planetf1.com

I do not now believe its just Honda thats keeping Mclaren back!! With the same engine as Renaults, look where Red Bull are!! Fighting for podiums. All along we have been hearing now that the Honda engine is more of a match with the Renault engine, yet Mclaren is not even fighting Torro Rosso or even Force India now!! Does it lay low their tall claims of having the best Chassis by European leg? Surely if the Chassis is SOO good, it would make up for some deficits on the engine side? Have they lost the plot completely now? Was really painful to see the Chinese GP. How long now before Alonso and Button both go!!!

wouldn't be surprised if they're just waiting for 2017 and the changes tbh

Immature PU
Immature ERS
Immature Software
Immature Fuel

I don't think the chassis is up there with Ferrari,Mercedes and RB obviously, nor the TR if you put a gun to my head, but it's nowhere near as bad as Renault. They seem poor on their tyres which doesn't help though.

When Arai talked about the ICE being better than Renault's it was largely dismissed but if they genuinely have HCCI capability in there then it bloody should be and I've no reason to doubt Mark Hughes or Ted Kravitz who say it does.

Unfortunately because the ERS and MGU-H specifically plays a key role according to Toto Wolf in getting it to work to it's optimum capabilities McHonda are way behind because theirs has only worked properly since the first test of this season. They need running to get everything where it should be and see where and how to improve. It's dull but it's true.

They should be stronger in Qualifying than the race right now because they now have a Qualy mode and don't have to worry about fuel consumption which is hurting them in the race.

Sudarshan wrote:I do not now believe its just Honda thats keeping Mclaren back!! With the same engine as Renaults, look where Red Bull are!! Fighting for podiums. All along we have been hearing now that the Honda engine is more of a match with the Renault engine, yet Mclaren is not even fighting Torro Rosso or even Force India now!! Does it lay low their tall claims of having the best Chassis by European leg? Surely if the Chassis is SOO good, it would make up for some deficits on the engine side? Have they lost the plot completely now? Was really painful to see the Chinese GP. How long now before Alonso and Button both go!!!

It never ceases to amaze me how many followers of Formula One relentlessly draw an ironclad connection between the pace of a car and the competence of the driver. As (journalist) Ben Anderson wrote recently of McLaren's two drivers, "These guys are good, among the best in the world undoubtedly, but they are not miracle workers."

Alonso is acknowledged by those inside racing to be around the fastest there is currently, certainly the most relentless over a race distance and Button, underrated Button, is but a gnat's whisker slower.

It's a sad (in my view) aspect of today's Formula One that the lap time is so hugely determined by the 'package' -- aero, chassis, power train. When and if McLaren get those elements in harmony, their drivers will deliver podiums and wins.

Lotus49 wrote:Immature PU
Immature ERS
Immature Software
Immature Fuel

I don't think the chassis is up there with Ferrari,Mercedes and RB obviously, nor the TR if you put a gun to my head, but it's nowhere near as bad as Renault. They seem poor on their tyres which doesn't help though.

When Arai talked about the ICE being better than Renault's it was largely dismissed but if they genuinely have HCCI capability in there then it bloody should be and I've no reason to doubt Mark Hughes or Ted Kravitz who say it does.

Unfortunately because the ERS and MGU-H specifically plays a key role according to Toto Wolf in getting it to work to it's optimum capabilities McHonda are way behind because theirs has only worked properly since the first test of this season. They need running to get everything where it should be and see where and how to improve. It's dull but it's true.

They should be stronger in Qualifying than the race right now because they now have a Qualy mode and don't have to worry about fuel consumption which is hurting them in the race.

Can you elaborate on this please? I'm a bit in the dark when it comes to the problems faced with the Honda engine this year.

I agree with you on the Chassis front

I wonder, how different is the engine in the Red Bull to the one in Renault? If they are close, that Red Bull would be a dominant car if it had a merc power unit

quere wrote:

Sudarshan wrote:I do not now believe its just Honda thats keeping Mclaren back!! With the same engine as Renaults, look where Red Bull are!! Fighting for podiums. All along we have been hearing now that the Honda engine is more of a match with the Renault engine, yet Mclaren is not even fighting Torro Rosso or even Force India now!! Does it lay low their tall claims of having the best Chassis by European leg? Surely if the Chassis is SOO good, it would make up for some deficits on the engine side? Have they lost the plot completely now? Was really painful to see the Chinese GP. How long now before Alonso and Button both go!!!

It never ceases to amaze me how many followers of Formula One relentlessly draw an ironclad connection between the pace of a car and the competence of the driver. As (journalist) Ben Anderson wrote recently of McLaren's two drivers, "These guys are good, among the best in the world undoubtedly, but they are not miracle workers."

I read it as 'how long before Alonso and Button get disgusted with this off the pace car and quit', not 'how long before Alonso and Button are fired for incompetence'.

As to the OP: It isn't as bad as you make it sound.

Sudarshan wrote:...yet Mclaren is not even fighting Torro Rosso or even Force India now!!

Toro Rosso maybe not just yet, but McLaren is definitely fighting (and as of last race, beating) Force India right now. Let's wait for a clean race at a less power-dominant track to see how the chassis really stacks up. If they're bad in Spain, then I'll be ready to admit the chassis is bad.

Standing trackside at Melbourne probably 15 meters from the cars at one stage, the McLaren sounds rough as guts. It has a different sound that the rest of the cars.
(The Renault engine was the quietest)
I don't know what that means for McLaren, but I would guess that further tuning, software tweaks etc etc could unlock a fair bit more from the engine.
Their biggest problem last year was reliability. My guess is that they are slowly turning it up race by race to find the performance/smash the engine sweet spot.

Well it doesn't reflect too well on Jenson and Fernando if they aren't abe to score points soon while Stoffel could do so in his first attempt.

Lupin wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:Immature PU
Immature ERS
Immature Software
Immature Fuel

I don't think the chassis is up there with Ferrari,Mercedes and RB obviously, nor the TR if you put a gun to my head, but it's nowhere near as bad as Renault. They seem poor on their tyres which doesn't help though.

When Arai talked about the ICE being better than Renault's it was largely dismissed but if they genuinely have HCCI capability in there then it bloody should be and I've no reason to doubt Mark Hughes or Ted Kravitz who say it does.

Unfortunately because the ERS and MGU-H specifically plays a key role according to Toto Wolf in getting it to work to it's optimum capabilities McHonda are way behind because theirs has only worked properly since the first test of this season. They need running to get everything where it should be and see where and how to improve. It's dull but it's true.

They should be stronger in Qualifying than the race right now because they now have a Qualy mode and don't have to worry about fuel consumption which is hurting them in the race.

Can you elaborate on this please? I'm a bit in the dark when it comes to the problems faced with the Honda engine this year.

I agree with you on the Chassis front

I wonder, how different is the engine in the Red Bull to the one in Renault? If they are close, that Red Bull would be a dominant car if it had a merc power unit

Which bit mate?. If it's the immaturity of the PU ERS etc then Hasegawa was basically saying that optimizing fuel efficiency with power is incredibly difficult and takes time. Because of their ERS trouble last year they haven't run as a cohesive unit for very long and they spent the winter sorting that out rather than chasing power from the ICE which is what they are focusing on now, probably means a change in the combustion chamber and fuel.


I believe the Tag is the exact same as the Renault.

Amon wrote:Well it doesn't reflect too well on Jenson and Fernando if they aren't abe to score points soon while Stoffel could do so in his first attempt.

Vandoorne scored in Bahrein just because two quicker cars (Vettel's Ferrari and Sainz's TR) did not finish the race and, in fact, Button was in front of him when he retired.

Amon wrote:Well it doesn't reflect too well on Jenson and Fernando if they aren't abe to score points soon while Stoffel could do so in his first attempt.

As impressive a debut as it was, we must remember we lost 5 cars in that race, 4 of which could have finished ahead of him.

Had the same happened yesterday, both McLarens could have been in the points.

