Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Forum rules
Please read the forum rules
Post Reply
pendulumeffect
Posts: 413
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:13 pm

Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by pendulumeffect »

McLaren aren't going to win for years. Honda simply do not have the technical staff on par with their European competitors. I had high hopes Honda engine could achieve the success like the BGP001 chassis if they just focused on the power unit. They said they were taking a risky approach but the truth is they didn't know how to get anywhere near the Mercedes performance level and likely never will as Mercedes are too far ahead for them to catch up. They should have got closer by now not further.

McLaren need to pray for a miracle or get a new engine partner or develop their own engine. The other option is simply leave F1 and try Formula E, Le Mans, WEC, Indycar or stick to supercar racing. When F1 eventually gives up on hybrids maybe then it might be worth returning. Another 3 years like the last will destroy the brand and the team anyway.

Wpuld McLar3n be better off outside F1 for a while and where would they best reside away?

mikeyg123
Posts: 18026
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by mikeyg123 »

Better to be in F1 not winning than out all together.

Why would another 3 years win less destroy the brand?

User avatar
Pole2Win
Posts: 926
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Brazil

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by Pole2Win »

It's difficult to understand, really. Because Honda took a while to win their first F1 championship as an engine supplier in the 80s, as they could only do it in 1987, though their engine was already one of the best in the grid. When the turbos were banned, they made a great V10 engine off the bat. The V12 from 1992 didn't seem too bad either, because that year McLaren was hindered by the chassis, as demonstrated when Schumacher was able to get good results with the Ford V8 in his Benetton.

Then came the turn of the millenium when they came back and their engine was never particularly bad, just hindered by the chassis once again, as David Richards took a while to sort out the mess at BAR. Jordan also entered a strong decline and could never deliver a good chassis either. BAR was always going to win their "shootout", as Honda wanted control of the team and it was probably easier to do it with BAR.

Their current slump is inexplicable, because they had the luxury of waiting a full year before they would join. They're no strangers to hybrid technology either, otherwise we'd see many problems with the NSX road car, which doesn't seem to be happening.
Image

"Ask any racer, any real racer... It don't matter if you win by an inch or a mile. Winning is winning." (Dominic Toretto, "The Fast and The Furious")

User avatar
huggybear
Posts: 1836
Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 6:08 pm

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by huggybear »

Makes no sense for McLaren to leave F1 if they have any designs on winning again. Honda are proof if any were needed that coming in cold after time out means you're guaranteed to struggle.
Indycar and Formula E are basically spec series except for the engine and drivetrain, of which Mclaren have no experience of. They've also not built a LMP before, so they'd struggle there too.
There's no point leaving one series you are struggling in, to just struggle in another one.

User avatar
nixxxon
Posts: 3767
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 11:08 pm

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by nixxxon »

So, all the midfield and backmarker teams should leave F1 aswell? Since they wont be winning either.
Lets end up with a 6 car grid with the top 3 teams only.

User avatar
Lotus49
Posts: 5273
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by Lotus49 »

Pole2Win wrote:It's difficult to understand, really. Because Honda took a while to win their first F1 championship as an engine supplier in the 80s, as they could only do it in 1987, though their engine was already one of the best in the grid. When the turbos were banned, they made a great V10 engine off the bat. The V12 from 1992 didn't seem too bad either, because that year McLaren was hindered by the chassis, as demonstrated when Schumacher was able to get good results with the Ford V8 in his Benetton.

Then came the turn of the millenium when they came back and their engine was never particularly bad, just hindered by the chassis once again, as David Richards took a while to sort out the mess at BAR. Jordan also entered a strong decline and could never deliver a good chassis either. BAR was always going to win their "shootout", as Honda wanted control of the team and it was probably easier to do it with BAR.

Their current slump is inexplicable, because they had the luxury of waiting a full year before they would join. They're no strangers to hybrid technology either, otherwise we'd see many problems with the NSX road car, which doesn't seem to be happening.
How on earth was that a luxury?.
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

User avatar
nixxxon
Posts: 3767
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 11:08 pm

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by nixxxon »

Lotus49 wrote:
Pole2Win wrote:It's difficult to understand, really. Because Honda took a while to win their first F1 championship as an engine supplier in the 80s, as they could only do it in 1987, though their engine was already one of the best in the grid. When the turbos were banned, they made a great V10 engine off the bat. The V12 from 1992 didn't seem too bad either, because that year McLaren was hindered by the chassis, as demonstrated when Schumacher was able to get good results with the Ford V8 in his Benetton.

