- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
The Honda PU sounds like a Bitch to work on. Something so difficult to prepare maybe exactly why all those reliability problems are occurring.Cale24 wrote:McLaren keep avoiding saying their ultra tight packaging is problematic. Whiles temperatures are apparently under control, the many seemingly minor problems like leaks, seals, and sensors going wrong - and big delays in resolving them- seems to at the very least suggest that tight packagaing has an impact. That is, the process of opening up the car, fixing, reassembling and then closing it all up. However, once they get those things dialled to the point that they don't go wrong in the first place, then I think we will see McLaren progressing fast.
Their PU has not been run at full power, while Toto Wolff says Mercedes have been running at 100%, and looking at speed traps, Ferrari also had theirs turned up high. So, very hard to guess what their ultimate pace will be in Melbourne during quali and race. Honda say they have hit their targets, and by now will have an idea on their power output relative to the competition, so I think the Mp4-30 will certainly be a lot faster than many people are saying. And the car 'feels great' according to Button and Magnussen- only a matter of time till they are mixing it with Williams/Ferrari/Red Bull.
Power wise, from what we have seen, my guess is Ferrari will be 30/40 hp down on Merc in Melbourne, at best. Honda I think will be on par with Ferrari, and most reports suggest Renault will be a little behind, maybe 60hp down on Mercedes.
If mclaren had done a quali lap, with low fuel and full power producing a fast lap but in the process toasting their engine, would anyone have said mclaren didn't have the pace?Richard wrote:To paraphrase "Their car can go much faster but it doesn't work." I don't know how someone can say that with a straight face
The laptimes don't lie. Mclaren can only manage to set laptimes that are 3 seconds of the pace. Yes, one can hope that they can unleash more power from the PU, but first they need to work out how to get to the finish.
) McLaren/Honda building an engine that is down on power, they had the Merc as a reference point, they would know the output, configuration and some engine mapping at the very least. 
The car needs to be giving 3rds by year end, build on that instead of a new car and go for championships in 2016. It looks incredible. When the PU problems will be fixed, this will be a rocket ship, I'm sure.mikeerfol wrote:https://scontent-fra.xx.fbcdn.net/hphot ... e=557B8403
I agree with you. Yes Mclaren has problems, but we can`t draw any conclusions except from the reliability problems team talked about (although some people on forums possess ability to see through the engine cover on pics and can diagnose problems from their chair while those incompetent mechanics spend few hours looking for a problem). They`ve done similar mileage like Red Bull did last year,they had Mercedes data, P.Prodromou, they are still optimistic about being competitive and still quite a few people here think they come out with car that is 3 seconds slower than Mercedes or that they won`t even qualify?JimClarkFan wrote:If mclaren had done a quali lap, with low fuel and full power producing a fast lap but in the process toasting their engine, would anyone have said mclaren didn't have the pace?Richard wrote:To paraphrase "Their car can go much faster but it doesn't work." I don't know how someone can say that with a straight face
The laptimes don't lie. Mclaren can only manage to set laptimes that are 3 seconds of the pace. Yes, one can hope that they can unleash more power from the PU, but first they need to work out how to get to the finish.
Of course not, they would have said they have a reliability problem.
Mclaren aren't 3 seconds behind Mercedes in terms of pace, they are 3 seconds behind because they have not had the opportunity to do a quali run whereas Mercedes has, because of poor reliability. Can crofts and you not see that you aren't comparing like with like?
What if mclaren come to Australia and they have their problems fixed, and are only .5 seconds behind merc in quali. Does that mean they have developed the car by 2.5 seconds in 2 weeks?
My point was that nobody knows exactly where mclaren is in terms of pace, because nobody has seen a mclaren with everything working. The only thing we know is that their reliability is sucks. And the only thing we know is that they are at most 3 seconds slower than Mercedes in a compromised car.
Let's wait until we have a few quali laps done on a Saturday before we start writing mclaren off as being 3 seconds behind merc.
I get what you are saying about reliability allowing you to demonstrate pace, but if croftie's only point was, "look at the time sheets, Macca are three seconds slower" then I hardly call that an analysis.
