Honda Power Unit Hardware & Software

[mclaren111]

Not really.

Just fix the suspension to work with the aero !!! Easy

[namao]

First off I would like to with everyone a Happy Holiday season.
Mr. GoranF1, why are you directing this statement at me? Are you asking for confirmation? Mr. Alonso is entitled to his opinion and we all know he has never exaggerated or embellished anything in the past. nor has he ever insulted McLaren or Honda.

Mr. Wazari

Alonso is telling the truth. Honda was trying to be futuristic, different god knows what and the truth is 2+ seconds gap comes 80-90% from terrible Honda PU.
Car isnt perfect but engine sucks.
I am sure that affected Honda road car sell atleast a bit.

Honda has all the money in the world and yet in F1 they didnt do anything since 1992.

I hope thing change in 2017 and Honda finnaly does a decent PU.

Mr. Goran,

What do you really know about the facts? How do you know 80-90% of the deficiency is from the PU? I have tried to be polite to you and answer your PM's demanding information. Hardly a hello, please or thank you. We are a prideful and competitive group of guys and girls at HRD. No one, NO ONE, is a harsher critic of Honda than us. And after all this you come out and say Honda sucks.

Here's a point to ponder for you. I have noticed that many race commentators say, "Look how XXXX passes McLaren on the straight because of lack of HP. Is that what you're basing your 80-90% figure from? Did you compare the exit speeds of the different cars heading into the straights? We have. Did you examine the throttle position of the car 10 meter, 25 meters, 40 meters after entering the straight because 100% throttle position could not be achieved sooner due to lack of mechanical grip compared to others? We have. So again, I ask, 80 to 90% of the deficiency is because of the PU? I can tell you what my opinion is of the percentage based on race telemetry data but it's obvious you would never believe me.

As far as Mr. Alonso and the comments I have made, if I offended anyone, I apologize. I was not bashing him IMO but just stating the observations I have personally witnessed. Maybe some of you know him better than I. My dealings with him have only been behind closed door meetings.

Yes, I do have a chip on my shoulder. We are a group of people who work extremely hard to put together the best PU possible. We don't want to be last. We don't work 16 to 18 hour days, 22 days straight to settle for mediocrity. It infuriates me to see Mercedes have a better car. But we are trying. When someone says, "Honda sucks," yes I do take it personally. Maybe I'm getting grumpy in my old age and my patience isn't what it used to be. I know I'm starting to lose my filters.

I come to this forum for entertainment and as a break from my tedious tasks of the day. Maybe I should take my daughter's advice. Although she is 35 years my junior, she is wiser than me in many ways. She always tells me, "Dad, when it's not fun anymore you should quit." Maybe I should follow her advice about this forum. This time, I think I should really listen to her.

はじめまして、わざりさん。なまおです。私たちはHondaが好きです。
These are only opinions. Please, don't get it personally. Let's debate in peace.
どうぞよろしくお願いします。
おげんきで。

[ziggy]

First off I would like to with everyone a Happy Holiday season.
Mr. GoranF1, why are you directing this statement at me? Are you asking for confirmation? Mr. Alonso is entitled to his opinion and we all know he has never exaggerated or embellished anything in the past. nor has he ever insulted McLaren or Honda.

Mr. Wazari

Alonso is telling the truth. Honda was trying to be futuristic, different god knows what and the truth is 2+ seconds gap comes 80-90% from terrible Honda PU.
Car isnt perfect but engine sucks.
I am sure that affected Honda road car sell atleast a bit.

Honda has all the money in the world and yet in F1 they didnt do anything since 1992.

I hope thing change in 2017 and Honda finnaly does a decent PU.

Mr. Goran,

What do you really know about the facts? How do you know 80-90% of the deficiency is from the PU? I have tried to be polite to you and answer your PM's demanding information. Hardly a hello, please or thank you. We are a prideful and competitive group of guys and girls at HRD. No one, NO ONE, is a harsher critic of Honda than us. And after all this you come out and say Honda sucks.

Here's a point to ponder for you. I have noticed that many race commentators say, "Look how XXXX passes McLaren on the straight because of lack of HP. Is that what you're basing your 80-90% figure from? Did you compare the exit speeds of the different cars heading into the straights? We have. Did you examine the throttle position of the car 10 meter, 25 meters, 40 meters after entering the straight because 100% throttle position could not be achieved sooner due to lack of mechanical grip compared to others? We have. So again, I ask, 80 to 90% of the deficiency is because of the PU? I can tell you what my opinion is of the percentage based on race telemetry data but it's obvious you would never believe me.

As far as Mr. Alonso and the comments I have made, if I offended anyone, I apologize. I was not bashing him IMO but just stating the observations I have personally witnessed. Maybe some of you know him better than I. My dealings with him have only been behind closed door meetings.

Yes, I do have a chip on my shoulder. We are a group of people who work extremely hard to put together the best PU possible. We don't want to be last. We don't work 16 to 18 hour days, 22 days straight to settle for mediocrity. It infuriates me to see Mercedes have a better car. But we are trying. When someone says, "Honda sucks," yes I do take it personally. Maybe I'm getting grumpy in my old age and my patience isn't what it used to be. I know I'm starting to lose my filters.

I come to this forum for entertainment and as a break from my tedious tasks of the day. Maybe I should take my daughter's advice. Although she is 35 years my junior, she is wiser than me in many ways. She always tells me, "Dad, when it's not fun anymore you should quit." Maybe I should follow her advice about this forum. This time, I think I should really listen to her.

Mr. Wazari. Don't take it personal. This is the reality on internet forums thse days. Many experts with no real knowledge. You see, this thread is about the Honda PU yet many of the posts have really nothing to do with it. Mods are continually asking people to post in the right thread, but...

On the other hand you have to understand all the speculation. Nothing is coming out from the factory (except some little hints from people like you). I will respect your decision about leaving this forum, but once again please don't be insulted by some idiots. Just leave them alone and don't feed those trolls. I think you are a highly respected member of this forum by the most of us, so please continue.

@mods: I've intentionally waited with this post till the end of the season, so the thread doesen't get disturbed that much. It really annoys me to read 3 or 4 pages, which have nothing to do with the topic. I mean, what have Alonsos suspension problems in his Ferrari days have to do with a Honda PU? I know you guys probably do it for free, so i think F1T should think about (temporary) banning some people here.

No offense and happy holidays to all F1T people.

[Wazari]

I am sorry if I don't answer your PM's right away. I will try and answer them each as soon as possible. I have received a lot of PM's in the last few days. I have glanced at most of them and the messages and questions all seem to be of the same nature so I will responds in general here.

First, thanks for all the kind words and wishes for a Happy Holidays. The feeling is mutual.

The most common questions I am getting is why Honda failed in 2016. Failure is subjective. Mercedes for 2016 was the benchmark. The following numbers are just examples only. Let's say that it was estimated that Mercedes would improve their peak power by 3% from 2015 to 2016. That was the target on which performance vs. reliability goals would be based on. However in actuality they improved by 5%. That sets you back. Fuel efficiency improvements by all the others also was greater than expected. It is very difficult to estimate how much the target is going to move since you really don't know what the others are doing. You speculate, hypothesize, analyze and then guess. For Honda, the big decision for 2016 was how much reliability is going to be a priority over performance. Those are decisions above my pay grade. The increase is power percentage wise was greater than the others. Fuel efficiency was not. Designs to improve the combustion process were implemented throughout the year and personally would have really liked to see them in use by Singapore but the domino effect on other components was decided to be too much of a risk for race distances.

For next year, the initial testing seems very encouraging. A new combustion process is in place. IMO, the extra 5 kilos of fuel will play a major factor on many courses. I think you will see a 3 to 8% increase in peak power among the various PU's. I can not wait for winter testing. I am very curious on how the MP4-32 chassis will perform.

[ringo]

I dont see the resson for the tensions in this thread. Unless its intended to get wazari to spill the beans. But jusging from williams, manor performance to mercedes i do agree with wazari. Not one is really in a position to say how good or bad the honda engine is. If it were in a redbull and redbull were doing bad as well then i would agree maybe the engine isnt so good. But as it stands, there is nothing to indicate its a failure. Finaly, being the leastpowerful isnt a failure. Someone has to be last. But for sure tyre temperatures and grip ; not just suspension design is the bigger issue before we can look on the engine.

[diffuser]

I am sorry if I don't answer your PM's right away. I will try and answer them each as soon as possible. I have received a lot of PM's in the last few days. I have glanced at most of them and the messages and questions all seem to be of the same nature so I will responds in general here.

First, thanks for all the kind words and wishes for a Happy Holidays. The feeling is mutual.

The most common questions I am getting is why Honda failed in 2016. Failure is subjective. Mercedes for 2016 was the benchmark. The following numbers are just examples only. Let's say that it was estimated that Mercedes would improve their peak power by 3% from 2015 to 2016. That was the target on which performance vs. reliability goals would be based on. However in actuality they improved by 5%. That sets you back. Fuel efficiency improvements by all the others also was greater than expected. It is very difficult to estimate how much the target is going to move since you really don't know what the others are doing. You speculate, hypothesize, analyze and then guess. For Honda, the big decision for 2016 was how much reliability is going to be a priority over performance. Those are decisions above my pay grade. The increase is power percentage wise was greater than the others. Fuel efficiency was not. Designs to improve the combustion process were implemented throughout the year and personally would have really liked to see them in use by Singapore but the domino effect on other components was decided to be too much of a risk for race distances.

For next year, the initial testing seems very encouraging. A new combustion process is in place. IMO, the extra 5 kilos of fuel will play a major factor on many courses. I think you will see a 3 to 8% increase in peak power among the various PU's. I can not wait for winter testing. I am very curious on how the MP4-32 chassis will perform.

Thank you for your input, it is always appreciated by me .

First, i don't like the term that the 2016 PU was a failure. I think it was a success considering where it came from in 2014. From a fan perspective, based on what little information we do have available to us, I believe that the table is well set for next year.

To get on with it, I noticed that you never mentioned that the token system was a hindrance in improving this year? It was my understanding that from a early point in the 2016 year Honda was aware of improvements it would like to have made but couldn't because of a shortage of Tokens?


Happy Holidays!

[NL_Fer]

Expecting Mercedes to have the same configuration on the test benches for at least 5 years now. I think they have gathered so much data, they could push performance this year till the ultimate limit. And maybe a 0.1% beyond looking at Hamilton's blowups.

From a development point of view the others, F R & H must be very close.

2016 was definitely solid performance and good reliability.

[godlameroso]

"I think you will see a 3 to 8% increase in peak power among the various PU's."

Does that mean you expect that more or less all power units will be at ~1,000hp? Does that mean that the best power unit will be the one that can maintain and smoothly deliver such a power level for the longest time instead of being about outright peak power?

[Wazari]

I think it has been mentioned by myself and Hasegawa-san previously that the token system definitely played a big role on what and how upgrades could or could not be introduced.

"I think you will see a 3 to 8% increase in peak power among the various PU's."

Does that mean you expect that more or less all power units will be at ~1,000hp? Does that mean that the best power unit will be the one that can maintain and smoothly deliver such a power level for the longest time instead of being about outright peak power?

I think the 1000 HP mark might be slightly optimistic at the start of next year by anyone. I just meant that I think you will see some PU's increase in the 3% range while others might manage up to 8%. My speculation/opinion only.

Best PU will be a combination of peak power, most linear torque curve, good deployment all the while maintaining incredible fuel efficiency in relation to the power being produced by the ICE.

[PhillipM]

How much did the token system hurt you this year compared to what you can take into 2017?
Did you have a lot of work/developments that you just had to sit on because you couldn't deploy them this year through lack of tokens?

[Wazari]

How much did the token system hurt you this year compared to what you can take into 2017?
Did you have a lot of work/developments that you just had to sit on because you couldn't deploy them this year through lack of tokens?

I don't think I understand the first part. With the token system it was not feasible to make certain changes during the season. 2017 is basically a clean slate but there are going to be limitations next year also.

Second part is a big yes. Many items tested on the shelves because of the token restrictions. However most of these items were with 2017 in mind.

[GoranF1]

Next years engine has problems on dyno.
Source: Murramassa.　

Hasegawa Interview at Abu Dhabi GP

by motorsport.com.JP

(judging by the date of the article i guess the interview is done on either Fri or Thur on ADGP weekend)




Part I
http://jp.motorsport...016年の総評-854391/
2016-11-27



----- Your review on 2016 season?
Of course considering our current stage of 2nd year in the sport, everyone has done very well, and reasonable progress could be observed, but I'm not satisfied with the result at all. It feels like, we are finally able to participate in the race properly. Within such short period of 2 years, each of us worked hard and managed to come this far. At the same time, looking at the overall, absolute result, still long way to go.

--------- after the 2015 season, what parts of power unit did you try to change towards 2nd season?
The issue of reliability as the whole team. Performance as well, but last year we were not able to race properly and make the car run properly due to the issue of reliability, I thought that was serious problem, so firstly you have to be able to run properly, get to the grid, and complete the race. Otherwise you cannot even measure the performance.

------- Regarding reliability, what was the problem specifically?
Problems that occurred last year were of great variation, but it wasn't like metal scorching, so that made the situation more complex rather than the opposite. In that sense, we were inexperienced on many fronts. But one thing for sure is that we were able to address/overcome these issues because we have encountered many issues last year. Then, make sure to cover and confirm the race mileage properly at the point of R&D at Sakura before using it in race, well that's something too basic of course, but first and foremost put the process in order, that's what we concentrated on for this year.

------- It's about testing engine on dyno by simulating car's actual behavior/condition precisely, isnt it
We were not able to do even that last year. Rather, last year, it was trouble that came out first, then fix the trouble, but we had to go ahead with what we've got for the time being because there was not enough time. So, for this year, let's prepare the level of power unit that can complete the race at least before anything during winter. By doing that, you have a certain reference point that you can go back to anytime no matter what happens, although of course you are going to improve performance. To secure that point, or foundation, which you can return to in case of emergency, is what we regarded as the most important task during the winter.

--------- What is the point you have poured the most effort into for this year's PU development?
The biggest point of development was turbo. That's what has progressed the most this year. Increasing the size of turbo to be able to recover energy and deploy more has contributed the most to the performance, and if you focus on that point only, we are not inferior to the top team, in fact drivers told us that our assist period was the longest at most circuits. In that sense, we can be proud of that at least.

----- Is improvement of efficiency in engine reaching the limit?
Regarding the engine, it has been improved too, like in intake as well as internal combustion engine itself. To look at it in perspective, taking our past activities like 00s into consideration, we are coming up good enough, but in terms of gap to other makers, we were not enough. By "other maker", I mean specifically Mercedes. About exactly how much the gap is, we cannot disclose numbers, or rather, cannot know it precisely, to be honest. Well, looking at the difference in top speed, we can know it like "we have to have engine output of this much otherwise we cannot catch up", but it's not necessarily that it's all down to the difference of PU actually.

-------- Are there any indivisual components that you applied improvement to, like engine, turbo and ERS?
I cannot disclose in detail, but for example shape of turbo, in a nutshell, we optimized the characteristics of the shape of fin in compressor of turbo to suit to the latest spec. That's not a special thing at all, so I cannot talk about its detail like the number of the fin or angle of the blade, besides there are areas that I'm not capable of explaining about, so. In terms of the engine, it's the shape of combustion chamber, shape of piston, shape of injection port...ie what so called engine development is about.

----------- Since when in this year did you start having certain confidence? Firstly, how was the opening race like?
For the first race of Australia, we had decently positive expectation. But the race turned out to be turmoil due to red flag by Alonso's accident, so to put it frankly we could not assess our performance properly. I thought we would be able to score point, but it didnt go that way. The next race at Bahrain, Vandoorne scored one point, so I was thinking we were around that area, position-wise. We finished the race at China in 12th and 13th in an eventless race. We realized we were not good at all at anything. In fact, we were not using engine at its full power at that time either. We had readability concern, so running by lowering output, but we recognized we were not able to compete at all with that, so from then on we started shifting engine usage to the full power side.

------- Until then, reliability was the first priority?
We surely regarded reliability as priority. As I've just told you, it was the first 2 races where our stance was that we've got to secure base line to be able to complete the race, so. Button retired at Bahrain, but that wasnt due to trouble in engine itself, so we were settling in about engine

---- After that, at what point did you make a big leap forward?
Introduced new turbo at Canada, new intake at Silverstone, the performance increased naturally as we put new spec during the season. Yet we were still lacking power, so, when we introduced the new engine called spec 3.0, which is currently in use practically, at Spa after the summer break was the toughest moment. We might not make it in time, but we've got to bring something that has gained as much performance as possible for Spa and Monza no matter what. Drivers were having high expectation, so.

---- Why did you struggle until Spa?
Fuel consumption. Until spec 3.0 was introduced at Spa, we struggled a lot about fuel consumption. From Spa onward, we were not concerned about fuel consumption during race anymore, so in that sense situation has changed a lot.




・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・

Part II
http://jp.motorsport...016年の総評-854392/
2016-11-27


---------- How about performance of the car overall?
I'm not thinking like horse power is good enough. As I've told while ago, top speed is slower by 10km/h. I think it's not necessarily all down to engine power alone, but there is no means to measure it precisely, so let's assume that it's all about engine power, then we need xxkW more, we were thinking like that.

------ Looks like you are not able to use tyre properly?
That's right. What has become clear since around Suzuka is that, we cannot press on throttle at high speed corners and corner exits, and we suffer from oversteer. Those issues were clear. Up until then, we were not paying much attention on that because we had been concentrating on engine upgrade.

----- If so, then it's tough even if you had good engine power.
In the 2nd half of the season esp after Suzuka, that the lack of traction is a big issue has been recognized by the team, drivers as well as us as Honda.

----- Was Honda side able to do anything in solving that issue?
Well, it's not like there is absolutely nothing we can do about it, but we are not doing much actively. Because Honda is an engine supplier right now. But, of course we participate in discussions like downforce is lacking, unable to use this area, and so on, but I think it's the team who actually solve them.

------ Honda do not give ideas on the car.
We don't do to that extent, but at least we ask them about why something is going like this way. That's the same as mclaren asking Honda why the power is lacking. They ask us. Then, as I've just told, this year we are able to make the car running decently and power is steadily improving. Through/by that process, we are finally able to establish relationship in which we can ask those things each other candidly, I think. It feels like we have become one team.

------- What was disappointing the most?
In terms of result, I'm disappointed about any race where we failed to grab scores....but after all, the most disappointing was Suzuka. Suzuka was terrible with no luck and no performance.

--------- Being fast at tracks like Suzuka means that the comprehensive performance of the car is excellent, right?
That's right. power, downforce, mechanical grip, you have to have everything otherwise you cannot get good result at Suzuka. It was really terrible wasnt it. It was at the timing where we should be switching focus to next year's engine fully as well, so we talked and confirmed together that we are not going to repeat that anymore next year.

---------- there is no problem in ERS? Are drivers able to use it well?
I think so about that. But, current ERS is quite restricted by regulation, in output as well as energy amount, so within that restriction we are using it to the max of regulation. If there was no restriction there, there would be performance difference, which would be fascinating. Well, you can put it that racing is about doing your best within the frame of regulation, but that area will be the subject of discussion for future regulation change, I think. It has been agreed that we are not going to change power unit regulation until 2020, so.
------------- How about progress of next year's power unit?
I think we must raise our level to be on par with top team at least, but right now we haven't yet reached the level that we can promise, so I cannot say something audacious.

------ you are developing next year's power unit at Sakura R&D in Japan while participating in the races all around the world. How about the direction for next year's PU?
As for the direction, at this moment it's easier to set the target because we are able to see the gap clearly. In 00s, we struggled to find out where to set the target in order to win, but right now we don't have such worry. As long as we can achieve this number, we can win.

----- Easier to set the target means easier to clear?
No it's not like that. It's difficult because the target is too high. It may possibly be that there is misunderstanding by us in there and we are setting target excessively/unreasonably high. But, higher the target the better. Because we are aware that, if we can achieve it, we can win without dispute.

---- Not just power unit but also chassis is important isnt it. If fundamental performance of the chassis is not good, you struggle for the entire year.
Yes. We are in charge of supplying power unit, and we just started discussion that we'd like you to produce kind of chassis that takes good advantage of the power unit. We will continue such discussion for the remainder of the year. Of course, basic concept has already been set in each area though.

---------- Has next year's Honda PU been completed already?
Rather, it's running on dyno. We've been running many already, but at the same time we are encountering problems quite a bit. We've got to crush those problems

[HPD]

Next years engine has problems on dyno.

---------- Has next year's Honda PU been completed already?
Rather, it's running on dyno. We've been running many already, but at the same time we are encountering problems quite a bit. We've got to crush those problems

Hasegawa always said that fiability was a concern... relax.

[Roostfactor]

Of course they will run into problems on the dyno. Especially with many iterations of power units. That's why they call it testing. Thank you for the reference though it was very informational.

[Wazari]

One thing that Mr. Soichiro Honda used to say, "If you are not breaking or experiencing failure during testing, then you are not pushing yourselves or your machinery hard enough."