McLaren Honda

Glaucus said:
i just don't understand how honda keep messing up. they knew how hard it was before when they quit, only for Brawn to go on and win.
then they come back and under estimate again, Now the rules where massively opened up and they completely **** up again.
how are they so useless and blind.

I really thought they would learn from the past, but they haven't learnt anything at all. Its not even like they are on a shoe string.
Click to expand...

They've failed more than they've succeeded, like most in F1. As far as I can work out in the 1960s and 2000s they won 3 races out of 153 starts as a constructor. As an engine manufacturer (including constructor) they've managed 69 wins in 883 starts.
 
dannyjo22 said:
Marketing damage? The best selling car is a Jazz (With a terrible outdated engine funnily enough) with an average ownership age who I am pretty sure don't worry about F1 when buying cars. I can see them splitting through embarrassment rather than worrying about marketing damage. It's like BAR Honda all over again.
Click to expand...

I know how bad Honda f1 are, and how good merc are. Does this influence my car choice? No. Any car enthusiasts would be the same.

It however can't do them any good. And tbh I don't think it's worth the hassle. But none of us know if bad publicity is a good or bad thing vs none.
 
this_is_gav said:
BAR Honda? They became Honda and designed the best car on the grid by an absolute mile. .
Click to expand...

Using someone else's engine. The Honda lump at the time was rumoured to be 50-80hp down on the rest, with how the end of Jensons season went, with a Honda engine stinking the joint up I don't think he would have won a title and Vettel would be +1.


413x said:
I know how bad Honda f1 are, and how good merc are. Does this influence my car choice? No. Any car enthusiasts would be the same.

It however can't do them any good. And tbh I don't think it's worth the hassle. But none of us know if bad publicity is a good or bad thing vs none.
Click to expand...

If Honda Jazz sales are down this year I think it's because the new shape has a terrible engine and a laughably bad entertainment system, not because of Alonsos comments on how terrible Honda are. You are right, we don't know the effects of publicity but Renault stated when they won 2 titles it made so little difference they questioned the worth of F1. If young people aren't getting in on the Honda brand it's because their cars look like they are designed by a child putting as many lines on a car as possible ;) or a Jazz.

Disclaimer: My wife owns the last Gen Jazz and loves it :( but she is old and wouldn't care about them stinking up F1.
 
this_is_gav said:
BAR Honda? They became Honda and designed the best car on the grid by an absolute mile. Admittedly they made the atrocious decision of pulling out just before Brawn was born and won the title, but still.
Click to expand...

"the best car on the grid by an absolute mile"? Haha hardly!

The Brawn had a different engine and the only reason it was dominant was because they spotted and exploited the double-diffuser 'loophole' when others missed it and I doubt that had anything whatsoever to do with Honda themselves. As soon as the other teams developed their own double diffusers the playing field was pretty much levelled
 
dannyjo22 said:
Using someone else's engine. The Honda lump at the time was rumoured to be 50-80hp down on the rest, with how the end of Jensons season went, with a Honda engine stinking the joint up I don't think he would have won a title and Vettel would be +1..
Click to expand...
It was lacking compared to the Mercedes and Ferrari but there's no way on earth it was 80hp down, but that wasn't what you were on about. It's certainly not "BAR Honda all over again".

I'm not even sure the Renault 111 degree engine in 2001 was down 80hp in the latter half of that season.
 
Of course it's BAR Honda/Honda again. Lumbering from one crap redesign to the next while vastly down on power. It was rumoured to be up to 80bhp down but all the links I can find now say 50bhp. Either way it was crap, they went from not being able to generate enough heat in the engine to it over heating. They will quit again with their tails between their legs.
 
Surely there must be performance related clauses or penalties in the McL/Honda deal? If there aren't then some lawyers somewhere need firing. I wonder if there is a break clause, when it is?

Renault might be interested, possibly under their Nissan brand.

I wonder if McL have informally talked to VAG, Ford, GM and maybe even TATA group?
 
Actually the RA106 honda engine was considered to actually be the most powerful one on the grid, although fragile. See 2006 season here https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honda_in_Formula_One

To eliminate the electrical failures caused by the vibrations honda have attempted to turn the engine down so they could perform aero tests, unfortunately it hasn't worked.
None of this is really the fault of Mclaren or honda and what's being demostrated is how difficult it is to start from scratch with a brand new engine under today's testing regime and, unlike other teams, the honda is new. When these engines first came out a few years ago Ferrari cheated by bolting their's into the back of a road car so they could test it more thoroughly.
 
Ouch... http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/39290908

Could be the beginning of the end of that relationship then. The problem is they've made a massive amount of changes from last years engine in the persuit of performance in effect starting them from scratch this year engine wise. It was always going to be a struggle doing that but they couldnt keep going with the dog of an engine from last year. They had to double down and go for it!

I still think they entered into F1 too quickly and should've held back a year to get things right and see what everyone else was doing. They also should've put the engine in a lower team purely to gather more data.

This part was interesting:

Linking up with Mercedes - or Renault, which is another option - would be a momentous decision for McLaren with huge potential consequences because the Honda engine deal is worth close to a net $100m annually to the team compared to a customer engine deal.

As well as supplying free engines rather than paying the 17m euros (£14.8m) annual fee for a customer of Mercedes, Honda also pays half of McLaren's driver-salary bill and a significant sponsorship contribution.

Thats a pretty sweet deal to be fair so they'll more than likely push stick with Honda as far as they can.
 
You have to say though, they'd likely not have Alonso or he'd be getting paid an awful lot less so there's a £10-20m saving straight away. And now that Ron has gone McLaren would likely find it a lot easier to get a title sponsor. Apparently Johnnie Walker came in with an offer of £25m a season and Ron turned it down saying it wasn't enough for a team like McLaren. They're still a great team, but far from the team they used to be.
 
No surprise there. With Ron gone, the philosophy or "being a manufacturer team" is also losing ground at Maclaren. I think the main thing is that not only have the Honda engines been bad, and the relationship between Maclaren and Honda been poor. It's been a couple of years now and things don't seem to be improving. Where's the light at the end of the tunnel? It's getting to the point where both Honda and Maclaren are being damaged, and it's affecting their finances (£100 million cost for Honda, inability to get a big sponsor for Maclaren), with nothing to show for it.

You don't expect small backmarker teams with little budget to challenge for race wins, but massive companies like Maclaren and Honda, with their technology, money and history should not be languishing where they are.
 
Would it not be better to get the re-branded Renault engines considering McLaren is 25% owned by TAG?

For 100m a year Honda could have funded Manor as a complete works team without McLaren... and still be at the same place on the grid.
 
Steeps said:
Would it not be better to get the re-branded Renault engines considering McLaren is 25% owned by TAG?

For 100m a year Honda could have funded Manor as a complete works team without McLaren... and still be at the same place on the grid.
Click to expand...
There's now no link between the TAG group that have partial ownership of McLaren and TAG-heuer that have their name on Red Bull's Renault engines.
 
I suspect it makes commercial sense on both sides to terminate. Cost to Honda plus negative marketing impact can't be great, however I suspect the Japanese culture towards failure is probably the main reason they keep persisting.
 
andicole0 said:
Isn't the TAG owner Mansour Ojjeh still a 25% share holder?

Also I see McLaren may have approached Mercedes http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/39290908.

Andi.
Click to expand...
He is, yes, but there's still no link between TAG and TAG Heuer. From Wikipedia: 'In 1985, TAG Group (Holdings) S.A. purchased Swiss watchmaker Heuer. TAG Group combined the TAG and Heuer brands to create the TAG Heuer brand and also gave its newly acquired watchmaking subsidiary the combined TAG Heuer name. Under TAG Group's ownership, TAG Heuer modernised its product line and significantly increased worldwide sales. LVMH purchased the TAG Heuer subsidiary in 1999 for $740 million. TAG Group is now primarily a holding company for Ojjeh's shareholdings in TAG Aviation and MTG.'

On my iPad so editing is a pain. Sorry!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom