From Muramassa Autosport forums
another season review articles appeared recently
dotted parts for Hasegawa quotes
*Again these quotes are from Abu Dhabi GP weekend at the latest I'm sure, just unreleased old quotes coming out newly so you need to read together with previously posted articles instead of taking this or each as isolated set of remarks otherwise you'd get completely lost
**Also note (as always) that usually these articles are not full interview article but take quotes/remarks out of context to use for and construct article so must take that into consideration heavily
============================================-
2016.12.30
https://sportiva.shu...split/index.php
(on the turbo upgrade at Canada) That was extremely significant. Canada and the following race at Baku were power circuit so that it was hard to notice the effect of the upgrade, but if not for the upgrade we would've struggled much more. Actually that upgrade was the target figure we were aiming to achieve for the season opener, but at the point of the opening race we were only able to achieve half of that.
With regard to reliability, i think we can give ourselves a passing mark for the present. We still had kind of trouble that stopped the session and race retirement about twice, but it was not severe enough to prevent us from race participation, so as 2nd year of participation I think we deserve the grade.
However, in comparison with rivals, we are inferior in particular, so we must raise our game one more step. Next year, we'd like to start the season by securing more reliability than this year.
Gain of spec 2 (the intake upgrade introduced at Silverstone) was big, enough to be an annual update if it was in previous era. Silverstone is power circuit as well, so it was difficult to acknowledge its effect, but we just caught up with others in a situation where there was already a good gap, hence not enough to surpass rivals, so it was just about closing the gap a bit.
With spec 3 (Spa upgrade), we made further gain. Under the current format, it's "output = fuel consumption", so until we introduced spec 3, we struggled a lot with fuel consumption. From then on, fuel consumption during the race wasn't an issue anymore, so in that aspect it was quite positive.
(According to analysis by teams, at the end of the season PUs by 4 makers are roughly on par, the margin converted in lap time is about 0.1-0.2sec/lap, what do you think?) Yes, that's about right, I think. The gap to Merc isn't as big as 1.0sec or 1.6sec, also of course no way we are behind by as much as 100hp. If there was such huge gap, such thing like beating Williams cannot happen at least. At the end of the season, we were in a position quite close to Renault.
Regarding the performance gap, you measure it by difference in acceleration observed from outside, but after spec 3, we are not beaten by RBR in acceleration performance on straight. However, without a doubt they are superior to us in aero performance, so it's not possible to make simple comparison there, also you cannot know it for certain. One thing is that the gap between Renault works and RBR is too big so that it's hard to read, also it might possibly be that we are not inferior too much.
(due to the delay in development) at the point of season opener, it was obvious that the weakest point in our package was PU. However we are conducting development at a speed faster than ordinary, also certainly speed of our evolution is faster than Mercedes, I suppose. I'm hearing that they had been developing for 4 years or so prior to 2014 season, and that's their big advantage, I think. The issue of time, that we were late to start the development, was the most significant issue.
our structure is getting more and more competitive. Within both Mclaren and Honda, experience of each and single staff have grown, human relationship got better, so it's maturing as an f1 team.
That Fernando pointed it out finally is one contributing factor, but Mclaren side admitted "after all chassis is problem too" at last. That was substantial advancement I think. There is no use in pulling each other's legs, and they are understanding that there is no point in being stubborn against Honda, I guess.
=====================================================
2016.12.31
https://sportiva.shu...lit_1/index.php
In order to close the gap to Merc at the point of 2015, we drew up a blueprint of increasing the performance by gaining 1sec with chassis and 1sec with PU. Not just ICE but also TC included.
But to be frank, we were not able to achieve none of them at the point of season opener. Deployment has improved a bit, but far from the targeted level. In reliability aspect, it has got a lot better compared to 2015 level, but was still having issues. There was no issue occurred in the race itself, yet lacking reliability in engine block itself, so there was water leak from there, turbo issue, and so on. In the early stage of the season, we often had water leak issues not only in MGU-H but also in the unit as a whole.
At the point of pre-season, I had a feeling that "as long as finish the race we can score". In fact looking at testing times it didnt feel like we were down at the bottom, and I was thinking we were around the position right behind top3. But ICE power was not good enough, deployment was insufficient, and at the long straight of Shanghai it has become evident that it was no good at all.
For Spec 1 (OZ version), airflow in intake system wasn't functioning as simulations and result of single cylinder evaluation, which was the cause for lack of power (info in the article)
In terms of original/initial plan, we were supposed/intending to race the opening race with the power we had at the final race, in the first place. So, I have to say we failed big time there.
(on spec 3 development) We struggled in confirming reliability. Even after the summer break began, the durability dyno was still in operation. At the stage of pre summer break, the spec itself was decided, so the rest was just about reliability confirmation, but if we encountered one single issue there, we wouldn't have been able to introduce spec 3, it was such tightrope situation, so I was kinda praying to wait for the outcome during the summer break. Ron-san was making phone call to us too (laughs).
(Spec 4 that had to be given up) If we could introduce the spec 4, we wouldve been able to go beyond our target for this season a bit. Theoretically we were seeing that, but when we actually manufactured it and tested on dyno, we were unable to get the expected output.
We have been improving our relative position obviously albeit gradually by the updates in TC and ICE intake and combustion, but I have to say that we were lacking technical capability to reach the level of Merc and Ferrari in the first place. Thus in the 2nd half of the season it was tough that we were struggling in a situation where we cant reach them no matter how hard we try.
To be frank, we knew at quite early stage that we wouldn't be able to catch up with Merc. It is that, we must review ICE framework fundamentally to make something that surpasses them.
I cannot disclose exactly what kind of technology in specifics, but we have already researched and considered all those new technologies being talked about publicly. Around early May (2016), we discussed about possibility that "how about putting 2017 development as the main task and introduce what can be used from there for 2016", but we reached the conclusion that we wouldnt be able to make it in time that way.
(on MP4-31) Unable to press on throttle so that full throttle rate of engine gets lower by as much as several percent than simulation (unnamed Honda personnel quoted)
- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
