Will McLaren survive their Honda contract?
Discussion
007 VXR said:
Merc have said they will leave if F1 went back to V8s as
they have no relieves to the future.
So this new tech must mean alot to Merc for the future mainstream cars. ?
It's certainly much easier to draw advertising links but I don't seriously believe Mercedes see there being significant technological pay-back for their road cars. they have no relieves to the future.
So this new tech must mean alot to Merc for the future mainstream cars. ?
- **BREAKING NEWS****
You don't say!
http://en.f1i.com/news/24298-honda-identifies-powe...
Edited by Doink on Tuesday 8th September 20:52
Scuffers said:
Muzzer79 said:
Developing an engine is still cheaper (and more relevant for a manufacturer) than running a team.
I believe that manufacturers (with the exception of Renault) have looked at the teams run in the 2000's by Toyota, BMW and Honda and decided that owning an entire team is a billion-dollar moneypit with the potential for zero return.
By making an engine, if successful, your technology is relevant to road cars and gets good publicity as a key component of a championship winning car.
By tying in closely to an existing team, like Honda have done with McLaren, you get almost as much publicity as winning with your own team, for half the cost.
I read on Joe Saward's blog that VW are spending $37m a day on R&D. Toyota spend £25m a day
$300m on an engine programme for F1 is chicken feed, if they want to get in to it, so money is not a problem.
The problem is that if your engine isn't good enough, the rules don't allow you to develop it to make it win. This is the problem Honda and Renault are facing.
If they solve the testing/development issue, the engines will improve and we will have a proper championship battle on.
Hogg-wash.I believe that manufacturers (with the exception of Renault) have looked at the teams run in the 2000's by Toyota, BMW and Honda and decided that owning an entire team is a billion-dollar moneypit with the potential for zero return.
By making an engine, if successful, your technology is relevant to road cars and gets good publicity as a key component of a championship winning car.
By tying in closely to an existing team, like Honda have done with McLaren, you get almost as much publicity as winning with your own team, for half the cost.
I read on Joe Saward's blog that VW are spending $37m a day on R&D. Toyota spend £25m a day
$300m on an engine programme for F1 is chicken feed, if they want to get in to it, so money is not a problem.
The problem is that if your engine isn't good enough, the rules don't allow you to develop it to make it win. This is the problem Honda and Renault are facing.
If they solve the testing/development issue, the engines will improve and we will have a proper championship battle on.
for starters, it costs a s
t load more than $300M, try 3 times that amount and rising.As for the team costs you really having a laugh now, just what do you think Sauber/Manor/Hass annual budgets are?
as for Honda, honestly? I would put good money on them bailing out as soon as they can, the negative publicity alone is costing them big time, especially in the US.
With respect to Joe, he's talking crap, yes the big car companies spend billions on R&D but that's on real stuff that they then use in mass produced cars that sell and make them profits to pay back the R&D, NOTHING of these F1 PU's will ever be used in road cars (that's not already being used!)
Anybody that believe this crap needs to get a reality check.
They're not made of unicorn bone you know.....
Not sure what you're driving at regarding team budgets. I was making the point that Toyota in particular spent $1bn on their F1 programme over several years for squat-all
Honda won't bail out now. Too much face lost.
They'll replace Arai instead
The tech is relevant to road cars. Not directly maybe, but it is relevant much like the gearboxes, suspension, etc are.
Both Mercedes and Renault have said they're out if they revert back to 20th century V8's.
Great - a grid filled with Cosworth and Judd engines, with Ferrari plodding along.
Times change - there's nothing wrong with the engine format, it just needs to be allowed to develop.
Muzzer79 said:
Times change - there's nothing wrong with the engine format, it just needs to be allowed to develop.
I see no real problem with the engine format, the issue is that if you foul it up you have no ability to correct it. Part of the problem for Honda is that they did not put the power unit in any car to test it. They could have chucked in a different class of car to test it.What would make more sense would be for the LMP1 cars and F1 cars to have the same engine regs. That would increase availability of engines and reduce the unit cost.
Doink said:
****BREAKING NEWS****
Honda have identifies the reason they're so slow, apparently it's the deployment!
You don't say!
http://en.f1i.com/news/24298-honda-identifies-powe...
^ With this level of insight and leadership I wouldn't be all that surprised if Haas join the grid next year and are immediately more competitive than McLaren. Honda have identifies the reason they're so slow, apparently it's the deployment!
You don't say!
http://en.f1i.com/news/24298-honda-identifies-powe...
HarryFlatters said:
Chrisgr31 said:
What would make more sense would be for the LMP1 cars and F1 cars to have the same engine regs. That would increase availability of engines and reduce the unit cost.
Hey, Mosely's back 
Please leave LMP1/ sports cars out of F1's mess.
Chrisgr31 said:
Muzzer79 said:
Times change - there's nothing wrong with the engine format, it just needs to be allowed to develop.
I see no real problem with the engine format, the issue is that if you foul it up you have no ability to correct it. Part of the problem for Honda is that they did not put the power unit in any car to test it. They could have chucked in a different class of car to test it.What would make more sense would be for the LMP1 cars and F1 cars to have the same engine regs. That would increase availability of engines and reduce the unit cost.
LMP1 and F1 cars sharing regs however doesn't make sense to me. An engine designed to run for 24hours straight isn't the same as an engine designed to run for a max of 3 hours at a time.
Muzzer79 said:
Show me a link that says that anyone has spent nearly a billion dollars developing these hybrid engines.
They're not made of unicorn bone you know.....
Not sure what you're driving at regarding team budgets. I was making the point that Toyota in particular spent $1bn on their F1 programme over several years for squat-all
Honda won't bail out now. Too much face lost.
They'll replace Arai instead
The tech is relevant to road cars. Not directly maybe, but it is relevant much like the gearboxes, suspension, etc are.
Both Mercedes and Renault have said they're out if they revert back to 20th century V8's.
Great - a grid filled with Cosworth and Judd engines, with Ferrari plodding along.
Times change - there's nothing wrong with the engine format, it just needs to be allowed to develop.
Agreed Arai will be gone once the season is over.They're not made of unicorn bone you know.....
Not sure what you're driving at regarding team budgets. I was making the point that Toyota in particular spent $1bn on their F1 programme over several years for squat-all
Honda won't bail out now. Too much face lost.
They'll replace Arai instead
The tech is relevant to road cars. Not directly maybe, but it is relevant much like the gearboxes, suspension, etc are.
Both Mercedes and Renault have said they're out if they revert back to 20th century V8's.
Great - a grid filled with Cosworth and Judd engines, with Ferrari plodding along.
Times change - there's nothing wrong with the engine format, it just needs to be allowed to develop.
No one has spent Billions on these engines, Merc have been spending approx £150m per season on engine for last few years. So Honda will now need to spend £250m for next two years to catch up.
I think actually the token system and freezing parts of engine for development can be good for F1. You can allow development but also limit cost. No one wants return to early 90s where F1 engine builders did spend £250m a year just to compete.
I don't mind the current formula from an engine side. I would introduce a min fuel level of 105 kgs so drivers need worry less about saving fuel. I make big changes chassis side though but the engines are fine and if sensible development is allowed actually manufactures will be pretty happy. As point out, much of the expense is written off as R&D and to what these companies spend its petty cash.
Back to Mclaren, its a mess. I don't believe their chassis is 0.3 slower than a merc or red bull, i would double that figure. Also can't blame those sponsors for jumping ship.
One point, if Dennis hadn't gone road car or asked for how the merc board were paying their half of the spygate fine, Mclaren would still be the works Merc team, with all the benefits that would have given them.
revrange said:
One point, if Dennis hadn't gone road car or asked for how the merc board were paying their half of the spygate fine, Mclaren would still be the works Merc team, with all the benefits that would have given them.
Well as they were 40% owned by Mercedes it probably wasn't an unreasonable question - as part owners they held some share of liability?Vaud said:
revrange said:
One point, if Dennis hadn't gone road car or asked for how the merc board were paying their half of the spygate fine, Mclaren would still be the works Merc team, with all the benefits that would have given them.
Well as they were 40% owned by Mercedes it probably wasn't an unreasonable question - as part owners they held some share of liability?Vaud said:
OK - I'd misremembered - I though they had taken a wider ownership, apologies.
Daimler did own 40% of McLaren but like most companies liability is limited. That is why companies are formed - to limit the liability of the owners. If it all goes pear-shaped you lose your investment but you don't then inherit the debts that the company couldn't pay.In recent years I don't think any road car maker on it's own has made a good job of F1 by themselves, the two business are too far apart. Where car makers have been successful (like Merc) is buying a racing outfit (Ilmor Engines) and branding it (Merc)
I genuinely can't see Honda working, by the time they get the engine OK for next yr, Merc and Ferrari will have made further steps.
I genuinely can't see Honda working, by the time they get the engine OK for next yr, Merc and Ferrari will have made further steps.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff