Honda Power Unit Complaints

[turbof1]

I'm not actually sure if you could put the issues Honda is dealing with under "teethering problems" as they have been struggling hugely to get to the exact cause and putting an appropiate solution forward.

Teethering problems would be things like hydraulics leaking, sensor issues, overheating wires, mapping a bit off,... . Things they can easily notice what's going wrong and apply an effective solution inmediately. The vibrations issues they are dealing with however are structural, being an actual (unwanted) part of the design.

How is that outside the "teethering problems" definition?

It´s an unintended consequence of a new concept they´re developing and are still learning about it

(Just checked and the term.is "teething problems", not teethering.)
Teething problems are short term issues for which you have a solution on the short term. We are beyond testing and 3 races in the season. So this is not short term anymore, hence why the term neither applies anymore. That sounds like symantics, but I find it crucial to underline the gravity of the issues of which Honda explicitly said they don't properly understand. It's a structural issue, hence why there is no short term solution. Rather, the PU needs to be redesigned.

[Thunder]

I think Honda simply didn't know what Development Path to follow until about mid 2016. That's why there was no redesign from 15 to 16. Tokens would have allowed a pretty hefty amount of new bits.

[marmer]

seen as they were at the back in the first year of the engine. what could the FIA have done if they kept improving the PU and ignored the token system.
back of the grid and small cash pens. Bernie wouldn't have let them be banned from actually racing

[turbof1]

I think Honda simply didn't know what Development Path to follow until about mid 2016. That's why there was no redesign from 15 to 16. Tokens would have allowed a pretty hefty amount of new bits.

Ironically the token system would probably have allowed Honda to be in a much better position. That way they had to focus on improving their base PU rather than pondering half a year whether to use a new concept or continue with the old one. Renault for instance, also with an entirely new concept, made the decision once they knew the token limitations got removed and focussed all of their R&D resources on that one concept.

Indecision led to misfire ignition for Honda.

[Andres125sx]

I'm not actually sure if you could put the issues Honda is dealing with under "teethering problems" as they have been struggling hugely to get to the exact cause and putting an appropiate solution forward.

Teethering problems would be things like hydraulics leaking, sensor issues, overheating wires, mapping a bit off,... . Things they can easily notice what's going wrong and apply an effective solution inmediately. The vibrations issues they are dealing with however are structural, being an actual (unwanted) part of the design.

How is that outside the "teethering problems" definition?

It´s an unintended consequence of a new concept they´re developing and are still learning about it

(Just checked and the term.is "teething problems", not teethering.)
Teething problems are short term issues for which you have a solution on the short term. We are beyond testing and 3 races in the season. So this is not short term anymore, hence why the term neither applies anymore. That sounds like symantics, but I find it crucial to underline the gravity of the issues of which Honda explicitly said they don't properly understand. It's a structural issue, hence why there is no short term solution. Rather, the PU needs to be redesigned.

Thank you for the clarification Turbo

Then I´ll stop using the term teething problems, they´re problems from an underdeveloped concept. Better this way?

[Andres125sx]

I think Honda simply didn't know what Development Path to follow until about mid 2016. That's why there was no redesign from 15 to 16. Tokens would have allowed a pretty hefty amount of new bits.

Ironically the token system would probably have allowed Honda to be in a much better position. That way they had to focus on improving their base PU rather than pondering half a year whether to use a new concept or continue with the old one. Renault for instance, also with an entirely new concept, made the decision once they knew the token limitations got removed and focussed all of their R&D resources on that one concept.

Indecision led to misfire ignition for Honda.

Sorry but I disagree with you both. I remember Honda people stating they couldn´t go to the 2016 PU design they know they should have gone because of the token system.

You both are talking like if Honda didn´t redesign their PU for 2016 season after the dissastrous 2015 season because they didn´t know what to do.... Are you serious guys???

[turbof1]

I think Honda simply didn't know what Development Path to follow until about mid 2016. That's why there was no redesign from 15 to 16. Tokens would have allowed a pretty hefty amount of new bits.

Ironically the token system would probably have allowed Honda to be in a much better position. That way they had to focus on improving their base PU rather than pondering half a year whether to use a new concept or continue with the old one. Renault for instance, also with an entirely new concept, made the decision once they knew the token limitations got removed and focussed all of their R&D resources on that one concept.

Indecision led to misfire ignition for Honda.

Sorry but I disagree with you both. I remember Honda people stating they couldn´t go to the 2016 PU design they know they should have gone because of the token system.

You both are talking like if Honda didn´t redesign their PU for 2016 season after the dissastrous 2015 season because they didn´t know what to do.... Are you serious guys???

I think you are clearly misintepreting my words here. I've said nothing wrong about the 2016 season. I'm rather saying a redesigned 2016 PU for 2017 under 32 tokens would have closed off the avenue immediately Honda spent too much time thinking about until they made the late call to go for it.

If you are going to go for a new concept, you have to make that call early. Not divide up your focus and resources.

Yes the token system would have meant Honda ended up partly with a PU they know would be inferior to a different concept. That would put them in the same league as Ferrari and Renault and possibly even Mercedes. All would have wanted a redesign as they would discovered by then more potential in an other design.

[Andres125sx]

Maybe it would have closed the gap for first race, but the remaining gap would have been much more difficult to reduce. They knew the 2016 PU, even when was more or less competitive, was a design without a bright future because of the lack of TJI, so I don´t think keeping 2016 concept for 2017 would have been the best choice.

In spanish we say sometimes you need to make a step backwards to then be able to make two or three forward, not sure if there´s some similar saying in english, but I think it perfectly explains Honda aproach for 2017 season

[turbof1]

Maybe it would have closed the gap for first race, but the remaining gap would have been much more difficult to reduce. They knew the 2016 PU, even when was more or less competitive, was a design without a bright future because of the lack of TJI, so I don´t think keeping 2016 concept for 2017 would have been the best choice.

In spanish we say sometimes you need to make a step backwards to then be able to make two or three forward, not sure if there´s some similar saying in english, but I think it perfectly explains Honda aproach for 2017 season

I do not disagree the new concept has ultimately more potential, and neither is that the point. The point is that Honda should have only focussed on that one project only, not 2 parallel concepts. Token systems would in that case forced Honda to focus, which is where the irony sits.

[Andres125sx]

Yeah the tokens would have forced Honda to focus... on a concept with a close dead end. I can´t see how that may be beneficial for Honda sincerely

BTW, that is exactly what happened past winter, the tokens didn´t allow them to modify the concept, so they only could focus on developing their current concept (2015) further. As we saw, that worked to make them evolve faster, but only to a point were they still were several steps down the competition.


I sincerely can´t see any benefit for Honda due to the tokens Turbo

[turbof1]

Yeah the tokens would have forced Honda to focus... on a concept with a close dead end. I can´t see how that may be beneficial for Honda sincerely

BTW, that is exactly what happened past winter, the tokens didn´t allow them to modify the concept, so they only could focus on developing their current concept (2015) further. As we saw, that worked to make them evolve faster, but only to a point were they still were several steps down the competition.


I sincerely can´t see any benefit for Honda due to the tokens Turbo

It's nonsense you can't improve a none-optimal design. You have to work around limitations, but that's perfectly possible.

But that's besides the point (again...). Let's just say that Honda is the kid with ADD in the manufacturer class, and that its concentration issues is now coming to bite them.