Now we know that F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of automotive technology so you would think that the least a designer could do was design a chassis that is a least driveable. Watching a few on board videos of my good old early days following the sport and I came across this catastrophe - The '99 Arrows-Hart. Seriously, you would think he was driving in the wet. So what is the least driveable car you can remember watching
I really can't say that a video of Tora Takagi is a benchmark to consider if a chassis is good or not! The 2007 Honda has to be in with a great shout though. All that money, two good drivers, yet constantly at the back and beaten by the 'junior' team who were running year old Honda chassis! Before then, I remember Keke Rosberg saying his Williams chassis flexed badly in the 1984 season, mainly caused by the abrupt power delivery of the early Honda turbo's. ooh, Honda again!
there were some truly awful chassis back in the day, at least the hart made it to the grid, the Coloni was so bad it never made it past pre quali, which is why i can't find a video to show how bad it was. In fact below is probably the only video of one moving under it's own power http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaENPQoojJY
The Minardi M85, The teams debut F1 car. Was well overweight (It was nicknamed the whale) and well underpowered. But still the small outfit survived for over 25 more seasons.
In the vid Miggins posted, you can see (although of course the driver is taking it easy) that he can't get anywhere near the power until he's fully on the straight, and even then it wiggled a bit over the bumps. I want another really hopeless team now! Lotus, Virgin and HRT are almost getting a whiff of respectability now!
2008 Honda, Jenson scored 3 points that year, then won the championship the following year with a race to spare. Thats how bad the car was in 2008. 2007 Honda was also just as bad.
