Mclaren Honda 2015

[Moose]

I'm pretty sure the scenario we're looking at is that the Honda engine is so down on power that McLaren can't put the package on the chassis side that they'd like to.

Make the engine more powerful and the L/D ratio that McLaren are willing to put up with on the car decreases, which increases the amount of downforce *and* the top speed.

[Sasha]

The RB aero doesn't work this year with the low nose.

And the narrow rear-end on the Mclaren caused bad snap overstear because of a very bad downforce unbalance(the front-end was making no downforce at the beginningof the season).

With the low nose the MB aero is the way to go.

[Jef Patat]

There must be something wrong in that article, at the same time:

We're running with a down tuned engine, and we know that if we can tomorrow up tune the engine, we will find not only tenths but seconds

http://www.gpupdate.net/en/f1-news/3280 ... k-seconds/

I don't want to start speculation because I think the article is incorrect but if Honda is really communicating that way I'm afraid they're starting a blame game, that would be bad, though I could understand it. At some point in time I don't think it's unusual to start damage control.

[iotar__]

Another example that Honda and McLaren talk through media just like Red Bull and Renault. No joint press conferences, only delayed response to Boullier/Dennis (connected) by Arai, http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns31382.html :

[In response to public help offer] "We already work with McLaren Applied Technologies from the start of the project. They have developed software for our power unit, according to our requests. And they did a great job." When told, however, that the cooperation could be extended even further, he insisted: "We do not need help with technology issues. "Good advice, of course, is always welcome, but we do not need technology solutions (from elsewhere) for our project."

So why would McLaren management (Ron Dennis) start that since it's obviously counter-productive?
1. Publicity related to brand in light of bad results (same as RB)
2. Defending their own position (same as RB), different situation but Horner and co also pretended they didn't make any mistakes (they did).
Both connected to mistakes by said management like lack of big/title sponsor deal. If the reason was the price they can't expect anything better (on the contrary) with current performance, both in terms of amount of money and candidates.
3. Third reason (pure speculation) could be forcing personnel changes at Honda (that would be conveniently perceived as someone else taking the blame). Same as Red Bull - changes at Renault did happen (Cyril Abiteboul).

[Jef Patat]

I don't tend to share your view in that aspect.

RB has been blaiming Renault. Obviously their engines were blowing up. But Renault has been blaming RB for 'forcing' them to work in a different manner, skipping tests and checks, and as a result the engine was not what it could have been. So they both blame each other.

For MCL-Honda we've seen all kind of communication, MCL stating the reliability and power are not where they should be. Honda has been admitting that. Both of them are making all kind of predictions that don't hold which is frustrating for the fans. MCL has offered help and Honda said no thanks, that's not blaiming, that's saying we know what we're doing, it won't help. (I know there's more to it than what is in the press, but still)

The big difference is that if the article quoted by ajnšpric_pumpa were correct this would be, AFAIK, the first time that Honda blaims MCL. I've never heard them complain about the 'size zero' requirements or the chassis/aero not being able to deliver what the engine has.

[GoranF1]

Honda development plans ;
http://en.f1i.com/news/18776-honda-keen ... Bk.twitter

[McG]

Honda are 100% to blame but McLaren have to accept some responsibility for selecting such a terrible engine supplier, with a rubbish test plan.

I think it's equally as likely that McLaren will switch engine suppliers or a major rule change helps than them naturally making progress. 4 or 5 years without a win I reckon if they stick with Honda.

A dark era for McLaren is afoot.

[Wazari]

Sorry McG but I will humbly disagree. While it is a dark era for McLaren, Honda is not 100% to blame. The majority of lack of pace is no doubt due to the PU and the FIA has a strong say on testing procedures especially for a new supplier. You can also question McLaren's testing practices for their aero program. Relying heavily on computer simulation versus wind tunnel testing can also be questioned. IE, why the major nose change? They are both to blame for the car's performance.

I also highly doubt McLaren will switch engine suppliers nor will it take Honda 4 to 5 years without a podium. McLaren Honda will be on the podium in 2016.

[Jef Patat]

You can also question McLaren's testing practices for their aero program. Relying heavily on computer simulation versus wind tunnel testing can also be questioned.

No you can't. Both CFD time and wind tunnel time are defined in the rules. You can be 100% sure that they use both to the limit. What they do with that time is another question, but not the relation between the two.

