Will McLaren survive their Honda contract?
Discussion
suffolk009 said:
^^^ Oh yeah. Motorsport magazine have nailed the problem. Those magazine journos have clearly out-thought the combined engineering genius at Honda.
Guess they've got a magazine to fill, in the off season...
it;s a pretty basic point.Guess they've got a magazine to fill, in the off season...
Last year Honda went with an axial compressor (that will fit in the V), problem is that the regs limit you to a single stage compressor, and axial ones are simply not efficient as single stage, (ideally, 3+ works great).
this meant in practice, they had to run it at max RPM almost all the time, not only giving them zero headroom, but also sacrificing recovered energy to boost overall power output, thus they were too slow.
The article hints at the gulf they need to close, I have been told that Merc's 2015 engine was pulling some 120Kw from the turbo, that's ~160Hp over and above the engines output, meaning they could run the MGU-K full time at it's max output.
suffolk009 said:
^^^ Oh yeah. Motorsport magazine have nailed the problem. Those magazine journos have clearly out-thought the combined engineering genius at Honda.
Guess they've got a magazine to fill, in the off season...
Aren't they quoting people from Honda and Merc?Guess they've got a magazine to fill, in the off season...
It's not like they are completely guessing. Honda are keeping within the V of the engine, that configuration comes with drawbacks as they themselves acknowledge.
Not sure what your issue is.
My issue simply is that magazines cannot fully understand the design process.
I expect Honda have identified the inadequacies with the 2015 engine. I imagine they have considered the alternatives and made an informed decision about the design of the 2016 engine.
The article adds two and two together with the sole purpose of making 1200 words. The fact that it appears in Motorsport magazine doesn't raise it above the speculative twaddle that many bloggers pour out during the off-season.
I guess I'm mainly disappointed with the blogger-level journalism though.
I expect Honda have identified the inadequacies with the 2015 engine. I imagine they have considered the alternatives and made an informed decision about the design of the 2016 engine.
The article adds two and two together with the sole purpose of making 1200 words. The fact that it appears in Motorsport magazine doesn't raise it above the speculative twaddle that many bloggers pour out during the off-season.
I guess I'm mainly disappointed with the blogger-level journalism though.
worth re-reading what was said last year about it:
http://en.f1i.com/magazine/10369-hondas-radical-po...
http://en.f1i.com/magazine/10369-hondas-radical-po...
suffolk009 said:
My issue simply is that magazines cannot fully understand the design process.
I expect Honda have identified the inadequacies with the 2015 engine. I imagine they have considered the alternatives and made an informed decision about the design of the 2016 engine.
The article adds two and two together with the sole purpose of making 1200 words. The fact that it appears in Motorsport magazine doesn't raise it above the speculative twaddle that many bloggers pour out during the off-season.
I guess I'm mainly disappointed with the blogger-level journalism though.
Normally I'd agree, but there are quotes and discussion points from the engine developers at Honda and Mercedes. It's not a puff piece filled with speculation based on nothing, or "sources close to the teams" like many pieces. I expect Honda have identified the inadequacies with the 2015 engine. I imagine they have considered the alternatives and made an informed decision about the design of the 2016 engine.
The article adds two and two together with the sole purpose of making 1200 words. The fact that it appears in Motorsport magazine doesn't raise it above the speculative twaddle that many bloggers pour out during the off-season.
I guess I'm mainly disappointed with the blogger-level journalism though.
There's also the limits of science involved and if you have a grasp of how an engine and the KERS systems work you can interpret likely outcomes.
The point of the piece isn't that Honda are wrong, it's about if they can generate enough downforce, and therefore speed, using the size zero approach with the compromises on the location and size of the 'power unit'.
Only a few more weeks to find out!
CraigyMc said:
London424 said:
Only a few more weeks to find out!
12 days. The first test at Barcelona is on the 22nd Feburary.I assume there will only be live txt feeds from Sky, Autosport and the like. Will Sky be having a evening roundup show, anyone know?
suffolk009 said:
CraigyMc said:
London424 said:
Only a few more weeks to find out!
12 days. The first test at Barcelona is on the 22nd Feburary.I assume there will only be live txt feeds from Sky, Autosport and the like. Will Sky be having a evening roundup show, anyone know?
http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/24100/10144693/f1...
^^^ Thanks.
Can't wait to see Ted explaining something complicated with the aid of empty bottles, his phone, a packet of mints and a doughnut. Was it last year or the year before that Ted was illustrating some technical point in front of Pat Symmonds. Pat then said to Ted, "of course, at Williams, we don't use actual doughnuts".
Can't wait to see Ted explaining something complicated with the aid of empty bottles, his phone, a packet of mints and a doughnut. Was it last year or the year before that Ted was illustrating some technical point in front of Pat Symmonds. Pat then said to Ted, "of course, at Williams, we don't use actual doughnuts".
suffolk009 said:
CraigyMc said:
London424 said:
Only a few more weeks to find out!
12 days. The first test at Barcelona is on the 22nd Feburary.I assume there will only be live txt feeds from Sky, Autosport and the like. Will Sky be having a evening roundup show, anyone know?
Though with testing the only real insight is if the thing doesn't break down. Cards will be very close to vests.
London424 said:
Though with testing the only real insight is if the thing doesn't break down. Cards will be very close to vests.
If you used the F1 testing from winter 2015 you'd have predicted the top 3 cars accurately at the end of the year.The main surprises were McLaren (because they didn't manage many laps, people were still talking about them being competitive by the end of the season at the end of winter testing) and Force India, because they used a modified 2014 car for testing and the start of the year, and only introduced their proper 2015 car in Silverstone.
Testing predicted that Merc would hammer everyone, and that Ferrari made huge gains, and that Williams had a decent car. It predicted Renault's engine hampering RBR.
TBH I think Honda are stubborn to the point of being deluded....... they ought to have poached some talent from Mercedes or Ferrari if at all possible. Having said that Mclaren have become so cold and corporate lately (and they were not exactly warm and cuddly to start off with) that I almost hope they don't do well. I think the way they have treated their drivers has been shocking and Ron Dennis has to be the most unlikeable team boss ...... also stuck in the past trying to recreate success of the 80s and 90s in a totally different era.
I do hope Renault can up their game as a competitive Redbull and Lotus/Renault would only be a good thing in my view.
I do hope Renault can up their game as a competitive Redbull and Lotus/Renault would only be a good thing in my view.
CraigyMc said:
London424 said:
Though with testing the only real insight is if the thing doesn't break down. Cards will be very close to vests.
If you used the F1 testing from winter 2015 you'd have predicted the top 3 cars accurately at the end of the year.The main surprises were McLaren (because they didn't manage many laps, people were still talking about them being competitive by the end of the season at the end of winter testing) and Force India, because they used a modified 2014 car for testing and the start of the year, and only introduced their proper 2015 car in Silverstone.
Testing predicted that Merc would hammer everyone, and that Ferrari made huge gains, and that Williams had a decent car. It predicted Renault's engine hampering RBR.
I'm pretty sure Williams had a good testing and were being talked about as being challengers but ended up 3rd again.
Would anyone be surprised to see Merc - Ferrari - Williams to be the final order again this year?
London424 said:
To be fair it's not that difficult to have a stab at predicting the top 3 teams right now before a wheel has been turned.
I'm pretty sure Williams had a good testing and were being talked about as being challengers but ended up 3rd again.
Would anyone be surprised to see Merc - Ferrari - Williams to be the final order again this year?
I went to the 3rd day at Jerez last year and left with a gut feeling for the top 3 WDC and WCC. After Malaysia, I was convinced I was right. Applying a little more logic the top 6 WDC was also a fkairly obvious outcome.I'm pretty sure Williams had a good testing and were being talked about as being challengers but ended up 3rd again.
Would anyone be surprised to see Merc - Ferrari - Williams to be the final order again this year?
At the moment, I suspect RB will be 3rd this year, surely the TAG engine can't be as bad as last year. I think a further improvement from Ferrari will mean that Mercedes will have to back Lewis this year (Nico will be gone in 2017 to make way for Wehrlein) and so I think the drivers will be LH, SV, NR.
This may change radically after the first test, of course.
Isn't it strange how when anyone senior in F1 is asked about Honda they always say that Honda engines will be right up there this year.
Mercedes are just the latest to say this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/35525585
The way that learning curves work, the law of diminishing returns and the limitations of both the F1 rules and of physics mean that the capabilities of the 4 engines will converge very rapidly. There might be ongoing philosophical differences about torque curves, packaging etc. But broadly they will as alike as bananas in a bunch. It is really just a matter of when.
There could be some good betting opportunities here before the bookies catch on.
Mercedes are just the latest to say this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/35525585
The way that learning curves work, the law of diminishing returns and the limitations of both the F1 rules and of physics mean that the capabilities of the 4 engines will converge very rapidly. There might be ongoing philosophical differences about torque curves, packaging etc. But broadly they will as alike as bananas in a bunch. It is really just a matter of when.
There could be some good betting opportunities here before the bookies catch on.
Adam Ansel said:
The way that learning curves work, the law of diminishing returns and the limitations of both the F1 rules and of physics mean that the capabilities of the 4 engines will converge very rapidly. There might be ongoing philosophical differences about torque curves, packaging etc. But broadly they will as alike as bananas in a bunch. It is really just a matter of when.
I sort of agree but the risk is that ether could come a point where they are too far ahead to catch within the timeline of the formula agreement.v8 overall thermal efficiency - 29%
2014 units - 40%
current units - 47%
(all from motorsport magazine)
Very broad brush numbers, but the cost to move up each level is horrific. My worry is that it becomes Mercedes/Ferrari dominance with Renault and Honda at risk and not enough time to catch up?
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff