Only 5 mins in and already better than most I've seen. Finally someone who realises you want to see clips of cars on or over the edge. Helps the cars were more skittish then and the tracks bumpy
Many thanks for this-great upload. I think a fair bit of this footage was a mixture of especially held back footage and stuff captured by Fuji TV. There's some great stuff here and in some ways, it's superior to the Official F1 Review, which ran an hour longer. The only odd decision here is that Prosts winning move on Capelli in France isn't shown. The funny thing is that the 1991 Front Runner Review is a lot more similar race footage wise to the Official Review.
Glad you like it! I've got the 1991 review and will be uploading it in the next week or so, there's still a fair few VHS tapes I'm in the process of converting over.
Nigel Mansell must've done something bloody awful in a previous life, he had the most rotten luck I've ever seen one person have in one seingle season of F1.
He got treated like shit by Ferrari throughout 1990. Unlike the year before he was now the team No2, and Alain Prost who had of course won the 89 title was prioritised for the better working cars, leaving Nige the scraps. This came all too clear at Silverstone when he also announced his retirement. He'd mentioned in front of the cameras (not included on this video) as he walked in that it always happened to him and hardly ever Alain.
@@daveattrill2712 Interesting how history is revisited with ignorance. Let's debunk these lies : 1. Ferrari had a similar treatment for both drivers. Alain however had secured the team's full support thanks to his hard work (his contribution to the car development and his work ethic are unparalleled while Mansell was an overweight golfer essentially), his dedication to learn and speak Italian (Mansell made zero effort to better communicate with his team), and of course he was the F1 victories record holder and triple world champion, which inspired confidence. He would also bring back a car in working conditions, whereas Mansell was a brute and often damaged his car. 2. Alain Prost was not driver number two. He wasn't driver number 1 either. Both were treated the same, provided with the same cars and the same engines and the same crew. One of the issue is precisely that the manager never made one more important than the other, and this actually hurt Prost far more than it did Mansell. 3. Silverstone was a typical Mansell inability to take care of his car, and the story about the cars being switched is a pure lie in the sense that the cars are not the property of the drivers. The team owned the cars and attributed them to the drivers. Mansell would often suffer mechanical failure because he was unable to take care of his car, his driving style verging on brutality.
Prost really took care of his car. Of all the drivers, he was the one able to manage chassis, engine, tyres and gearbox the best. This allowed him to often win, and even more often to finish a race, sometimes with a bent chassis or a misfiring engine or a defective gearbox. He was gentle, extremely gentle with his cars. Mansell was quite the opposite; the flip side to his perceived flamboyance was his brutal driving and little care for his car, leading to many mechanical failures and crashes, limiting his ability to finish the race, therefore win and score points.
The F1 cars of the 80s and 90s look like cars from a Mad Max movie… today’s F1 cars look like remote control electric cars… that’s why F1 was so fascinating back then and so boring now.
Only 5 mins in and already better than most I've seen. Finally someone who realises you want to see clips of cars on or over the edge. Helps the cars were more skittish then and the tracks bumpy
58:33 Today one of the most iconic laps of old F1.
It's immense isn't it, could watch it all day!
Raikkonen 2005 Monaco is quite impressive too. Watch it.
Many thanks for this-great upload. I think a fair bit of this footage was a mixture of especially held back footage and stuff captured by Fuji TV. There's some great stuff here and in some ways, it's superior to the Official F1 Review, which ran an hour longer. The only odd decision here is that Prosts winning move on Capelli in France isn't shown.
The funny thing is that the 1991 Front Runner Review is a lot more similar race footage wise to the Official Review.
Glad you like it! I've got the 1991 review and will be uploading it in the next week or so, there's still a fair few VHS tapes I'm in the process of converting over.
@@CrimsonReaver cool🙂I know VHS''s are from far in the past, but some of the stuff like this is gold.
4:40 What an athlete!
🤣🤣
Great Review !
Subscribed. Well done.
Thank you
Crazy how many false starts there are 😅
Nigel Mansell must've done something bloody awful in a previous life, he had the most rotten luck I've ever seen one person have in one seingle season of F1.
He got treated like shit by Ferrari throughout 1990. Unlike the year before he was now the team No2, and Alain Prost who had of course won the 89 title was prioritised for the better working cars, leaving Nige the scraps. This came all too clear at Silverstone when he also announced his retirement. He'd mentioned in front of the cameras (not included on this video) as he walked in that it always happened to him and hardly ever Alain.
@@daveattrill2712 Interesting how history is revisited with ignorance.
Let's debunk these lies :
1. Ferrari had a similar treatment for both drivers. Alain however had secured the team's full support thanks to his hard work (his contribution to the car development and his work ethic are unparalleled while Mansell was an overweight golfer essentially), his dedication to learn and speak Italian (Mansell made zero effort to better communicate with his team), and of course he was the F1 victories record holder and triple world champion, which inspired confidence. He would also bring back a car in working conditions, whereas Mansell was a brute and often damaged his car.
2. Alain Prost was not driver number two. He wasn't driver number 1 either. Both were treated the same, provided with the same cars and the same engines and the same crew. One of the issue is precisely that the manager never made one more important than the other, and this actually hurt Prost far more than it did Mansell.
3. Silverstone was a typical Mansell inability to take care of his car, and the story about the cars being switched is a pure lie in the sense that the cars are not the property of the drivers. The team owned the cars and attributed them to the drivers. Mansell would often suffer mechanical failure because he was unable to take care of his car, his driving style verging on brutality.
Prost really took care of his car. Of all the drivers, he was the one able to manage chassis, engine, tyres and gearbox the best. This allowed him to often win, and even more often to finish a race, sometimes with a bent chassis or a misfiring engine or a defective gearbox.
He was gentle, extremely gentle with his cars.
Mansell was quite the opposite; the flip side to his perceived flamboyance was his brutal driving and little care for his car, leading to many mechanical failures and crashes, limiting his ability to finish the race, therefore win and score points.
@@yeshuahdenazareth7868 Today I learned that our Lord and Saviour is a 80s/90s F1 almanach. The more you know...
@@jeremyj.5687 Thy faith shalt save thou.
The F1 cars of the 80s and 90s look like cars from a Mad Max movie… today’s F1 cars look like remote control electric cars… that’s why F1 was so fascinating back then and so boring now.
Ferrari eta linda e em 90 era mais forte wue a mclaren de senna