You can't use that argument tho, because F2004 had plenty of advantages that SF23 didn't Back then engines needed to last only 2 races, tyres were made specifically for Ferrari by Bridgestone pretty much, rules allowed for lighter car and driver aids. All cars are made to specific ruleset, you can't just say for one "imagine if it had this", without doing the same for other one.
@@russotusso1695 There's literally nothing that you can add from the F2004 to the SF23 that would make it faster aside from the traction control, and that would only net you like maybe 2-3 tenths per lap tops. But if you do something as simple as giving the F2004 some C5 tires, it's gonna gain multiple seconds a lap on every single track on the calendar. In that logic as well, let's just give the F2004 some DRS as well. Get that top speed another 10-20kph higher. Like, I obviously see the point of your argument, but there's really nothing for the SF23 to gain. It has massively more advanced aerodynamics and the tires are better to the point that the F2004's tires might as well be consumer-grade tires. It's not fun to imagine the new cars with driver aids, but it's a ton of fun to imagine the F2004 with new age tech under its belt.
@@firedell1031F2004 already did 367 kph at Monza now you want it to do 20 kph higher??? How much speed you want my Friend 😂 With that F2004 will cut off 2-3 seconds off
@@firedell1031 Better tires? You're joking right? In the F2004's era there was a tire war going on, the tires weren't made by only one manufacturer and purposefully made to have a short lifespan for the sake of pit strategies, sure they were grooved, but the tire manufacturers were always trying to get an edge on eachother, they were pretty much on the limit of what their rules and technology allowed, unlike pirelli tires, which are only better because they're 20 years newer. Also, if we are giving the F2004 C5 tires and DRS, let's give the SF-23 a turbo V12, get rid of the hybrid system for weight reduction and THEN compare them again. "But imagine if the f2004 had..." No. We're judging the cars under the rules they have been built for, not based on what your imagination said it would be like, and if the F2004 is to follow the rules it was designed for, it would not be the fastest car in the planet, doesn't matter how many assetto corsa simulations you've done with an F2004 with slicks, it's just not how it works.
F2004 with no race fuel like here and 2023 qualy format could be easy under 1:19,0. With slicks i think it would be about 1,5s perhaps even more on this track. so a sub 1:18,0 would be possible in modern qualy conditions with slicks
In 2004 they had race fuel for quali, usually for first 10-12 laps + the quali lap. So they had atlest 30 liters of fuel which was back then calculated to around a second a lap depending on the circuit. Even without slick those cars were monsters.
have you seen ralf schumacher´s lap around the red bull ring last year? new-gen tires but de-tuned engine (i think 750hp) and he didnt drove his car for almost 10 years and still was faster than the fastest race lap
Imagine how fast a 2023 car would be if it weren't hampered by safety, and were allowed to use as much fuel as the 2004 car, it would develop 1600hp and weigh 100kg less than it is today
love this comparisons. the 3 litre v10 era was great. Looking back at old footage, there is a distinct visual difference in how nimble the older cars were in slow turns and off the corners. I would love to see a comparison of an 86 monster in quali trim to todays cars, but I don't think any track layouts survive that match
Love that Rubens still has the race lap record. Nice guy and nice for him to have one or two spots in history books since Michael took 90% of the records.
The sad thing is we’ll never know how many drivers in equal equipment could match Michael as with Ferrari he had a clause if running one two he would always be number one. Knowing that I just can’t call him the GOAT.
@@zacharyradford5552yeah I was always a fan of Rubens rather than Michael for that reason, he was mistreated so much. People think it’s just Austria but honestly the incompetence on his side of the garage was crazy. All sorts of basic errors with pit stops etc, it was like instead of dividing the staff 50-50, Michael had every top mechanic and Rubens had none. Michael was obviously the better driver overall but it should have been a lot closer than it was and we could have had one or two good championship fights.
@@zacharyradford5552 just watch the seasons michael didnt won the championship, he was in inferior car and outperformed the top dogs, like 1998 Hungary 1996 spain and a lot of others. And outperformed Rubens like 90%
I liked Rubens but let’s be honest, he doesn’t had the quality to be a champion, you must have that something, that in my personal opinion I think the only one out of the already champions in that era was Coulthard, Irvine almost got a lucky break in 99 same as massa in 07 but they don’t quite seems to have that extra risk in the moment of truth and remain as really good drivers but that’s all Unless you get a monster car like mansell 92, hill/villeneuve 96-97 and button 09 it’s hard to see a good overall driver winning a championship Schumacher hakkinen Hamilton Alonso Verstappen kimi Vettel etc apart from been good drivers they can advise and help the team to improve the car and in the moment of truth they can risk everything for that throphy the last one been verstappen last lap of the season against Hamilton for his first championship he was all in attacking with fresh tyres and Hamilton was all in defending and attacking with old tyres, that didn’t ended in crash just by luck but they show what a champion is capable of in those moments
@@jjessus9405Schumacher didn't help any team build anything. He drove only one man car in his entire career, that Brawn, he isn't that great at building cars.
@@formulaaddict The answer is simple. DEI quota. We should be inventing tech that is twice as fast or twice as powerful today, but we are not. I've seen phenomenon across multiple car businesses as well. For example, a 2008 Arial Atom 500 V8 versus a 2023 Ariel Atom 4R...the 2008 Atom wins. DEI quota is ruining us.
@jonasjonaitis8571 what a braindead thing to say. thats just not possible lol. grooves = less rubber on the track = less grip. slicks are the opposite. modern slicks have been added to many v10 era cars in simulators and it does give seconds better lap times. go look at ralf schumacher lapping red bull ring with slicks; hes old and out of touch with the car and still faster than anyones race pace.
What do you think about making an animation comparing a lap by Alonso in 2005/2006 to one of his laps from the current season? It'd be interesting to see since the cars changed a lot, but the driver is still the same
Someone with some common sense in these comments. I'm truly puzzled how other people don't understand that the sausage curbs now slows the modern cars a lot.
>1,5s bullshit. Look at the lines. In Lesmo i.e. the 2023 even turns in a tighter radius than the 2004. And in the chicanes it's only Ascari where the diiference in racing line is really large. 2004 had: grooved tyres, race fuel loads, no DRS, no ground effect. And still being quicker. For a speed track, these cars are superior. simple as.
@@kirinoa LMAO! the Lesmo doesn't have sausage curbs so why bring those up?! From the video it clearly shows the 2004 car taking the first chicane, the 2nd chicane, and Ascari with a much tighter line. The 2023 car is able to close right up to the gearbox of the 2004 car in the first braking zone, but then suddenly teh 2004 car pulls away before even hitting the first corner apex. pretty astonishing if a grooved tire car absolutely destroy a fat slick tire in a slow corner... The 2004 car is able to get onto the power MUCH sooner, pulling a HUGE lead before it even needs to get to high speeds. 1.5s easily. People like to talk about top speeds and gaining lap time, when in fact, you win and lose the most out of slow corners. If you are going to talk about having grooved tires and no DRS, why did you l leave out traction control and TWICE the fuel flow??? If the 2023 car were allowed as much fuel it'll develop 1600hp. game over.
It seems new cars produce more downforce, allowing them to gain time in heavy braking zones (along thanks to wider slick tyres) and through high speed corners, but low weight of 2004 cars allow them to match them in low and medium speed sections, as well as less downforce allowing higher top speeds despite being around 50hp weaker.
They have higher sustained horsepower than todays cars as the V10s could sustain 900-950 Hp through the entire lap unlike todays cars where the ttv6 provides 850 Hp only and the mguk providing additional 200hp until the system clipped out therefore the sudden decrease in top speed before the end of the start finish straight. We just need the V10/V12 instead of the hybrids and with advanced technologies like VVT and direct injection we could easily creat 1100 HP from the combustion alone resulting in much higher sustained power, lighter engines and hence lighter cars and not to mention the supreme eargasmic sounds combined with todays downforce levels.
@@owaisahmed1109 One of the goals of F1 is innovation that can be carried through to the road. The smaller engines and lower fuel limits are part of that. Going back to the gas guzzlers that require multiple pit stops for refueling is not an option.
@@Croga yes but f1 has never been road relevant so why suddenly they want to show themselves as environmentalists. Plus I was referring for the carbon neutral fuels which can pave the way for higher displacement engines. F1 is an entertainment Sport and it should remain that way
@@owaisahmed1109 F1 has always been road relevant. The original ERS stood at the forefront of development of hybrid-electric and full electric cars, monococ development has lead to safer road vehicles. There is a good reason why VAG wants to become part of F1.... Next to that: No, carbon neutral fuels do not exist and are just about the biggest lie big oil companies are telling us. There are no carbon neutral gasoline fuels; they take CO2 out of a permanent storage, put it into the fuel and then into the air again. There is a very good reason why the F1 circus is lowering the fuel limits both on the cars and on the travel and that's because they know "carbon neutral fuels" is utter nonsense.
@@Croga Which I've honestly always found kind of stupid. F1 should be about seeking the ultimate performance, not progressing road cars. That should be the role of endurance racing.
Look at the acceleration of those mid 2000s V10s out of corners and the modern V6 turbo can only keep up when fulling deplying the ERS and with DRS open.
V6 Hybrids have quicker 0-250 km/h Acceleration and equally matched top speed don't cry too hard bro have you seen Hamilton's 0-280 km/h Acceleration? 0-100 kph 1.9 seconds 0-200 kph 3.9 seconds that's on low fuel but ERS KERS was not used V6 Hybrids are always gonna win in Acceleration from standing start
@@Smzxe Yeah sure V6 turbo hybrid 1150hp are faster 0-250kph, imagine with the narrower chassis of 1998-2016 but 2021 engines... or even if they carried on developing the 3.0 V10s until this day, either way MotoGP wouldn't have a chance, they're slower than 20 year old tech.
@@1010thechamp you funny bro MotoGP bikes are so much faster than any F1 cars Rimac Nevera destroys 2019 Ferrari F1 car in Acceleration I made a video Rimac owns any F1 car While 2021 GP bike destroyed Rimac Nevera GP bike was running on low power map 8.2 seconds quarter mile @190 mph ua-cam.com/video/xsrBL6nqLXI/v-deo.htmlsi=uKbIYW9uIzwexZmQ Gp bike had wheelspin wheelie and there was high speed crosswind affecting bike Speed Bike still outlaunched Rimac Nevera on dusty concrete surface On that surface Rimac Nevera did 0-100 km/h in 1.9 seconds 0-200 kph 4.2 seconds 1/4 mile 8.4 seconds While MotoGP bike was Faster than Rimac Nevera on such terrible surface Imagine 2022 Ducati Moto GP bike drag racing Rimac Nevera on prepped surface or racing circuit with full power map and mugello gearing That GP bike will dust the Rimac Nevera Not even a close race GP bike would be 200 meters ahead 2022 Ducati MotoGP 100-360 km/h 10 seconds Qatar GP Rimac Nevera 100-360 km/h 17 seconds Huge gap not even close
Very nice comparison. Many Thanks. I am thinking that Rubens had some fuel already in car for the race and the tyres were not quite up to temperature because of only 1 flying lap. And also because of that he couldn't push 110%
Give it time. Monza is one of the rare occasions where old F1 cars can compete with modern ones. However, note that we currently have changed regulations and the teams are still getting around them. Times will drop. The 2020 cars laped at 1:19 with the pole being 1:18.8 So yeah. With current 2023 cars maybe the 2004 gets and advantage at Monza specifically. It wont last for long.
the Onboard view is very good, I would suggest making a whole video in 2 parts, 1 full-time aerial camera and then a full-time Onboard camera, I think it would be very good
I'd say tire technology and no groove tires makes up the great majority of the improvement under braking for the 2023 car. The grooves were designed to slow down the cars after all. A modern F1 car also has about twice as much torque as the 2004 car so that would help in acceleration.
As backwards as this sounds F1 is a marathon not a sprint, the V10 engines had to refuel on pitstops and died after 1-2 races. The new engines last half the season and the fuel lasts the whole race. Watch a comparison of the pit stops. Just cause a 2023 seems slightly slower but everything around it advanced as much as you would think it would have.
All Formula One is, is a book full of rules and limits, and the vast majority of them are designed to slow the cars down. The rest, are designed to make it cheaper...which also slows the cars down. That's literaly all a "Formula" is. It's the book of restrictions and regulations that dictate how you can build the car. And any time someone comes up with something that makes the cars much faster, and is still within the rules, they change the rules, to ban it. It makes sense. It's for the safety of the crowd as much as the drivers.
@@pA-yy-Abut this is not good. Not a thing you said is enjoyable. Refuelling, albeit dangerous, was very good for entertainment. Same goes for the crazy tunned up engines that lasted a few races. Nowadays cars can afford to not have almost zero mechanical issues, which is disgustingly boring
Just to be clear the F2004 had grooved tyres instead of the slicks we have right now and it also didn't have DRS. What it did have is sheer power to weight ratio!
2004 width, length and weight and of course V10 engines. But also some of the aero rules that prevent dirty air, and necessities such as the halo, and no traction control of course.
@@uv77mc85Hamilton have three good season with Rosberg and the two vs Vettel he won with a worse car than Vettel’s in both years. The only boring years was 2019 and 2020. Schumacher’s era I was not alive yet so I can’t give opinion of that.
People talk about the F2004 being faster.... its not about a better car, higher speed or more grip. Its about 1 thing only and that is the regulations for every year. If the teams today had free hands with everything than the cars now would be twice as fast as a car from 2004. The concept of F1 is "do the same with less". Today you have smaller engine, heavier car, less fuel, more reliability, more driver weight, no driving aid, less revs and it has to last for much longer... and still the car is almost as fast. F1 has always been about pushing the engineers, designers and the people... not lap times. Peace to all and lets hope for rain in Singapore (have we ever had a Singapore race with rain ??)
That's not what F1 is about at all, respectfully, you're just justifying F1's decisions because you love the sport, and that's okay! But F1 is about who can build the fastest car on the planet. That is all. Regulations just get in the way of that mission for safety reasons.
@@TehAzaack yes and the buisness model from the beginning was everyone puts in money as a prize pool, and whoever builds the fastest car wins. Modern F1 has ruined the sport by forgetting that. It would be way more popular if they didnt butcher it. There is a reason WEC and WRC are gaining viewers so rapidly, it's because they have resorted back to the spirit of racing being about the cars themselves. F1 will deteriorate unless they follow suit and make smaller, lighter, louder cars
Fun fact: In the same weekend, but in the first qualifying which at the time determined the positions for the real qualifying session Juan Pablo Montoya did the fastest ever lap on Monza of 1:19.525 with average speed of 262,2km/h! This is 0,5sec quicker than the pole position time! In qualifying he finished 2nd.
because in 2004 the qualy format was different and it had no DRS too. the real difference between this car is seen on race fastest laps: 2004 1:21,0, 2023: 1:25,0. Now imagine you put slicks on the F2004... it would laugh at everything even W11 here.
@@delusion2987 looking at the footage of qualy of each respective year i think in the second chickane they were cutting the chicane more in 2004. I think this translates in a few tenth. So i have to give you right here. But there is a 4s difference in race pace still
@@delusion2987 i have to disagree here. This was the case until they gave a point to race fastest lap, so in many cases now they pit 2-3 laps before race end so practically no fuel, take the softest tyre and go for it with ers charged so it is more like a qualy race fastest lap nowadays while in 2004 they never pitted for fastest lap so tyres were older especially in Monza where they had max 2 pit stops. So it is quite the opposite of what you told
@@delusion2987in monza yes right. fastest lap was on lap 43 with new softs. In 2004 it was on lap 41 with new tyres so if we would go to your statement that nowadays fastest laps are handicapped well they are not
you can't possibly compare these two because the track is completely different. Back then kerbs didn't exist on this track and they could cut all three chicanes. Look up any 2004 monza onboard, you will see the difference. I'd say 2004 track is at least two seconds faster and with the same corner layout new cars would be much faster.
@@juzh1238 i mean that a comparation has to be done with common parameters: you say that the track is not the same and this is true, but i say that the tyres and drs are not the same, and It Is also true, and all summed up give a sort of parification of condition
@@PPMGunslinger point is we're trying to compare cars, but that's hard because track varies too much between those years. There's so very few track left that we can make a comparison. Actually not a single track remains the in same layout as it was in 2004 - all tracks apart from suzuka and bahrain are not slowe and those two are faster
because they use threaded tyres in 2004 - if they allowed to hace slicks. that thing will never ever be caught. all things considered, for me its the V10 that make 2004 cars more appealing.
Makes sense a track like Monza, of all circuits, benefits the 2004 car. And the higher speed of this year's car at Parabolica also makes sense because of the more sophisticated aero and suspencion. Not to mention the 2004 car had grooved tyres.
The impressive thing here is that a car that’s 30% bigger and heavier can keep up, finish a Grand Prix on 120 kg of fuel and only use four engines per season.
The advancements didn't make it slower. The rulebook did. They NEED to peg the car's speed. if they'd let cars keep getting quicker, they'd have to redesign all the safety barriers, and move the stands farther away from the track
F2004 was few hundreds kilos lighter, F23 has ground effect. F2004 has a 900bhp naturally aspirated engine, F23 is capable of over 1.000bhp but just for some limited time during the lap. Another huge difference is the size of the two cars: F2004 is much shorter and narrower than F23. F2004 ran on grooved tyres, F23 on slicks. F2004 needed pretty much double the fuel of F23 to run the same distance. F2004 was much simpler than F23. Ciao!
In other words, FIA, both in WEC and F1, is determined to keep top speeds down, meaning the only way manufacturers/teams will be able to improve lap times is by increasing cornering speeds.
Tbf to 2023 cars, the 2004 cars were lower on drag and had lower weight with the same power. Having no drs meant extra slim wings aswell. Also having Traction Control helps too.
