@@ciaronsmith4995 Wasnt Villeneuve shown up by Button the year before? In any case, the Ferrari was at least a second faster per lap than the BAR and even in equal machinery, Schumacher would have Villeneuve's number all day long.
Benetton B196 and Williams FW36 come to mind as well. Ross Brawn reckoned that the 1996 Benetton would have won lots of races if they hadn't lost Schumacher to Ferrari.
Not true. Jean Alesi would have won in Monaco had the car not developed suspension problems less than 10 laps from the end. Also Berger lost out on a few possible points finishes because the damn car kept blowing up. Alesi and Berger are better drivers than the media give them credit for. Berger WRECKED the opposition in Germany in 1997. It was one of the most insane races I have ever seen. It was also the last win of his career.
The B196 of Benetton definitely is up there. 10 podiums , 5 THIRD and 5 SECOND Positions, including Monaco, where Alesi broke a left rear suspension when in first position and leading with more than 20 seconds over Panis, and Germany, where Berger broke the engine just 3 laps to go when leading. 3 Fastest Laps. The problem with the car was that too heavy in the rear end. To me, one of the best "what ifs" cars in the 90s
Yep, I thought this was going to be number 1! How it could come so close to a win so many times but never quite make it was quite an achievement. No other car has come even remotely close!
Also the car got a great chance to win the Italian Grand Prix when Alesi started 6th and was 1st before the first corner, but a bad strategy call cost him the victory to Michael Schumacher
Ivan Capelli's Leyton House Judd at Paul Ricard in 1990. Capelli would surely have won that race, after setting the race lap record, only to have his Judd engine develop issues a handful of laps before the end, allowing Alain Prost to catch and pass Capelli for the victory.
Capelli was in the lead and Gugelmin second, Gugelmin retired and Capelli was also unlucky. They ran a no pit stop strategy at the race and as you say, so nearly pulled it off.
My extra choices: Ferrari SF16H Toyota TF109 Sauber C31 Williams FW36 McLaren MP4-21 Toyota TF105 Force India VJM02 Renault R30 Arrows A18 Williams FW21 Benetton B196 Leyton House CG901
Definitely some good choices. Mp4 - 21 is especially my favorite vote, still baffling that they couldn't even win once despite having the pace for a race win on numerous occasions.
Apologies for the reupload, and good eye to all those who noticed the mistake in the previous version! We can confirm that the editor of the previous version has been loaded into a cannon and fired into the sun, as he deserved.
Martin Brundle would have won in the Jordan in 97 no doubt. Even Eddie finally admitted that years later . Pity EJ didn't give him another year which Martin thoroughly deserved
This is all true but personally I would have liked Martin to pick up a win or possibly two in his final season before heading for the commentary box. F1 owed him at least one win
@Izumi Culture I’m pretty sure you called a eddie Irvine a prick because of the country he’s from because most of are population are smartass pricks And I from that country
The 1997 Prost JS45 finished 2rd twice driven by Panis , if he had not been blocked while trying to lap Irvine for seven laps he could have won the Spanish grand prix , if he had not had suspension failure during the Canadian grand prix which caused a massive crash breaking his legs and putting him out for several months he could have won the French grand prix or the Hungarian grand prix where the Bridgestone tyre was better on that track as proved by Hill in the Arrows and the Prost was a better car.
Harvey Postlethwaite's Tyrrell 018/019. Great and innovative design for 1990 season. Jean Alesi got close to victory two times with the old and the new car, only beaten by the great Senna.
Fisi had eight GP's before he joined Jordan, so he was definately still inexperienced. Hell, people give Max a pass for his inexperience and he's been in F1 for five years
@@ericb3593 Then how can you tell us that the 21 deserved a championship with just a little over half the points of Renault and Ferrari that year ? It wasn't competitive enough to deserve a championship.
Ahhhh, yes no Ferrari now, the march 701 is back were it deserves to be. I miss the Ferrari and the editor, i hope he finds a new job while orbiting the sun
Maserati Cooper T81 - yes it won two races but if not for Jack Brabham could have won more in '66 with two very classy drivers - John Surtees and Jochen Rindt. Plus - I just like the look of that car. Great video - thanks.
Sounds like everyone is saying to: Purposely compete in every season race, ... except 1. This way you are always a "Full-season rookie", so when you finally win a race they'll say, "Only the 4th rookie winner in History!", ...despite it being your 12th season in F1, lol.
This video feels strange. It doesn't feel like an Autosport video, and I think it's the robotic voice-over, along with the not-so-great background music.
The Ferrari SF16 H from 2016. Achieved a podium in eight of the first nine races. Came close in Spain, Vettel could've won Austria if not for a puncture
The Prost JS45 - before Panis smashed his legs up in Canada he was on fire in that car. Even when Trulli took over he was running well up the order in Austria before the Mugen engine went all 2015 on him. I'd also have the Toyota TF109 and TF105 in there too.
Name me a race that car SHOULD have won......or a race where it was the best car mate. Hey, im not a hater, i loved the 97 Prost.....but its not in this bracket.
Lotus 107 in 1992…that was such a good chassis, but it didn’t have the fancy electronics of the Williams FW14B and McLaren MP4/7. By late 1992 it was the third quickest car on the grid.
After May 1, 1994 I didn't want to watch F1 GP to this day especially because of Schumacher pressuring Senna to drive fast and crazy on that fateful day at Imola
Anderson has described his Jordan 191 as an overblown/jumped up F3000 car, although that doesn't change the fact that is was quick, reasonably reliable and one of the prettiest F1 cars ever. It probably did deserve a win in '91 but that was difficult with Williams, Mclaren and to a lesser extent Benetton (who got the best Ford engines).
The Arrows FA1 comes to mind. The debut season of Arrows and they nearly won their second race before the Ford engine in Patreses car blew up. The car also showed great perfromance in other races and scored a fine 2nd in Sweden behind the Brabham fan car. And you know the stor of the FA1: a carbon copy of the Shadow DN9. After the Swedish GP they had to use a new car, the A1
I think if Damon Hill had joined Jordan in 97 instead of Arrows he would have won at least a couple of races in that 197. Like the video says it needed an experienced head which neither Ralf or Fisi were at the time.
That car was a piece of junk for most of the season - Merc messed up the engine. Kimi was at his peak and flattered its performance as everyone at McLaren admits. The engine was horrible so slow in a straight line. Mark Slade said Kimi had to pull Miracles every race to get it on the podium. The chassis also had a fundamental issue with rear end stability which screwed over Montoya and DeLaRosa.
It would be great if smaller teams were able to run 1 car and consolidate their resources behind a single driver. Sure they wouldn't be able to compete for the constructors, but they might have a few more stand out race results throughout the season. Maybe even letting new teams run 1 car for their first 2 seasons could encourage more to enter the sport.
5:36 That's one of the ugly mugs of the March. It looks like a Submarine on Wheel. The Nose is Way above the ground. and yet it can transform into Submarine mid-air.
If you're picking another March (since that's what LH was a continuation of), then it should be the 881 since that had good points finishes and three podium finishes. The CG901 was good at exactly ONE track (the smooth French GP) and failed to qualify six times in the same season.
@@MrSniperfox29 I agree, a lot of people seem to be naming cars that were anywhere from crap to average most of the season bar the odd race. The 1988 March would be a better choice but shouldn't be on this list either
Damon Hill’s 1997 Arrows We’re it not for poor reliability I think Hull would have scored a canny bit more than 7 points...and of course, we can’t forget Hungary, the race he should have won
I'm not sure that car would fit this video. I agree Damon could of scored more points with a more reliable car, but apart from the ocassional inspired performance by Damon where the track suited the Arrows (Hungary/Jerez) it was largely rubbish in comparison to the ones in the video that were quick and competitive in the majority of races they entered. You couldn't say that about the 97 Arrows
The thing is, it wasn’t a good car. Damon was 8 tenths away from being 107%’d in Australia. The best finish that wasn’t Hungary was 6th in Britain where Frentzen, Hakkinen, Michael, and Irvine all retired. Correct, Damon should have won in Hungary, but that wasn’t the point of this video.
Benetton B196 surely should be winning races Williams FW32 of 2009 was pretty good car, Rosberg was quite close to winning at Malaysia Also, from the same year, Toyota TF109 was one of the Top 3 cars that year but didn't win Toyota was also good with the TF105 when they came P4 at the constructors The Talbot-Lago of 1950 was also a pretty good car in 1948 and 1949 but was outshined in 1950 by the likes of Alfa Romeo. Williams FW37 was the 2nd best car of 2014, even took a pole, but zero wins. Ligier of 1982 was as well a solid car and I include it because of the season it competed at. Even Tyrrell won a race that year, but not Ligier, who still was at its peak. Benetton B198 was as well pretty quick, Alexander Wurz was amazing that season, Fisichella took a pole, but missed out on a victory. McLaren MP4-21 took many poles if I remember correctly, Kimi could win at Hungary in 2006, but Liuzzi enabled some dirty tactics. Sauber C31 was one of the great cars in 2012, Perez came really close to winning Sepang and Monza, Kobayashi was 3rd at Suzuka but also no wins for them. BMW Sauber F1.07 was the third best car but I ain't sure on whether they could win races (but they should tbh) Arrows A1 was pretty rapid but unreliable.
I think a lot of people are going to confuse consistently good cars with unlucky average ones in the comments here. Leyton House 90, Arrows 97 and the 2009 Force India shouldn't be anywhere near this list.
Black'n white Sauber First two/three Martini Williams Arrows Yamaha in '97 Hungarian GP Force India, one or two of your choice One of the Toro Rosso driven by Ricciardo and Vergne ... I know, it's a very crappy way to make a list...
I would add McLaren Mp4-21 from 2006 to this list. That car scored three poles and would have won in Hungary had Kimi not crashed with a back marker. Not to mention that car looked sick af
I wouldn't that Merc engine was a disaster that year, Mark Slade said Kimi performed miracles to even put it on the podium. Kimi had 3 poles, not that car. Look at the margin from Kimi' to his teammate in each of those poles he had. It wasn't good enough to win DeLaRosa should have won in Hungary if that was true.
Fisi wasn’t really a rookie in ‘97, he had outings for Minardi in ‘96. It wasn’t a full year in ‘96, but I think calling him a rookie doesn’t lend itself to accurately portray the experience he had compared to The Ralf.
@@suggon Hodna had a much stronger engine than Mercedes had that year. Again, Kimi just outperformed the car insanely. The 2006 win for Honda was a fluke. It's like saying Toyota should have won a race in 2003 because Jordan fluked into one. Kimi beat Jenson in the standings because Kimi was a better driver than Jenson. Not because the car was better. Remember that.
Ciaron Smith Even if the mp4 21 was an insanely shit car Kimi managed a win in the mp4 19 which had no right to even be on podium until the back end of the season. The mp4 21 was always in the fight for podiums and just off the lead cars. It’s just straight facts ? You say the Honda was faster than the mclaren but even with mclarens “rear stability issues” and there “shit engine” they still finished well clear of Honda ? ...
I thought this would be the top 10 Constructors who never won, not just their yearly cars. But this was a nice list. Man, #6 was an ugly car! Cool statistics for #2, what more could Mutton do?