Then came the turn of the millenium when they came back and their engine was never particularly bad, just hindered by the chassis once again, as David Richards took a while to sort out the mess at BAR. Jordan also entered a strong decline and could never deliver a good chassis either. BAR was always going to win their "shootout", as Honda wanted control of the team and it was probably easier to do it with BAR.

Their current slump is inexplicable, because they had the luxury of waiting a full year before they would join. They're no strangers to hybrid technology either, otherwise we'd see many problems with the NSX road car, which doesn't seem to be happening.
How on earth was that a luxury?.
Indeed it was, that meant they ended up being 1 year behind in experience with those new hi-tech engines.

User avatar
Pole2Win
Posts: 926
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Brazil

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by Pole2Win »

Lotus49 wrote:How on earth was that a luxury?.
There are numerous cases in the history of motorsport of manufacturers arriving late to a ruleset and sweeping championships after one or two troublesome seasons. That's why I believe that Honda joining a year after everyone aggravates their current situation, because they shouldn't have been so bad.

Some examples:

1973: Lancia Stratos. The first car built specifically for rallying. Nothing else needs to be said.

1984: Peugeot 205 T16. Audi proved to the world with the Quattro in the years before that AWD was the way to go in rallying. Peugeot took it one step further by building a smaller and lighter car in an attempt to compensate for the weight gain of AWD, and effectively rendered the Quattro obsolete.

1989: Nissan Skyline GT-R. Homologation special for Group A touring car racing. One of the very last cars to be homologated, it swept every championship it took part in. This led the Australians to canning the ATCC and running their own private show which became known as V8 Supercars.

1996: Porsche 911 GT1. The BPR series is going at full force, following a revival of grand touring cars in the early 90s. Most of the cars in the series are based on existing production road cars. Porsche forced their hand by building a purpose race car and then toned it down for series production to be able to homologate it.

1997: Mercedes CLK-GTR. The answer to Porsche's car from the year before. It was even better, and, because the others couldn't compete with it, they gave up and the GT1 class in the FIA GT was cancelled for 1999, with the old GT2 cars eventually being promoted to GT1.

2000: Audi R8. Audi tested the waters in 1999 by fielding two different prototypes at Le Mans to see which one was the most promising. They picked the open R8R, which eventually became the all-conquering R8. Such was the dominance of Audi in the 2000s that they could basically toy with the race, letting Bentley build their own car based on the abandoned Audi R8C and win the race with it, as well as fielding the R10 diesel prototype purely as a marketing exercise and dominating with it, too.

Usually, to arrive late means that you know what your opponents can do and can therefore prepare for it.
Image

"Ask any racer, any real racer... It don't matter if you win by an inch or a mile. Winning is winning." (Dominic Toretto, "The Fast and The Furious")

User avatar
nixxxon
Posts: 3767
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 11:08 pm

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by nixxxon »

However, now that I remember, it might have been not such a luxury if we take in count that engines in theory were not allowed to be modified at all during those latest years, therefora Honda could try to copy the best designed one that resulted to be mercedes. They failed though

User avatar
Lotus49
Posts: 5273
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by Lotus49 »

Pole2Win wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:How on earth was that a luxury?.
There are numerous cases in the history of motorsport of manufacturers arriving late to a ruleset and sweeping championships after one or two troublesome seasons. That's why I believe that Honda joining a year after everyone aggravates their current situation, because they shouldn't have been so bad.

Some examples:

1973: Lancia Stratos. The first car built specifically for rallying. Nothing else needs to be said.

1984: Peugeot 205 T16. Audi proved to the world with the Quattro in the years before that AWD was the way to go in rallying. Peugeot took it one step further by building a smaller and lighter car in an attempt to compensate for the weight gain of AWD, and effectively rendered the Quattro obsolete.

1989: Nissan Skyline GT-R. Homologation special for Group A touring car racing. One of the very last cars to be homologated, it swept every championship it took part in. This led the Australians to canning the ATCC and running their own private show which became known as V8 Supercars.

1996: Porsche 911 GT1. The BPR series is going at full force, following a revival of grand touring cars in the early 90s. Most of the cars in the series are based on existing production road cars. Porsche forced their hand by building a purpose race car and then toned it down for series production to be able to homologate it.

1997: Mercedes CLK-GTR. The answer to Porsche's car from the year before. It was even better, and, because the others couldn't compete with it, they gave up and the GT1 class in the FIA GT was cancelled for 1999, with the old GT2 cars eventually being promoted to GT1.

2000: Audi R8. Audi tested the waters in 1999 by fielding two different prototypes at Le Mans to see which one was the most promising. They picked the open R8R, which eventually became the all-conquering R8. Such was the dominance of Audi in the 2000s that they could basically toy with the race, letting Bentley build their own car based on the abandoned Audi R8C and win the race with it, as well as fielding the R10 diesel prototype purely as a marketing exercise and dominating with it, too.

Usually, to arrive late means that you know what your opponents can do and can therefore prepare for it.
Usually you are allowed to test and you're not working with something as complex as these PU's.

There was nothing to learn sitting on the sidelines that they could R&D in the time frame. During 2014 everyone thought the split turbo was the reason for Mercedes success but it turns out it offers only marginal benefits. Nobody was talking about the combustion concepts at that time and that's what Honda are currently struggling with.

Honda had already decided to run a split turbo before learning that Mercedes were running one. They had from summer/fall 2013 to Nov.2014 to come up with their concept and get it built and in the car. What could they learn?.

For example an already up and running Honda with nearly 3 years experience took from May 2016 to December 2016 to test this new 2017 concept in a V6 configuration from mono-cylinder testing.

They were never going to learn anything from watching the F1 season start from March 2014 and everyone hailing a split turbo concept all summer. There's no luxury in arriving late with no testing and immediately entering a restricted token system.

Not that the late entry is an excuse to this current units failings, it isn't, but calling it a luxury is absurd. The amount Ferrari,Mercedes and Renault learnt during 2014, especially around the MGU-H is priceless and can't be replicated sitting at home watching the TV.
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by Zoue »

Turn their back on F1? Whatever for?

They may well decide to do other races in addition to F1, but they are now as much a part of the sport's DNA as Ferrari or Williams. They're not going anywhere

User avatar
moby
Posts: 8072
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by moby »

I predict with full confidence, I bet a beer on it, Mclaren will have wins next year. Probably a podium or two this year.

Now I am not available for comment for a while :uhoh:

User avatar
dizlexik
Posts: 7796
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:07 pm

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by dizlexik »

Wouldn't McLaren as a car manufacture be forced to compete in Le Mans in the same category as Porsche and Toyota? Going to Le Mans would also mean developing their own hybrid engine. Going to any other series mean pretty much closure of their current racing team.
eeee

Jomox
Posts: 1108
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:52 am

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by Jomox »

Silly question and topic. Pointless for them to do that. They can already put enough efforts into sports cars along with F1 if they wanted, and F1 is where the big game is at and something that they will continue to develop, through good and bad, F1 is in their blood and needed for their image.

User avatar
Blake
Posts: 6819
Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 4:12 pm
Location: Nebraska, USA
Contact:

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by Blake »

nixxxon wrote:However, now that I remember, it might have been not such a luxury if we take in count that engines in theory were not allowed to be modified at all during those latest years, therefora Honda could try to copy the best designed one that resulted to be mercedes. They failed though
I believe that it was a potential advantage to McLaren-Honda... for that very reason. While all the the teams were limited in what they could do with power plant development, Honda had no such restriction. As such, they could watch the problems the other teams faced and be free to learn from the and rectify them with their own engines.

I have been quite surprised at their futility.
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15

User avatar
Lotus49
Posts: 5273
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by Lotus49 »

Blake wrote:
nixxxon wrote:However, now that I remember, it might have been not such a luxury if we take in count that engines in theory were not allowed to be modified at all during those latest years, therefora Honda could try to copy the best designed one that resulted to be mercedes. They failed though
I believe that it was a potential advantage to McLaren-Honda... for that very reason. While all the the teams were limited in what they could do with power plant development, Honda had no such restriction. As such, they could watch the problems the other teams faced and be free to learn from the and rectify them with their own engines.

I have been quite surprised at their futility.
If everyone came up with the same concept that might have worked but with 4 different ones, another teams problems are largely irrelevant unfortunately.

Without specific knowledge of what the problems were and what caused them what can you do with it in reference to your own untested concept that you designed because you think it's the best one in the first place?.
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

User avatar
guardiangr
Posts: 192
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 6:43 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by guardiangr »

What kind of question is that? McLaren's main bussiness is F1 as is Ferrari's, those 2 teams will be here long after Mercedes and Renault decide to leave the sport once again.

User avatar
Alex53
Posts: 933
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 9:11 am

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by Alex53 »

Their sports cars would have less appeal if they weren't in F1.

Teddy007
Posts: 1079
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 2:54 pm
Contact:

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by Teddy007 »

pendulumeffect wrote:McLaren aren't going to win for years. Honda simply do not have the technical staff on par with their European competitors. I had high hopes Honda engine could achieve the success like the BGP001 chassis if they just focused on the power unit. They said they were taking a risky approach but the truth is they didn't know how to get anywhere near the Mercedes performance level and likely never will as Mercedes are too far ahead for them to catch up. They should have got closer by now not further.

McLaren need to pray for a miracle or get a new engine partner or develop their own engine. The other option is simply leave F1 and try Formula E, Le Mans, WEC, Indycar or stick to supercar racing. When F1 eventually gives up on hybrids maybe then it might be worth returning. Another 3 years like the last will destroy the brand and the team anyway.

Wpuld McLar3n be better off outside F1 for a while and where would they best reside away?
No, F1 is where Mclaren belong and leaving the sport admits defeat. They do need a miracle though.

User avatar
jimmyj
Posts: 1899
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 2:53 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by jimmyj »

No way. Their objective should be (and I'm sure is) to get back to winning form. Nothing else would be acceptable.

User avatar
Blinky McSquinty
Posts: 1463
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2016 12:13 pm

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by Blinky McSquinty »

Remember two years ago, when the Renault was just as bad as the Honda engine? Yes, anyone can turn things around very quickly. What has crippled Honda in the past were the insane restrictions on development. Now that most roadblocks have been removed, they can now accelerate their development process and get that engine sorted. Trust me, of all the parties, Honda want this fixed the most.

I am continually amazed at the impatience of so many race fans. A driver new to a team has so-so races and the talk is about consigning him to the children's table. An engine manufacturer struggles, talk about giving up.

McLaren know that Formula One is their core business and this activity defines the company. But since they now have new faces running the show, and some of them are Indycar fans, they will now branch out to other motorsports in tune with their wonderful past.

McLaren Technology Group executive committee principal Mansour Ojjeh said that he is open to McLaren having a permanent IndyCar presence in the future – and, possibly, a return to Le Mans.

http://www.racer.com/f1/item/139552-ojj ... ndy-return
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.

User avatar
moby
Posts: 8072
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by moby »

The only advantage to McHonda would be that they could take a year of testing as it would not be the accepted machinery.
If they wen this road, they would be better off buying the remnants of Manor and doing it. They would also have half this year as extra time too as the manor is not in competition, and could use lots of Mclaren parts as Haas do with Ferrari

User avatar
Exediron
Posts: 8230
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Location: Michigan, USA
Contact:

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by Exediron »

jimmyj wrote:No way. Their objective should be (and I'm sure is) to get back to winning form. Nothing else would be acceptable.
:thumbup:

As soon as that stops being the objective, they're not a top team anymore.
PICK 10 COMPETITION (6 wins, 18 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017 & 2019
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion

pendulumeffect
Posts: 413
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:13 pm

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by pendulumeffect »

They are not going to get back to winning form though. The engines are the only super critical component now, all the aero and packaging is reliant on an efficient power unit hence why Mercedes and Ferrari are the only ones in the hunt for wins.

They are currently joint last and you have to wonder, what happens if they finish this year with no points? It might seem crazy but I think they might need 10 races to get a point scoring opportunity, but what if the rest of the grid gets better engine upgrades than Honda? Then they are really in trouble.

User avatar
Exediron
Posts: 8230
Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Location: Michigan, USA
Contact:

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by Exediron »

pendulumeffect wrote:They are not going to get back to winning form though. The engines are the only super critical component now, all the aero and packaging is reliant on an efficient power unit hence why Mercedes and Ferrari are the only ones in the hunt for wins.

They are currently joint last and you have to wonder, what happens if they finish this year with no points? It might seem crazy but I think they might need 10 races to get a point scoring opportunity, but what if the rest of the grid gets better engine upgrades than Honda? Then they are really in trouble.
They had a scoring opportunity in both the first and the second races, and would have had points from both if Alonso's car hadn't failed. It's bad, but it's not that bad.
PICK 10 COMPETITION (6 wins, 18 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017 & 2019
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion

User avatar
jimmyj
Posts: 1899
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 2:53 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by jimmyj »

Honestly, I'd give my left kidney to be an F1 driver even in this car. Ha ha ha

Herb Tarlik
Posts: 1618
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by Herb Tarlik »

Exediron wrote:
pendulumeffect wrote:They are not going to get back to winning form though. The engines are the only super critical component now, all the aero and packaging is reliant on an efficient power unit hence why Mercedes and Ferrari are the only ones in the hunt for wins.

They are currently joint last and you have to wonder, what happens if they finish this year with no points? It might seem crazy but I think they might need 10 races to get a point scoring opportunity, but what if the rest of the grid gets better engine upgrades than Honda? Then they are really in trouble.
They had a scoring opportunity in both the first and the second races, and would have had points from both if Alonso's car hadn't failed. It's bad, but it's not that bad.
Engine reliability is getting worse, not better with Honda. The non start and retirement were both classified as engine problems.

Sure, McLaren will be much much better off if Honda can produce an engine of sufficient power and reliability. But that has been true the past 3 years and there is no metric you can point to that shows that any progress has been made in this area. In terms of reliability, they are clearly worse off than the past years.

Question: How many years of failure will it take for you to think that Honda is in over their head? Four? Five? More?

User avatar
moby
Posts: 8072
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by moby »

Herb Tarlik wrote:
Exediron wrote:
pendulumeffect wrote:They are not going to get back to winning form though. The engines are the only super critical component now, all the aero and packaging is reliant on an efficient power unit hence why Mercedes and Ferrari are the only ones in the hunt for wins.

They are currently joint last and you have to wonder, what happens if they finish this year with no points? It might seem crazy but I think they might need 10 races to get a point scoring opportunity, but what if the rest of the grid gets better engine upgrades than Honda? Then they are really in trouble.
They had a scoring opportunity in both the first and the second races, and would have had points from both if Alonso's car hadn't failed. It's bad, but it's not that bad.
Engine reliability is getting worse, not better with Honda. The non start and retirement were both classified as engine problems.

Sure, McLaren will be much much better off if Honda can produce an engine of sufficient power and reliability. But that has been true the past 3 years and there is no metric you can point to that shows that any progress has been made in this area. In terms of reliability, they are clearly worse off than the past years.

Question: How many years of failure will it take for you to think that Honda is in over their head? Four? Five? More?
Remember, this is a completely different engine to last year. Different architecture and different ethos completely.
You can not base the development of this on on last years engine.
From what I gather, this engine was superb when on their test rig, erm, except it was just one cylinder. 8O
When they added the other 5, it sort of went pair shape. Its only Xmas that they knew thy had this problem on this engine. Still a long time, but not 3 years

Herb Tarlik
Posts: 1618
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by Herb Tarlik »

moby wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Exediron wrote:
pendulumeffect wrote:They are not going to get back to winning form though. The engines are the only super critical component now, all the aero and packaging is reliant on an efficient power unit hence why Mercedes and Ferrari are the only ones in the hunt for wins.

They are currently joint last and you have to wonder, what happens if they finish this year with no points? It might seem crazy but I think they might need 10 races to get a point scoring opportunity, but what if the rest of the grid gets better engine upgrades than Honda? Then they are really in trouble.
They had a scoring opportunity in both the first and the second races, and would have had points from both if Alonso's car hadn't failed. It's bad, but it's not that bad.
Engine reliability is getting worse, not better with Honda. The non start and retirement were both classified as engine problems.

