Will McLaren survive their Honda contract?

[Vaud]

Or some easy ones - no engine changes / parts / testing limits for the lowest 25% percent of constructors in the points table? More tyre freedom for them as well.

Maybe a tiny tax from the top teams - few hundred thousand each - to pay for the testing sessions.

Still like the idea of points for quali and/or fastest lap. Encourage the smaller teams to throw in some radical strategies and gain some valuable points for end of season prize money.

[Scuffers]

all comes back to stupid engine regs again...

the regs are way too prescriptive, leading to the most expensive developments in racing history and add nothing to the sport.

At some point that's rapidly approaching, F1 will realise that we are running out of teams, money and audience , and that high-minded green credentials are meaningless if you have just killed off the sport.

F1 simply cannot go on with $30M engine contracts and development budgets the size they are, we will be lucky to have 2 engine makers left by next year at this rate, this is simply unsustainable.

Somebody needs to bite the bullet and junk these power units, set a timetable, then write some engine rags that are simple and open, get them out early enough for potential builders to make good decisions on them, set limits on how much they can charge teams for them etc, job done.

I can honestly see next year with even less cars on the grid than we have now.

[Vaud]

Scuffers said:

I can honestly see next year with even less cars on the grid than we have now.

Who will exit? Manor are well funded by some accounts with a solid business plan.
Lotus look likely to be bought.
Top teams all secure.

I guess that leaves Sauber and Force India?

[Scuffers]

Vaud said:

Scuffers said:

I can honestly see next year with even less cars on the grid than we have now.

Who will exit? Manor are well funded by some accounts with a solid business plan.
Lotus look likely to be bought.
Top teams all secure.

I guess that leaves Sauber and Force India?

so you think Toro Rosso are 100% secure? (and let's not ignore the noises from Red Bull).

Way I see it, by this time next year we will be lucky to still have 10 teams/20 cars.

Something needs to give, I am even starting to think McLaren are in serious trouble at this rate.

[Vaud]

Scuffers said:

so you think Toro Rosso are 100% secure? (and let's not ignore the noises from Red Bull).

Way I see it, by this time next year we will be lucky to still have 10 teams/20 cars.

Something needs to give, I am even starting to think McLaren are in serious trouble at this rate.

Yes - I think so. Worst case is Ferrari buy them as a "B" team.

I'm worried about McLaren but they still seem to be in a better place than Williams were a few years ago. Plenty of asset and brand to leverage.

[aeropilot]

Vaud said:

Scuffers said:

so you think Toro Rosso are 100% secure? (and let's not ignore the noises from Red Bull).

Way I see it, by this time next year we will be lucky to still have 10 teams/20 cars.

Something needs to give, I am even starting to think McLaren are in serious trouble at this rate.

Yes - I think so. Worst case is Ferrari buy them as a "B" team.

Why would they......?
The Haas F1 team is already as close to being a Ferrari 'B' Team as you are likely to get.

[revrange]

Scuffers said:

so you think Toro Rosso are 100% secure? (and let's not ignore the noises from Red Bull).

Way I see it, by this time next year we will be lucky to still have 10 teams/20 cars.

Something needs to give, I am even starting to think McLaren are in serious trouble at this rate.

I think they will be ok, the backers have plenty of cash, but F1 can burn cash for fun. So if this carries on next year then 2017 could look learn, especially as 2017 cars will require extra investment with reg changes

[McAndy]

New BBC article on their woes here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/34208407

[Vaud]

aeropilot said:

Why would they......?
The Haas F1 team is already as close to being a Ferrari 'B' Team as you are likely to get.

I don't think they would want to - but a worst case scenario - in exchange for some Bernie deal - i.e. even more cash - and brand them Maserati, etc.

[Scuffers]

McAndy said:

New BBC article on their woes here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/34208407

whoever writes this stuff has a fundamental lack of understanding for how all this works.

BBC said:

Beyond the hybrid system's shortcomings, Honda's internal combustion engine (ICE) is also lacking compared to the best units from Mercedes and Ferrari.
By how much, however, not all agree.
Mercedes is said to have a significant advantage, just on the ICE, of 10-15bhp over Ferrari and as much as 70bhp over Renault.
Arai has said he believes Honda's ICE is in the region of 20-25bhp more powerful than Renault's. Other engineers say that the two are very close, that Honda was perhaps marginally ahead before an upgrade in July moved Renault in front.
Adding the 700bhp Mercedes is reputed to develop from its ICE, to the regulated 160bhp of MGU-K power and the extra 'free' electrical energy from the MGU-H of as much as 30-40bhp, gives a total Mercedes power output in the region of 890-900bhp.

it does not work like that, ignoring the numbers, the power you recover from the MGU-H is not additional to the power the MGU-K can supply to the powertrain.

so their adding up of 700 (IC) + 160 (MGU-K) + 30-40 (MGU-H) = 890-900 is plain wrong, the max is 700 + 160, what they get from the MGU-H is irrelevant to this figure, it's only relevant to how long they can deploy the MGU-K for.

the regs state they can only 'recover' 2Mj/lap from the MGU-K (to the ES) and only deploy 4Mj/Lap from the ES, anything they can recover from the MGU-H is a bonus to this, so assuming they use the full 2Mj per lap that's some 16.667 seconds of 160Hp from the MGU-K per lap, however, if they can then recover say 40Hp from the MGU-H whilst on full throttle, that's another 7.5 seconds of 160Hp MGU-K power per 30 sec's full-throttle MGU-H recovery.

(I think they 30-40 Hp figure is also somewhat adrift, I have been lead to believe it's somewhat higher than this for the Merc engine)

Now, somewhere like Monza, the time on WOT is lot longer than 30 sec's a lap, so realistically, even on their guesstimates, you can almost double the 2Mj per lap available for the MGU-K, and that's going to make a significant difference to the overall performance.

I think this is where the Merc PU is so much ahead of the others, the IC engine is not the difference, it's the efficiency of their hybrid integration and energy recovery.

If you remember last year when Nico (and Lewis) lost their MGU-K brake energy recovery, they still had sufficient recovery from the MGU-H to keep almost to the same lap pace, even with compromised braking, so just how much energy are they pulling off the MGU-H?

I suspect in real running conditions, they have the energy to run the MGU-K at it's full 160Hp just about all the time (they need it).

[VolvoT5]

McAndy said:

New BBC article on their woes here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/34208407

I find the whole article a bit fishy.... but then I'm highly sceptical of anything Benson writes.

He seems to suggest the Mclaren chassis is as good as Ferrari which I find hard to believe. To suggest Honda is 80hp down on the ICE and 160bhp down from the hybrid unit for much of the lap seems a bit bonkers to me as well.

But if you believe what he writes about Honda it does raise a lot of questions about their chosen design philosophy as it seems they compromised power output for a 'compact' engine and aerodynamics.......... which is basically the same mistake Ferrari made.

[revrange]

Scuffers said:

it does not work like that, ignoring the numbers, the power you recover from the MGU-H is not additional to the power the MGU-K can supply to the powertrain.

so their adding up of 700 (IC) + 160 (MGU-K) + 30-40 (MGU-H) = 890-900 is plain wrong, the max is 700 + 160, what they get from the MGU-H is irrelevant to this figure, it's only relevant to how long they can deploy the MGU-K for.

the regs state they can only 'recover' 2Mj/lap from the MGU-K (to the ES) and only deploy 4Mj/Lap from the ES, anything they can recover from the MGU-H is a bonus to this, so assuming they use the full 2Mj per lap that's some 16.667 seconds of 160Hp from the MGU-K per lap, however, if they can then recover say 40Hp from the MGU-H whilst on full throttle, that's another 7.5 seconds of 160Hp MGU-K power per 30 sec's full-throttle MGU-H recovery.

(I think they 30-40 Hp figure is also somewhat adrift, I have been lead to believe it's somewhat higher than this for the Merc engine)

Now, somewhere like Monza, the time on WOT is lot longer than 30 sec's a lap, so realistically, even on their guesstimates, you can almost double the 2Mj per lap available for the MGU-K, and that's going to make a significant difference to the overall performance.

I think this is where the Merc PU is so much ahead of the others, the IC engine is not the difference, it's the efficiency of their hybrid integration and energy recovery.

If you remember last year when Nico (and Lewis) lost their MGU-K brake energy recovery, they still had sufficient recovery from the MGU-H to keep almost to the same lap pace, even with compromised braking, so just how much energy are they pulling off the MGU-H?

I suspect in real running conditions, they have the energy to run the MGU-K at it's full 160Hp just about all the time (they need it).

Indeed it is where Merc is miles ahead. its also the control of all those systems into corners in relation to chassis/aero where it works very well.

The quality of BBC tech side is awful these days, Benson buys into mclarens our chassis is second best out there BS. when pushed on twitter to back up his BHP claims and chassis he hides behind, paddock engineers told me, well paddock engineers, hmm those being mclaren ones, pushing out the good PR? The only think in F1 that doesnt lie is the stopwatch and that isn't great for the boys and girls from Woking at the mo

[longblackcoat]

revrange said:

Indeed it is where Merc is miles ahead. its also the control of all those systems into corners in relation to chassis/aero where it works very well.

The quality of BBC tech side is awful these days, Benson buys into mclarens our chassis is second best out there BS. when pushed on twitter to back up his BHP claims and chassis he hides behind, paddock engineers told me, well paddock engineers, hmm those being mclaren ones, pushing out the good PR? The only think in F1 that doesnt lie is the stopwatch and that isn't great for the boys and girls from Woking at the mo

Agreed on the lack of BBC technical input - I miss Gary Anderson; sadly he polarised opinion, being a massive hit with the geeks, but a complete turnoff for the casual viewer.

[ajprice]

Magnussen would like to drive a Haas next year http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/120809

Will McLaren's drivers survive the Honda contract?

[weyland yutani]

The article says Haas wants an experienced driver to partner their Ferrari driver (Gutierrez) - that should rule Kmag out then with just one season under his belt

[glazbagun]

Are there better options than KMAG with more experience than him that'll take as low a salary? How much are Sainz and Verstappen on? (though I can't see them wanting to shift just yet). I can't imagine how satisfying it would be to pass Alonso in a Haas.

Edited by glazbagun on Tuesday 15th September 06:22

[revrange]

This is the best i have seen on the Honda engine from SomersF1

http://www.somersf1.co.uk/2015/09/mclaren-hondas-w...

[Scuffers]

revrange said:

This is the best i have seen on the Honda engine from SomersF1

http://www.somersf1.co.uk/2015/09/mclaren-hondas-w...

that's the best, most informative bit I have seen on engines anywhere,

finally, we have somebody that actually understand what they are talking about and can put it across in a clear non-hyped up way.

[revrange]

Scuffers said:

that's the best, most informative bit I have seen on engines anywhere,

finally, we have somebody that actually understand what they are talking about and can put it across in a clear non-hyped up way.

Indeed, compare it to Sky/BBC coverage, they are a joke.

[rdjohn]

His piece on the Mercedes / Pirrelli / FIA fracas at Monza also makes interesting reading.