2016 McLaren F1 Team - Honda

[Sonador]

the pace was there , we saw it in practice, but qual , mclaren screwed up by sending them late, with traffic and flat tyres jenson could not get in Q3. shame if he was in the top 10 , points was on the cards today. race pace was the best all season without getting lapped

[/quote]


On Sundays i think that they must save to much fuel compared to other teams.
On the difference between Free pratice and Qualifying, i think that they cannot turn the engines up like other teams do.

So i agree with you

[Thunder]

Are People really surprised by the Performance?

We know the Chassis isn't Top of the Class. We know the PU is nowhere near the expectations. We knew this Track was not going to suit the Package.

We see good Times on Friday because apparently the basic Setup they are working out in their Simulator is good and the other Teams are running in cruise Mode. Come Saturday other Teams (in this Case Ferrari and RB) improve their Setup and in Case of Ferrari stick in the nice juicy Token Upgraded PU and turn up the Power. McLaren can't. Come Sunday the old efficiency Story just keeps repeating.

And now we have we even have Gearbox issues in 2 consecutive Races. P11 was the absoulte Maximum the Car was able to do.

Edit:
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/mclar ... so-789572/

"The car works in the corners, but on the straight we are losing seven or eight tenths," said Alonso, who failed to reach Q3 for the first time in four races.

"On full throttle and with the steering wheel straight we are losing all that."

He added: "It's frustrating but it's not something we didn't know when we arrived here.

"The lack of power is obvious and on circuits like this we try to make do, especially in the race with other cars."

[McG]

I've been surprised since the 1st race of 2015!

All my thoughts are on 2017 but at least this years engine updates will be useful next year. Wouldn't be surprised if this years updates are actually for 2017. I think it could be good next year.

Are People really surprised by the Performance?

We know the Chassis isn't Top of the Class. We know the PU is nowhere near the expectations. We knew this Track was not going to suit the Package.

We see good Times on Friday because apparently the basic Setup they are working out in their Simulator is good and the other Teams are running in cruise Mode. Come Saturday other Teams (in this Case Ferrari and RB) improve their Setup and in Case of Ferrari stick in the nice juicy Token Upgraded PU and turn up the Power. McLaren can't. Come Sunday the old efficiency Story just keeps repeating.

And now we have we even have Gearbox issues in 2 consecutive Races. P11 was the absoulte Maximum the Car was able to do.

Edit:
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/mclar ... so-789572/

"The car works in the corners, but on the straight we are losing seven or eight tenths," said Alonso, who failed to reach Q3 for the first time in four races.

"On full throttle and with the steering wheel straight we are losing all that."

He added: "It's frustrating but it's not something we didn't know when we arrived here.

"The lack of power is obvious and on circuits like this we try to make do, especially in the race with other cars."

[godlameroso]

They won't fare much better in Austria, 3 straights and only 5 non hair pin turns. Hockenheim is much the same with that long parabolic curve. In Silverstone they managed to get 8th on merit last year, perhaps a circuit with lots of sweeping turns is what the chassis likes. Top speeds are generally low in Silverstone, no one pushes more than 330 even with DRS. Maybe that's another chance for them to get a top 5-6 finish.

[diffuser]

They won't fare much better in Austria, 3 straights and only 5 non hair pin turns. Hockenheim is much the same with that long parabolic curve. In Silverstone they managed to get 8th on merit last year, perhaps a circuit with lots of sweeping turns is what the chassis likes. Top speeds are generally low in Silverstone, no one pushes more than 330 even with DRS. Maybe that's another chance for them to get a top 5-6 finish.

I

[diffuser]

I've been surprised since the 1st race of 2015!

All my thoughts are on 2017 but at least this years engine updates will be useful next year. Wouldn't be surprised if this years updates are actually for 2017. I think it could be good next year.

Are People really surprised by the Performance?

We know the Chassis isn't Top of the Class. We know the PU is nowhere near the expectations. We knew this Track was not going to suit the Package.

We see good Times on Friday because apparently the basic Setup they are working out in their Simulator is good and the other Teams are running in cruise Mode. Come Saturday other Teams (in this Case Ferrari and RB) improve their Setup and in Case of Ferrari stick in the nice juicy Token Upgraded PU and turn up the Power. McLaren can't. Come Sunday the old efficiency Story just keeps repeating.

And now we have we even have Gearbox issues in 2 consecutive Races. P11 was the absoulte Maximum the Car was able to do.

Edit:
http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/mclar ... so-789572/

"The car works in the corners, but on the straight we are losing seven or eight tenths," said Alonso, who failed to reach Q3 for the first time in four races.

"On full throttle and with the steering wheel straight we are losing all that."

He added: "It's frustrating but it's not something we didn't know when we arrived here.

"The lack of power is obvious and on circuits like this we try to make do, especially in the race with other cars."

[PhillipM]

Mclaren Honda were quite noticeably slower after a series of high speed corners than the vast majority of the field but they were still able to reach pretty much the same Vmax. Potentially Mclaren Honda could be exiting T20 with an extra 10kmh, this might have got them a little bit faster over the start/finish it might not, I couldn't say.

This is completely wrong, Button got a tow on the straight from a car ~1s in front of him, Alonso got a tow from a car ~3s in front of him, hence the 'high' top speeds

The only way this data could possibly support a view that the Honda PU is the problem is if we could demonstrate that Mclaren are running much less drag / downforce than their rivals. Which from previously shown wing levels looks unlikely.

Actually very likely, they've been running short upper chord lengths on the rear wing
....

....
Again im going to go out on a limb a bit here and suggest that this split differentiates those with a large, high downforce rear wing, and those with a skinny wing. A larger wing when opened for DRS will reduce the overall drag by more than opening DRS on a smaller wing. This appears to suggest that Mclaren are also running a pretty heavy wing level compared to those around them.
This is just plain wrong. In the days of DRS which have a fixed opening difference then a smaller second element (I.E. Lower downforce wing) will give much more effective drag reduction because although you move it the same amount the effective AoA change is much higher. This is well documented and has been from the start of the DRS days.

...Be very careful analysing data alone. It doesn't tell you anywhere near enough about circumstances.

[Pierce89]

Facts?

So you know McLaren didn´t do any compromise chasis wise to compensate a weak PU, what means their chasis without compromises is not working as it should, ergo it´s bad, right? What´s your source?


I find amazing how people feel the need to bash someone, if it´s a weak PU let´s bash Honda because they couldn´t ignore the token system and solve their problems, if not then let´s bash McLaren because their chasis isn´t compensating the weak PU so they´re not as good as they say...

I understand we all want to know what´s the weak, or weakest point, but we can´t know because we don´t have enough data.

Even topspeeds are useless, how do you know they are not using all available energy for the straight so top speed is not too bad, but then they´re lacking power the remaining 4km of the track?


Another intersting thing is how people think in Monaco the PU is irrelevant, like if 100hp down would not cause any deficit. In Monaco the PU is not the most important part of the car, but it still is important. Maybe it was irrelevant when difference between best and weakest engine was 30-40hp and behaviour/reactions were similar, but not now when difference is much higher than that and there´s an ERS. Even in Monaco the PU makes a difference. As an example, traction is irrelevant in Monaco? The PU play a huge role traction wise obviously, so you simply cannot ignore PU differences and state the chasis is not as good as they said.

Basically people usually try to oversimplify things, but this is F1, things are always too complicated

Well, if you really think that McLaren has the 3rd best chassis on the grid, and the only thing keeping it from performing better is the PU, then I say we agree to disagree. Because that's exactly what I meant with my post.

Well, Autosport.com published an article calling it the 4th best chassis.

[mrluke]

Mclaren Honda were quite noticeably slower after a series of high speed corners than the vast majority of the field but they were still able to reach pretty much the same Vmax. Potentially Mclaren Honda could be exiting T20 with an extra 10kmh, this might have got them a little bit faster over the start/finish it might not, I couldn't say.

This is completely wrong, Button got a tow on the straight from a car ~1s in front of him, Alonso got a tow from a car ~3s in front of him, hence the 'high' top speeds


I would suggest that there are very few cars that managed to complete a lap being more than 3 seconds behind another car given the congestion in Qualy. All of the teams top speeds are very similar with a group at 340kmh and a group at 350kmh. I dont think we can say that it was only Mclaren that may have been following another car, others in the data set must have been as well.

The only way this data could possibly support a view that the Honda PU is the problem is if we could demonstrate that Mclaren are running much less drag / downforce than their rivals. Which from previously shown wing levels looks unlikely.

Actually very likely, they've been running short upper chord lengths on the rear wing

Below image suggests their wing levels are not unusual compared to the other teams



....
Again im going to go out on a limb a bit here and suggest that this split differentiates those with a large, high downforce rear wing, and those with a skinny wing. A larger wing when opened for DRS will reduce the overall drag by more than opening DRS on a smaller wing. This appears to suggest that Mclaren are also running a pretty heavy wing level compared to those around them.

This is just plain wrong. In the days of DRS which have a fixed opening difference then a smaller second element (I.E. Lower downforce wing) will give much more effective drag reduction because although you move it the same amount the effective AoA change is much higher. This is well documented and has been from the start of the DRS days.

Can you provide a link to where this is well documented?

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2011/09/06/r ... za-harlow/

"Force India engineering director Dominic Harlow expects the Drag Reduction System to be less powerful at Monza, owing to the high-speed nature of the circuit.

“Yes, the effect will be quite a bit smaller, because the amount of downforce the wing is generating is less,” said Harlow."


(http://consultkeithyoung.com/content/cf ... gle-attack)
Wing angle and drag do not share a linear relationship. Therefore as seen on the above indicative chart, reducing from 15deg to 10deg gives a much larger drag reduction than reducing from 10deg to 0deg.


...Be very careful analysing data alone. It doesn't tell you anywhere near enough about circumstances.

Thank you for taking the time but with a sensible head and transparent assessment there is no reason why data should not be sought to challenge the PR statements made by the teams in the media.

[Vasconia]

They won't fare much better in Austria, 3 straights and only 5 non hair pin turns. Hockenheim is much the same with that long parabolic curve. In Silverstone they managed to get 8th on merit last year, perhaps a circuit with lots of sweeping turns is what the chassis likes. Top speeds are generally low in Silverstone, no one pushes more than 330 even with DRS. Maybe that's another chance for them to get a top 5-6 finish.

Austria will be another nightmare. You really need a powerful PU on this track I expect another 12-14th for qualy and more or less the same for the race, if they dont have a failure.

[Thunder]

Austria will be another nightmare. You really need a powerful PU on this track I expect another 12-14th for qualy and more or less the same for the race, if they dont have a failure.

Honestly that's what i expect for the majority of the remaining Races, right outside Top 10 on merit.....

[Vasconia]

Austria will be another nightmare. You really need a powerful PU on this track I expect another 12-14th for qualy and more or less the same for the race, if they dont have a failure.

Honestly that's what i expect for the majority of the remaining Races, right ourside Top 10 on merit.....

I hope they can do something good in Hungary and perhaps England/Singapur and Japan is the evolution is enough good.

[PhillipM]

Can you provide a link to where this is well documented?

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2011/09/06/r ... za-harlow/

"Force India engineering director Dominic Harlow expects the Drag Reduction System to be less powerful at Monza, owing to the high-speed nature of the circuit.

“Yes, the effect will be quite a bit smaller, because the amount of downforce the wing is generating is less,” said Harlow."

http://www.consultkeithyoung.com/media/ ... _Chart.png
(http://consultkeithyoung.com/content/cf ... gle-attack)
Wing angle and drag do not share a linear relationship. Therefore as seen on the above indicative chart, reducing from 15deg to 10deg gives a much larger drag reduction than reducing from 10deg to 0deg.


Thank you for taking the time but with a sensible head and transparent assessment there is no reason why data should not be sought to challenge the PR statements made by the teams in the media.

You're not talking about overall downforce/drag change but relative downforce/drag change, which is a much different effect, especially when it's not the overall angle change as per in that image but the change of the second element by a fixed distance to stall the entire wing, which that diagram is not at all relevant to.
However, if you are going to bring overall AoA into it, you'll also note that the lower element on the Mclaren is running very little AoA - it may be a deep wing but the front edge is lifted compared to such as Torro Rosso, (in fact, you can see that in your own photo), or the Red Bull, who you'd assume to be running similarly low DF, as below.





Whether the extra camber hurts more than the AoA is one for the CFD guru's on here.

[Sayeman]

"Honda avoided high fuel consumption repeat in Baku"

http://gptoday.com/full_story/view/5702 ... t_in_Baku/

[godlameroso]

I think they'll be firmly in the top 6. The situation is not as bad as last year. McLaren and Honda have too big a budget and good engineers to not make up ground. I still have faith they can overhaul Williams before the end of the year.

Last year they had 7? tokens, this year they had double that to develop in season. They can't be pathetic forever, it's just not realistic to think that way.