus in '82 or the Ferrari in '89-'90, he gave 100% and probably had bigger balls than Buster Gonad.
I also had admiration for the way he won the Indy series in '94 as a rookie.
Quite what happened in '95 I don't know, but that was a big dissapointment.
While Mansell was never the best driver on the grid, he was easily one of the most exciting. Cause his popularity isn't explained by his personality ;)
I consider Moss to have been the best driver on the F1 grid during the period between Fangio's retirement until Moss' retirement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Devote
Quite, what with him coming from Birmbinggggggham and all that.Quote:
Originally Posted by theugsquirrel
That's Brummist.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
Since he won the 1994 Australian Grand Prix you can't say he was over the hill in the space of a few months. Lots of things went wrong at McLaren, not least because he simply didn't get on with the McLaren management. And that the 1995 McLaren was probably one of the worst cars McLaren have ever come out with!Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
Whilst he did have a very good pole lap, he was over 30 seconds behind Hill and Schumacher less than halfway through the race. He won by virtue of being the only Benneton/Williams driver running, rather than by being fast.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark
Agreed.Quote:
Lots of things went wrong at McLaren, not least because he simply didn't get on with the McLaren management. And that the 1995 McLaren was probably one of the worst cars McLaren have ever come out with!
Considering the top cars he had (like in years 1986, 1987, 1990, 1991, 1992, even in 1994) it is given that he should have won a huge amount of races. It says a lot that with even such cars he only won one title.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Devote
Same goes for his teammates driving the same machinery....Quote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
In 86, 88, 89 90, & 91 his teammate did not win the championship either.
Errrrrrrr, in '94, if he'd won the championship that would have been very clever - ho only drove 4 races.
In 1986 he and Piquet lost because Prost was a much much better driver than them. Williams as a car was much better than what Prost had.Quote:
Originally Posted by SGWilko
I did not mention 1988 or 1989.
In 1990 Prost was fighting for the title, while Mansell was nowhere. Sennas brilliance kept the Ferrari from winning.
in 1991, Patrese was beating Mansell for the first part of the season, but then Mansell started beating him. Considering that this is the same guy a few years later kept getting lapped by Schumi in the same car and Mansell struggled against him, that doesnt speak well for Mansell.
For the most part, 1991 was written off due to the unreliability of both the semi auto 'box and the still developing active ride.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
Until 2010, Schumi's teammates generally had two hopes - one was Bob......
I think in '89 the Ferrari was a top car, shame the reliability could not keep up with the rest of the car - too many times the alternator belt went west rendering the solenoids on the semi auto 'box useless. SIlly how such an insignificant part can ruin a race car reputation - and such a beautiful car too.....
You just hate Mansell. I am on the side of Chapman and Williams who recognized Nigel was a very special individual.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
And again, your fixation on titles rather than race wins is convenient - albeit that doing so axiomatically places Stirling Moss in the same category you do Mansell.
You are very wrong in this matter. For every argument you level against Nigel [and Jenson I might add] also erodes the status of other drivers that are recognized greats.
You may overlook this little abstract contradiction in order to attack using concretes. But it is illogical.
Mansell would have won the title in 1986 if that tyre hadn't blown itself to pieces 19 laps from home.Quote:
Originally Posted by Garry Walker
Ironically, if Piquet hadn't pitted, then Prost wouldn't have past him and then Piquet would have been on 72 points to Prost's 69.
Prost won the 1986 title because of 14mm of rubber.
Prost won because he put himself in a position to win the title going into the last race, with an inferior car.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
I don't believe Prost had a mega strong team mate stealing points off him. If only Mansell or PK had been in that Williams with a weak team mate yo back them up the championship would have been settled well before oz.Quote:
Originally Posted by theugsquirrel
Certainly Nige was bested in the early part of '91, but do bear in mind Patrese was the incumbent in that team at the time and it only took Mansell half a season to beat him, and by 1992 - by the time he really understood how to maximise the active ride - he totally wiped the floor with him to the tune of seconds per lap!
Even if you take away the 9 wins he scored in that dominant FW14B his record is still an impressive 22 wins. The man is a Leg End - end of story.
Amen.Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
Shame about the B&B Henners, eh? ;)
Henners = spot on!
He wasn't the greatest of his generation - but what a generation?! PK, Prost, Senna; triple or better WDC's. To get even 15 wins in an era like that would be impressive, but 31! And involved in (at least) 3 close championship fights - one of which deservedly went his way.
Gross! But LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by henners88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Devote
Saint.
What many racing fans don't know ( I suspect you do) is the bad publicity Nigel received was directly due to two overriding reasons, (1) he came from the wrong side of the tracks, he had to finance his early career himself, he raced and won with second hand out of date cars, he even had to take a second mortgage on his house to continue his career, he was unlike nearly every other F1 driver of his time he was working class and had a midlands accent, he was seen by his contemporaries as a below stairs upstart with ambition above his place.
(2) Nigel like many working class people needed to financially capitalize on his ability, as his star began to rise in F1 he was approached by several Journalists offering their services as his publicity agent, two of which were hacks on the times and telegraph, Nigel refused their offer, from then on Nigel was attacked at every turn by those who he had rebuffed.
Saint, if you have the time and inclination to research either or both of those papers during Nigel's time at the top you will find that neither paper ever wrote anything good regarding him, in fact I well remember one of said papers condemning him (after he won a race for Williams) for having a dull boring midlands accent, I admit Nigel didn't have the light touch of Senna, or the financial ability of Prost to purchase a seat in the best car, but what he did have was determination, drive, and above all the will to win whatever the odds, it's no wonder Ferarri fans refered to him as "the lion"
Regards scaliwag.
Gilles Villeneuve carved a similar path en route to F1. It's no wonder that the tifosi regarded Mansell as his natural successor at Ferrari.
I would hazard a guess that quite a few drivers didn't have an easy road to F1. Ok, Nigel was no Elio, but nor was he the exception when it came to making sacrifices for his motorsport career; it's just that this story has been built up by and around Mansell until it has reach historical proportions.Quote:
Originally Posted by scaliwag
I can almost see Nigel being interviewed now: "No-one ever in F1 history had it harder." :p
Still, there's no doubt he made the very most of the ability he had.
The discussion, arguments and ratings of Mansell remind a bit of that from the G.Villeneuve thread. And considering their "spectacularity", rather unsurprisingly. For instance in terms of performance Berger at least matched Mansell in 1989. A year later both of them got beaten by their new team-mates (Senna and Prost) in quite a similar fashion. But despite all that, how many people really rate Berger as an equivalent to Mansell? So again the rightful question can be asked - who is really over-/underrated?
Prost described the 1991 641 Ferrari as a dog, not the 1990 640 with which Prost won 5 GP's and Mansell only 1.Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
Prost blew Mansell away.
I dont actually hate him. I just think he is overrated by a huge amount these days and before are forgetting to look at the facts that for most part of his career he was not any better than the many teammates he had.Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Devote
I dont care how many titles Mansell had or how many wins. My point is that he struggled against many of his teammates. But yes, titles are the most important things in F1. If you have the best car, you should win the title. Mansell had that for 3-4 years and only took 1 title.Quote:
And again, your fixation on titles rather than race wins is convenient - albeit that doing so axiomatically places Stirling Moss in the same category you do Mansell.
You are very wrong in this matter. For every argument you level against Nigel [and Jenson I might add] also erodes the status of other drivers that are recognized greats.
You may overlook this little abstract contradiction in order to attack using concretes. But it is illogical.
Who was Alain Prosts teammate? Keke Rosberg - a world champion. The same guy who in the year before beat Nigel Mansell in EQUAL cars (both in points and in Qualifying). That Rosberg was humiliated by Prost and shone against Mansell shows one thing, but I will let you decide what it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonic
Still believe in your argument?
Patrese hated the car in 1992. He had no confidence in it at all. He himself has said so. That said, Patrese was not a very good driver. Schumacher kept lapping him in 1993.Quote:
Certainly Nige was bested in the early part of '91, but do bear in mind Patrese was the incumbent in that team at the time and it only took Mansell half a season to beat him, and by 1992 - by the time he really understood how to maximise the active ride - he totally wiped the floor with him to the tune of seconds per lap!
With his cars, he should have 3-4 titles and many more race wins. I maintain that. Prost or Senna would have. If he hadnt lucked into the crazygood williams in 1992 with a nobody as teammate (and instead had had Schumacher, Senna or Prost), then we would be talking about nigel mansell - 0 times world champion.Quote:
Even if you take away the 9 wins he scored in that dominant FW14B his record is still an impressive 22 wins. The man is a Leg End - end of story.
What an awful example. The michelin tyres were never suitable for the conditions, the ones Mansell had were. You didnt see everyone else having tyre explosions at Adelaide, did you?Quote:
Originally Posted by henners88
His teammate realized that he needed to pit to change them or they will explode, Mansell didnt. That the tyres failed after a long hard race and he didnt change them is the fault of one man - Nigel Mansell.
Prost called the 1991 car dog, the car itself in 1990 was excellent and on many occasions, the best and fastest car in the field.Quote:
In 90 Mansell was in a Ferrari which Prost described as a dog, and although the car could be fast, it was dreadfully unreliable to say the least.
16 races, 3 gearbox failures (the one in canada I am not sure was a gearbox failure, they say Mansell himself dropped the revs and let the car die. So it could be 16 races and 2 gearbox failures. Funnily, these were the only car problems he had during the year, besides a retirement in Spa due to electronics. So 3 retirements due to car problems out of 16 races. Not that bad for a car that enjoyed a massive speed advantage.Quote:
In 91 the Williams was arguably the fastest car on the grid but again an unreliable gearbox contributed to him retiring from a third of the races that season.
Mansell was one of the luckiest drivers of all time. He had awesome cars throughout his career, but on many occasions he did nothing with them.Quote:
Nigel was by no means the best driver of his generation, but he was a driver who was fast and could never be described as a quitter. An exciting racer to watch combined with his arrogant personality made him one of the greats of his time IMO. He has got 31 race wins to his name and that eclipses some triple and even 5 times WDC's. Whenever a great like Senna is discussed, there always seems to be a mention of Monaco 1992, or Silverstone 1991 so he is a big name from that era and also one of the most unluckiest IMO. :)
Fact1 - Mansells all time qualifying record is 92:97 (so he lost to his teammate in Q more times than he beat his teammate in Q)
The only teammates out of the 10 he had that he had a positive Q record against were Patrese and Piquet (of course, it took the Imola crash after which Piquet was never the same for that to happen).
He finished behind his teammate more than he finished in front of his teammate.
Those are not good facts for Mansells greatness. As a driver of his generation, I would not rate him any better than Rosberg, Piquet, Berger, De Angelis. The opposite in fact.
Prost won the title because in an inferior car he took it to the williams guys all year long.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
Mansells tyre did not last - it was only one mans problem. His. He used it too much and destroyed it.
excellent post.Quote:
Originally Posted by jens
You cant get away from the facts regardless of anyone's opinion.
Nigel is the fourth highest ever race winner in F1.
He was afraid of nobody and overtook people in places where overtaking was supposedly impossible, winning the races.
He was the measure of all the drivers of his day.
He was one of the toughest and drove in his championship year with a broken foot.
He did not withdraw from a race when he was being soaked and burnt by exposure to fuel.
Colin Chapman and Frank Williams recognized his ability.
No. Nigel is a legend and it is the little bitter people that squeal against this giant of a racing driver.
We LOVED Nigel racing that Red 5 and he loved the fans back.
Sucks to be those who did not enjoy that time. Indeed.
And as for the usual ignorant comments about driving the Williams FW14b - is it the unique violin that makes the violinist or the person?
To use any instrument or drive any racing car requires the person that can use it. It is a false argument therefore.
Once again Garry, you argue concretes and are defeated by your abstracts. Confusion ought to be your name - philosphically speaking of course.