2017 Mclaren F1 Team - Honda

[mrluke]

Testing is needed to understand the loads and torsional forces experienced by various mechanicals under full load of fuel over a race distance. This becomes even more critical as there are bigger heavier tires and higher G forces because of new regulations. It is commendable that Mclaren have zeroed in on a decent setup so soon because of the excellent correlation they have managed to develop over the last 2 years.

The problem Honda are facing in my opinion is that their inability to pickup issues on the test bed. I am not saying all the issues can be picked up on a dyno but a modern 7 post rig can at least pick up basic stuff. Honda have the resources to turn it around but i feel they are responding a bit slowly to the issues at hand. They are more often reacting to the issues arising instead of being proactive. I hope they have enough data generated over the weekend which will help them clean up the rough edge of this spec software wise and will put the learning towards the up coming spec.

Your first paragraph explains it is not Mclaren fault there suspension / brakes are not designed properly because that it was testing is for.

Then in the second you are giving Honda a hard time for having failures in testing which shows they haven't designed properly.

As ever, you can't have it both ways.

I find it ironic that after testing we find out its actually the chassis that didnt last a race distance.

[GoranF1]

What was Vandorne doing in the last stint? Very slow lap- faster than Alonso...slow-fast..... https://twitter.com/F1sMyDrug/status/846080560732753925

[The_table]

Zo moesten we een groot deel van de koers proberen benzine te sparen. Dat verklaart waarom ik een heel eind zeer onregelmatige tijden draaien: nu eens een snelle ronde, dan weer met de handrem op.

We had to save fuel for a long time during the race that's why my times were very irregular,an occasional fast lap, then a few slow ones and so on.

[Alonso Fan]

Testing is needed to understand the loads and torsional forces experienced by various mechanicals under full load of fuel over a race distance. This becomes even more critical as there are bigger heavier tires and higher G forces because of new regulations. It is commendable that Mclaren have zeroed in on a decent setup so soon because of the excellent correlation they have managed to develop over the last 2 years.

The problem Honda are facing in my opinion is that their inability to pickup issues on the test bed. I am not saying all the issues can be picked up on a dyno but a modern 7 post rig can at least pick up basic stuff. Honda have the resources to turn it around but i feel they are responding a bit slowly to the issues at hand. They are more often reacting to the issues arising instead of being proactive. I hope they have enough data generated over the weekend which will help them clean up the rough edge of this spec software wise and will put the learning towards the up coming spec.

Your first paragraph explains it is not Mclaren fault there suspension / brakes are not designed properly because that it was testing is for.

Then in the second you are giving Honda a hard time for having failures in testing which shows they haven't designed properly.

As ever, you can't have it both ways.

I find it ironic that after testing we find out its actually the chassis that didnt last a race distance.

How can McLaren have tested in testing when they weren't able to do more than 12 laps at a time? Continual loading causes fatigue and effects which cannot simply be recreated by stress testing etc. They have to run it for a full race distance, or multiple race distances and then they can be sure it will last. They clearly weren't able to do that in testing and thus fell foul of the higher loads this year

You also have to take into account that this is probably McLaren's first chassis related dnf since the relationship began. But how many Honda issues have we had? Don't bother counting

[ncassi22]

Testing is needed to understand the loads and torsional forces experienced by various mechanicals under full load of fuel over a race distance. This becomes even more critical as there are bigger heavier tires and higher G forces because of new regulations. It is commendable that Mclaren have zeroed in on a decent setup so soon because of the excellent correlation they have managed to develop over the last 2 years.

The problem Honda are facing in my opinion is that their inability to pickup issues on the test bed. I am not saying all the issues can be picked up on a dyno but a modern 7 post rig can at least pick up basic stuff. Honda have the resources to turn it around but i feel they are responding a bit slowly to the issues at hand. They are more often reacting to the issues arising instead of being proactive. I hope they have enough data generated over the weekend which will help them clean up the rough edge of this spec software wise and will put the learning towards the up coming spec.

Your first paragraph explains it is not Mclaren fault there suspension / brakes are not designed properly because that it was testing is for.

Then in the second you are giving Honda a hard time for having failures in testing which shows they haven't designed properly.

As ever, you can't have it both ways.

I find it ironic that after testing we find out its actually the chassis that didnt last a race distance.

You have to take into account that this is probably McLaren's first chassis related dnf since the relationship began. But how many Honda issues have we had? Don't bother counting

Don't be stupid. Button's suspension failed literately the previous race. It doesn't excuse Honda's dismal performance, but making up ---???? Really???

[Alonso Fan]

Your first paragraph explains it is not Mclaren fault there suspension / brakes are not designed properly because that it was testing is for.

Then in the second you are giving Honda a hard time for having failures in testing which shows they haven't designed properly.

As ever, you can't have it both ways.

I find it ironic that after testing we find out its actually the chassis that didnt last a race distance.

You have to take into account that this is probably McLaren's first chassis related dnf since the relationship began. But how many Honda issues have we had? Don't bother counting

Don't be stupid. Button's suspension failed literately the previous race. It doesn't excuse Honda's dismal performance, but making up ---???? Really???

Yes he hit a sausage kerb, his fault. Same happened to a number of drivers in Austria

[ncassi22]

Yes he hit a sausage kerb, his fault. Same happened to a number of drivers in Austria

That's still suspension failure bud.

[JonoNic]

Yes he hit a sausage kerb, his fault. Same happened to a number of drivers in Austria

That's still suspension failure bud.

Driver error bud or are you calling the RB going backwards into the tyre barrier a suspension failure too?

Sent from my SM-A700F using Tapatalk

[ncassi22]

Driver error bud or are you calling the RB going backwards into the tyre barrier a suspension failure too?

Sent from my SM-A700F using Tapatalk

Curbs aren't part of the track? Be realistic and use your brain. Also don't miss the point. The point was he made an obviously factually incorrect statement. I.e "...You have to take into account that this is probably McLaren's first chassis related dnf since the relationship began... "

[Chicane]

Testing is needed to understand the loads and torsional forces experienced by various mechanicals under full load of fuel over a race distance. This becomes even more critical as there are bigger heavier tires and higher G forces because of new regulations. It is commendable that Mclaren have zeroed in on a decent setup so soon because of the excellent correlation they have managed to develop over the last 2 years.

The problem Honda are facing in my opinion is that their inability to pickup issues on the test bed. I am not saying all the issues can be picked up on a dyno but a modern 7 post rig can at least pick up basic stuff. Honda have the resources to turn it around but i feel they are responding a bit slowly to the issues at hand. They are more often reacting to the issues arising instead of being proactive. I hope they have enough data generated over the weekend which will help them clean up the rough edge of this spec software wise and will put the learning towards the up coming spec.

Your first paragraph explains it is not Mclaren fault there suspension / brakes are not designed properly because that it was testing is for.

Then in the second you are giving Honda a hard time for having failures in testing which shows they haven't designed properly.

As ever, you can't have it both ways.

I find it ironic that after testing we find out its actually the chassis that didnt last a race distance.

How can McLaren have tested in testing when they weren't able to do more than 12 laps at a time? Continual loading causes fatigue and effects which cannot simply be recreated by stress testing etc. They have to run it for a full race distance, or multiple race distances and then they can be sure it will last. They clearly weren't able to do that in testing and thus fell foul of the higher loads this year

You also have to take into account that this is probably McLaren's first chassis related dnf since the relationship began. But how many Honda issues have we had? Don't bother counting

Yup.

I am not in to blame game but accountability is something which cannot be overlooked. Yes testing is something where you expect issues but when the testing days are so few and clubbed together, it is the responsibility of the engine manufacturer to allow some worthwhile running to understand the package. I completely understand Honda are working hard to sort out the issues and they do have my sympathy but time is not unlimited in f1. Long term planning is important but you cannot completely overlook the short term necessities especially when it is the third year since the come back and Mclaren have to answer to the sponsors and partners.

[mrluke]

The point I was making is that the perfectly valid statement that Mclaren cannot fully simulate the loads without running an actual car in testing is just as applicable to Honda as it is to Mclaren.

From what we have heard so far there appears to be a vibration issue related to gear changes that has become apparent when the car is driven in anger but which was not apparent in any of the sim work done to date.

As it is gear change related I'm going to suggest that this is a Mclaren issue however the bigger picture is that it is an integration issue and both parties need to work together better to resolve these.

And lets be honest Mclaren have not turned up with a car that looks to be a match for either Mercedes or Ferrari in the aero game.

As ever both parties have work to do. But the progress made by Honda since testing is good to see and somewhat reassuring.

No doubt Alonso is extra pissed because Ferrari won.

[mwillems]

Testing is needed to understand the loads and torsional forces experienced by various mechanicals under full load of fuel over a race distance. This becomes even more critical as there are bigger heavier tires and higher G forces because of new regulations. It is commendable that Mclaren have zeroed in on a decent setup so soon because of the excellent correlation they have managed to develop over the last 2 years.

The problem Honda are facing in my opinion is that their inability to pickup issues on the test bed. I am not saying all the issues can be picked up on a dyno but a modern 7 post rig can at least pick up basic stuff. Honda have the resources to turn it around but i feel they are responding a bit slowly to the issues at hand. They are more often reacting to the issues arising instead of being proactive. I hope they have enough data generated over the weekend which will help them clean up the rough edge of this spec software wise and will put the learning towards the up coming spec.

Your first paragraph explains it is not Mclaren fault there suspension / brakes are not designed properly because that it was testing is for.

Then in the second you are giving Honda a hard time for having failures in testing which shows they haven't designed properly.

As ever, you can't have it both ways.

I find it ironic that after testing we find out its actually the chassis that didnt last a race distance.

personally I don't find it ironic. Mclaren cannot test a car without a working engine. But Honda can test the engine to death in all manner of ways.

It seems to be the concesus that Honda didn't test the engine thoroughly enough, or found issues and rather than fix them properly, focussed on adding more technology for a theoretical improvement. Wazari himself has said this. But also hasegawa in less words.

They had every opportunity to bring a working engine to testing, and didn't.

[mwillems]

The point I was making is that the perfectly valid statement that Mclaren cannot fully simulate the loads without running an actual car in testing is just as applicable to Honda as it is to Mclaren.

From what we have heard so far there appears to be a vibration issue related to gear changes that has become apparent when the car is driven in anger but which was not apparent in any of the sim work done to date.

As it is gear change related I'm going to suggest that this is a Mclaren issue however the bigger picture is that it is an integration issue and both parties need to work together better to resolve these.

And lets be honest Mclaren have not turned up with a car that looks to be a match for either Mercedes or Ferrari in the aero game.

As ever both parties have work to do. But the progress made by Honda since testing is good to see and somewhat reassuring.

No doubt Alonso is extra pissed because Ferrari won.

If I were in Mclarens position, IF I had any ground-breaking aero, I wouldn't put it on the car when it can't use it properly or there is a strong chance it will be carried off the Track, for all photographers to see.

I'm not saying they do, I'm simply pointing out your making assumptions and treating them as fact.

[mrluke]

If you had some brilliant aero ideas but never tested them then you would not be able to test, refine or develop them.

I don't buy that teams keep things a secret and don't test them, we saw Mclaren arrive on Aus with a raft of different prototype parts not having enough of them to kit both cars out with the "best" spec. I think it is therefore unlikely they have a developed aero solution that is just sitting in the garage while they wait for Honda to reach some level deemed "good enough"

The order we saw in testing was representative of what we saw in Aus, the complex cars that arrived in testing are now more complex, the simple ones remain simple.

There is not enough testing time available for the teams to waste it playing games, you need to make the most of every moment you get on track. Look at rbr with Ricciardo, no chance of points but they wanted the data despite the additional PU wear.

[ispano6]

The project does not work because the Japanese have too much pride to ask for external help and are thousands of miles away from McLaren HQ where the chassis is made and everything put together. Today, when the competition is brutal, it just can't work. They just can't seem to understand that...

Really is it a "Japanese" thing. That sounds pretty racist to me. I think Eric Boullier and Zak Brown have mentioned, accurately, it is a Honda thing. A Soichiro Honda thing. There is a very famous speech Soichiro Honda made about NOT copying others, about NOT hiring outside help, and that failure is necessary to learn.