Will McLaren survive their Honda contract?
Discussion
Studio117 said:
Honda made underpowered engines in the v8 era.
What made anyone think a clean sheet design with all the extra electronics would be any better?
Going back all the way to the original Mac/Honda partnership. They were most successful with the turbo engine, which WAS a great engine which went through a very painful gestation period in the back of a Williams. They then sorted the engine, Williams mopped up and then Ron pinched Honda. Once the cars went over to 3.5l Atmo engines, the Honda motor was only ever good, not great. Maclaren were producing good cars for 89'90 Honda built a big old V12, which was thirsty and heavey, at this point Williams were using Judd, then Renault. once the reggie started to get the V10 right, Williams got Newey on board and the willimas Renault was the car to beat. Honda even totally scrapped the V12 for a V10 as they saw the benefits that Renault were getting from that configuration. But their V10 was reported to be inferior to the Reggie, Senna was quite vocal about the car/engine issues. He scraped the championship in '91, mostly through Williams dropping the ball to much and Nige making a few errors. In my view the mythical mac /Honda partnership was as much down to other teams misfortunes as maclaren and Hondas brilliance. What made anyone think a clean sheet design with all the extra electronics would be any better?
27 years has passed and both teams have picked up where they left off, both producing sub par parts of the car, promising the earth to each other.
ClarkPB said:
jammy_basturd said:
Can't imagine the tech they supply to the other teams brings them that much revenue in relatives terms?
Either way, they're clearly not struggling for cash - one look around the MTC will make that very clear!Regarding the MTC... I don't think that is necessarily a good barometer of their current financial situation IMO. Not to challenge your view, simply that it needs to be remembered it was built when the company and the F1 team were dripping cash. Coming off the back of early 90's success they had oodles of regular tobacco and other sponsorship income, a competitive works engine supplied from a company that bought into the team for a very significant sum of money and cars that if not regularly winning, were challenging for wins most weekends. Feeding the income further.
Mclaren are the Williams of this decade. Maybe Williams headquarters were never on the scale of the MTC, but they are a team for whom the owners ended up selling significant personal assets and business properties to keep the team in business. A team, which after their highly successful works engine supplier ended the contract, began another works engine partnership that was publicly fractious when expectations weren't met and ended in an acrimonious split. Which put Williams into a self feeding downward spiral of customer engines, slipping down the grid, diminishing development budget, loss of title sponsorship and the owners downsizing having to sell assets just to survive in the wilderness at the tail end of the grid.
Mclaren are on the same path, into the second works engine partnership and a relationship that is fraying faster than the BMW-Williams did. Cars that can't finish a race but critically are slow too, no title sponsor for the second year running as well as distinct lack of smaller sponsors too. Martin Whitmarsh was telling the personnel that they were on the verge of signing a title sponsor midway through his last season, let alone Ron saying it now too (and that is from the mouth of someone to whom Whitmarsh stated this I should say).
The MTC could yet turn into either 1) a millstone around their neck that costs them more money to run than they have income 2) a valuable asset that they can re-mortgage and generate budget to keep the company/ F1 team afloat or 3) Following two have to sell a big chunk of the company to pay off the mortgage and stop the repossession of the MTC! An extreme scenario, but a realistic one and what the MTC is an indicator of rather than financial good health. IMO, I must stress (doom and gloom mode and all that!!).
PW said:
RGambo said:
Maclaren
It is curious to me how people seem to struggle with that name.Never really see any other teams mis-spelled so frequently.
Maybe they should have a big "McLaren" logo on the side of the car whilst they're waiting for a title-sponsor.
As it currently stands you can change any number of engine parts over the weekend and you can't go any further back on the grid than the very back, hence McLaren changed two complete power units in Belguim.
Given McLaren are qualifying near the back anyway it begs the question why don't they just wind everything up to max and turn the engine into a one race special like the old days.
Not really in the spirit of the rules but a fast car starting from the back has more chance of grabbing some points than the current slow one wobbling about only ahead of Marussia.
Given McLaren are qualifying near the back anyway it begs the question why don't they just wind everything up to max and turn the engine into a one race special like the old days.
Not really in the spirit of the rules but a fast car starting from the back has more chance of grabbing some points than the current slow one wobbling about only ahead of Marussia.
But they've also been telling the press that they'll have a title sponsor "soon" and on a number of occasions, bigged up performance upgrades, made noises about teams like Ferrari whom they expect to compete with on a weekend, only to be absolutely no more reliable or quicker.
If I were in charge of a team with cars so slow, I definitely wouldn't be telling the press that the engines were turned up to the max either (even if they were)!
If I were in charge of a team with cars so slow, I definitely wouldn't be telling the press that the engines were turned up to the max either (even if they were)!
RGambo said:
Going back all the way to the original Mac/Honda partnership. They were most successful with the turbo engine, which WAS a great engine which went through a very painful gestation period in the back of a Williams. They then sorted the engine, Williams mopped up and then Ron pinched Honda. Once the cars went over to 3.5l Atmo engines, the Honda motor was only ever good, not great. Maclaren were producing good cars for 89'90 Honda built a big old V12, which was thirsty and heavey, at this point Williams were using Judd, then Renault. once the reggie started to get the V10 right, Williams got Newey on board and the willimas Renault was the car to beat. Honda even totally scrapped the V12 for a V10 as they saw the benefits that Renault were getting from that configuration. But their V10 was reported to be inferior to the Reggie, Senna was quite vocal about the car/engine issues. He scraped the championship in '91, mostly through Williams dropping the ball to much and Nige making a few errors. In my view the mythical mac /Honda partnership was as much down to other teams misfortunes as maclaren and Hondas brilliance.