Sure, McLaren will be much much better off if Honda can produce an engine of sufficient power and reliability. But that has been true the past 3 years and there is no metric you can point to that shows that any progress has been made in this area. In terms of reliability, they are clearly worse off than the past years.

Question: How many years of failure will it take for you to think that Honda is in over their head? Four? Five? More?
Remember, this is a completely different engine to last year. Different architecture and different ethos completely.
You can not base the development of this on on last years engine.
From what I gather, this engine was superb when on their test rig, erm, except it was just one cylinder. 8O
When they added the other 5, it sort of went pair shape. Its only Xmas that they knew thy had this problem on this engine. Still a long time, but not 3 years
You mention what may be the key problem with Honda. Their test methods cannot predict real life results. That is 100% necessary to develop any engineered product. If they cannot trust their test methods, then how can they know what their engine is capable or not capable of?

Essentially Honda is playing dice with their engines. Their poor internal methods cost a lot of money and produce results, but they only have a random chance of giving real feedback on the design.

This makes a lot of sense and can perhaps explain why after 3 years we have seen virtually no improvement with Honda's engines.

Also, this means that the problems with Honda are far worse than imagined, as it takes years to validate expensive tests. The validation process is long, arduous and very very expensive.

User avatar
mcdo
Posts: 10289
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by mcdo »

Pole2Win wrote:It's difficult to understand, really. Because Honda took a while to win their first F1 championship as an engine supplier in the 80s, as they could only do it in 1987, though their engine was already one of the best in the grid. When the turbos were banned, they made a great V10 engine off the bat. The V12 from 1992 didn't seem too bad either, because that year McLaren was hindered by the chassis, as demonstrated when Schumacher was able to get good results with the Ford V8 in his Benetton.

Then came the turn of the millenium when they came back and their engine was never particularly bad, just hindered by the chassis once again, as David Richards took a while to sort out the mess at BAR. Jordan also entered a strong decline and could never deliver a good chassis either. BAR was always going to win their "shootout", as Honda wanted control of the team and it was probably easier to do it with BAR.

Their current slump is inexplicable, because they had the luxury of waiting a full year before they would join. They're no strangers to hybrid technology either, otherwise we'd see many problems with the NSX road car, which doesn't seem to be happening.
Jordan got screwed you mean :frown:
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost

User avatar
mcdo
Posts: 10289
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Location: Ireland

Re: Should McLaren leave F1? Concentrate on Sportscars?

Post by mcdo »

moby wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Exediron wrote:
pendulumeffect wrote:They are not going to get back to winning form though. The engines are the only super critical component now, all the aero and packaging is reliant on an efficient power unit hence why Mercedes and Ferrari are the only ones in the hunt for wins.

They are currently joint last and you have to wonder, what happens if they finish this year with no points? It might seem crazy but I think they might need 10 races to get a point scoring opportunity, but what if the rest of the grid gets better engine upgrades than Honda? Then they are really in trouble.
They had a scoring opportunity in both the first and the second races, and would have had points from both if Alonso's car hadn't failed. It's bad, but it's not that bad.
Engine reliability is getting worse, not better with Honda. The non start and retirement were both classified as engine problems.

Sure, McLaren will be much much better off if Honda can produce an engine of sufficient power and reliability. But that has been true the past 3 years and there is no metric you can point to that shows that any progress has been made in this area. In terms of reliability, they are clearly worse off than the past years.

Question: How many years of failure will it take for you to think that Honda is in over their head? Four? Five? More?
Remember, this is a completely different engine to last year. Different architecture and different ethos completely.
You can not base the development of this on on last years engine.
And people seem to recall last year's engine being terribly unreliable. But it wasn't that bad at all. Alonso and Button each had 2 race-ending failures related to the PU. That's just one more than Lewis Hamilton!

I think the main problem with last year's design was that the performance ceiling wasn't high enough. That design couldn't ever reach the performance that the other manufacturers could. So a full redesign was necessary
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost

Post Reply