Will McLaren survive their Honda contract?
Discussion
“We are not good enough in power or aerodynamic and mechanical grip, so there are still many things to put in place to be competitive and win championships.”
In none PR speak - everything about the car is s
t. We know it, Mclaren know it, the drivers know it, frankly I'm surprised we're even still bothering..
In none PR speak - everything about the car is s
t. We know it, Mclaren know it, the drivers know it, frankly I'm surprised we're even still bothering..
rdjohn said:
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.
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.
Thing is that is what Red Bull are doing - saying they are rubbish because of Renault. Which is the better approach?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.
jammy_basturd said:
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-...
spunkytherabbit said:
Their tech supply arm is a significant income for them. It'll never keep the company afloat in times of dire need but it does contribute and pay some of the bills.
McLaren Applied Technologies is a small company (£25m turnover, £2m profit). Whilst it does contribute it can't be described as a significant source of income.spunkytherabbit said:
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!!).
I'm not sure that they haven't already mortgaged the MTC. McLaren Group has 3 outstanding charges (1 mortgage, 2 debentures) and 2 or them are over various pockets of "land at the McLaren Technology Centre" dating back to 2011. You would have to check with Land Registry which pockets are covered but I'm not sure they would have been able to borrow much against land other than that containing the factory.greygoose said:
Perhaps they are too embarassed to put their name on it.
They had a sponsor lined up by Whitmarsh, but Ron wanted top dollar, and staged a coup. Sponsor was told pay up or don't sign, they didn't sign. Since then its gone from bad to worse, and now the Mclaren rate card will be looking hugely over priced for results.Now as a result the prize money will be a fraction of what Mclaren is use to, cuts will be made, there is sadly one £12m cut looks like Ron will be making for next year
RGambo said:
You are of course correct. My post was a bit ill conceived 
. 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.
Honda went for the V12 as they couldn't see more BHP gains coming from the V10, Renault proved them wrong and also then gave Williams a lead in packaging, fuel consumption and drivability. . 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. Honda by the end of 92 had a BHP advantage over Renault but as package the Williams/Renault was miles ahead mainly thanks to superior tech on the Williams
McAndy said:
Sounds like you have a finger on the Button. (Although his salary is reputed to have been halved this year, so I may be mistaken.)
Its reported, although it was cut this year, next year it increases to 12m. Idea was originally things would be going well now, a title sponsor would be around the corner and £12m be a snip. However things haven't worked out that way have theyNRS said:
Yes and no - I don't think McLaren ever said it was the best. But just because it is not the best it doesn't mean it is the worst (or near that - we just don't know because of the engine being so poor). Not to mention the Honda guy quoted there said they were as good as Renault, and that the engine should hopefully be as good as Ferrari at Spa. So he is either speaking nonsense, or he was meaning the ICE and it is the electrical gubbins that is so poor. However it is pretty clear the main issue is the engine given how poorly the car performs at higher speed tracks.
Yeah Honda have got punchy in their defence, i think he is smoking something about being better than Renault but the Mclaren chassis clearly isn't the 2nd best on the grid as Ron claims. Its maybe the 4 or 5th I would guessrevrange said:
Yeah Honda have got punchy in their defence, i think he is smoking something about being better than Renault but the Mclaren chassis clearly isn't the 2nd best on the grid as Ron claims. Its maybe the 4 or 5th I would guess
Just wondering where Ron has claimed it is second best? Don't think I have seen that quote?NRS said:
Just wondering where Ron has claimed it is second best? Don't think I have seen that quote?
Sorry I slightly misquoted, but as quick as other cars, just not the Merc in corners.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjJ2_ZVBRO4
revrange said:
NRS said:
Just wondering where Ron has claimed it is second best? Don't think I have seen that quote?
Sorry I slightly misquoted, but as quick as other cars, just not the Merc in corners.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjJ2_ZVBRO4
Now (clearly) we know that to be ABSOLUTELY not the case, in the clip above he states categorically that they will be much more competitive over the next few races, again totally untrue.
I don't know if he's misinformed (hard to imagine for such a well known control freak) or he's simply lying, either way it's badly harming both his and McLaren's image.
FW18 said:
When DC was talking to Motorsport Magazine during their podcast, he said that Ron would always be full of it but the reality would be far from what was promised.
perhaps Ron is going for a Steve Jobs style "Reality Distortion Field", except that's fked too as it only appears to work on himself?NRS said:
Yes and no - I don't think McLaren ever said it was the best. But just because it is not the best it doesn't mean it is the worst (or near that - we just don't know because of the engine being so poor). Not to mention the Honda guy quoted there said they were as good as Renault, and that the engine should hopefully be as good as Ferrari at Spa. So he is either speaking nonsense, or he was meaning the ICE and it is the electrical gubbins that is so poor. However it is pretty clear the main issue is the engine given how poorly the car performs at higher speed tracks.
I read an article last night where Honda said they were a bit up on Renault, somewhere near Ferrari and massively off Mercedes. In Honda's mind, they should go to Monza and be ahead of Red Bull. Then this morning, any thought of doing anything at Monza for McLaren is a no-no as it's not a track that their car suits. I think it's going to get to a point where either McLaren or Honda handle press briefing, but neither on their own as they cant get a straight story together. Everyone's looking at Honda as the bad guys, and a more powerful engine will be the saviour of everything including the Euro crisis, world peace and abolishment of child hunger. It seems more likely that McLaren havent got a decent enough car underneath them to make the best of whatever engine is dropped into it
Gaz. said:
I'm surprised JB thinks they'll do well in Singapore when he or Alonso have already said it has poor traction, poor acceleration, not that great on the brakes, the balance shifts considerably as the fuel goes down, it's draggy, they lack downforce, they run out of hybrid power earlier in the lap than anyone else, they lack hybrid power and the ability to harvest like everyone else and the car is thirsty, and to top it off it's unreliable.
But apart from that it's pretty good 
Gaz. said:
I'm surprised JB thinks they'll do well in Singapore when he or Alonso have already said it has poor traction, poor acceleration, not that great on the brakes, the balance shifts considerably as the fuel goes down, it's draggy, they lack downforce, they run out of hybrid power earlier in the lap than anyone else, they lack hybrid power and the ability to harvest like everyone else and the car is thirsty, and to top it off it's unreliable.
<Ron is saying quietly to himself>But I know the front right hand wheel hub is the most perfect piece of design, went through 3600 design cycles, was prototyped in a 3D printer, machined in a state of art centre and put on the car in a sterile, dust free, perfect environment.
Doesn't stop the car very well, but it looks lovely...
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff