F1technical.net

diffuser wrote:For what it's worth ... http://www.omnicorse.it/magazine/73793/ ... crash-test

omnicourse are saying (in the same breath that the Mp4-31 passed the crashed test) that the new PU isn't thrilling on the bench tests.

Which reminds me what I dislike most about F1 reporting. It tends to use wording that shocks but really say nothing.

" the focus of the new chief designer Japanese would be aimed at 2017, in the knowledge that you will not close the gap power with the Mercedes, although significant improvements are expected before the season starts in Melbourne."

I think their choice of term "chiudere il gap" is really poor. Last year, I'm just throwing a number out there, the Honda PU had 80% of the ability of the Merc PU. I expect a huge improvement this year (to about 95%) . I don't think anybody out there expects the Honda PU to match Merc at the beginning of this year.

#

Actually they are saying the the Honda PU wouldn't be thrilling in bench tests as they should be focusing on 2017.

Pure conjecture!

I love Pre Season Speculation
https://twitter.com/andrewbensonf1/stat ... 2364314624

Thunders wrote:I love Pre Season Speculation

https://twitter.com/andrewbensonf1/stat ... 2364314624

This'd be impressive if it's gonna be true. But 223bhp more is pretty hard to believe.

223 bhp is just a headline number. It's the worst case deficit, derived from end of straight power when the Honda unit basically runs without MGU-K while the others do. They say the actual difference in power was 80 bhp to Mercedes when both where deploying via the MGU-K, and that 60 bhp has been gained over the winter. Thus the 2016 Honda should be 20 bhp down on the 2015 Mercedes PU, according to the article.

Mercedes obviously will make advances of their own though. But the biggest thing is Honda will have MGU-K deployment for a longer duration.

Does anyone remeber that BBC article where they turn 1BHP into deficit time on a avg F1 track?
Would be interesting to see where that comes whit this 223 hp.

It's funny how nothing changes with regards to the media. I remember when I was still with Honda and Toyota Racing all the press we received, both good and bad. So much speculation and we used to wonder where did all this misinformation come from??

I'm sure many but not all answers will be revealed at next month's testing. Both McLaren and Honda seem very optimistic, much more than last year, (at least in Sakura) so I hope that is a sign of good things for 2016. We are know the problems and issues that need to be fixed. The question is how well did they address these issues. Both parties seem to think very well. I am curious to see how much rake the chassis has with PP's design and how much energy the MGU-H can extract from the turbo. At this point I am confident their ICE is just as good as any of their competition if not better.

the 223 number is 1000% wrong......2015 honda PU running some % of ers power .....no way 0 power for ers......the article says 163 from ers for 2016 .....and sounds like 163 for 2016 engine from 0 for 2015...and that is not true....the good news is sounds like they solve the problems on that area....and find something more on ICE.....

Wazari wrote:It's funny how nothing changes with regards to the media. I remember when I was still with Honda and Toyota Racing all the press we received, both good and bad. So much speculation and we used to wonder where did all this misinformation come from??

I'm sure many but not all answers will be revealed at next month's testing. Both McLaren and Honda seem very optimistic, much more than last year, (at least in Sakura) so I hope that is a sign of good things for 2016. We are know the problems and issues that need to be fixed. The question is how well did they address these issues. Both parties seem to think very well. I am curious to see how much rake the chassis has with PP's design and how much energy the MGU-H can extract from the turbo. At this point I am confident their ICE is just as good as any of their competition if not better.

This last part about ICE is your opinion or did you "understand" that?

bauc wrote:

diffuser wrote:For what it's worth ... http://www.omnicorse.it/magazine/73793/ ... crash-test

omnicourse are saying (in the same breath that the Mp4-31 passed the crashed test) that the new PU isn't thrilling on the bench tests.

Which reminds me what I dislike most about F1 reporting. It tends to use wording that shocks but really say nothing.

" the focus of the new chief designer Japanese would be aimed at 2017, in the knowledge that you will not close the gap power with the Mercedes, although significant improvements are expected before the season starts in Melbourne."

I think their choice of term "chiudere il gap" is really poor. Last year, I'm just throwing a number out there, the Honda PU had 80% of the ability of the Merc PU. I expect a huge improvement this year (to about 95%) . I don't think anybody out there expects the Honda PU to match Merc at the beginning of this year.

OT -
Omnicourse staff still think this is the ''cold war'' era between Mclaren & Ferrari and they always give pessimistic opinions for Mclaren.

It's not about cold war, they are just plain liar, it's a site that should be banned on this forum.

Joseki wrote: It's not about cold war, they are just plain liar, it's a site that should be banned on this forum.

I had a better idea:

The F1 news FUD topic!
http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23807

GoranF1 wrote: This last part about ICE is your opinion or did you "understand" that?

Both

Wazari wrote:It's funny how nothing changes with regards to the media. I remember when I was still with Honda and Toyota Racing all the press we received, both good and bad. So much speculation and we used to wonder where did all this misinformation come from??

I can't find it now, but I recall Rubens Barrichello saying that in all the times his salary was reported in the press, not once was the number correct.

Now British Sky confirming the news, and saying Spanish source is credible.

http://www.skysports.com/f1/live-blog/1 ... sip-column

Sky saying that AS is credible?? . Wierd

F1NAC wrote:Sky saying that AS is credible?? . Wierd

Well sky's thread is called F1 Gossip Column but I hope the report is indeed true... [-o<