McLaren Honda

andicole0 · 3 Mar 2017 at 12:44

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/39151187

Honda now seem to be getting frustrated, whoever said they should have invested in Manor was right. I can see Mclaren in deep trouble this year. At least thay'll have some champagne to cheer themselves up

Andi.

Emlyn_Dewar · 3 Mar 2017 at 15:55

Was it not just Ron Dennis who was against Honda having 2 teams? We could have had Super Aguri 2 running a couple of Japanese drivers and giving Honda more miles!

The_Abyss · 3 Mar 2017 at 21:32

If you look beyond the stupid headline the story is quite different...

drunkenmaster · 4 Mar 2017 at 08:41

Is quite different to what exactly? Headline is worried about lack of reliability, in it the boss talks about their lack of reliability and not knowing what killed the first engine, let alone the others.

As for the rest, what is actually troubling is they say the redesigned engine has had it's weight reduced to drop the centre of gravity for the benefit of the car... that is concerning shall we say.

Last time around they compromised the engine design entirely for the benefit of the chassis and it caused them to design the wrong concept that allowed it to be the smallest of any of them but the least powerful and the least reliable. If they've compromised on the engine again for aero reasons that is concerning. The lower weight is the most concerning bit. Merc and Renault have ADDED weight to the engines because it's one less engine this year, more powerful and they'll be on throttle longer this year and longer at the very high end rpm because they'll enter a lot of straights faster so hit near the top speeds and the very last few kph possible will be hit earlier and maintained longer. They added weight for reasons of reliability while Honda have reduced the weight?

You would have thought at some Mclaren would say hey, make the best damned engine you can, then we'll build a car to go around it. Instead the wording already feels a bit like, Mclaren required it to have lower weight so we did what we had to type situation.

But if any engine needed to be a bit stronger and heavier, it was the Honda. We'll see, hopefully they at least got the right basic concept and this basic design can be iterated over a couple of years into something decent but I wouldn't be surprised to see Honda back out after maybe next year, if 2018 doesn't start well I can see them pulling out and then Mclaren being back with...Mercedes?

Slam62 · 4 Mar 2017 at 09:07

This is very grim for all concerned, I wonder if they will have a decent engine before Ross Brawn changes the rules.

Steampunk · 4 Mar 2017 at 12:17

Wasn't the whole point of Ron partnering with Honda was that they wanted to compete with the factory teams who effectively design the engine and the car together? Maclaren are no longer the factory-like team of Mercedes, so they wanted someone else to treat them just like a factory team ie just like how Renault treated Red Bull before their acrimonious split and the re-emergence of a factory Renault team.

In the end it isn't working, and I suspect the different cultures of Honda and Maclaren are clashing, and asking one side to make compromises for the other is ending up with problems when you try to put the two parts together. It certainly is shocking how two world class companies with such history can be doing such a laughably bad job of building a race car.

andicole0 · 4 Mar 2017 at 14:27

Slam62 said:
This is very grim for all concerned, I wonder if they will have a decent engine before Ross Brawn changes the rules.

I don't think Ross is in favour of changing things that would incur further massive costs. Staying with the Hybrid system is probably the cheapest way forward.
Andi.

Steampunk · 4 Mar 2017 at 16:14

andicole0 said:
I don't think Ross is in favour of changing things that would incur further massive costs. Staying with the Hybrid system is probably the cheapest way forward.
Andi.

I think most of the engine suppliers have said they will be out if F1 tries to go back to normally aspirated engines. Hybrid and the surrounding tech is useful research for their road divisions. I never understood why Bernie changed things to "save money", cost the teams tens of millions, and just when things were settling down, it would all change again. It's like he never wanted the smaller teams to survive.

Goksly · 4 Mar 2017 at 16:26

Still totally perplexed how reliability can be so bad. Won't they have strapped the engine into something and had it running around a track in almost like for like conditions? Seems bizarre.

Mark365 · 4 Mar 2017 at 16:32

I honestly thought with the level of optimism this last few months that McLaren were about to turn a corner and start making their way up the grid. It's disappointing and equally concerning in so many ways. The McLaren - Honda project is not a shinning endorsement for any new engine manufacturers considering the challenge of F1 especially when there is only one team doing testing and data collecting. It's also robbed Alonso of potentially more success and more importantly in my view could prevent the incredible talent of Vandoorne from shinning. Drivers like Vandoorne deserve to be at the front. Can McLaren go through another season with an underperforming/unreliable car but still have a positive outlook? Something are someone will snap!!!!

andicole0 · 4 Mar 2017 at 16:46

Steampunk said:
I think most of the engine suppliers have said they will be out if F1 tries to go back to normally aspirated engines. Hybrid and the surrounding tech is useful research for their road divisions. I never understood why Bernie changed things to "save money", cost the teams tens of millions, and just when things were settling down, it would all change again. It's like he never wanted the smaller teams to survive.

Good point.
Andi.

Steampunk · 4 Mar 2017 at 16:59

Goksly said:
Still totally perplexed how reliability can be so bad. Won't they have strapped the engine into something and had it running around a track in almost like for like conditions? Seems bizarre.

Even running it on a bench should have been better than all these critical failures. After three years, Honda still can't build a reliable engine. How are Maclaren ever going to get the car working when the engine isn't even able to push the car around a track nine times out of ten?

Steampunk · 4 Mar 2017 at 17:14

Mark365 said:
I honestly thought with the level of optimism this last few months that McLaren were about to turn a corner and start making their way up the grid. It's disappointing and equally concerning in so many ways. The McLaren - Honda project is not a shinning endorsement for any new engine manufacturers considering the challenge of F1 especially when there is only one team doing testing and data collecting. Something are someone will snap!!!!

Lack of success is probably why the likes of Ron Dennis and Martin Whitmarsh got ousted. If you actually look back, Maclaren have not been getting the results for years, and are trading off their past successes in the eighties. Mikia Hakkonen won the championships in '98 & '99, Hamilton in 2008, and that's about it. Maclaren have been really underperforming for most of the last sixteen years, and their team-up with Honda has brought them to even lower depths. It's pretty sad for a company with such a great history and reputation, and there doesn't seem to be an improvement in sight.

CaptainRAVE · 4 Mar 2017 at 17:23

Honda have been a joke since day one. Listening to McLaren being interviewed on Sky this week they sound pretty darn frustrated. Hardly surprising.

Holst1981 · 4 Mar 2017 at 17:48

They have made some wrong choices.

Not all that surprising with Ron getting ousted then back in then out again.

They have chosen this lightweight design as they think it will be faster, but so far it looks like the disadvantages far outweigh the gains.

Hopefully they will be better than last year.

Type_R · 4 Mar 2017 at 20:04

The way I see it, McLaren have produced a car which is average at best (according to observers at the first test) and Honda have produced another lemon.

If McLaren have insisted on dimensions and weights for the new engine then it's no surprise Honda have so royally messed things up.

I'm pretty sure Renault don't get given dimensions and weights by RBR for the engine, they make a decent engine and it is RBR's job to make a decent car around it.

Apparently Honda have the most amazing facilities that Ron had ever seen yet can't produce anything that can go round a track slowly for more than a few mins.

Overall only time will tell but one thing is for sure unless this partnership delivers McLaren-Honda won't be a team come the end of this year, McLaren-BMW maybe?

drunkenmaster · 4 Mar 2017 at 22:51

Goksly said:
Still totally perplexed how reliability can be so bad. Won't they have strapped the engine into something and had it running around a track in almost like for like conditions? Seems bizarre.

You're still not allowed to run the engine on track after it's taking part. Mclaren ran it in some bodged together car in like November 2014, but once you get into being an official competitor then the rules mandate where and when you can test.

However keep in mind Merc, Ferrari and even Renault(to a lesser degree) managed to make reliable parts in the lab. We're way beyond the point where track testing is genuinely required. For the most part 95% of design is done and simulated on a computer, wind tunnels mostly just confirm results and check the computer isn't wrong and for the better teams with better design departments, the majority of what they bring to track is near final and works great. Track testing isn't what is holding them back, quite the opposite, their in lab testing appears to be at fault. Other teams test something in the lab and bring something great to the track, Mclaren/Honda are bringing poorly tested things to the track, find out they don't work but because of the way the rules work the engine they have is all that is ready so they have to live with it for a couple months till new replacements are ready and being that they are tested in the same way, and probably even more rushed, half of them are terrible anyway.

Honda just weren't ready for it, they certainly weren't ready for 2015.

Mclaren I just don't get, they wanted to get back on top, all they had to do was plan for the future, if Honda came in for 2017 they'd have more time to develop an epic engine than anyone else all the while watching what the other teams were doing. Why did it have to be 2015, such insane arrogance from Dennis as usual. I can work because it's what I want, screw sense I want a new engine now.

Flibster · 4 Mar 2017 at 23:32

I still Like how Porsche got around the old test ban issues.

1) Take a standard 911.
2) Remove weedy pathetic flat 6 and throw it away.
3) Install Tag Porsche 1.5l Turbo 1000bhp engine.
4) Add a couple of fairly hefty intercoolers.
5) ???
6) Profit!

Honda could follow suit and develop a version of the engine for endurance racing *as it appears Ferrari may have done to get around the testing issues with a Enzo/FXX* Run it in a slightly lower tune for 'endurance racing' but with the same internal components and run it to destruction or a couple of laps, whichever come sooner.

F1 V6 powered NSX test mule anyone?

Entai · 5 Mar 2017 at 07:28

Slam62 said:
This is very grim for all concerned, I wonder if they will have a decent engine before Ross Brawn changes the rules.

Number one, engines are fixed until 2020 minimum, changes to engine rules can only happen after then.

Number two, Only the FIA can change the rules of F1, Ross is in charge of FOM, (not the FIA they are two different organisations)
FOM cannot create or change any rules regarding how the cars ar designed or built.

Ross does however hope that FOM can get a little more involved in suggesting possibilities going forward, although really it's between the FIA and the manufacturers as to how engines will develop

Mark365 · 5 Mar 2017 at 17:31

Tell me this, during an official FIA F1 test do Ferrari,Mercedes and Renault collect data from all those who are using there power units for R & D purposes? If so, is that not a massive disadvantage to Honda in that they only have one power unit at a time testing.