At Ferrari Prost beat Mansell 5 to 1 in an identical car, Mansell won the title in a car with the biggest technical advantage since the Lotus 78 (but wouldn't admit it) left F1 because he didn't want to share a team with Prost (again). In Indycar Mario Andretti said of him "I guess if Ronnie Peterson was the best team-mate I ever had, Nigel Mansell was the worst" Mansell was fast but not an intelligent driver and not in the league of Schumacher,Senna, Prost, Stewart, Clarke, or the real greats.
I think you need to recheck your facts because Nigel was nearly 3 times F1 world champion. Bad drivers don't become world champions no matter how good their car is.. Nigel was smashing Indy lap records IN PRACTICE SESSONS!
Well my facts are correct, Mansell actually won 1 title in F1, nearly doesn't count, Prost, Lauda, Piquet & Senna have all NEARLY won lots of world titles in addition to the ones they actually did win. As to breaking practice records in INDY ( a formula where drivers no longer competitive in F1 regularly win) If you read my post I said Mansell was fast, just not intelligent and not a complete driver in the mold of Schumacher, etc.
Prost, Piquet, Senna etc are extremely good drivers but so is Mansell. OK Mansell did lose the 1987 due to stupidity but all the other drivers you mentioned have done stupid things. As we all know, Mansell only lost the 1986 championship due to his left rear tire exploding. If the safe conlusion to his tire exploding isn't intelligent driving, then please show me what is.
F1 titles are won or lost over a season not in one race, you could just as easily say Mansell lost the 86 title when he stalled his car on the grid in Mexico. Mansell was a a 'win or bust' driver who would rather risk breaking his car trying for an unrealistic win than playing the long game and getting a points finish. He's just not in the Prost league as a tactician, developer of a car and in terms of mechanical sympathy, witness their respective performances at Ferrari in 1990.
@Spaceace2001 i also just want to add that in 1990 prost was playing politics at ferrari to get the better car and they were swapped without telling mansell thats how prost beat him at ferrari that season
Everyone plays politics at Ferrari, u should know that. Prost beat Mansell for the same reason he beat Rosberg and Lauda at McLaren, he's the better driver. Blindingly fast, brilliant tactically & sympathetic to his machinery. Mansell was a gritty trier who tried too hard in 1990 and broke his car regularly trying to beat Prost and stay in the hunt. Same as Rosberg, Mansell underestimated Prost's speed and thought he would beat him in an identical car, he was wrong.
Pardon me for disagreeing but in my mind Piquet got 3 lucky titles.
Reutemann had led almost the entire 1981 season and was on pole for the last race. In the race his gearbox developed a fault and he ended it in 7'th place outside the points. Meanwhile his team mate Alan Jones cruised to an easy victory in the same car. Piquet took 5'th and won the title with 1 point.
In 1983 one can question the legality of the fuel BMW was using in the Brabham and Prost's turbo broke in the last race too.
As for 1987. Mansell won twice the number of races Piquet did and led almost three times the distance. Sure, I agree he went for an all or nothing approach which probably lost him the title, but cruising and collecting is no way for a driver to win titles.
Schumacher may be a complete driver but he aslo had complete control of his team and the best engineers and personel behind him too. Ross Brawn deserves more credit than he gets. Senna proved himself against Prost in the team
@McLarenMercedes Interesting points. To answer them in order, i don't think any driver lucks their way to 3 titles, Piquet was a great testing / development who developed a superb relationship with Gordan Murray and drove intelligent races. In 87/88 Piquet was recovering from a huge crash at Imola that left him unable to drive flat out, so instead he collected podium places. Mansell won more races but Piquet was champion, so cruising and collecting was the way to win a title.
@McLarenMercedes Schumacher had the control of his team and best engineers because he was the best driver and like attracts like. Mansell was a driver in the Graham Hill mould, lots of guts and determination but never in the league of the prost, senna or schumacher IMHO.
Took Indy by storm and if they had'nt a brought that f-ing yellow flag out he wud have coasted to a superb victory, Mansells luck horrendous. Still won the title 1st time out awesome.
to be fair he only had two attempts at it, and 1994 effort was half hearted. I have to admit, even tho he was an indy rookie in 93, i was surprised he lost the lead to luyendyk and fittipaldi on the restart. I think nige is very disappointed he didn't claim victory in 93. also, interestingly enough, in his autobiography, murray walker says nige is one of the best drivers, technique wise, round Monaco even though he never won there. In some cases just a question of luck, and nige had very little
I wish Nigel would have stayed in IndyCar longer.
mad122780 1 year ago 2
At Ferrari Prost beat Mansell 5 to 1 in an identical car, Mansell won the title in a car with the biggest technical advantage since the Lotus 78 (but wouldn't admit it) left F1 because he didn't want to share a team with Prost (again). In Indycar Mario Andretti said of him "I guess if Ronnie Peterson was the best team-mate I ever had, Nigel Mansell was the worst" Mansell was fast but not an intelligent driver and not in the league of Schumacher,Senna, Prost, Stewart, Clarke, or the real greats.
Spaceace2001 2 years ago
I think you need to recheck your facts because Nigel was nearly 3 times F1 world champion. Bad drivers don't become world champions no matter how good their car is.. Nigel was smashing Indy lap records IN PRACTICE SESSONS!
ssssroryssss2 2 years ago 4
Well my facts are correct, Mansell actually won 1 title in F1, nearly doesn't count, Prost, Lauda, Piquet & Senna have all NEARLY won lots of world titles in addition to the ones they actually did win. As to breaking practice records in INDY ( a formula where drivers no longer competitive in F1 regularly win) If you read my post I said Mansell was fast, just not intelligent and not a complete driver in the mold of Schumacher, etc.
Spaceace2001 2 years ago
Prost, Piquet, Senna etc are extremely good drivers but so is Mansell. OK Mansell did lose the 1987 due to stupidity but all the other drivers you mentioned have done stupid things. As we all know, Mansell only lost the 1986 championship due to his left rear tire exploding. If the safe conlusion to his tire exploding isn't intelligent driving, then please show me what is.
ssssroryssss2 2 years ago 4
F1 titles are won or lost over a season not in one race, you could just as easily say Mansell lost the 86 title when he stalled his car on the grid in Mexico. Mansell was a a 'win or bust' driver who would rather risk breaking his car trying for an unrealistic win than playing the long game and getting a points finish. He's just not in the Prost league as a tactician, developer of a car and in terms of mechanical sympathy, witness their respective performances at Ferrari in 1990.
Spaceace2001 2 years ago
@Spaceace2001 i also just want to add that in 1990 prost was playing politics at ferrari to get the better car and they were swapped without telling mansell thats how prost beat him at ferrari that season
yngwie503 2 years ago 2
Everyone plays politics at Ferrari, u should know that. Prost beat Mansell for the same reason he beat Rosberg and Lauda at McLaren, he's the better driver. Blindingly fast, brilliant tactically & sympathetic to his machinery. Mansell was a gritty trier who tried too hard in 1990 and broke his car regularly trying to beat Prost and stay in the hunt. Same as Rosberg, Mansell underestimated Prost's speed and thought he would beat him in an identical car, he was wrong.
Spaceace2001 2 years ago
@Spaceace2001 Prost was favoured by Ferrari 100%
Mansell got all the dodgy spares while prost got the premium spares!
flipsidedogchop 1 year ago
Pardon me for disagreeing but in my mind Piquet got 3 lucky titles.
Reutemann had led almost the entire 1981 season and was on pole for the last race. In the race his gearbox developed a fault and he ended it in 7'th place outside the points. Meanwhile his team mate Alan Jones cruised to an easy victory in the same car. Piquet took 5'th and won the title with 1 point.
In 1983 one can question the legality of the fuel BMW was using in the Brabham and Prost's turbo broke in the last race too.
McLarenMercedes 1 year ago 2
@Spaceace2001
As for 1987. Mansell won twice the number of races Piquet did and led almost three times the distance. Sure, I agree he went for an all or nothing approach which probably lost him the title, but cruising and collecting is no way for a driver to win titles.
Schumacher may be a complete driver but he aslo had complete control of his team and the best engineers and personel behind him too. Ross Brawn deserves more credit than he gets. Senna proved himself against Prost in the team
McLarenMercedes 1 year ago 3
@McLarenMercedes Interesting points. To answer them in order, i don't think any driver lucks their way to 3 titles, Piquet was a great testing / development who developed a superb relationship with Gordan Murray and drove intelligent races. In 87/88 Piquet was recovering from a huge crash at Imola that left him unable to drive flat out, so instead he collected podium places. Mansell won more races but Piquet was champion, so cruising and collecting was the way to win a title.
Spaceace2001 1 year ago
@McLarenMercedes Schumacher had the control of his team and best engineers because he was the best driver and like attracts like. Mansell was a driver in the Graham Hill mould, lots of guts and determination but never in the league of the prost, senna or schumacher IMHO.
Spaceace2001 1 year ago
Took Indy by storm and if they had'nt a brought that f-ing yellow flag out he wud have coasted to a superb victory, Mansells luck horrendous. Still won the title 1st time out awesome.
Slibey 2 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Most over-rated racing driver in history
Spaceace2001 2 years ago
I wont feed the troll.....No, I will....Fuck up wont you, he's one of the all time greats....
flapshot 2 years ago
What a twat you are!
morgandude2 2 years ago
tosser
darkarts59 2 years ago
Spot on Nigel!!!!
morgandude2 2 years ago
f1 champion and indycar champion in his first year. nuff said...
fairclought7 3 years ago 10
Yeah, you have to compare him to Zinardi - he found IndyCar easy enough, but F1 impossible (Shame Indy cost him his legs, poor fella.)
Mansell had no such troubles...
Tj930 3 years ago 2
It went really well for JP Montoya in F1 after winning Indycar.............NOT.
RICKD790 2 years ago
Raul Boesel is really under appreciated. He was wicked fast at Indy...
IRLIndyCar 3 years ago 2
to be fair he only had two attempts at it, and 1994 effort was half hearted. I have to admit, even tho he was an indy rookie in 93, i was surprised he lost the lead to luyendyk and fittipaldi on the restart. I think nige is very disappointed he didn't claim victory in 93. also, interestingly enough, in his autobiography, murray walker says nige is one of the best drivers, technique wise, round Monaco even though he never won there. In some cases just a question of luck, and nige had very little
rob839A 3 years ago 2
the indy 500 was like monaco to him in F1 - desperately wanted to win there but never did
christschinwon 3 years ago
what does he says? i can't understand it :(
Taikamya 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
to bad his smart ass attitude didn't get him to victory lane
slompappy 4 years ago
TOO BAD you don't have a smart attitude. Just an attitude problem slompappy.
dextersno1fan 3 years ago
LOL, Great answer from Nige,
X24RIDER 4 years ago 8