2016 McLaren F1 Team - Honda

[a1b2i3r45]

Considering where Honda started and the token system limitation they are doing a good job. Unfortunate we need to wait another year before they can just change whatever they feel they need when they feel they need.

I dont think they will change whatever they feel they need when they feel they need next year, unless they find a significant step like they are saying/doing this year. Because the limitation on the number of PU elements will still be there next year. They wont want to incur grid penalty for little changes. So there will may be 4 or 5 updates next year in-season, the only difference will be that theoretically they will be able to change the design of the whole pu every single time if they wish.

[Thunder]

Red Bull 'will lose 1.2s on Baku F1 straight' - Marko
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... u-straight

Well i guess McLaren can stay in Woking for this one.

[Vasconia]

Red Bull 'will lose 1.2s on Baku F1 straight' - Marko
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... u-straight

Well i guess McLaren can stay in Woking for this one.

Meh, Marko is not a very reliable person. Of course they will lose , perhaps 0,5-0,7 but not more.

But I agree with the fact that McLaren should stay in Woking. They will suffer like pigs.

[Andres125sx]

To add a bit further explanation, if we all agree Honda 2015 PU was a disaster, and we all know the token system wich prevents manufacturers from doing massive changes, we all should agree we couldn´t expect a massive change this season. Reliability improved to the point past season was the worst, and this season is the best or close to it as both Mercedes and Ferrari have had more reliability issues than Honda. That alone is a massive improvement, and pace has also improved to the point now we all expect McHonda scoring points consistently, so please explain to me and the forum what did you expect for 2016 season, considering the base PU (2015) and the token system

[Sayeman]

I am sure Honda will get there, maybe taking a bit more time than the Mclaren boys anticipated. and FIA will freeze the engines as soon as all the manufacturers have PUs with similar performance like the V8 era.

Real question is, will Mclaren be able to build a championship winning chassis? They haven't done it for a long time.
Honda might be left to rue their 10 year long contract with Mclaren.

[Steven]

I have removed some unfounded bashing and praising.
Can we up the standard a bit please?

[diffuser]

Considering where Honda started and the token system limitation they are doing a good job. Unfortunate we need to wait another year before they can just change whatever they feel they need when they feel they need.

I dont think they will change whatever they feel they need when they feel they need next year, unless they find a significant step like they are saying/doing this year. Because the limitation on the number of PU elements will still be there next year. They wont want to incur grid penalty for little changes. So there will may be 4 or 5 updates next year in-season, the only difference will be that theoretically they will be able to change the design of the whole pu every single time if they wish.

I think you're trying to draw a distinction between what I said and what you said, there isn't. I just didn't spell it out.

They may ONLY feel they need to change the PU 4 or 5 times. Like you said, those modifications can be across many different parts. If they feel they need to, they can make HUGE MODS at every NEW iteration of the PU. If that isn't enough, Next year, if they think the changes are worth incurring penalties they can make that decision too. This year, if they're out of tokens they're SOL.

[ME4ME]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... not-engine

Ok so blame goes to Mclaren, not Honda. Good, that raises confidence in they're engine somewhat.

[horse]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... not-engine

Ok so blame goes to Mclaren, not Honda. Good, that raises confidence in they're engine somewhat.

This is good news, but the fact that its Button's 4th ICE is concerning if they are planning on making ICE upgrades in the future as it seems unlikely that they will keep his allocation to just 5.

[McG]

I guess there isn't going to be a complete overhaul of the engine for 2017 if Alonso is saying to keep developing the 2016 car. Fingers crossed Mclaren aren't stuck where they are now at the end of the season.

[a1b2i3r45]

I hope that's just the Montreal Wing bolted on. Looks pretty big compared to the other Rear Wings seen already.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClDsiEeVYAAsjCd.jpg

Hoping for something like that:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClDy_JrUgAAvhMr.jpg

May be this is one of McLaren's ploy to keep the pressure on Honda by using high DF wings & cutting off top speed as they did in Canada too. Because after monaco there was pressure on McLaren due to lack of speed.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.ph ... w--smedley
"Everybody is catching up," he said. "Honda have a little way to go but of course they are going to be a year behind, they came in a year late.
"It's not quite as much as some people would have you believe, that deficit there."
Or may be it is just McLaren trying to understand why their high DF package did not work in monaco & trying to sort it out or may be it's both.

[SameSame]

Hi everyone I'm a long time reader of the forum but first time poster!

I don't quite understand McLarens philosophy to not introduce track specific low downforce packages. Canada, Baku, Spa and Monza are all power sensitive circuits so it's not like the package will be a one off. Surely their main issue in race trim is fuel consumption and by not cutting drag this just compounds the issue? Their downforce may be efficient but using the same package at both high and medium speed tracks just seems a bit extreme to me. Why would they employ such a strategy? They should have enough resources to develop both package configurations?

[Alonso Fan]

Hi everyone I'm a long time reader of the forum but first time poster!

I don't quite understand McLarens philosophy to not introduce track specific low downforce packages. Canada, Baku, Spa and Monza are all power sensitive circuits so it's not like the package will be a one off. Surely their main issue in race trim is fuel consumption and by not cutting drag this just compounds the issue? Their downforce may be efficient but using the same package at both high and medium speed tracks just seems a bit extreme to me. Why would they employ such a strategy? They should have enough resources to develop both package configurations?

Welcome!

You raise a very valid point

[diffuser]

Hi everyone I'm a long time reader of the forum but first time poster!

I don't quite understand McLarens philosophy to not introduce track specific low downforce packages. Canada, Baku, Spa and Monza are all power sensitive circuits so it's not like the package will be a one off. Surely their main issue in race trim is fuel consumption and by not cutting drag this just compounds the issue? Their downforce may be efficient but using the same package at both high and medium speed tracks just seems a bit extreme to me. Why would they employ such a strategy? They should have enough resources to develop both package configurations?

Now look at what you've done ! We've been happy with you till now !!!

I don't know if it is true, this is just my opinion.

Part of my thinking is because of a lack of power they can't benefit from a high downforce(HDF) package. I think they run a kind of LDF package all the time.
If you're gonna create LDF and HDF packages, it takes cycles in the wind tunnel. They could have chosen to spend that time on a more mainstream package to catch up to the other teams.

[1lifeliveit]

Hi everyone I'm a long time reader of the forum but first time poster!

I don't quite understand McLarens philosophy to not introduce track specific low downforce packages. Canada, Baku, Spa and Monza are all power sensitive circuits so it's not like the package will be a one off. Surely their main issue in race trim is fuel consumption and by not cutting drag this just compounds the issue? Their downforce may be efficient but using the same package at both high and medium speed tracks just seems a bit extreme to me. Why would they employ such a strategy? They should have enough resources to develop both package configurations?

Maybe we should reserve this judgement till later?! In Canada they took a risky punt (High DF) hoping for rain. The position they are in at the moment, they have to take such risks. If the rain did come, it would have been a "masterstroke" by McLaren.

Again, I'm no expert but doesnt low DF setups wreck tyres in the corners due to wheel spin? If already they were having problems switching on their tyres due to cold temperatures, low DF would have made it worse. It will be interesting to see what they do in Baku though where its going to be dry.