Poll: who will be ahead in 2018, McLaren-Renault or STR-Honda

[Big Tea]

Shock horror STR repeat Bahrain performance in next track that is slow corners and straights.

They have very good traction and low downforce set up and the straights aren't long enough to expose deployment deficiency unlike China and Baku. On these types of tracks STR will lead until McLaren fix their traction and straight line issues.

I don't get it. Are you pro-Honda or pro-McLaren? I assumed Honda more than Maca..?
Honda introduced a significant upgrade and it worked (well, one of the PU's worked), but it's great!

Why does someone have to choose? Can’t we support both?

I do. At the moment I think STR is doing a better job, but Mclaren is capable of more. I follow them with this in mind.
Gee up STR and say could do better to Mclaren (because they can, or should)

[AJI]

Why does someone have to choose? Can’t we support both?

Of course we can support both, but the title of the thread/poll is, '...who will be ahead', so you do have to choose, right at the top of the 1st page...

[techman]

with this new honda upgrade i think, toro rosso would well be ahead of mclaren. just wish they had a good drivers. gasly is ok and the other is struggline

[McHonda]

They'll be ahead on the Bahrain,Canada type tracks for sure. Traction limited with plenty of straights and few or no high speed corners.

France and Austria could be good for STR but this thread will be very quiet in Silverstone and afterwards it will depend on the next round of upgrades so too early to say.

[techman]

yes i think traction and straights favours toro rosso
fast coners and mid corner favours mclaren

[adrianjordan]

Why does someone have to choose? Can’t we support both?

Of course we can support both, but the title of the thread/poll is, '...who will be ahead', so you do have to choose, right at the top of the 1st page...

Obviously you have to choose in the poll. However my comment was in response to someone asking whether a particular user was pro-McLaren or pro-Honda. My point was that they could be pro-both.

There seems to be a growing trend online these days of people feeling like everyone has to fall into one of 2 extreme categories.

[AJI]

Why does someone have to choose? Can’t we support both?

Of course we can support both, but the title of the thread/poll is, '...who will be ahead', so you do have to choose, right at the top of the 1st page...

Obviously you have to choose in the poll. However my comment was in response to someone asking whether a particular user was pro-McLaren or pro-Honda. My point was that they could be pro-both.

There seems to be a growing trend online these days of people feeling like everyone has to fall into one of 2 extreme categories.

I appreciate your point, but I'm not going to play 'guess the logical fallacy' in a thread that was created to generate a black or white answer.

There's nothing wrong with liking both, but that user, who's views I respect, has the user name of McHonda. That amalgamation of two company names creates a problem when you're asked a straight question about who you like more, after the two entities are no longer amalgamated...

For me, Marlborough McLaren/TAG and then Marlborough McLaren/Honda, we're the years when I was first truly fanatical about F1. I have a very romanticised view of that period, so when McLaren/Honda was re-formed I was truly excited. Then came the extreme disappointment...

But that's not what we're discussing here. What's subtly being discussed is who has fallen the farthest and who we think will pull themselves out of the mire the fastest. It's a valid discussion and 'can't everyone be a winner' doesn't fit the narrative.

[makecry]

Of course we can support both, but the title of the thread/poll is, '...who will be ahead', so you do have to choose, right at the top of the 1st page...

Obviously you have to choose in the poll. However my comment was in response to someone asking whether a particular user was pro-McLaren or pro-Honda. My point was that they could be pro-both.

There seems to be a growing trend online these days of people feeling like everyone has to fall into one of 2 extreme categories.

I appreciate your point, but I'm not going to play 'guess the logical fallacy' in a thread that was created to generate a black or white answer.

There's nothing wrong with liking both, but that user, who's views I respect, has the user name of McHonda. That amalgamation of two company names creates a problem when you're asked a straight question about who you like more, after the two entities are no longer amalgamated...

For me, Marlborough McLaren/TAG and then Marlborough McLaren/Honda, we're the years when I was first truly fanatical about F1. I have a very romanticised view of that period, so when McLaren/Honda was re-formed I was truly excited. Then came the extreme disappointment...

But that's not what we're discussing here. What's subtly being discussed is who has fallen the farthest and who we think will pull themselves out of the mire the fastest. It's a valid discussion and 'can't everyone be a winner' doesn't fit the narrative.

TBH, Honda's job is "easier" than McLaren's. Honda has the most important thing in the world i.e $$$$. Only way McLaren will get out of the mess they are in if they somehow find $100-150mil/yr and get that rolling chassis dyno and that is not going to happen any time soon.

[AJI]

TBH, Honda's job is "easier" than McLaren's. Honda has the most important thing in the world i.e $$$$. Only way McLaren will get out of the mess they are in if they somehow find $100-150mil/yr and get that rolling chassis dyno and that is not going to happen any time soon.

Ya, McLaren made a monumental f-up in ditching Honda. No more free PU, no 'partner' payment, no Alonso wages, and a payout to Honda for breaking contract...
Couple that with 3 years of PU building experience (and the likelihood that Honda would eventually get it right for a transition to Red Bull) and it makes the whole STR vs McLaren thing pretty pointless. It's all about Red Bull Honda vs McLaren Renault.

[makecry]

TBH, Honda's job is "easier" than McLaren's. Honda has the most important thing in the world i.e $$$$. Only way McLaren will get out of the mess they are in if they somehow find $100-150mil/yr and get that rolling chassis dyno and that is not going to happen any time soon.

Ya, McLaren made a monumental f-up in ditching Honda. No more free PU, no 'partner' payment, no Alonso wages, and a payout to Honda for breaking contract...
Couple that with 3 years of PU building experience (and the likelihood that Honda would eventually get it right for a transition to Red Bull) and it makes the whole STR vs McLaren thing pretty pointless. It's all about Red Bull Honda vs McLaren Renault.

As a HUGE Fernando fan, it pains me to say this but RBR-Honda vs McLaren-Renault is not even a legit comparision. McLaren is not even in the same league anymore.

[HPD]

To clarify something
Is this survey to know which team has the most points in the championship?
Or are we comparing teams for their performance?
There is quite a difference.

Mclaren could end the year with more points, but with a weaker car than TR. So how do we solve this survey?

[techman]

i honestly believe that mclaren car currently is a weaker car to toro rosso , its just that their drivers are better overall.

[vassilispapadop]

i honestly believe that mclaren car currently is a weaker car to toro rosso , its just that their drivers are better overall.

For sure ALO is better driver than rest 3(VAN,GAS,HAR)

[rscsr]

i honestly believe that mclaren car currently is a weaker car to toro rosso , its just that their drivers are better overall.

For sure ALO is better driver than rest 3(VAN,GAS,HAR)

I am also pretty certain that Van is better than Har in F1.

[techman]

yes hartly is just too slow. he is not ready. van is definetly quicker than har