2017 Mclaren F1 Team - Honda

[FW17]

The great STR Honda 2018

[etusch]

The guys at Honda will have no access to aero data of the McLaren car in terms of drag and downforce, can't get a handle on the engine but think they are aero geniuses.

The funny thing is mclaren boast about GPS data, but the reality is , you can take a car sauber, add plenty of drag and downforce and sauber will also be able to boast about how good the car is in corners. GPS data is NOT always an accurate assesment of how efficient is the chassis. Honda does not have access to aero data in a partnership?. give me a break. wait for 2018 i can guaranteee redbull will show mclaren how to build a proper efficient chassis. just wait a few months

Quite true, but their overall lap time would likely be worse. Are you suggesting that McLaren are similarly compromising their overall pace and therefore chances of gaining WDC points, position and money (which if the rumours of them losing $100m of Honda money next year, they need it)? If so, and you seem to suggest they are, what is the motive?

To Make Honda look bad? If they were looking for an exit, I could believe it. But, they have an exit so therefore it makes no logic to continue to compromise your soon to be ex-partner at the same time compromising yourself. It would be cutting your nose off to spite your face.

To make their chassis seem better to attract sponsors for next year? That doesn't work any better than trimming for higher top speed/running less compromised and finishing higher. "Look, we are challenging the top three at all circuits and we will be winning next year with the extra power of the Renault PU" or "We are on the back end of the top ten but will be challenging the top three next year with the extrap power of the Renault PU".

Will McLaren beat RBR next year? Maybe, maybe not. Both teams will have different chassis for 2018. But they are something like 1% slower in race trim as at Brasil. If they are less than 1% slower in 2018 with better reliability, they have made the correct decision.

Come 2019, who knows. RBR might not have Renault power after 2018.

It is not one sided thing. It will be very veeery surprising if they are close to redbull next year. But even in this condition if Honda has at least same performance it's still wrong

[stevesingo]

If Honda has at least the same performance? As what, 2017? Same as Renault in 2017, same a Renault in 2018?

Only one of those options would make the decision wrong.... in hindsight.

Decisions can only be made on the basis of information available at the time of the decision. At that time, McLaren clearly believed that was the correct decision and I for one (I'm sure I'm not alone) agree with it based on poor power, poor efficiency, poor MGU-H harvesting, abysmal reliability and failure to meet Honda's own agreed targets. And that is only the info available to the public.

I believe that Renault is more likely to be closer to Mercedes and Ferrari in terms of performance and reliability than Honda in 2018.

[tcooper27]

This was posted in the Honda engine thread and I think it bears repeating:

Km raced so far in 2017 per engine manufacturer:
1. Mercedes 32631
2. Ferrari 29447
3. Renault 18032
4. Honda 8733
5. TAG Heuer 8341 (but this is really a rebadged Renault, obviously).

from http://www.statsf1.com/en/2017/stats.aspx?t=M

How exactly is Honda supposed to build a competitive engine with less than a third of the mileage as their nearest competitor (Renault at over 26,000)? Compound that deficit over three years. Who was it in this partnership that vetoed Honda supplying additional teams?

[DFX]

This was posted in the Honda engine thread and I think it bears repeating:

Km raced so far in 2017 per engine manufacturer:
1. Mercedes 32631
2. Ferrari 29447
3. Renault 18032
4. Honda 8733
5. TAG Heuer 8341 (but this is really a rebadged Renault, obviously).

from http://www.statsf1.com/en/2017/stats.aspx?t=M

How exactly is Honda supposed to build a competitive engine with less than a third of the mileage as their nearest competitor (Renault at over 26,000)? Compound that deficit over three years. Who was it in this partnership that vetoed Honda supplying additional teams?

Mate, if Mclaren hadnt veto Honda from supplying RB, Horner would have make Honda engineers commit sudoku (yes im joking) by now.

Cant really blame them for vetoing at the time, would RB accept a customer deal from Honda? Would they demand the same info as the works (Mclaren)? We dont know what was involved in this possible deal.

[etusch]

If Honda has at least the same performance? As what, 2017? Same as Renault in 2017, same a Renault in 2018?

Only one of those options would make the decision wrong.... in hindsight.

Decisions can only be made on the basis of information available at the time of the decision. At that time, McLaren clearly believed that was the correct decision and I for one (I'm sure I'm not alone) agree with it based on poor power, poor efficiency, poor MGU-H harvesting, abysmal reliability and failure to meet Honda's own agreed targets. And that is only the info available to the public.

I believe that Renault is more likely to be closer to Mercedes and Ferrari in terms of performance and reliability than Honda in 2018.

2017 level or ability to save on straights/ability of attacking on straights. Because all other aspects I think Honda PU is better.
I believe Renault will be almost top level next year. As we see this year they can attack or defense against top engines. So this year's Renault's straight performance is good for Honda.

[diffuser]

This was posted in the Honda engine thread and I think it bears repeating:

Km raced so far in 2017 per engine manufacturer:
1. Mercedes 32631
2. Ferrari 29447
3. Renault 18032
4. Honda 8733
5. TAG Heuer 8341 (but this is really a rebadged Renault, obviously).

from http://www.statsf1.com/en/2017/stats.aspx?t=M

How exactly is Honda supposed to build a competitive engine with less than a third of the mileage as their nearest competitor (Renault at over 26,000)? Compound that deficit over three years. Who was it in this partnership that vetoed Honda supplying additional teams?

Wazari also mentioned that the SPEC 4 might be raced next year. The ICE and MGU-H are new in SPEC 4, only run on Dyno.

[Wazari]

Wazari also mentioned that the SPEC 4 might be raced next year. The ICE and MGU-H are new in SPEC 4, only run on Dyno.

Maybe, maybe not.

[Thunder]

From jetalt and CPR on the Autosport Forum:

EB on the Renault Cooling Requirements:
https://globoesporte.globo.com/motor/fo ... aign=ge_f1

Further explanation from the McLaren director: "We are not radically changing the car, the 2018 will be 100% an evolution of the current. The radiators required by the Renault unit are smaller than those of Honda, making our aerodynamic set easier. We need to redesign the exchange. I can not tell you anything else, "Boullier told GloboSport.com reporter.

The need for cooling the French power unit is less than that used by Honda. The implication of the smaller radiator is the freedom granted to designers to design lower and more premature sides, with significant gain in aerodynamics, such as less drag and greater airflow to the rear airfoil, another source of aerodynamic pressure generation.

"The day we announced the partnership with Renault, the technical data of the unit was already with us. It was in the time limit to be able to design the 2018 model in studies, even without knowing the engine, since June. "

[bauc]

From jetalt and CPR on the Autosport Forum:

EB on the Renault Cooling Requirements:
https://globoesporte.globo.com/motor/fo ... aign=ge_f1

Further explanation from the McLaren director: "We are not radically changing the car, the 2018 will be 100% an evolution of the current. The radiators required by the Renault unit are smaller than those of Honda, making our aerodynamic set easier. We need to redesign the exchange. I can not tell you anything else, "Boullier told GloboSport.com reporter.

The need for cooling the French power unit is less than that used by Honda. The implication of the smaller radiator is the freedom granted to designers to design lower and more premature sides, with significant gain in aerodynamics, such as less drag and greater airflow to the rear airfoil, another source of aerodynamic pressure generation.

"The day we announced the partnership with Renault, the technical data of the unit was already with us. It was in the time limit to be able to design the 2018 model in studies, even without knowing the engine, since June. "

So this confirms earlier reports saying that Mclaren had a huge task of designing a new clutch and gearbox for the Reno PU, however from aerodynamic point of few there is little to 0 penalty.

New hope for 2018

[techman]

here is a link that proves my point. mclaren intentionally run heavy downforce just to boast about their overated chassis and put honda down.not even listening to honda engineers to run less downforce.
https://sportiva.shueisha.co.jp/clm/mot ... /index.php

anyway 2018 , there is no more boasting about chassis when they will be compared to redbull

[Alonso Fan]

here is a link that proves my point. mclaren intentionally run heavy downforce just to boast about their overated chassis and put honda down.not even listening to honda engineers to run less downforce.
https://sportiva.shueisha.co.jp/clm/mot ... /index.php

anyway 2018 , there is no more boasting about chassis when they will be compared to redbull

Broken tape recorders are so outdated and so are broken CD players.

You should consider upgrading to digital media instead

[stevesingo]

here is a link that proves my point. mclaren intentionally run heavy downforce just to boast about their overated chassis and put honda down.not even listening to honda engineers to run less downforce.
https://sportiva.shueisha.co.jp/clm/mot ... /index.php

anyway 2018 , there is no more boasting about chassis when they will be compared to redbull

Partisan Japanese press supports Japanese manufacturer. Shocker!

Honda engineer wants Team to make their engine look better than the reality. Shocker!

techman spouts the same narrative. No surprise!

Did they or did they not go faster on Saturday?

It could be argued that in order to have a competitive top speed (and have Honda appear respectable), McLaren had to trim so much downforce off the car it became uncompetitive.

Assuming 900hp on both Friday and Saturday, the difference in drag is approx 11%. If they have another 25hp for qualifying, giving 925hp, the difference becomes over 15%. That is a huge amount of trimming to do for a given circuit. Perhaps for Friday, they listened to Hasagawa and trimmed for top speed. Doesn't look like it worked too well in terms of lap time.

[bauc]

here is a link that proves my point. mclaren intentionally run heavy downforce just to boast about their overated chassis and put honda down.not even listening to honda engineers to run less downforce.
https://sportiva.shueisha.co.jp/clm/mot ... /index.php

anyway 2018 , there is no more boasting about chassis when they will be compared to redbull

Broken tape recorders are so outdated and so are broken CD players.

You should consider upgrading to digital media instead

Ignore it, I had the same comment few pages back and he is now back with evidence

[HPD]

Eric does not lie. But look at the upper air intake