Australian Grand Prix 2015, Melbourne - Race 1/19
- Thread starter Shimmy
- Start date
Honda would not be allowed access to the engine or specs. Doesn't need to be taken away.
If Mclaren want to breach that, good luck burning that bridge, at best.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
A locked engine remains sealed and can only be opened under FIA scrutiny to replace parts you can prove you think aren't reliable(on a list of things you can replace) or replace entire engine parts if they've failed. Mercs guys in the garage would certainly have kept pretty tight control over those situations, doing that work. Effectively there will be a bunch of guys now who are the engine specialist guys for Honda/Mclaren, and Merc had their guys doing those things last year.
I'd imagine Mclaren know less about the Merc engine than you'd expect, though more than Merc would want. It wouldn't surprise me if the Mclaren guys actually had very few looks directly inside the engine parts, may never have seen actually inside say the MGU-K unit. Though they'd have a lot of data and information and obvious a pretty damn detailed idea of how every single part of the engine works, but how many mm is this, how strong is that, precisely what alloy they may use on the turbo/compressor shaft or precisely how they dealt with the vibration on that shaft... maybe not.
Again there have been pictures of the supposed Honda layout, similar to the last picture except that compressor then mgu-h then turbo out the back has been shifted forwards, sot he compressor, then mgu-h sit just inside the v of the engine, then the turbo is just at the end of the engine block. Think the supposed Ferrari/Renault pic except the compressor on the other side of the mgu-h.
This seems to point to what Ferrari had last year, limited compressor(because it had to fit in the V), limited turbo size and limited harvesting from the mgu-h because the turbo isn't powerful enough. Ferrari have stated they had the full split turbo idea but failed to crack the long shaft between compressor/turbo. I suspect they were forced to move the compressor closer but with the rest of the engine somewhat done at that point they had one option, move it inside the V, which meant a small compressor, which led to their mgu-h problems. It looks increasingly like Honda failed on the full split turbo and have maybe made exactly the same compromise. Even with a strong ICE it will have the weaknesses of the Ferrari last year... except tighter packaging. Also the further issue they have due to the packaging is the MGU-K is barely usable due to overheating with no easy fix to get air to it.
Ferrari moved the compressor out of the V so they could increase it's size, increase the turbo size and increase MGU-H harvesting which has helped them significantly and they used a conservative engine map as their custom higher power one wasn't ready yet, so could have even better power by Malaysia.
I think Honda have ended up exactly where Ferrari were last year... fundamental issues with compressor/turbo/mgu-h that stopped them being competitive. If that is the case it will take a big Ferrari like fix of moving the compressor out of the v and increasing the size of the whole turbo unit.
I'd imagine Mclaren know less about the Merc engine than you'd expect, though more than Merc would want. It wouldn't surprise me if the Mclaren guys actually had very few looks directly inside the engine parts, may never have seen actually inside say the MGU-K unit. Though they'd have a lot of data and information and obvious a pretty damn detailed idea of how every single part of the engine works, but how many mm is this, how strong is that, precisely what alloy they may use on the turbo/compressor shaft or precisely how they dealt with the vibration on that shaft... maybe not.
Again there have been pictures of the supposed Honda layout, similar to the last picture except that compressor then mgu-h then turbo out the back has been shifted forwards, sot he compressor, then mgu-h sit just inside the v of the engine, then the turbo is just at the end of the engine block. Think the supposed Ferrari/Renault pic except the compressor on the other side of the mgu-h.
This seems to point to what Ferrari had last year, limited compressor(because it had to fit in the V), limited turbo size and limited harvesting from the mgu-h because the turbo isn't powerful enough. Ferrari have stated they had the full split turbo idea but failed to crack the long shaft between compressor/turbo. I suspect they were forced to move the compressor closer but with the rest of the engine somewhat done at that point they had one option, move it inside the V, which meant a small compressor, which led to their mgu-h problems. It looks increasingly like Honda failed on the full split turbo and have maybe made exactly the same compromise. Even with a strong ICE it will have the weaknesses of the Ferrari last year... except tighter packaging. Also the further issue they have due to the packaging is the MGU-K is barely usable due to overheating with no easy fix to get air to it.
