Mclaren Chassis Vs Honda Power Unit

Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
User avatar
diffuser
173
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:55 pm
Location: Montreal

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

PlatinumZealot wrote:If they had a mercedes engine they would be a little in front of redbull at the malaysia track based on my estimations.. (9 tenths improvement). So the chassis is still behind redBull but not by much. It is promising.

Wandering into the unknown ,,,,you get more power , you thrown more downforce on but we're not really sure how the chassis will react to that ...example Monaco... Don't think it's as black and white as you make it sound. I hope it is ...you never know till you try,.

NL_Fer
NL_Fer
63
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2014 8:48 am

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

People sometimes seem to forget how relative the power of the engines are. Don't forget, the Torro Rosso 2015 Ferrari is the least powerfull at the moment. But that same engine was on par with Mercedes one a few moments during the 2015 season. Renault and Honda in 2016 are more powerfull than the Mercedes (and Ferrari) of 2015.

And looking at Lewis' bad luck, the Mercedes is on the limit this year.

Sasha
Sasha
67
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:43 am

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

Suzuka is all about being smooth and losing zero speed in fast and mid speed corners.So a great chassis(keeping it level to the ground at all times) and PU drivability(still must have great ICE power and great HERS at the sametime, KERS not as important at this track) is a must here.

Mclaren chassis doesn't keep level all the time and eats rear tires so sucks on mid to fast corners.Honda PU is behind everybody on drivability.

User avatar
godlameroso
367
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:27 pm
Location: Miami FL

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

That's pretty damning of the chassis itself, if it's not good at mid to high speed corners it's downforce balance is lousy. If the engine has poor drivability it's not well integrated with the chassis. The other top teams have heaps of body roll so their chassis is not exactly flat either. I guess it makes sense if they've been basically conducting a season long test session only on things that would work for next year. I guess the narrow power band of the engine(needing more revs to get into an effective MGU-H region) limits the drivability of the chassis.
The height of cultivation is really nothing special. It is merely simplicity; the ability to express the utmost with the minimum. Mr.Lee

User avatar
PlatinumZealot
381
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:45 am

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

Just like Monaco, it wasn't the chassis this time around; McLaren just couldn't get the tyres to work.
===================✯✯
============✯✯
====✯✯[/b]
LH44

PhillipM
PhillipM
334
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 2:18 pm
Location: Over the road from Boothy...

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

As above, they seem to be struggling to get a handle on the tyres at some events, you could see the rears especially were visibly worse than the cars around them.

User avatar
diffuser
173
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:55 pm
Location: Montreal

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

I like Sasha's suggestion better....tires just seem to BSy too me. Plus Jenson said they were having issues with the change of direction and long fast straights.

but then what do I know.

PhillipM
PhillipM
334
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 2:18 pm
Location: Over the road from Boothy...

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

I can't agree with someone that believes a good chassis is 'one that keeps level all the time' - especially when the car that's winning championships up front has more roll than most of the grid.

We know they're having trouble keeping the tyres in the operating window when they can't crank on enough downforce for a track, we know Japan requires a good engine in order to be able to bolt on downforce (it's quite drag sensitive). Combine the two and you have the same issue they've shown at other circuits where they couldn't load the tyres up enough due to not having the power to overcome the resultant aero drag, or where they don't have a high-downforce package to bolt on.

It's a setup issue. But it's one that would be easier to solve if you could just throw some extra BHP in there and bolt some draggy wings on.

User avatar
diffuser
173
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:55 pm
Location: Montreal

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

PhillipM wrote:I can't agree with someone that believes a good chassis is 'one that keeps level all the time' - especially when the car that's winning championships up front has more roll than most of the grid.

We know they're having trouble keeping the tyres in the operating window when they can't crank on enough downforce for a track, we know Japan requires a good engine in order to be able to bolt on downforce (it's quite drag sensitive). Combine the two and you have the same issue they've shown at other circuits where they couldn't load the tyres up enough due to not having the power to overcome the resultant aero drag, or where they don't have a high-downforce package to bolt on.

It's a setup issue. But it's one that would be easier to solve if you could just throw some extra BHP in there and bolt some draggy wings on.
wasn't FRIC all about doing exactly that ?

PhillipM
PhillipM
334
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 2:18 pm
Location: Over the road from Boothy...

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

Actually it was about keeping it stiff where required so it could be run softer the rest of the time for mechanical grip/tyre life and kerb running.

Sasha
Sasha
67
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 6:43 am

Re: Honda Power Unit

Post

McLaren had/has problem with the rear from day 1! People in the know point to rear suspension design and their aero design.(too much drag) So at tracks like this they just can't get the chassis balance right.Blame goes to Honda for making a low power PU(can't push high DF aero) and McLaren for bad Drag to DF numbers.


So like Monaco, Mclaren Honda is about the worse car on the track at Suzuka.

And in my past post...smooth means chassis DF balance. Yes....you hit the curbs, that balance goes out the door but the best chassis gets back to normal business the fastest after hitting the curb.

mrluke
mrluke
124
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2013 7:31 pm

Re: Mclaren Chassis Vs Honda Power Unit

Post

With the recent performance of Mclaren in Suzuka discussions are again breaking out as to whether this is down to Mclaren or Honda.

I have gone through and updated the charts with the qualifying times from the last couple of races. All of the charts through this thread have updated themselves as well.

Image

Once again we are seeing a divergence in the performances of RBR and Mclaren. Mclaren made ground on the leaders in Malaysia, whereas RBR were less competitive but then Mclaren struggled at Suzuka while RBR performed consistently.

Image

Malaysia 2014 was wet and 2015 was "damp" but closer to dry times.

Looking at the last 4 races on the above chart, Mclaren are performing consistently slightly better vs pole than they did last year but only by a small margin and infact if we look at Japan their deficit has been very consistent over the last 3 years despite wildly varying power outputs. I am going to suggest therefore that Japan is one of the less power sensitive tracks. I am also going to state that I would have expected Mclaren to be a bit better here, I would have predicted them being at about the 2% threshold (around 0.3s per lap faster).

Suzuka continues to be a bogey track for Mclaren which is more suggestive of an underlying conflict between the track and their car philosophy. It puzzles me therefore why Mclaren were expecting to do well here.

Image

If we go back to the RBR : Mclaren comparison shown above and look particularly at the races since Canada, we can see a clear trend of Mclaren losing ground at the downforce heavy tracks, Britain, Germany, Singapore and Japan but performing better at the more power focused tracks, Baku, Hungary, Belgium, Italy, Malaysia.

I think we are getting to the point now that we have enough of a trend to confirm this hypothesis.

Image

Finally I go back to this chart, the baseline here is the pole deficit in 2014 between Mclaren and Mercedes.

Where the traces are positive it shows that Mclaren have a larger deficit to pole than they did in 2014, and where the traces are below the line then they have gained ground against pole.

The average deficit in 2015 was 1.12%
The average deficit in 2016 is down to 0.22%

Now I am going to suggest that the main reason for the deficit between 2014 and 2015 was the lack of performance from the Honda PU and the whole integration of the new unit within the car. As discussed Malaysia 2014 was wet so is anomalous, however the general trend is that most of the deficit experienced in 2015 has now been recovered. Bearing in mind in 2014 Mclaren had the best PU on the grid, I would happily round up that 0.22% to 0.30% and say that roughly this is the current deficit in laptime between the Honda PU and the Mercedes PU there or thereabouts.

This still leaves an average 2.01% deficit between the 2014 Mclaren and the 2014 Mercedes. This remaining 2% gap I am going to say is generally a chassis / aero / tyre deficit and one that Mclaren are responsible for overcoming.

The counter argument would be that actually Mclaren's chassis has improved which is overcompensating for the power reduction. To this I would point out the Mclaren's worst performances vs pole are the downforce heavy tracks. Meaning that Mclaren's overcompensating chassis only appears on the power sensitive tracks, if somebody is going to hold that position then I think that is more based on faith than logic.

For the avoidance of any doubt it is clear as day that both Mclaren's chassis and the Honda engine have improved over the last season, however the rest of the field have also improved and there is the whole issue of tyres, this is why all of my comparisons are to pole laps. I am not suggesting that the 2016 car is little better than the 2014 car, in ultimate terms it is actually several seconds a lap faster, but so are Mercedes.

User avatar
Juzh
454
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 7:45 am

Re: Mclaren Chassis Vs Honda Power Unit

Post

mrluke wrote:I am going to suggest therefore that Japan is one of the less power sensitive tracks.
It's actually the opposite. It's one of the more power dependant circuits at 66% full throttle.

User avatar
henry
247
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2004 7:49 pm
Location: England

Re: Mclaren Chassis Vs Honda Power Unit

Post

Juzh wrote:
mrluke wrote:I am going to suggest therefore that Japan is one of the less power sensitive tracks.
It's actually the opposite. It's one of the more power dependant circuits at 66% full throttle.
l

I measured 52% for the 2015 pole lap and 55% for 2016.
Fortune favours the prepared; she has no favourites and takes no sides.
Truth is confirmed by inspection and delay; falsehood by haste and uncertainty : Tacitus

User avatar
Juzh
454
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 7:45 am

Re: Mclaren Chassis Vs Honda Power Unit

Post

henry wrote:
Juzh wrote:
mrluke wrote:I am going to suggest therefore that Japan is one of the less power sensitive tracks.
It's actually the opposite. It's one of the more power dependant circuits at 66% full throttle.
l

I measured 52% for the 2015 pole lap and 55% for 2016.
I took data from here:
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/f1-informati ... uit-japan/