27 years has passed and both teams have picked up where they left off, both producing sub par parts of the car, promising the earth to each other.
Where do you get this version of revisionist history from?27 years has passed and both teams have picked up where they left off, both producing sub par parts of the car, promising the earth to each other.
McLaren Honda followed the turbo MP4/4, with the V10 MP4/5 and MP4/5B
They won back to back constructor and driver championships with it in 89 and 90, so not too shabby then?
They followed in 91 with a V12 in an effort to gain more power, both Burger and Senna considered it underpowered compared with the V10. In that they felt the gains were not justified by the trade off in weight and fuel consumption, Senna in particular rode Honda throughout the season for more power.
Again they won both championships.
The reason Williams were hounding them (beating them when reliability allowed) particularly through the second half of the season was the overall package was simply much more advanced. It was an Adrian Newey masterpiece, with a paddle-shift semi auto box, hugely more advanced aero and active ride (for legal reasons called reactive ride).
jammy_basturd said:
But they've also been telling the press that they'll have a title sponsor "soon" and on a number of occasions, bigged up performance upgrades, made noises about teams like Ferrari whom they expect to compete with on a weekend, only to be absolutely no more reliable or quicker.
If I were in charge of a team with cars so slow, I definitely wouldn't be telling the press that the engines were turned up to the max either (even if they were)!
The whole thing seems like a massive PR disaster. It seemed pretty clear after winter testing that 2014 was inevitably going to be a struggle, (as it would be for Red Bull) yet they seem remarkably over-optimistic at every opportunity.If I were in charge of a team with cars so slow, I definitely wouldn't be telling the press that the engines were turned up to the max either (even if they were)!
I am sure they would garner more sympathy if they openly acknowledged that this was not what had been promised to Alonso. Button has only now downgraded his expectations from a race win, to a podium. This just seems fanciful right now. We would laugh if Manor kept insisting that they will have a good haul of points by the end of the season. They are realists, as are Sauber, Torro Rosso, Lotus and Force India.
It has been suggested before that the MTC has been loaded with folks who like to say YES to Ron. If you are in a hole then the next smart move has to be STOP DIGGING.
So the engine proves not to be as fast as a Ferrari, so now Honda have a pop at McLaren.
http://www.inautonews.com/mclaren-not-best-car-on-...
http://www.inautonews.com/mclaren-not-best-car-on-...
rdjohn said:
So the engine proves not to be as fast as a Ferrari, so now Honda have a pop at McLaren.
http://www.inautonews.com/mclaren-not-best-car-on-...
Looks like a valid "pop" based on those quotes from Boullier!http://www.inautonews.com/mclaren-not-best-car-on-...
FeelingLucky said:
RGambo said:
Going back all the way to the original Mac/Honda partnership. They were most successful with the turbo engine, which WAS a great engine which went through a very painful gestation period in the back of a Williams. They then sorted the engine, Williams mopped up and then Ron pinched Honda. Once the cars went over to 3.5l Atmo engines, the Honda motor was only ever good, not great. Maclaren were producing good cars for 89'90 Honda built a big old V12, which was thirsty and heavey, at this point Williams were using Judd, then Renault. once the reggie started to get the V10 right, Williams got Newey on board and the willimas Renault was the car to beat. Honda even totally scrapped the V12 for a V10 as they saw the benefits that Renault were getting from that configuration. But their V10 was reported to be inferior to the Reggie, Senna was quite vocal about the car/engine issues. He scraped the championship in '91, mostly through Williams dropping the ball to much and Nige making a few errors. In my view the mythical mac /Honda partnership was as much down to other teams misfortunes as maclaren and Hondas brilliance.
27 years has passed and both teams have picked up where they left off, both producing sub par parts of the car, promising the earth to each other.
Where do you get this version of revisionist history from?27 years has passed and both teams have picked up where they left off, both producing sub par parts of the car, promising the earth to each other.
McLaren Honda followed the turbo MP4/4, with the V10 MP4/5 and MP4/5B
They won back to back constructor and driver championships with it in 89 and 90, so not too shabby then?
They followed in 91 with a V12 in an effort to gain more power, both Burger and Senna considered it underpowered compared with the V10. In that they felt the gains were not justified by the trade off in weight and fuel consumption, Senna in particular rode Honda throughout the season for more power.
Again they won both championships.
The reason Williams were hounding them (beating them when reliability allowed) particularly through the second half of the season was the overall package was simply much more advanced. It was an Adrian Newey masterpiece, with a paddle-shift semi auto box, hugely more advanced aero and active ride (for legal reasons called reactive ride).
. I still maintain that McLaren were able to dominate so quickly with Honda because the legwork on the Honda turbo motor was done with Williams. They went through similar pain to McLaren currently are. The V10-12 I just got the wrong way around 
I do remember the V12 being a bit of a let down on the power and weight front. Then Honda pulled out leaving McLaren in the lurch. The William FW14, was a great car, but the Renault engine was also from memory (I shouldn't rely on that ) by then better than the Honda as well, so Mc/Honda were under the cosh from both sides, as you said the Williams was much more advanced, but I suppose, that's my point, for all the talk, Both companies parted after delivering poor or weak parts of the package. They have re-united and both have produced average/poor parts of the package. 
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff