McHonda wrote: ↑
Mon Dec 11, 2017 8:28 pm
HPD wrote: ↑
Sun Dec 10, 2017 2:04 pm
McHonda wrote: ↑
Fri Dec 08, 2017 11:58 pm
Can we get a summary? I looked but couldn't see it.
I think Mclaren demanded a lot about packing.
That doesn't read to me it was a McLaren fault but rather their oil tank didn't work once it was in the car. It reads like another correlation issue between Sakura testing and track like Hasegawa spoke of previously in the year.
I'm also not convinced McLaren put any increased pressure on Honda for packaging for the first year of a new concept. They've literally just asked Renault for the conservative packaging so it would be odd to me if they show more caution for a race winning engine but demand tight packaging for one that was brand new from a supplier who were struggling badly and had 2 years of issues and failure behind it.
That is one giant leap of faith from McLaren that Honda could deliver. Surely you'd prioritise pre-season testing running for the first season of a major rule change and first year of a new engine concept, it's too important to risk getting bogged down with overheating engines for the 3rd pre-season in a row and risk limited running for me to believe it.
I agree, I read it as their design did not work once on the car. Japanese-English translation can get a little lost here. I refuse to believe the engines main oil tank was up to McLaren to deal with... It's probably safe to assume Honda underestimated the level of grip and the G-Forces experienced with the new regulations and this is where the issues arose from.
One thing I disagree with though, is using McLaren's supposed request for the conservative packaging for the Renault as evidence they were not hard on Honda.. I think it's safe to say McLaren had applied a lot of pressure on the packaging for Honda. I'm not claimng that's the route of all their problems because I don't believe thaty but I do think it's definitely a part of it.
Just because McLaren want to play it safe this time, does not mean they were so careful in the past.
That's like a couple getting divorced because the Husband was a violent twat, and when it became public they were splitting, the wife maintained his behaviour was as such, but the husband became charitable and loving in the public eye.
Don't be so easily deceived. Both companies have had their serious shortcomings over the past 3 years.