To be fast around Monza you need good low speed grip and handling, traction and top end. Both cars have great top end. The SF23 has better traction but the real deciding factor here is the low speed grip and handling the F2004 has through the slow corners is it's biggest advantage. This is an exercise of light cars
I'm just waiting for the day tht one of the F1 teams decide to build the fastest f1 car possible with no restrictions and do a laptime around Spa. Similar to what porsche did
The biggest difference is not the engine, its aero and weight. 2004 cars are lighter and smaller with far more aero flaps. Monza is the only track that modern cars lose to 2000s because of longe straights. Every other track the turbo era smashed times!
Its not only the 2023 got slicks even though the develpment of 20 years of tires. i was dring amateur/hobby motocycle racing many years. In my class there was a ristiction to bridgestone tires to get points and after race finish you get inspected for that. In qualifying everyone drive Pirelli Diablo Supercorsa at this time. It brings you even on a short track more then 4 seconds.
There was a time when F1 was the pinnacle of motor sport and engineering, that was a long time ago. There is now more excitement in one lap of MotoGP than an entire F1 race.
I would love to know the difference in fuel used. Pretty amazing the laps are that close consodering how much smaller the engine is now. Also like someone else mentioned. No sausage curbs in 2004.
Everybody is like "Imagine if 2004 has this has that....." LOL. The only real question is what if 2023 has 2004 regulation. It would travel to the moon already,
The 2004 car would have had it's lap deleted for track limit violations by today's standards. It went outside the solid white lines at least 3 times in the video.
you should do some race lap comparisons between 2004 and 2020. Probably a lot harder to find data for that but i think the results would be very interesting, modern cars lose way more between qualy and the race than the old cars did.
The improvement every team has made this season has been remarkable. The same car Max won 19 races with last year would be fighting near the back of the field this year.
It's just the regulations. If things were free, the cars would be rocketships sticking to the ground and as soon as things go wrong they'd fly into the dancing crowds.
Now imagine how big the gap would be if the 2004 had the same C5 tires as the 2023.
You can't use that argument tho, because F2004 had plenty of advantages that SF23 didn't
Back then engines needed to last only 2 races, tyres were made specifically for Ferrari by Bridgestone pretty much, rules allowed for lighter car and driver aids.
All cars are made to specific ruleset, you can't just say for one "imagine if it had this", without doing the same for other one.
The same goes to w11 i think.... ppl talking about it's 'evo' version...
@@russotusso1695 There's literally nothing that you can add from the F2004 to the SF23 that would make it faster aside from the traction control, and that would only net you like maybe 2-3 tenths per lap tops.
But if you do something as simple as giving the F2004 some C5 tires, it's gonna gain multiple seconds a lap on every single track on the calendar.
In that logic as well, let's just give the F2004 some DRS as well. Get that top speed another 10-20kph higher.
Like, I obviously see the point of your argument, but there's really nothing for the SF23 to gain. It has massively more advanced aerodynamics and the tires are better to the point that the F2004's tires might as well be consumer-grade tires.
It's not fun to imagine the new cars with driver aids, but it's a ton of fun to imagine the F2004 with new age tech under its belt.
@@firedell1031F2004 already did 367 kph at Monza now you want it to do 20 kph higher??? How much speed you want my Friend 😂
With that F2004 will cut off 2-3 seconds off
@@firedell1031 Better tires? You're joking right? In the F2004's era there was a tire war going on, the tires weren't made by only one manufacturer and purposefully made to have a short lifespan for the sake of pit strategies, sure they were grooved, but the tire manufacturers were always trying to get an edge on eachother, they were pretty much on the limit of what their rules and technology allowed, unlike pirelli tires, which are only better because they're 20 years newer. Also, if we are giving the F2004 C5 tires and DRS, let's give the SF-23 a turbo V12, get rid of the hybrid system for weight reduction and THEN compare them again.
"But imagine if the f2004 had..."
No. We're judging the cars under the rules they have been built for, not based on what your imagination said it would be like, and if the F2004 is to follow the rules it was designed for, it would not be the fastest car in the planet, doesn't matter how many assetto corsa simulations you've done with an F2004 with slicks, it's just not how it works.
Also remember that F2004 still using groove tyre which is less grip.
F2004 + Slick tyre : could be less than 1:19:000.
F2004 with no race fuel like here and 2023 qualy format could be easy under 1:19,0. With slicks i think it would be about 1,5s perhaps even more on this track. so a sub 1:18,0 would be possible in modern qualy conditions with slicks
@@vonPelger cars dont have fuel for race in quali...
In 2004 they had race fuel for quali, usually for first 10-12 laps + the quali lap. So they had atlest 30 liters of fuel which was back then calculated to around a second a lap depending on the circuit. Even without slick those cars were monsters.
@@denisliber6740 well, in 2004 they had... they hadto put fuel for their first stint.
@@vonPelger oh i didnt understood the sentence...i thought you were talking about todays cars...
The F2004 was a beast! And the V10 engines sounded 1000x better back then. Those were the days!
Makes us feel nostalgic towards the engine sound
I prefer the current engine sounds. The old ones are as annoying as a screaming child compared.
@@jumi9342 🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@jumi9342lol you are gay
@@jumi9342 The current engine sounds like a vacuum cleaner...
Imagine how fast an F1 car would be with 2004 regulations and 2023 technology 😮😮
Dude
Then it wouldn't be F2004 haha
have you seen ralf schumacher´s lap around the red bull ring last year? new-gen tires but de-tuned engine (i think 750hp) and he didnt drove his car for almost 10 years and still was faster than the fastest race lap
Imagine how fast a 2023 car would be if it weren't hampered by safety, and were allowed to use as much fuel as the 2004 car, it would develop 1600hp and weigh 100kg less than it is today
It would be the year 2023 doofus
love this comparisons. the 3 litre v10 era was great. Looking back at old footage, there is a distinct visual difference in how nimble the older cars were in slow turns and off the corners. I would love to see a comparison of an 86 monster in quali trim to todays cars, but I don't think any track layouts survive that match
Monaco layout remained very similar, Monza also.
Love that Rubens still has the race lap record. Nice guy and nice for him to have one or two spots in history books since Michael took 90% of the records.
The sad thing is we’ll never know how many drivers in equal equipment could match Michael as with Ferrari he had a clause if running one two he would always be number one. Knowing that I just can’t call him the GOAT.
@@zacharyradford5552yeah I was always a fan of Rubens rather than Michael for that reason, he was mistreated so much. People think it’s just Austria but honestly the incompetence on his side of the garage was crazy. All sorts of basic errors with pit stops etc, it was like instead of dividing the staff 50-50, Michael had every top mechanic and Rubens had none. Michael was obviously the better driver overall but it should have been a lot closer than it was and we could have had one or two good championship fights.
@@zacharyradford5552 just watch the seasons michael didnt won the championship, he was in inferior car and outperformed the top dogs, like 1998 Hungary 1996 spain and a lot of others. And outperformed Rubens like 90%
I liked Rubens but let’s be honest, he doesn’t had the quality to be a champion, you must have that something, that in my personal opinion I think the only one out of the already champions in that era was Coulthard, Irvine almost got a lucky break in 99 same as massa in 07 but they don’t quite seems to have that extra risk in the moment of truth and remain as really good drivers but that’s all
Unless you get a monster car like mansell 92, hill/villeneuve 96-97 and button 09 it’s hard to see a good overall driver winning a championship
Schumacher hakkinen Hamilton Alonso Verstappen kimi Vettel etc apart from been good drivers they can advise and help the team to improve the car and in the moment of truth they can risk everything for that throphy the last one been verstappen last lap of the season against Hamilton for his first championship he was all in attacking with fresh tyres and Hamilton was all in defending and attacking with old tyres, that didn’t ended in crash just by luck but they show what a champion is capable of in those moments
@@jjessus9405Schumacher didn't help any team build anything.
He drove only one man car in his entire career, that Brawn, he isn't that great at building cars.
Realy nice new onboard view
Thank you! We are currently testing the new angles to place them to the comparisons permanently. Glad to hear that you enjoyed it!
@@formulaaddictyeah, I just wanted to comment the same, excellent, keep it going!
@@formulaaddict The answer is simple. DEI quota. We should be inventing tech that is twice as fast or twice as powerful today, but we are not. I've seen phenomenon across multiple car businesses as well. For example, a 2008 Arial Atom 500 V8 versus a 2023 Ariel Atom 4R...the 2008 Atom wins. DEI quota is ruining us.
The Onboard looks really really sick. Something so high quality that everyone might sub instantly xD. But fr, deserves a mil subs for that
We appreciate the extra effort you're putting into the new views 👊🏿
Did that require more animating or is it running on physics?
Yea, how the hell are these made eh? They're so good
0:16 Look at the first chicane cars position “Higher kerbs were installed at the first two chicanes in 2009 to prevent cutting.”
There is a reason why the fastest race lap in Monza continues to be a race lap with Barricello in the F2004.
I have no idea how you make these, but I love these videos. Also love what you did with the onboard stuff!
F 2004 with slick tyres would be much faster.
Once again, amazing work. I hope I can learn something from it.
F12004 with SF23 slick soft tyres would be much faster@jonasjonaitis8571
@jonasjonaitis8571 what a braindead thing to say. thats just not possible lol. grooves = less rubber on the track = less grip. slicks are the opposite. modern slicks have been added to many v10 era cars in simulators and it does give seconds better lap times. go look at ralf schumacher lapping red bull ring with slicks; hes old and out of touch with the car and still faster than anyones race pace.
@jonasjonaitis8571 You're joking, right??
@jonasjonaitis8571 The whole reason they had grooved tires back then was to lower the grip of the cars.
But not faster then 2019
Probably worth noting the weight difference is staggering.
F2004 = 605 kg (1,334 lb)
F2023 = 798 kg (1,759 lbs) - minimum weight limit
.....this is progress of past two decades.....sadly ! It applies across many fields of every day life
What do you think about making an animation comparing a lap by Alonso in 2005/2006 to one of his laps from the current season? It'd be interesting to see since the cars changed a lot, but the driver is still the same
There's a big difference that in 2004, they didn't have sausage curbs. That alone would have made 1.5s difference.
Someone with some common sense in these comments. I'm truly puzzled how other people don't understand that the sausage curbs now slows the modern cars a lot.
>1,5s
bullshit. Look at the lines. In Lesmo i.e. the 2023 even turns in a tighter radius than the 2004. And in the chicanes it's only Ascari where the diiference in racing line is really large.
2004 had: grooved tyres, race fuel loads, no DRS, no ground effect. And still being quicker.
For a speed track, these cars are superior. simple as.
@@kirinoa LMAO! the Lesmo doesn't have sausage curbs so why bring those up?! From the video it clearly shows the 2004 car taking the first chicane, the 2nd chicane, and Ascari with a much tighter line. The 2023 car is able to close right up to the gearbox of the 2004 car in the first braking zone, but then suddenly teh 2004 car pulls away before even hitting the first corner apex. pretty astonishing if a grooved tire car absolutely destroy a fat slick tire in a slow corner... The 2004 car is able to get onto the power MUCH sooner, pulling a HUGE lead before it even needs to get to high speeds. 1.5s easily. People like to talk about top speeds and gaining lap time, when in fact, you win and lose the most out of slow corners. If you are going to talk about having grooved tires and no DRS, why did you l leave out traction control and TWICE the fuel flow??? If the 2023 car were allowed as much fuel it'll develop 1600hp. game over.
Every single chicane the car forced to go wider due to a higher curbs. With the trajectory crossed between turns
Modern brakes and aero tech are amazing, but old school makes it up through sheer brute force.
I`ve been waiting for a comparison video like this!! Thank you!!
It seems new cars produce more downforce, allowing them to gain time in heavy braking zones (along thanks to wider slick tyres) and through high speed corners, but low weight of 2004 cars allow them to match them in low and medium speed sections, as well as less downforce allowing higher top speeds despite being around 50hp weaker.
They have higher sustained horsepower than todays cars as the V10s could sustain 900-950 Hp through the entire lap unlike todays cars where the ttv6 provides 850 Hp only and the mguk providing additional 200hp until the system clipped out therefore the sudden decrease in top speed before the end of the start finish straight.
We just need the V10/V12 instead of the hybrids and with advanced technologies like VVT and direct injection we could easily creat 1100 HP from the combustion alone resulting in much higher sustained power, lighter engines and hence lighter cars and not to mention the supreme eargasmic sounds combined with todays downforce levels.
@@owaisahmed1109 One of the goals of F1 is innovation that can be carried through to the road. The smaller engines and lower fuel limits are part of that. Going back to the gas guzzlers that require multiple pit stops for refueling is not an option.
@@Croga yes but f1 has never been road relevant so why suddenly they want to show themselves as environmentalists. Plus I was referring for the carbon neutral fuels which can pave the way for higher displacement engines.
F1 is an entertainment Sport and it should remain that way
@@owaisahmed1109 F1 has always been road relevant. The original ERS stood at the forefront of development of hybrid-electric and full electric cars, monococ development has lead to safer road vehicles. There is a good reason why VAG wants to become part of F1....
Next to that: No, carbon neutral fuels do not exist and are just about the biggest lie big oil companies are telling us. There are no carbon neutral gasoline fuels; they take CO2 out of a permanent storage, put it into the fuel and then into the air again. There is a very good reason why the F1 circus is lowering the fuel limits both on the cars and on the travel and that's because they know "carbon neutral fuels" is utter nonsense.
@@Croga Which I've honestly always found kind of stupid. F1 should be about seeking the ultimate performance, not progressing road cars. That should be the role of endurance racing.
Look at the acceleration of those mid 2000s V10s out of corners and the modern V6 turbo can only keep up when fulling deplying the ERS and with DRS open.
V6 Hybrids have quicker 0-250 km/h Acceleration and equally matched top speed don't cry too hard bro have you seen Hamilton's 0-280 km/h Acceleration? 0-100 kph 1.9 seconds 0-200 kph 3.9 seconds that's on low fuel but ERS KERS was not used
V6 Hybrids are always gonna win in Acceleration from standing start
@@Smzxe Yeah sure V6 turbo hybrid 1150hp are faster 0-250kph, imagine with the narrower chassis of 1998-2016 but 2021 engines... or even if they carried on developing the 3.0 V10s until this day, either way MotoGP wouldn't have a chance, they're slower than 20 year old tech.
@@1010thechamp you funny bro MotoGP bikes are so much faster than any F1 cars
Rimac Nevera destroys 2019 Ferrari F1 car in Acceleration I made a video Rimac owns any F1 car
While 2021 GP bike destroyed Rimac Nevera GP bike was running on low power map 8.2 seconds quarter mile @190 mph
ua-cam.com/video/xsrBL6nqLXI/v-deo.htmlsi=uKbIYW9uIzwexZmQ
Gp bike had wheelspin wheelie and there was high speed crosswind affecting bike Speed
Bike still outlaunched Rimac Nevera on dusty concrete surface
On that surface Rimac Nevera did 0-100 km/h in 1.9 seconds 0-200 kph 4.2 seconds 1/4 mile 8.4 seconds
While MotoGP bike was Faster than Rimac Nevera on such terrible surface
Imagine 2022 Ducati Moto GP bike drag racing Rimac Nevera on prepped surface or racing circuit with full power map and mugello gearing
That GP bike will dust the Rimac Nevera
Not even a close race GP bike would be 200 meters ahead
2022 Ducati MotoGP 100-360 km/h 10 seconds Qatar GP
Rimac Nevera 100-360 km/h 17 seconds
Huge gap not even close
MotoGP 0-300 kph 8.2 seconds even with worse launch
ua-cam.com/video/yDqoX2pB480/v-deo.htmlsi=voN4zpvsLKFXgRHz
450LB car weight difference? Or is it Kg, idk
2004 and 2005 were peak F1. Nothing has compared since.
2018, 2019, 2020?
@@marcinokon7659 Speaking purely of the machinery, not the competition.
2021 cars were amazingly fast as well, but f1 cars from that era with the sreaming v10 still the Best for me.
2019, 2020 Car would destroy the 2004 Cars.
@@gundam9489 In terms of their individual speed perhaps, but the racing was terrible and they sound stupid.
Amazing video once again man keep it up!
Very nice comparison. Many Thanks. I am thinking that Rubens had some fuel already in car for the race and the tyres were not quite up to temperature because of only 1 flying lap. And also because of that he couldn't push 110%
Give it time. Monza is one of the rare occasions where old F1 cars can compete with modern ones. However, note that we currently have changed regulations and the teams are still getting around them. Times will drop. The 2020 cars laped at 1:19 with the pole being 1:18.8 So yeah. With current 2023 cars maybe the 2004 gets and advantage at Monza specifically. It wont last for long.
the Onboard view is very good, I would suggest making a whole video in 2 parts, 1 full-time aerial camera and then a full-time Onboard camera, I think it would be very good
I'd say tire technology and no groove tires makes up the great majority of the improvement under braking for the 2023 car. The grooves were designed to slow down the cars after all. A modern F1 car also has about twice as much torque as the 2004 car so that would help in acceleration.
It's good to know that after twenty years of development is actual F1 slower than before..
As backwards as this sounds F1 is a marathon not a sprint, the V10 engines had to refuel on pitstops and died after 1-2 races. The new engines last half the season and the fuel lasts the whole race. Watch a comparison of the pit stops. Just cause a 2023 seems slightly slower but everything around it advanced as much as you would think it would have.
All Formula One is, is a book full of rules and limits, and the vast majority of them are designed to slow the cars down. The rest, are designed to make it cheaper...which also slows the cars down. That's literaly all a "Formula" is. It's the book of restrictions and regulations that dictate how you can build the car. And any time someone comes up with something that makes the cars much faster, and is still within the rules, they change the rules, to ban it.
It makes sense. It's for the safety of the crowd as much as the drivers.
@@pA-yy-Abut this is not good. Not a thing you said is enjoyable. Refuelling, albeit dangerous, was very good for entertainment. Same goes for the crazy tunned up engines that lasted a few races. Nowadays cars can afford to not have almost zero mechanical issues, which is disgustingly boring
Okay, so you prefer to see drivers dying, right?@@TileBitan
I enjoy your videos and I particularly love this instrumental.
Just to be clear the F2004 had grooved tyres instead of the slicks we have right now and it also didn't have DRS. What it did have is sheer power to weight ratio!
F2004 is the best F1 ever as of today, no doubt :)
Loved that! Great video
For me 2004 was the peak for F1. They should change the regulations to 2004 with slick tyres, bring back refueling and of course v10s.
E invece vogliono correre con i biocarburanti
2004 width, length and weight and of course V10 engines. But also some of the aero rules that prevent dirty air, and necessities such as the halo, and no traction control of course.
Great video and comparisson! And this lap record is still my loved and countryman Barrichello!! :))
I'm honored to have lived through two of the best cars in F1 history, the F2004 and the mighty W11.
They were really boring races though. the Schumacher and Hamilton eras were awful. I Stopped watching both times.
@@uv77mc85Hamilton have three good season with Rosberg and the two vs Vettel he won with a worse car than Vettel’s in both years. The only boring years was 2019 and 2020. Schumacher’s era I was not alive yet so I can’t give opinion of that.
I love how much effort and skill you put in these videos
F2004 goat car
200kg lighter 😂😂😂
McLaren 1988
This is amazing, great job, i enjoy it so much!!!
The drivers of these Ferraris were only Barrichello and Schumacher, that alone explains a lot.
Crazy cool the way you do your videos, keep em coming
People talk about the F2004 being faster.... its not about a better car, higher speed or more grip. Its about 1 thing only and that is the regulations for every year. If the teams today had free hands with everything than the cars now would be twice as fast as a car from 2004. The concept of F1 is "do the same with less". Today you have smaller engine, heavier car, less fuel, more reliability, more driver weight, no driving aid, less revs and it has to last for much longer... and still the car is almost as fast. F1 has always been about pushing the engineers, designers and the people... not lap times. Peace to all and lets hope for rain in Singapore (have we ever had a Singapore race with rain ??)
That's not what F1 is about at all, respectfully, you're just justifying F1's decisions because you love the sport, and that's okay! But F1 is about who can build the fastest car on the planet. That is all. Regulations just get in the way of that mission for safety reasons.
Twice as fast. Monza in 50 seconds.
@@GhibliNovaF1 is not building the fastest car, it's just another business and if it weren't no one could fund it
@@TehAzaack yes and the buisness model from the beginning was everyone puts in money as a prize pool, and whoever builds the fastest car wins. Modern F1 has ruined the sport by forgetting that. It would be way more popular if they didnt butcher it. There is a reason WEC and WRC are gaining viewers so rapidly, it's because they have resorted back to the spirit of racing being about the cars themselves. F1 will deteriorate unless they follow suit and make smaller, lighter, louder cars
Fun fact:
In the same weekend, but in the first qualifying which at the time determined the positions for the real qualifying session Juan Pablo Montoya did the fastest ever lap on Monza of 1:19.525 with average speed of 262,2km/h! This is 0,5sec quicker than the pole position time!
In qualifying he finished 2nd.
incredible how the 2023 car is just 2 tenths slower while being much heavier, much safer and 1/3 of the fuel
because in 2004 the qualy format was different and it had no DRS too. the real difference between this car is seen on race fastest laps: 2004 1:21,0, 2023: 1:25,0. Now imagine you put slicks on the F2004... it would laugh at everything even W11 here.
@@vonPelger Now let's image you use some brain. 2023 car is 2023 is 200kg heavier.
@@delusion2987 looking at the footage of qualy of each respective year i think in the second chickane they were cutting the chicane more in 2004. I think this translates in a few tenth. So i have to give you right here. But there is a 4s difference in race pace still
@@delusion2987 i have to disagree here. This was the case until they gave a point to race fastest lap, so in many cases now they pit 2-3 laps before race end so practically no fuel, take the softest tyre and go for it with ers charged so it is more like a qualy race fastest lap nowadays while in 2004 they never pitted for fastest lap so tyres were older especially in Monza where they had max 2 pit stops. So it is quite the opposite of what you told
@@delusion2987in monza yes right. fastest lap was on lap 43 with new softs. In 2004 it was on lap 41 with new tyres so if we would go to your statement that nowadays fastest laps are handicapped well they are not
you can't possibly compare these two because the track is completely different. Back then kerbs didn't exist on this track and they could cut all three chicanes. Look up any 2004 monza onboard, you will see the difference. I'd say 2004 track is at least two seconds faster and with the same corner layout new cars would be much faster.
don't forget that F2004 had grooved tyres (and 20 years older :) ) and no DRS, that make a lot of difference
@@PPMGunslinger that's got nothing to do with track
@@juzh1238 i mean that a comparation has to be done with common parameters: you say that the track is not the same and this is true, but i say that the tyres and drs are not the same, and It Is also true, and all summed up give a sort of parification of condition
@@PPMGunslinger point is we're trying to compare cars, but that's hard because track varies too much between those years. There's so very few track left that we can make a comparison. Actually not a single track remains the in same layout as it was in 2004 - all tracks apart from suzuka and bahrain are not slowe and those two are faster
@@juzh1238 true
What a video. Well done. And great music!
I would absolutely watch a version entirely from the cockpit view!! You should either add it to the end of just make it a second video, so cool!
because they use threaded tyres in 2004 - if they allowed to hace slicks. that thing will never ever be caught. all things considered, for me its the V10 that make 2004 cars more appealing.
We need to go back...
To 500km lifespan engines vs the 8000km or so today 😂 good luck convincing the teams to build 14-16 engines per season 🤣
Makes sense a track like Monza, of all circuits, benefits the 2004 car. And the higher speed of this year's car at Parabolica also makes sense because of the more sophisticated aero and suspencion. Not to mention the 2004 car had grooved tyres.
Monza is easily the fastest circuit in F1. The modern car would be faster everywhere else.
Proof that the F2004 was just perfect
2019, 2020 Car would destroy the 2004 Cars.
@@gundam9489 2004 was perfect for its time. Sure 2019/2020 cars were faster I remember
Great video, love the new view!
0:26 Not all corners..... F2004 was in a different ballpark in that turn
The impressive thing here is that a car that’s 30% bigger and heavier can keep up, finish a Grand Prix on 120 kg of fuel and only use four engines per season.
In other words F1 becoming slowest and boring.
2023 cars are faster than 2004 cars in every track except monza probably
@@qksf1645 I bet the 2004 car would be just as fast if not faster at Imola with the long full throttle sections.
@qksf1645 only because new car have slick tire
this track is the best case for the F2004 like my guy replied earlier tracks with more corners the newer car would be faster probably :)
Its been shit for the last decade or so
Honestly I’d love to see the entire lap from the onboard perspective that was so cool
The driver was Michael Schumacher thats why
it is literally in the description that it was Rubens Barrichello pole lap in Monza, god how dvmb must you truly be
2023 cars are optimized for corners, if you use any other track than Monza, 2004 car won't stand a chance.
The improvement since 19 years has been in vain.
Looks like the SF-23 makes up the most of its performance on the brakes… better tyres or have brakes developed that much over time?
something to consider is has the track been resurfaced since then, probably has. Makes it harder to compare
How nice to have all these advancements just to make the category slower
The advancements didn't make it slower. The rulebook did. They NEED to peg the car's speed. if they'd let cars keep getting quicker, they'd have to redesign all the safety barriers, and move the stands farther away from the track
I like the new on board graphics. Nice job!👍
F2004 was few hundreds kilos lighter, F23 has ground effect. F2004 has a 900bhp naturally aspirated engine, F23 is capable of over 1.000bhp but just for some limited time during the lap. Another huge difference is the size of the two cars: F2004 is much shorter and narrower than F23. F2004 ran on grooved tyres, F23 on slicks. F2004 needed pretty much double the fuel of F23 to run the same distance. F2004 was much simpler than F23. Ciao!
If F2004 had a DRS, that gap would be way more wide.
In other words, FIA, both in WEC and F1, is determined to keep top speeds down, meaning the only way manufacturers/teams will be able to improve lap times is by increasing cornering speeds.
Tbf to 2023 cars, the 2004 cars were lower on drag and had lower weight with the same power. Having no drs meant extra slim wings aswell. Also having Traction Control helps too.
the cars then had a little less power but the weight to hp ratiofavoured the 2004 car better
To be fast around Monza you need good low speed grip and handling, traction and top end. Both cars have great top end. The SF23 has better traction but the real deciding factor here is the low speed grip and handling the F2004 has through the slow corners is it's biggest advantage. This is an exercise of light cars
Now i want a v10 turbo hybrid with todays aero tires and brakes 🤯
1:36 More speed in, less speed out. If Leclerc's car wouldn't be broken it would be 3 tenths close to the mighty Schumi-car.
?
I'm just waiting for the day tht one of the F1 teams decide to build the fastest f1 car possible with no restrictions and do a laptime around Spa. Similar to what porsche did
monza fastest lap
2004: 1:21.046 (lap 41) barichello
2023: 1:25.072 (lap 43) piastri
Refuel
The biggest difference is not the engine, its aero and weight. 2004 cars are lighter and smaller with far more aero flaps. Monza is the only track that modern cars lose to 2000s because of longe straights. Every other track the turbo era smashed times!
And, with another year of development, the ground effects cars were actually faster this year. The 2024 pole time was 1:19.327.
amazing analysis!
Just put slick tyres, a turbo, and drs in that 2004 car, and my oh my 😍🤩
Its not only the 2023 got slicks even though the develpment of 20 years of tires. i was dring amateur/hobby motocycle racing many years. In my class there was a ristiction to bridgestone tires to get points and after race finish you get inspected for that. In qualifying everyone drive Pirelli Diablo Supercorsa at this time. It brings you even on a short track more then 4 seconds.
Those onboard views make for some great code brown moments!
The first person view looks amazing nice work
There was a time when F1 was the pinnacle of motor sport and engineering, that was a long time ago. There is now more excitement in one lap of MotoGP than an entire F1 race.
I would love to know the difference in fuel used. Pretty amazing the laps are that close consodering how much smaller the engine is now. Also like someone else mentioned. No sausage curbs in 2004.
Everybody is like "Imagine if 2004 has this has that....." LOL. The only real question is what if 2023 has 2004 regulation. It would travel to the moon already,
Imagine this car with slicks and DRS...
So they have only upgraded the brakes and tires in the last 20 years🤣
Deep in my heart i want that red team winning again like old times
The 2004 car would have had it's lap deleted for track limit violations by today's standards. It went outside the solid white lines at least 3 times in the video.
the tyres should be the same to make to comparison.
you should do some race lap comparisons between 2004 and 2020. Probably a lot harder to find data for that but i think the results would be very interesting, modern cars lose way more between qualy and the race than the old cars did.
２０年前のマシンは野獣の咆哮のような心に響く素晴らしいエキゾーストノートだったけど、今のマシンは虫の羽音みたいなブーンブーン🐝のエキゾーストノートじゃ全然心に響かない😩これもF1離れの大きな要因の１つだと思う。あの甲高く突き抜ける最高のエキゾーストノートはもう聞こえない😭
2024 Lando Norris pole position time: 1:19:327. Way faster than 2023 cars
The improvement every team has made this season has been remarkable. The same car Max won 19 races with last year would be fighting near the back of the field this year.
It's just the regulations. If things were free, the cars would be rocketships sticking to the ground and as soon as things go wrong they'd fly into the dancing crowds.
Wow wow wow, dashboard view🎉🎉🎉🎉, can Can you make the onboard view always visible on the screen?, Because we mostly see it when playing games
F04 - What an absolute spaceship it was!
If the 2004 Car had DRS, he would fly away
These cars were different breed agile and allowed for better battling but the cars today are safer which is the number 1 priority
Great stuff...thanks!
Its beautiful some news like onboard view 😍
Genius Rubens Barrichello
Hey man can you do Sainz pole in 2023 vs Leclerc s pole in 2022?
I agree… those cars were fantastic. But this is at Monza. What about Spa or Suzuka or Silverstone?
The onboard without the halo just hits different
Wish we could turn back time
to the good old days
Amazing visuals!
Barrichello still holds the best race lap record of Monza.