Ferrari moved the compressor out of the V so they could increase it's size, increase the turbo size and increase MGU-H harvesting which has helped them significantly and they used a conservative engine map as their custom higher power one wasn't ready yet, so could have even better power by Malaysia.
I think Honda have ended up exactly where Ferrari were last year... fundamental issues with compressor/turbo/mgu-h that stopped them being competitive. If that is the case it will take a big Ferrari like fix of moving the compressor out of the v and increasing the size of the whole turbo unit.
I still can't get away from..
Touring cars (for all the artificial management) is entertaining
Too much of the f1 isn't. The most exciting thing is off track
I get tired of comparing drivers on true merit and 'was it the car' or 'he had a rubbish team mate'
When you can only compare any one driver to his team mate.
And cars change year on year. It's practically impossible to validate a good driver
The argument can always be countered by opinion especially as we never see the real data.
Part of me loves the detail. These discussions. But if it really does end up like Australia every race.. People will turn off.
If Hamilton beats Rosberg every day that could be a big audience problem.
Ugh. I still want it to be a team sport. I like the wcc best.
I know a theoretical cost cap is impossible but I think it would help. But being impossible how do you simulate the same thing?
Is it worth a try?
One thing I hate but understand is early development shift to following year. Again a cost cap would stop it
Doesn't help that it is all about the money.
Only on Sky
Apps of ridiculous cost
And now terrible designed tracks. I don't get this at all. You know what creates good races. Mimic these!
Must be a natural tipping point where audiences get to low and nobody will pay the fees
Touring cars (for all the artificial management) is entertaining
Too much of the f1 isn't. The most exciting thing is off track
I get tired of comparing drivers on true merit and 'was it the car' or 'he had a rubbish team mate'
When you can only compare any one driver to his team mate.
And cars change year on year. It's practically impossible to validate a good driver
The argument can always be countered by opinion especially as we never see the real data.
Part of me loves the detail. These discussions. But if it really does end up like Australia every race.. People will turn off.
If Hamilton beats Rosberg every day that could be a big audience problem.
Ugh. I still want it to be a team sport. I like the wcc best.
I know a theoretical cost cap is impossible but I think it would help. But being impossible how do you simulate the same thing?
Is it worth a try?
One thing I hate but understand is early development shift to following year. Again a cost cap would stop it
Doesn't help that it is all about the money.
Only on Sky
Apps of ridiculous cost
And now terrible designed tracks. I don't get this at all. You know what creates good races. Mimic these!
Must be a natural tipping point where audiences get to low and nobody will pay the fees
I also see it (who doesn't) Hamilton, Rosberg, vettel
Must be hard for Rosberg
Great for vettel. Almost a good a move as Hamilton to merc
I really would love to know what Alonso is thinking. If he really does have the drive (pun intended) to win then he must be a pit frustrated with himself
I'm not too bothered who wins wdc and if it does come down to reliability. It isn't nice, but with the wcc being my main thing is even worse. Merc, absolutely. But after that it does get interesting.
Hopefully more cars will be better.
Main thing I enjoy is wheel to wheel racing. If drs achieves it, yes it's 'artificial' and fundamentally I don't like it. But if it is the best way to get that spectacle then I want it
Must be hard for Rosberg
Great for vettel. Almost a good a move as Hamilton to merc
I really would love to know what Alonso is thinking. If he really does have the drive (pun intended) to win then he must be a pit frustrated with himself
I'm not too bothered who wins wdc and if it does come down to reliability. It isn't nice, but with the wcc being my main thing is even worse. Merc, absolutely. But after that it does get interesting.
Hopefully more cars will be better.
Main thing I enjoy is wheel to wheel racing. If drs achieves it, yes it's 'artificial' and fundamentally I don't like it. But if it is the best way to get that spectacle then I want it
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Meh, Australia really is a poor track. Without the safety car last year it would have been the same. Rosberg finished 24 seconds ahead of Riccy(whose car had more power than it should have) last year, but after a safety car reduced his existing lead around lap 16-17 or something, so 6 second smaller gap but in 12 less laps or so. The safety car also helped make a few overtakes in both races... but that was about it. A few more cars, Australia is too tight, straights too short with too many of the faster corners being single file, joining together with next to no chance of taking them side by side.
As for a lot of it is off the track, yup, agreed, but that is what F1 has always been, it's an on track drivers race and an off track technology race.
Ultimately most of F1(afaik) has been one team nails a certain format, a new engine, or a new aero regulation, or a new tire, or picks the best engine, or the best tire, and somewhat dominates for a time.
Thing about cost caps and the STUPID , utterly stupid thing Brundle suggested which is that regulation should be done without the teams input, is it won't work. F1 loses money for the big teams, they sink money in because they have ulterior motives. Mclaren find value in the advertising of their brand which extends beyond F1. Renault find a technology extension behind F1 and value in marketing, same for all the bigger manufacturers. If as Brundle suggested in his column, regulations no longer included the teams and they just picked an engine.. if said companies see no value in pumping 100's of millions into developing those engines they'd be out, it's that simple. Like RBR, when there is no longer value to them they'll be out.
F1 has always been driven by the companies that are in it for more than actual profit from the racing itself, those who invest beyond what they can bring in with the motives outside of F1.
Currently we're a bit aero limited regulation wise but engine very heavy with development. The previous 5 years was mostly frozen engine but wider aero rules. F1 goes through spells. After several years of engine development we'll have locked engines and a new aero period with a big change. I think that is good for the sport, big changes and a race to see who can develop the cars the best.
If Ferrari/Renault hadn't ballsed up their engines quite so badly last year would have been pretty competitive anyway and this year still could prove to be more competitive than people think. At the most fuel limited tracks Merc had their biggest advantage... such as Australia. The most efficient engine and team might find that they had enough efficiency to go pretty much as fast as they can go elsewhere, while other teams were limited by efficiency here and will gain more than merc will at less fuel limited tracks. I wouldn't count this season over yet.
As for a lot of it is off the track, yup, agreed, but that is what F1 has always been, it's an on track drivers race and an off track technology race.
Ultimately most of F1(afaik) has been one team nails a certain format, a new engine, or a new aero regulation, or a new tire, or picks the best engine, or the best tire, and somewhat dominates for a time.
Thing about cost caps and the STUPID , utterly stupid thing Brundle suggested which is that regulation should be done without the teams input, is it won't work. F1 loses money for the big teams, they sink money in because they have ulterior motives. Mclaren find value in the advertising of their brand which extends beyond F1. Renault find a technology extension behind F1 and value in marketing, same for all the bigger manufacturers. If as Brundle suggested in his column, regulations no longer included the teams and they just picked an engine.. if said companies see no value in pumping 100's of millions into developing those engines they'd be out, it's that simple. Like RBR, when there is no longer value to them they'll be out.
F1 has always been driven by the companies that are in it for more than actual profit from the racing itself, those who invest beyond what they can bring in with the motives outside of F1.
Currently we're a bit aero limited regulation wise but engine very heavy with development. The previous 5 years was mostly frozen engine but wider aero rules. F1 goes through spells. After several years of engine development we'll have locked engines and a new aero period with a big change. I think that is good for the sport, big changes and a race to see who can develop the cars the best.
If Ferrari/Renault hadn't ballsed up their engines quite so badly last year would have been pretty competitive anyway and this year still could prove to be more competitive than people think. At the most fuel limited tracks Merc had their biggest advantage... such as Australia. The most efficient engine and team might find that they had enough efficiency to go pretty much as fast as they can go elsewhere, while other teams were limited by efficiency here and will gain more than merc will at less fuel limited tracks. I wouldn't count this season over yet.
Yep that is a crazy idea.
Did Renault not almost leave if they didn't switch to this new form?
To add
I think what is happening with the back markers is farcical
Turning up, not turning up, just doing quali, having to pay, not having to pay, not getting the prize money.
It all comes across very amateurish in terms of interpreting the rules
Did Renault not almost leave if they didn't switch to this new form?
To add
I think what is happening with the back markers is farcical
Turning up, not turning up, just doing quali, having to pay, not having to pay, not getting the prize money.
It all comes across very amateurish in terms of interpreting the rules
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
I still generally think Alonso was hoping to shake out a seat at RBR or Merc, maybe with the Ferrari seat as a fall back... then just got kinda caught out with no where left to go. AFAIK When Vettel signed, Alonso still had a contract for this year(yet they didn't get the same flak Sauber did
).I also think that much like Merc sold Hamilton on the 2014 regulation car build up, Mclaren/Honda will have told Alonso their car will be great.... he just didn't know they didn't know what they were talking about
I still think Alonso should have taken a pay cut and asked for a seat at WIlliams before Massa was confirmed for another year.
In fairness the existing guys in charge at Ferrari had made mistakes with the car before and not been great at fixing them. Ferrari at the same time as Alonso was looking to leave, were rebuilding. they identified a good leader and replaced the engine guy, the change in direction of the engine has done wonders for them. AS Hamilton lost faith with Mclaren, Alonso lost faith with the existing team at Ferrari and he decided to leave while most of them were still in place. Had the changes started 6-12 months earlier at Ferrari he may well not have considered leaving.
Though there is a lot of people who talk about the atmosphere being better at Ferrari without him, a more friendly equal driver feeling garage. I think ALonso is very much used to feeling like the no.1 driver and maybe losing that feeling at Ferrari he also felt like he wanted to find that somewhere else.
I must admit that if this season turns out just as bad as this race then even I might switch off for the first time ever. What I would love to see though is that if manufacturers no longer see value in F1 then they should return to the BTCC like the 90's, there was almost more spending in that than F1 at the time. 
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
I must admit that if this season turns out just as bad as this race then even I might switch off for the first time ever. What I would love to see though is that if manufacturers no longer see value in F1 then they should return to the BTCC like the 90's, there was almost more spending in that than F1 at the time.
Australia is a crap track, not entirely sure why so many people think the season will follow it's trend, nor will also start with so few drivers also making if yet more boring than usual.
Bottas won't get a freak torn whatever it was every race. Two cars won't stop on the way to the grid every race. This season is an oddity in that even last year with new engines the spec taken into the season was effectively the same as they started with in Jerez. This year the teams took different parts to test the engine with in various combinations and Renault it seems in particular went with an entirely new spec for Australia with parts that were both never tested in the lab and never tested in Barcelona/Jerez.
As a result Renault didn't have any real world testing on that specific engine and they didn't have tuned engine maps. Even by Malaysia I'd expect all four Renault cars to have better driveability and more performance. Ferrari took a engine map for reliability over performance, they believe they have a fairly decent effective BHP improvement coming for Malaysia also.
If Manor actually get out.... which is debatable, I'd be surprised to not see 18 cars starting the race and of those 3 teams should look stronger than they did in Australia. AFAIK Ferrari effectively used their customer engine maps, which are more reliable and take less risks so Ferrari power might increase, Sauber might not. Both Renault teams should find gains from learning about the engine and new engine maps.
Love F1 but what a farce
How hard can it really be to get your car to the starting line in 2015?
11 cars finished, 10 got points, Button did not. come on McLaren/Honda sort it out,
Great start for Lewis, but even a massive F1 fan like me thought it was a bit boring and that is not good.
Hopefully the next one will cheer us up.
How hard can it really be to get your car to the starting line in 2015?
11 cars finished, 10 got points, Button did not. come on McLaren/Honda sort it out,
Great start for Lewis, but even a massive F1 fan like me thought it was a bit boring and that is not good.
Hopefully the next one will cheer us up.
Thanks for that whole post quote....
Soldato
One of the better F1 race weekend reviews I've read, at the very least one that didn't make me want to throw things at the screen and mutter dark thoughts about the IQ of most F1 journalists. And published by pitpass as well, wonders never cease.
Highlights for me:
You get the impression that Max Noble isn't necessarily a huge fan of Chris Horner
Highlights for me:
You get the impression that Max Noble isn't necessarily a huge fan of Chris Horner
Man of Honour
Yet I don't think Alonso would agree to the contract if there was a risk of being trapped in a poor performing car. He left Ferrari for the very same reason that they couldn't deliver him a winning car.