Randine wrote:Standing trackside at Melbourne probably 15 meters from the cars at one stage, the McLaren sounds rough as guts. It has a different sound that the rest of the cars.
(The Renault engine was the quietest)
I don't know what that means for McLaren, but I would guess that further tuning, software tweaks etc etc could unlock a fair bit more from the engine.
Their biggest problem last year was reliability. My guess is that they are slowly turning it up race by race to find the performance/smash the engine sweet spot.

Brundle was saying during commentary that the noise from the Honda is the ICE switching to and from HCCI mode. Mark Hughes wrote a bit about it as well and it was posted in another thread.

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/f1s-power-secret/

Difficult to say if the car is slow because of the engine or chassis. The McLarens were amongst the quickest at the speed traps and chewed their tyres at alarming rates, which could be a sign of good engine and poor chassis. However, it could also mean that the engine was poor and they were obliged to use a minimum downforce configuration in a circuit with along straight.

Red Bull probably have the best chassis on the grid and a PU better than Honda. McLaren have an upper midfield chassis and the worst engine.

I think Alonso was second fastest in Q3 in the twisty second sector. I would say that the chassis is very good, but tyre degradation and the engine are stopping them from progressing. They probably need 5 tenths to clear Toro Rosso and Williams, and then a further couple of tenths to be able to fight Red Bull. I was hoping for more from them in the third race.

Exediron wrote: I read it as 'how long before Alonso and Button get disgusted with this off the pace car and quit', not 'how long before Alonso and Button are fired for incompetence'.

Same.

Button has already expressed possible retirement and it would be interesting to see where McLaren end up if they lose both drivers. Not only financially but results as well. We know if both these drivers hit 11/12th then frankly on a great day that car may hit 10th. These two drivers may not always get the max possible results (as shown with previous team mates over the years) but if both drivers bring the car home in those positions you know that the car isn't up to scratch.

I did say it would take a miracle for anything better and I got shot down this time last year when we was having this exact same discussion.

There were those who said this is McLaren they will get things together by half way this season. Half way came and their car was barely any better.

All you have to do is look at that first race from last year to see how bad that car is. When Button is struggle at the back of the grid, well off the pace you know there is something seriously wrong. It's just a shame we had to wait till later on in the Year for Fernando to say enough is enough with this GP2 engine.

No I don't think it's just the engine but that does pay a major part. The Renault engine seems very good on slow corners but I don't think it's safe to compare the Renault/RBR to the Honda/McLaren. That Renault engine has been built, worked together with RBR for some years. This is still only the second official Year with Honda. And with all the "Testing" rules and regulations, how much work Pre Last Season was that team able to do ?

It's not just about an engine, it's getting that engine to work with the car and the tyres while also the team trying to maximise strategy. Personnally I think the strategy was killed by the team. JB was putting on an impressive first stint keeping the left over front pack honest. I would be asking the question what on earth was McLaren doing leaving JB out so long to become a sitting duck and then pitting him towards the end. When you look at the first stint, JB should have been on course to score some good points. Instead he ended up with his team mate.

Exediron wrote:I read it as 'how long before Alonso and Button get disgusted with this off the pace car and quit', not 'how long before Alonso and Button are fired for incompetence'.

That's a good point. I may well have had a firm grip of the wrong end of the stick! If so, apologies to the OP.

I must say I've been most surprised at Alonso's continued (apparent) patience with the situation and his generally classy way of expressing his discontent, viz. the folding chair incident last year. I even thought his reference to GP2 - "I am getting passed down the straight like a GP2. This is embarrassing, very embarrassing." was strategic and appropriate even though McLaren was manifestly piling all the pressure it could on Arai-san. Some things just have to be said!

I especially loved Alonso and Button leaping onto the podium in Brazil.

Lotus49 wrote:Brundle was saying during commentary that the noise from the Honda is the ICE switching to and from HCCI mode. Mark Hughes wrote a bit about it as well and it was posted in another thread.

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/f1s-power-secret/

Going off-topic a little but those arguing that F1 technology is not relevant to road cars should read the linked article. Rant over...

Lotus49 wrote:

Randine wrote:Standing trackside at Melbourne probably 15 meters from the cars at one stage, the McLaren sounds rough as guts. It has a different sound that the rest of the cars.
(The Renault engine was the quietest)
I don't know what that means for McLaren, but I would guess that further tuning, software tweaks etc etc could unlock a fair bit more from the engine.
Their biggest problem last year was reliability. My guess is that they are slowly turning it up race by race to find the performance/smash the engine sweet spot.

Brundle was saying during commentary that the noise from the Honda is the ICE switching to and from HCCI mode. Mark Hughes wrote a bit about it as well and it was posted in another thread.

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/f1s-power-secret/

Interesting read, thanks.

Alonso raced with a not fully recovered and still a bit fractured rib bone.

tootsie323 wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:Brundle was saying during commentary that the noise from the Honda is the ICE switching to and from HCCI mode. Mark Hughes wrote a bit about it as well and it was posted in another thread.

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/f1s-power-secret/

Going off-topic a little but those arguing that F1 technology is not relevant to road cars should read the linked article. Rant over...

What do you mean? This technology has been researched since the early-mid 00's in commercial vehicles, before F1 took it. This seems like the F1 borrowing (and perfecting) commercial car technology and not the other way round.

Siao7 wrote:

tootsie323 wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:Brundle was saying during commentary that the noise from the Honda is the ICE switching to and from HCCI mode. Mark Hughes wrote a bit about it as well and it was posted in another thread.

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/f1s-power-secret/

Going off-topic a little but those arguing that F1 technology is not relevant to road cars should read the linked article. Rant over...

What do you mean? This technology has been researched since the early-mid 00's in commercial vehicles, before F1 took it. This seems like the F1 borrowing (and perfecting) commercial car technology and not the other way round.

So quite relevant indeed, like tootsie said.

Lotus49 wrote:

Lupin wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:Immature PU
Immature ERS
Immature Software
Immature Fuel

I don't think the chassis is up there with Ferrari,Mercedes and RB obviously, nor the TR if you put a gun to my head, but it's nowhere near as bad as Renault. They seem poor on their tyres which doesn't help though.

When Arai talked about the ICE being better than Renault's it was largely dismissed but if they genuinely have HCCI capability in there then it bloody should be and I've no reason to doubt Mark Hughes or Ted Kravitz who say it does.

Unfortunately because the ERS and MGU-H specifically plays a key role according to Toto Wolf in getting it to work to it's optimum capabilities McHonda are way behind because theirs has only worked properly since the first test of this season. They need running to get everything where it should be and see where and how to improve. It's dull but it's true.

They should be stronger in Qualifying than the race right now because they now have a Qualy mode and don't have to worry about fuel consumption which is hurting them in the race.

Can you elaborate on this please? I'm a bit in the dark when it comes to the problems faced with the Honda engine this year.

I agree with you on the Chassis front

I wonder, how different is the engine in the Red Bull to the one in Renault? If they are close, that Red Bull would be a dominant car if it had a merc power unit

Which bit mate?. If it's the immaturity of the PU ERS etc then Hasegawa was basically saying that optimizing fuel efficiency with power is incredibly difficult and takes time. Because of their ERS trouble last year they haven't run as a cohesive unit for very long and they spent the winter sorting that out rather than chasing power from the ICE which is what they are focusing on now, probably means a change in the combustion chamber and fuel.


I believe the Tag is the exact same as the Renault.

I think I just need a very simple explanation of it all. I get right into all the details of F1, but I must admit all this MGU-H stuff is a bit boring. I wish they had better names like double decker diffuser.

What is HCCI?

Lupin wrote:What is HCCI?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homogeneo ... n_ignition

HCCI combines characteristics of conventional gasoline engine and diesel engines. Gasoline engines combine homogeneous charge (HC) with spark ignition (SI), abbreviated as HCSI. Diesel engines combine stratified charge (SC) with compression ignition (CI), abbreviated as SCCI.

As in HCSI, HCCI injects fuel during the intake stroke. However, rather than using an electric discharge (spark) to ignite a portion of the mixture, HCCI raises density and temperature by compression until the entire mixture reacts spontaneously.

And further down:

Since HCCI engines are fuel-lean, they can operate at diesel-like compression ratios (>15), thus achieving 30% higher efficiencies than conventional SI gasoline engines

Covalent wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

tootsie323 wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:Brundle was saying during commentary that the noise from the Honda is the ICE switching to and from HCCI mode. Mark Hughes wrote a bit about it as well and it was posted in another thread.

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/f1s-power-secret/

Going off-topic a little but those arguing that F1 technology is not relevant to road cars should read the linked article. Rant over...

What do you mean? This technology has been researched since the early-mid 00's in commercial vehicles, before F1 took it. This seems like the F1 borrowing (and perfecting) commercial car technology and not the other way round.

So quite relevant indeed, like tootsie said.

What I meant is that normally F1 technology (motorsport generally, but let's stick to F1) trickles down to road cars, not the other way round. That's why I asked Tootsie what did he/she mean.

Siao7 wrote:What I meant is that normally F1 technology (motorsport generally, but let's stick to F1) trickles down to road cars, not the other way round. That's why I asked Tootsie what did he/she mean.

And how do you know this is not the case? HCCI has been around since late 1800's, but the implementation details of how it's done in F1 might still be relevant to normal road cars.

I agree. While the Honda engine is not the fastest they did not look bad on straights or acceleration. Mclaren were just bad on the corners. The Chinese circuit layout really exposed the poor maclaren chasis. The problem with Maclaren is they will never admit the chasis is a problem. So if you don't admit failure you will never fix mistakes and keep on failing.

Lupin wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:

Lupin wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:Immature PU
Immature ERS
Immature Software
Immature Fuel

I don't think the chassis is up there with Ferrari,Mercedes and RB obviously, nor the TR if you put a gun to my head, but it's nowhere near as bad as Renault. They seem poor on their tyres which doesn't help though.

When Arai talked about the ICE being better than Renault's it was largely dismissed but if they genuinely have HCCI capability in there then it bloody should be and I've no reason to doubt Mark Hughes or Ted Kravitz who say it does.

Unfortunately because the ERS and MGU-H specifically plays a key role according to Toto Wolf in getting it to work to it's optimum capabilities McHonda are way behind because theirs has only worked properly since the first test of this season. They need running to get everything where it should be and see where and how to improve. It's dull but it's true.

They should be stronger in Qualifying than the race right now because they now have a Qualy mode and don't have to worry about fuel consumption which is hurting them in the race.

Can you elaborate on this please? I'm a bit in the dark when it comes to the problems faced with the Honda engine this year.

I agree with you on the Chassis front

I wonder, how different is the engine in the Red Bull to the one in Renault? If they are close, that Red Bull would be a dominant car if it had a merc power unit

Which bit mate?. If it's the immaturity of the PU ERS etc then Hasegawa was basically saying that optimizing fuel efficiency with power is incredibly difficult and takes time. Because of their ERS trouble last year they haven't run as a cohesive unit for very long and they spent the winter sorting that out rather than chasing power from the ICE which is what they are focusing on now, probably means a change in the combustion chamber and fuel.


I believe the Tag is the exact same as the Renault.

I think I just need a very simple explanation of it all. I get right into all the details of F1, but I must admit all this MGU-H stuff is a bit boring. I wish they had better names like double decker diffuser.

What is HCCI?

I haven't the first clue how it all works i'm afraid, I've only read about it on a few sites and the discussion is usually well above my limited comprehension i'm afraid.

Toto didn't go into any detail in the quote I read from him really he was answering a question on whether Renault's upgrade in the combustion chamber would see them join the fight at the front I think it was and he basically said it's not just the combustion phase but how you get it to work with the MGU-H to get maximum efficiency out of it.

I'm just assuming because Honda's ERS was fundamentally broken last year there would be little to no good progress made on efficiency and optimizing the system.

Lord Crc wrote:

Siao7 wrote:What I meant is that normally F1 technology (motorsport generally, but let's stick to F1) trickles down to road cars, not the other way round. That's why I asked Tootsie what did he/she mean.

And how do you know this is not the case? HCCI has been around since late 1800's, but the implementation details of how it's done in F1 might still be relevant to normal road cars.

1800's? I think you are thinking of diesel engines. But this is off topic, my post was pointing that usually F1 is lending tech to road cars, not the other way round. Not a big issue really

AravJ wrote:I agree. While the Honda engine is not the fastest they did not look bad on straights or acceleration. Mclaren were just bad on the corners. The Chinese circuit layout really exposed the poor maclaren chasis. The problem with Maclaren is they will never admit the chasis is a problem. So if you don't admit failure you will never fix mistakes and keep on failing.

It would have been so nice to see if Redbull was able to get the Honda engine. Somehow I think more and more that they would have been even closer to Ferrari and Merc.

Honda needs another team running its engine for better comparison. Those guys at Mclaren have not proven they can build a good chassis since 2012, in F1 that is an eternity.

FI also had tyre wear issues in the race and thus did not score points. Mclaren is not a good car on tyres. In Bahrain they were better. It is close between STR, F1 and Mclaren. According to Mercedes Renault, Honda engine are competitive:
http://www.grandprixtimes.com/news/id/11738

So basically STR has the worse engine but nice car. FI has the best engine but not a good car and Mclaren are average in both.

Williams are little ahead of this pack but not by much

I hope both drivers stick with Macca for a couple of years, they deserve a good car and we deserve a great fight between both.

Siao7 wrote:

tootsie323 wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:Brundle was saying during commentary that the noise from the Honda is the ICE switching to and from HCCI mode. Mark Hughes wrote a bit about it as well and it was posted in another thread.

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/f1s-power-secret/

Going off-topic a little but those arguing that F1 technology is not relevant to road cars should read the linked article. Rant over...

What do you mean? This technology has been researched since the early-mid 00's in commercial vehicles, before F1 took it. This seems like the F1 borrowing (and perfecting) commercial car technology and not the other way round.

I fully agree. This technology was first applied back in 1886 as "hot bulb engine", and it's present day version has been heavily developed. In 2007 Mercedes previewed this technology in the F 700 concept car. And make no mistake, any parent company will invest a heck of a lot more money and effort in researching something like this, than any Formula One team. In this case, Mercedes had already developed the technology, and allowed the race team access to it, which they further developed into a specific range of applications for their racing. Formula One did not drive this technology, it had been around for decades and further refined by the parent organization.

Why is McLaren so slow? They aren't, not by development standards. It took Red Bull four years from taking ownership of a team to producing winning cars. When Schumacher went to Ferrari and they embarked on a complete rebuild, it took five years before the investment paid off. When Renault bought Benetton in 2002, it wasn't until 2005 until they had a champion.

Patience, it can take four or five years until the efforts of a complete rebuild propel any team back to the top. 2015 was a fresh start for McLaren, Ron Dennis had taken control and was in the process of rebuilding his team. With their new partner Honda 2015 was a complete disaster. But already in 2016 they are much improved from last year. That is all we can expect at this time, improvement, not winning.

Blinky McSquinty wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

tootsie323 wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:Brundle was saying during commentary that the noise from the Honda is the ICE switching to and from HCCI mode. Mark Hughes wrote a bit about it as well and it was posted in another thread.

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/f1s-power-secret/

Going off-topic a little but those arguing that F1 technology is not relevant to road cars should read the linked article. Rant over...

What do you mean? This technology has been researched since the early-mid 00's in commercial vehicles, before F1 took it. This seems like the F1 borrowing (and perfecting) commercial car technology and not the other way round.

I fully agree. This technology was first applied back in 1886 as "hot bulb engine", and it's present day version has been heavily developed. In 2007 Mercedes previewed this technology in the F 700 concept car. And make no mistake, any parent company will invest a heck of a lot more money and effort in researching something like this, than any Formula One team. In this case, Mercedes had already developed the technology, and allowed the race team access to it, which they further developed into a specific range of applications for their racing. Formula One did not drive this technology, it had been around for decades and further refined by the parent organization...

Oops - I stand corrected. I might argue that my post was sufficiently ambiguous that it could be interpreted as relevant, even if the relationship is in the other direction, but that was not my point. Cheers for the update, from Mr Severalyearsbehindtheball.

tootsie323 wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:Brundle was saying during commentary that the noise from the Honda is the ICE switching to and from HCCI mode. Mark Hughes wrote a bit about it as well and it was posted in another thread.

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/f1s-power-secret/

Going off-topic a little but those arguing that F1 technology is not relevant to road cars should read the linked article. Rant over...

It's rather irritating that when F1 comes up with something genuinely innovative we a fans are completely kept in the dark about it. They should be selling this as an example of cutting edge technology being introduced in F1, not hiding it away as a trade secret.

The major manufacturers have been researching HCCI for years but this is the first time I have ever heard of it being used successfully.

For this scenario, Formula One has not been innovating but following the donkey. The hot bulb idea is over a hundred years old, Honda has been using a variation called the CVCC since the 1970's.

A major auto manufacturer can not afford to get a production model wrong, so they spend insane amounts of research and development time and money on relevant technologies. In comparison, Formula One spend a pittance on R&D.

nixxxon wrote:Alonso raced with a not fully recovered and still a bit fractured rib bone.

“But then only now jumping out of the car I reminded myself about the rib.

“When I was in the race, I don’t know if it was the adrenaline, the competition, whatever – I forgot completely.”

http://motorsports.nbcsports.com/2016/0 ... hinese-gp/

Doesn't seem to have been a problem.

Covalent wrote:

nixxxon wrote:Alonso raced with a not fully recovered and still a bit fractured rib bone.

“But then only now jumping out of the car I reminded myself about the rib.

“When I was in the race, I don’t know if it was the adrenaline, the competition, whatever – I forgot completely.”

http://motorsports.nbcsports.com/2016/0 ... hinese-gp/

Doesn't seem to have been a problem.

He probably raced with painkillers or something. It is obviously better to be 100% fit and recovered.

do we need vastly complicated engines to get good racing - no -who's it for ? not joe blogs that's for sure - we could get great racing by giving the drivers the same engines year after year - it's the constant changing of the power plants that keeps teams with small budgets at the back of the grid and keeps new teams from wanting to come in particulary with the present powerplants

I did hear Alonso telling his team they need more power on the radio and he's desperate to win another title -well its not gonna happen this year . is it
are the rules changing much for 2017 , because if they are the same . I don't see Alonso doing it before he's past his sell by date .
can he stay fast and keep in a top team until 2019, but if we don't see some speed from McLaren in the next few races , I reckon Alonso will start to lose his new found love for McLaren and look elsewhere and so many fast youngsters coming tru

I would say Alonso's not in a good place at the moment , and how he comes to each race so determined is amazing, and as the title says -why are McLaren so slow, still

j man wrote:

tootsie323 wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:Brundle was saying during commentary that the noise from the Honda is the ICE switching to and from HCCI mode. Mark Hughes wrote a bit about it as well and it was posted in another thread.

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/f1s-power-secret/

Going off-topic a little but those arguing that F1 technology is not relevant to road cars should read the linked article. Rant over...

It's rather irritating that when F1 comes up with something genuinely innovative we a fans are completely kept in the dark about it. They should be selling this as an example of cutting edge technology being introduced in F1, not hiding it away as a trade secret.

The major manufacturers have been researching HCCI for years but this is the first time I have ever heard of it being used successfully.

Not kept in the dark. This is from 2014:

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/indus ... -emissions

The info has been out there. But you are right, there was a freeze in the HCCI development as they hit the wall many times through the years, but over the last 20 years or so they have managed to implement the technology in prototype engines. It is progressing to the point that it may be on the road within the next few years. But definitely not an F1 innovation this one.