F1technical.net

godlameroso wrote:It's typical Honda work ethos, it's actually very admirable, and going down their path is very unique. No one else has the willingess to fail miserably in order to learn deeply and tremendously, then pick themselves up dust themselves off and try again with even more determination. Look at all their engine programs, they never started at the very top, they systematically improved. Their LMP2 engine was a dud the first season, and now is a much better engine than the Nissan, or arguably any other. When they first came into F1 they were also complete duds only to go on and dominate, why should now be any different?

Last time they came into F1 they were dud, and remained until they left. Not saying that will happen, but until their engineers learn everything there needs to be learnes about new PUs, others may very well be on finish line.

I don't understand where this 50 HP gap figure between Mercedes and Honda's ICE is derived from? Everything I've heard is that this is not the case when comparing at race (fuel flow limit) trim. I think Honda would have been happy if their ERS was 50% of Mercedes per lap.

ferkan wrote:

godlameroso wrote:It's typical Honda work ethos, it's actually very admirable, and going down their path is very unique. No one else has the willingess to fail miserably in order to learn deeply and tremendously, then pick themselves up dust themselves off and try again with even more determination. Look at all their engine programs, they never started at the very top, they systematically improved. Their LMP2 engine was a dud the first season, and now is a much better engine than the Nissan, or arguably any other. When they first came into F1 they were also complete duds only to go on and dominate, why should now be any different?

Last time they came into F1 they were dud, and remained until they left. Not saying that will happen, but until their engineers learn everything there needs to be learnes about new PUs, others may very well be on finish line.

Technically they would have won the championship had they stayed in 09, but that's besides the case.

godlameroso wrote:

ferkan wrote:

godlameroso wrote:It's typical Honda work ethos, it's actually very admirable, and going down their path is very unique. No one else has the willingess to fail miserably in order to learn deeply and tremendously, then pick themselves up dust themselves off and try again with even more determination. Look at all their engine programs, they never started at the very top, they systematically improved. Their LMP2 engine was a dud the first season, and now is a much better engine than the Nissan, or arguably any other. When they first came into F1 they were also complete duds only to go on and dominate, why should now be any different?

Last time they came into F1 they were dud, and remained until they left. Not saying that will happen, but until their engineers learn everything there needs to be learnes about new PUs, others may very well be on finish line.

Technically they would have won the championship had they stayed in 09, but that's besides the case.

Yea, but maybe not with Honda engine.

Well the '08 Honda engine was fairly strong, wasn't it?

Blaze1 wrote:

ringo wrote:What we should note is that the Self sustaining power from a good MGUH can be the same as the 160hp limit to the MGUK.
That's the big stick that mercedes could be walking around with.
nonetheless these power discussions are quite interesting, and i've learned of many methods to increase engine power beyond what we think is possible. Saying that i don't think it's far fetched if one ICE at the start of the engine formula was as much as 100hp down. There are just too many ways to extract gobs of power with a change in combustion philosophy.

Honda are definitely playing catch up with combustion philosophy, but mostly their Heat recovery and air management.

That would make the ES pretty much redundant. A small battery simply to spin up the turbo is all that would be required, however I think there is a minimum weight for the ES, so no weight saving benefits, lower c.g perhaps.

You still need the ES for harvesting kinetic energy. When re-used this energy is "free" ie does not draw from the 100 kg race fuel limit.

When some or all of the MGUK power is coming from the ES, the ICE can be tuned to produce more crankshaft power.

Brian Coat wrote:Well the '08 Honda engine was fairly strong, wasn't it?

Iirc Jensen said it had poor driveability.

djos wrote:

Brian Coat wrote:Well the '08 Honda engine was fairly strong, wasn't it?

Iirc Jensen said it had poor driveability.

And around 60bhp down on the replacement Merc' unit according to people at Brackley.

It was accepted that there was very little difference in absolute engine performance back then. In 2009 there was an estimated 2.5% difference between the best and the worst engines, Merc being the top of the pile with 755hp, and I'm not aware that 2008 was really any different: http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2009/11/a ... e-in-2009/

Racecar engineering did an article about Honda when they released the tech details of the old 2008 engine ahead of their debut in 2015. Described as producing 747hp: http://www.racecar-engineering.com/arti ... -revealed/

Driveability and fuel consumption aside (I've no idea how they compared) it's likely the different engine made relatively little difference to the performance of the Brawn, in fact I imagine that the last minute changes to the chassis and the packaging to accommodate the Mercedes would have had a greater (and probably negative) effect on the overall performance.

Facts Only wrote:

djos wrote:

Brian Coat wrote:Well the '08 Honda engine was fairly strong, wasn't it?

Iirc Jensen said it had poor driveability.

And around 60bhp down on the replacement Merc' unit according to people at Brackley.

I heard different. The power wasn't an issue.

It was thirsty and vibratey though.

and running very hot

Mark Hughes
http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1/op ... -obsolete/

The turbine sits outside the V and Honda do not have a physical restriction as far as employing a physically bigger turbine is concerned.

As many on here have opined that the compressor need not be actually made bigger to make it more efficient. A redesigned compressor which can spin at higher rpm with desired efficiency is the way Honda have chosen to go going by Arai's recent quotes.

Too many people are coming up with speculative articles without having any inside knowledge of what is going on in Sakura.

Honda have already got one half of it bang on. Their ICE is working well and the tokens were well spent during last season. I might be wrong but i feel Honda will go for a ''physically'' bigger turbine and a redesigned compressor. Also the MGU-H will receive a thorough attention as well.

Biggest isn't most efficient, most efficient is turbine with lowest back pressure possible, with compressor that makes the highest needed boost pressure at lowest rpm over widest margin possible, only then can you maximize mgu-h harvesting. If you get this right you can have an extra 160hp for the whole race distance.

If max mgu-h speed is 125,000 rpm, and your turbo is making max boost between 45,000 and 60,000 rpm, and you overdrive the mgu-h to it's max speed, you have the potential to generate much more electricity than if your turbo makes max boost at 110-135k rpm. It's not hard to see how.

So how do you shift a turbine's most efficient RPM from 110-135k to 45-60k as you are saying?