You can clearly see how Senna gains an advantage in the corners, but Prost makes up the lost time on the straights, partially due to his semi-automatic gearbox.
The oversteer coming out of the hairpin onto the main straight at the end of Senna's lap might be my favorite moment in F1. It also reminds me of the difference in approach between these two drivers. Senna likes to enter fast and toss the car around, transferring load up to the front to lighten the rear and use this along with the throttle and yaw moments to position his corner exits. It's a more feel-based, high-energy driving style that is only faster than the more linear technique if you've totally mastered the dynamics of your car and can maintain an extraordinary level of focus, even for a professional racing driver. I believe it's one of the reasons Ayrton was so successful at Monaco, a tight, bumpy-ass track where better lines can be created by oversteer and where he really leverages his extraordinary ability to cope with seemingly non-stop, fairly dramatic looking corrections.
Agreed. It's pretty evident how much Senna relies on "intentional oversteer" by just looking at how aggressively he jerks the steering wheel upon entry and/or exit. In fact, this is when people say his car "dances" right?
you don't focus when driving like ayrton. he is more of a martial artist, or a prodigy musician. he will shut off that neural corruption and use feel. thats why he hated where cars were going...you couldn't really feel them anymore so he began to rely on reflexes which were still prodigy grade. alain was a thinker and doer. he couldn't understand why he couldn't keep up... only people like ayrton know how he works because we too know how to shut off our senses to use reflex capacity and subconscious triggers to prevent thought from decaying a moment.
@@treatb09 we? How is your lap compared to Prost? Meditation is nice but Senna was just a remarkable qualifier. Cheever and Lauda felt the same frustration at Prosts speed. It seemed so boring. No throttle stabs just smooth speed.
Driver preference I had to compensate for my lack of budget in sim racing by tapping the throttle rapidly instead of gradually raising the throttle (due to the lack of an analogue throttle) and I've been doing this for the past six months. But I can still assure you that there are alot of faster drivers than me that holds firm to conventional ideas
Prost was being all delicate smoothly putting on the throttle and has paddle shifters and Senna was being all aggressive and manual gear box and stabbing on the throttle. These two combinations make the best rivalries. Smooth and cautious vs aggressive and daring
They were even until that one long left turn senna had more confidence on the throttle there but after that didn't create much more of a gap. Everything matters but they were two insanely talented drivers
They go under 6 signs after start: Ford Pirelli Marlboro Opel Renault and Tio Pepe It looks to me if you stop Senna was tied or 1/100 or so ahead at Ford but by each overhanging sign he was slightly increasing a very small advantage.
Senna would go into a corner much faster than anyone else and brake a lot less for that corner and stab at the throttle until he could give it the beans. This was Senna's technique and was 100% natural to him. This technique means he was ahead by a couple of hundredths per lap, and sometimes even per corner.
I think Jon Palmer said this about his technique. But how the hell Senna developed that technique is crazy. Perhaps this is why he relies on oversteer. Instead of slowing down just from braking, he loses grip AND at the same time shifts the angle to a "straighter" path.
@@yeshuahdenazareth7868 well, in races yes, but we're talking about quali here which ayrton senna is no doubt the best at. prost is the more complete driver, but senna is just the fastest driver and you can't deny that.
@@autisticguitar I deny it. See, on one lap Mansell was quicker than Senna, and that's a fact. Senna was good and also lucky to have driven very fast cars, from the Lotus Renault to the McLaren Honda. Mansell was less fortunate, apart from 1987 and 1992, and that's only two seasons, but what did he managed? 1987 : 8 poles for Mansell, 1 for Senna 1992 : 14 poles for Mansell, 1 for Senna All that story about Senna being the king of poles is a myth : his car allowed him to get these poles just like Mansell's allowed him to have his poles. In fact, 90% of Senna's poles were with the Lotus and the McLaren, very fast cars, with McLaren Dominating the 80s. Furthermore, a pole is irrelevant. It says nothing about a driver. Absolutely nothing at all. It doesn't score you any points. It's useful on tight tracks and deadly first corners, such as Monaco and Spa, but qualifications are only there to... qualify. Sure, Senna holds the best record of his era with 65 ahead of Prost 33 and Mansell 32, but look at Lauda 24, or Fangio 29 or Piquet 24 or Stewart 17 or Clark 33 : they never really valued pole. The only reason Senna fans insist on pole is because Senna signed so many. Why don't they talk about fastest laps which today lands you 1 point ? Simple: Prost 41 and Mansell 30 or Piquet 23 had more than Senna 19. That's why a relatively insignificant stat becomes a valued one. Again, poles are useless. Victories are important and points are crucial.
@@yeshuahdenazareth7868 read my comment again before you decide to make a whole essay will you? i said there that "prost is the more complete driver", because i preferred prost's clever race driving more than senna's that allowed him to preserve a car and win more championship than senna's reckless pushing all the time in the race. again, we are talking about quali here, we already know that quali isn't important to win championships but hey, you seemed really pressed that everybody is talking about who's faster at quali pace? and also the year you mentioned was when mansell had an op car that are at least second faster than the mclaren and lotus, it's not surprising if he will get so many more pole than senna. but we can't just deny senna's amazing talent at milking every grip possible. again, he's not a clever racer (sometimes dirty) we all know that, but there's nothing wrong about discussing a quali pace innit?
Senna de V10 aspirado, contra Prost de V12....de igual pra igual!!..Mesmo com o motor sendo aspirado, Senna ainda utilizava sua técnica de ficar continuamente bombando o acelerador durante as curvas para manter o giro do motor alto na melhor faixa de torque possível, para ter a força máxima do motor nas reacelerações em saídas de curva...um dos tantos diferenciais do nosso grande Senna!..
With the Semi automatic Ferrari, i'd expect it to be the other way around. The McLaren had superior power, bu the Ferrari had superior aerodynamics, plus the semiautomatic gearbox made cornering easier.
Sem falar da diferença de peso entre Senna e Prost que era de aproximadamente 10 kg, se 1kg já faz muita diferença entre dois carros imagina 10, Senna realmente foi o piloto mais rápido da Formula 1 de todos os tempos
It was by choice, because of the car's balance and peaky engine power curve. If you watch his 93 and 94 onboards his throttle application is smooth and precise.
My friend, do you have this video with Senna driving alone? I saw it on a Japanese TV, but on RU-vid is impossible to find it. Please man, I'm asking you for that!!!! Thanks man!!!
Se você prestar bem atenção só o Sena é quem tira a mão do volante para trocar as marchas já que Prost com sua FERRARI já tinha nessa época trocas de marchas no volante , e nem assim o Prost conseguia ser mais rápido do que o Sena .!!!!!
From 1988 to 1991 the best car and the best team were McLaren Honda. Prost managed a miracle in 1990. One only has to check how mansell fared in 1987 and 1992 when he drove the best car : he obliterated Senna on poles and races, whereas in 1990 he couldn't cope with neither Prost nor Senna : Prost because he was the best driver of his time and Senna because the McLaren was superior. This is a solid, cold, factual analysis.
Senna obliterated Prost in 88 and 89 in terms of outright pace in most qualifying and race sessions. It was only through political interference that Senna lost the 89 title. As for 1990, the Ferrari was better on some tracks, particularly due to its aerodynamics, semi-automatic gearbox, tyre management and fuel consumption. You can see the advantage under acceleration even in this onboard comparison over just a single lap. As for 1991, you have to be kidding... Williams was far superior and if it wasn't for some reliability issues, mistakes by both Mansell and the team, and Senna doing miracles, they would have walked that championship. Senna basically got 2 titles without driving a dominant car or even the best car on average. Where was Prost in 91? Same as Senna in 1992 and 1993 - struggling in an inferior machinery. It's no indication for lack of ability - you need a top car to win championships, even back then. It's ridiculous to compare Mansell with Senna when one had the best car on the grid and the other did not. Senna's pole tally speaks for itself - 60 poles in just 7 years, only 2 of which he had the best car (88 and 89) but also the strongest teammate (Prost). Senna was the master of raw pace in those years, nobody could come even close. He didn't even need to drive the best car to pull out a miracle lap and destroy his teammates. There, fixed your solid, cold, factual analysis for you. Don't judge about things by merely looking at end results alone. You have to dig in to figure out what led to those statistics.
@@hristoitchov Both seasons Prost outscored Senna who only clinched a title thanks to an outdated points system. In today's points to be clear: 1988 Prost 308 v 277 Senna 1989 Prost 249 v 176 Senna 1991 : McLaren 139 v 125 Williams. Clearly McLaren was the best Team with the best car. Just as I stated. Senna drove the best car from 1988 to 1991. And again in 1994. There's no debate at all. The car, the chassis, the engine, the team : McLaren was the best package. When Mansell had the best package in 1987 and 1992, Senna was nowhere to be seen. You didn't pay attention when I mentioned Mansell as a better pole setter than Senna, obviously. Read again please. It's easy to be faster with the fastest car. When Senna didn't have the fastest car, like 1997, 1992 and 1993, he was just a regular driver, although he did very good in 1993 thanks to a superb chassis, electronic aids and experienced, well managed team. In 1990, Prost made the Ferrari look great a be fast at times. Best example is Mansell who wouldn't have won a single race if not for pushing Prost against the wall at the start of Estoril. Look at Mansell results and see for yourself how good that Ferrari was of it wasn't for Prost's extraordinary skills. You didn't fix anything. You're projecting your fantasies on a dead driver who was good, yet deeply flawed. All I wrote still solidly stands, not because I wish it would, but precisely because it is rooting in fact and good arguments.
@@kukang1232 His 1992 season was his best. He was at his peak and fully deserved that title in the iconic Williams #5. For the rest, he's been a very poor driver, but brought some entertaining thrills in the 80s. To me, he's on par with Senna, and was far less dirty.
@@yeshuahdenazareth7868 the "outdated" scoring system rewards being a fast racer, not running a marathon. In both seasons Senna won more races than Prost, and in 89 every race that Senna didn't retire (barring the first one) he finished above Prost. Not to mention winning 6 (7 if not for Balestre) to Prost's 4 races
Senna preparaba el auto para ganar la pole. Prost preparaba el auto para la carrera final. Finalmente Prost ganó la carrera. Por cierto, el sonido de esos autos es una sinfonía 🥰
who are the cars on the lap at 0:33 in Senna's lap and why are they there? they don't even look like they are moving... do you get the track to yourself for qualifying laps or not necessarily so? seems unusually and unnecessarily dangerous?
Antigamente, todos os carros faziam volta de classificação ao mesmo tempo. Aqueles dois carros estavam aquecendo os pneus ou acabado de fazer volta rápida e estavam indo aos box
What I like about this comparison is that Prost passed one guy (0:23), but Senna passed TWO (both of them at 0:33). Doesn't anyone else find that funny?
Senna is the real driver to drive a F1 car ... Prost looks like a grandmother in comparison ... if you want the real excitement , see the great brazilian driving !!! F1 is F1 with him ... ☝️☝️☝️☝️☝️☝️☝️👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
@PJ2436 Well, no matter how quick Senna is going up the gears with manual shifting, it can't beat semi-automatic which give Prost a few hundreds for each gear change. As for cornering, I suppose it's just Senna's ability to carry more speed on corner entry. :)
😅😊 show de bola 😃😃💯 dois pilotos bons e com muita abilidades de pilotagem viu ficou massa arretado 🏁🏁🏆🏆🏎️🏎️🏎️🏎️🏎️🏎️🦶🎮🏁🏁🏆🏎️🦶🎮👍🤜🤛👍🤜🤛👍🤜🏆🏎️🏎️🏎️🏎️🏎️🏎️🏎️🏎️🏎️🏎️🏎️🏎️🏎️🏎️🏎️ Prost foi campeão em 85 86 89. Tricampeão mundial de fórmula de F1 com 55 vitórias Senna so 41 vitórias bom Prost Senna dóis cabras arretado viu kkk bom se tem o Schumacher mais o piloto alemão chegou depois não e assim com colocar a carroça na frente dos 🐂♉ mas e também exagera bom e o nagell mansell 🏴👍💯 e estava na categoria do automobilismo mundial junto ao Prost com piquet e e keke Rosberg e Alan Jones em tão o Senna foi e um dos pilotos mais geniais de todos os tempos viu nota 💯👏🤠 eles protagonisaram ótimos duelos da principal categoria do automobilismo mundial que fórmula 1 e esse círculo de Jerez dela fronteira na Espanha uma das pistas boa da fórmula 1 que ficou voltou a realizar as corridas desde 86 ha 97 e saiu das listas do calendário do automobilismo mundial e so. Quatro anos mais tarde voltou a realizar as corridas em 94 que tinha a de Barcelona monbelo e so agora como está essa pista em irmão valeu 💯👏🤠🤜🤛 grande Senna do Brasil 🏎️🏎️🦶🎮🏁🏁🏁🏆🏆🏎️🦶🎮🏁🏁🏆🏆🏎️🦶🎮🏁🏁🏆🏎️🦶🏎️ 🏎️🏎️🏎️ Senna tricampeão mundial ao lado de Jack stuwart e Jack Brabham e piquet e bom e Prost tetracampeão mundial de fórmula de F1 somente Prost e vettell e show de bola 😃😃💯☺️😃😁☺️😃😃💯☺️😃😃💯☺️😃
Ferrari 10HP less - difference the ferrari power probably at high rpm, where the Mclaren was at mid to high. But it seems like Ferrari had Aero dynamic advantage and combined with Semi-Automatic Gear Box. In 1991 Mclaren seems to have adapted Aero of the Ferrari.
From 1988 to 1991 the best car and the best team were McLaren Honda. Prost managed a miracle in 1990. One only has to check how mansell fared in 1987 and 1992 when he drove the best car : he obliterated Senna on poles and races, whereas in 1990 he couldn't cope with neither Prost nor Senna : Prost because he was the best driver of his time and Senna because the McLaren was superior.
Prost almost won the WDC with that Ferrari which was constantly 0.5 - 1.5 seconds slower. Senna had to knock him out in Japan to prevent that. But yeah... Prost wasn't a Hollywood pretty boy and didn't die young like Senna and James Dean.
Constantly 0.5-1.5 slower? In which parallel universe? Ferrari had the better car on average, especially in races - more efficient aerodynamics, faster gearbox and a chassis easier on the tyres. Mansell even took several poles in it, despite Senna's mastery of qualifying. In races it was often going very strong and challenging for podiums and victories. McLaren had lots of issues during the season and were far from the dominant force they used to be. It was only thanks to Senna's ability that car won the championship, just like it happened in 91. I understand being a fan of Prost and preferring him over Senna, but let's stick to actual facts. Senna was already 0.5-1.5 faster than Prost even when they had the same car in 88 and 89... Also, his death isn't what elevated him to legendary status, except perhaps in the eyes of people who aren't fans of the sport. He was already considered the best driver by most in the paddock by 1990-1991 and was globally popular. Comparing him to James Dean is ridiculous.
@@hristoitchov uh huh. Ferrari had 10 mechanical failures to McLaren's 4. Berger, having been thoroughly outperformed by Mansell the year before, beat Mansell 43-37. To say "even Mansell scored poles" is quite ridiculous. Mansell was one of the best of his generation. Berger was a journeyman. Aside from Prost, Senna's team mates were wank. Andretti, Dumfries, Nakajima, Cecotto. Lol. Prost faced the calibre of Watson, Lauda, Rosberg, Mansell, Alesi for his entire career.
Prost was the better driver. As exciting as Senna's style is, him struggling to hang onto the car while Prost is almost perfectly in sync with it shows that Prost had an advantage in terms of car control. Combine that that his expert racecraft, and he's the more complete driver. You could honestly make a good case for Prost being the best ever.
No, that’s not how it works. Senna was as smooth as it gets when he had to be, in the races, in longer stints, when he didn’t have to push to the absolute limit of the car. Once you get to the limit, the car is bound to become unstable, because it can never be perfectly neutrally balanced. Especially in those years, the cars (and tracks) were notoriously difficult to control on the limit. The fact that Senna was quicker in this instance without having the better car is proof enough he was able to extract more of the car, which makes him the better driver. And in the races he was just as quick and consistent as Prost. In 1989 in particular, he was almost always in front. Had it not been for other drivers crashing into him and his reliability issues, he’d have easily won the title with a few races to spare. Prost was one of the best, no doubt about that, but Senna as an overall package was a step ahead.
@@hristoitchov How was Senna as an overall package a step ahead when he was notorious for not paying much attention to the development of his championship winning cars (including 88-89 when he later admitted that Prost used to make a set up for both the Mclaren cars)? While Prost used to be the opposite of that even developing other teams cars after his retirement. And how does this video serve as any parameter to a comparison since they're both in very different cars running on diferent set ups and with Prost clearly on the inferior one? At that stage in their careers Senna wasn't one of the greats and many considered him to be a Jim Clark wannabe while Prost with all the backslash from the previous season was still considered the very best on the grid even managing what seemed to be a Ferrari comeback at a time drivers called their cars 'electric chairs'. Senna had everything to prove while Prost was chasing records to end his already legendary career, look at the 1989 season (before the shitshow at Japan) Prost knew exactly when to take a risk and when not to, when he needed points he chased down Senna on track without any drama while Senna fucked his tires up for no apparent reason other than to set up a fastest lap or because his aggressive driving style was the only way he thought was possible to stay ahead.
@@JoJo-br6yq Where did you come up with that claim, that Senna didn't pay attention to development? He spent very long hours testing cars and giving very detailed feedback on the chassis, the engine, especially during the seasons. Yes, he took a longer holiday in winter, but as you probably know, cars are already almost finished by that stage. Cars and components for each next year are mostly developed during the previous season, up until January or so. It was normal for Prost to be making the setup in 88 - he was the seasoned driver and Senna was still the rookie. It doesn't make much sense to compare drivers at different stages of their careers. Was Prost just as knowledgeable and experienced in the early 80s? Of course not... Senna was still learning, but he was good enough to compete with and to beat Prost. As for 89, Senna had plenty of input by then to be making his own setup to better match his driving preferences. That's why they often ran different setups. Prost was mostly fortunate to be in the right place at the right time. It's not like he had anything to do with McLaren's genius car of 88, or Williams of 93. No matter how good of a test driver Prost could be, it wasn't up to him to make the car better. The way Ferrari went downhill in 1991 is a proof of that. Drivers are not F1 engineers and designers. Apart from providing feedback during testing, but after that, it was not in their hands anymore. It's a common misconception about Prost being excellent at setting up cars and development, thus being called the professor, and that Senna was somehow bad at all that. It's just nonsense spouted by British and French journalism at the time. People who have actually worked with both tell a different story. It's similar to how people claim Schumacher developed Ferrari into a championship winning team, as if he somehow created those cars himself. He might have motivated and glued the team around him, so they deliver their best, and also provide precise feedback so they'd know what to improve, but that's about it. Likewise with Prost, likewise with Senna. The rest was entirely up to the team's designers and engineers... As for 89, Senna was dominating most races and Prost had no answer for it. It was only through sheer luck (engine reliability issues plus Mansell taking out Senna in Portugal plus Prost turning into Senna in Japan) and the interference of Balestre that he won that title. Senna was the moral champion in that season. Prost may have been considered the best up until 88 and even at the start of 89, but that was no more the case after 1989, despite his newly won title.
@@hristoitchov Adrian Newey was indifferent to Sennas imput (the little he was able to provide given the fact he tested the car way less than Damon Hill) on the car during the 1994 pre-season (and during the first two races Newey claimed to have heard no feedback from him) since Senna was next to clueless on the aerodynamics of the car, as he was during the 1986 season in which he claimed to have the best chassis of the grid tied with an engine that couldn't match the Honda engine, now years later we acknowledge that what made the Lotus not as fast as the Williams FW11 on race trim was its outdated aerodynamics. What I have read from who worked with both and was able to give an impartial comment contests your statements and it came from Osamu Goto, who said Senna drove his cars (Osamus cars) as far as they could go and was an excellent driver, whilst Prost apart from being excellent could provide more feedback which enabled more improvement by Honda. Senna was no rookie by 1988 and he should have been able to set up his own car if he as so immensely technical, drivers such as Lauda, Piquet and Prost were the last voice to be heard by an engineer on race set up already during their second full season in Formula One. Ayrton also wasn't able to dominate Mclarens environment till Prost left the team, something which Prost was able to do during his first year at Renault.
Incredibly smooth driving by Prost. Awesome V12 sound. That car deserved a crown, if not for Senna's criminal cheating and Mansell's jealousy. Prost at the wheel of the McLaren was simply unmatched. At the wheel of the Ferrari 641/2, he was an artist, a poet, a true exceptional F1 driver.
@@canalqualquercoisa6208 Fact. By today's standard he'd have been banned for life. By the 1950s to 1970s standards, they would have died both. It's pure luck that none was hurt.
@@canalqualquercoisa6208 Well, your arguments are overwhelming. Thank you for the insults. Of course, they won't change anything to the criminal behaviour of that driver, will they?
FERRARI WAS A BETTER CAR THAN MCLAREN..MORE EASY TO DRIVE,, SAME POWER.. SENNA WAS AMAZING...HE CHANGE GEARS WITH ONE HAND...PROST NO! AND SENNA MORE FASTER....
From 1988 to 1991 the best car and the best team were McLaren Honda. Prost managed a miracle in 1990. One only has to check how mansell fared in 1987 and 1992 when he drove the best car : he obliterated Senna on poles and races, whereas in 1990 he couldn't cope with neither Prost nor Senna : Prost because he was the best driver of his time and Senna because the McLaren was superior.
@Justin Y The Robber Another blatant lie. McLaren Honda won the constructors championship in 1900 ahead of Ferrari and in 1991 ahead of Williams Renault. In 1986, Williams Honda won the championship but Alain Prost won the title on McLaren TAG Porsche. He could win with a lesser car. Senna simply couldn't : in 1992 and 1993, still driving a great car, he got bitch-slapped by Mansell then Prost. Without the best car Senna couldn't win. Others could. That's why Prost was way better than Senna. For that matter, Mansell was too. And Piquet as well. Oh, and of course Schumacher who humiliated him in a lesser car: Williams Renault won the title, while Schumi won his on the Benetton Ford. Well, even driving the best car he got severely beaten 🤣
@@yeshuahdenazareth7868 You spend so much time on your dislike for Senna. Pretty pathetic. I think Prost, Mansell and Piquet will all tell you that Senna was better. Senna dominated Prost in qualifying in equal machinery. In 1992 the FW14B was in a league of its own, Mansell was 3 seconds faster than Senna in the Mp4/7 at Silverstone and in 1993 the Ford V8 was down about 100hp to the Renault V10. Get out of here with that nonsense.