[mrluke]

How can it be 100% Hondas fault? Mclaren had the best engine on the grid last year and were still completely uncompetitive. Even if the Honda unit was a good as the mercedes PU, Mclaren would still just be fighting with Force India.

[McG]

Last year was last year and McLaren weren't technical partners with Mercedes anymore. In fact the intimate technical partnership probably stopped years before 2014. This year is now and now the Honda engine can't pull the skin off a rice pudding or last through an episode of Ted's Notebook. It has already been explained that the car is pretty fast in the corners. If it were 2014 Honda would still be doing rubbish.

I'm a McLaren fan but starting to doubt my loyalty. Not because they are at the back, because they talk rubbish and are so unrealistic and have made such a bad decision to go with Honda.

[mclaren111]

Patience - it's a long term project

Edit: With good & solid results hopefully soon

[trinidefender]

Sorry McG but I will humbly disagree. While it is a dark era for McLaren, Honda is not 100% to blame. The majority of lack of pace is no doubt due to the PU and the FIA has a strong say on testing procedures especially for a new supplier. You can also question McLaren's testing practices for their aero program. Relying heavily on computer simulation versus wind tunnel testing can also be questioned. IE, why the major nose change? They are both to blame for the car's performance.

I also highly doubt McLaren will switch engine suppliers nor will it take Honda 4 to 5 years without a podium. McLaren Honda will be on the podium in 2016.

Nobody can possibly be 100% to blame. However it is my personal belief that had the engine been more reliable and been able to complete more mileage during testing, free practices and races then McLaren would have been able to develop the aerodynamic package further. Also had more mileage been completed then I'm sure Honda would know the direction to go with the PU better as well. It is a double edged sword where nobody wins.

I do believe that McLaren currently are using their wind tunnel/CFD time to its maximum as these are tightly controlled. About the nose, it is hard to say why the change came about. Maybe it was an area that was planned to be looked at further later on in the season but a solution (the long nose) provided acceptable results while being easy to deign while the team could focus on other areas of the car more. Remember that PP came into the McLaren fairly late, as such I am sure much of the car design was completed before he had a say.

As it stands RIGHT NOW maybe Honda should have pursued reliability more during the deign phase instead of performance that they cannot use because of lack of reliability with the engine turned up. For the future however; Hungary and after the summer break, 2016 and the following seasons we really don't know, maybe once the PU gets ironed out it may be a beast. As it stands nobody has enough information.

Frankly I would welcome any information you can pry out of your nephew about anything to do with the new PU. Even if it has nothing to do with the PU itself but in general about how Honda motor-sports functions as a whole, their processes or anything at all recently. Would it be possible to maybe shed some light on your own experiences working with Honda and Japanese racing companies on the general flow of things. I'm sure everybody on this forum would love to hear about your history and learn some more, especially as most of the forum users here are, I suspect, from a more westernised culture.

[ringo]

I say they will come good next year. Honda hasn't been in F1 for a while. This year's data will definitely help them develop a good power unit and control system for next year. I'm actually not shocked that they are performing so poorly.
Honda basically has been thrown in the deep end with these new engine regulations, added to that what they other engine makers have learned from the time of exhaust blowing and other race and reliability enhancing techniques that evolved after 2008, Honda has a lot to learn.

[PlatinumZealot]

I think in general we are discussing details. I think we all agree that teams copy, smaller teams from bigger teams, vice versa, and from history with only one goal: improve themselves.

This is getting very off topic but anyways. The blown diffuser in bhall II's post is from 1990 or something Lotus. this is Senna in 91:
http://www.formula1-dictionary.net/Big/ ... 7A_big.jpg

Off course there was not off throtle blowing back then, the placement were different, but the rules were different as well. The same principle applies.

And weren't blown diffusers first used by... Renault in 1983, so no, it wasn't new, even not in F1.
http://mccabism.blogspot.be/2012/06/fir ... in-f1.html

I do remember (I was two and very into F1T before the internet existed as well )

Edit: just for those interested in history and variations: found this nice overview: http://www.formula1-dictionary.net/diffuser_blown.html

This blown diffuser works differently from the Blown diffuser in the RB6. This one blows the throat of the diffuser and it is not as efficient as sealing the sides and blowing the throat as what the RB6 did.