I have the answer to Honda's problem...
Discussion
andyps said:
They did indeed but I can't recall any of the manufacturers saying it is too expensive but have heard Pat Symonds say that the engine bill for a team is lower now than it was at times in the past.
The main complaint from Renault and Honda is the lack of development ability of their poor engines, with Ferrari also being concerned about this.
not sure that's entirely true.The main complaint from Renault and Honda is the lack of development ability of their poor engines, with Ferrari also being concerned about this.
Renault were the ones that said they would leave without them, Ferrari were not too interested.
Merc were luke warm at the start too.
Pure, were pushing hard (saw an opportunity)
The reality is that none of them at the time really understood what the costs would be, and only Merc bit the bullet and spent whatever it took.
Gaz. said:
He's right about the engine bill for the teams though. Per unit yes they are bloody expensive, but per season they are comparable to the first V8s and much cheaper than the V10s, especially when each team used 4-6 V10s per weekend. In 2005 Toyota used 300 engines in development, in season testing, race weekends = $90m for one team for just engines.
Now RBR spend $46m on a Renault deal whether they use 9 engines (4 race engines per driver plus a test engine) or 20. The other thing is that the journalists often quote the price of a crate V10 vs a full support V6PU and drive train. Those gearboxes are not cheap either yet are added onto the cost of the current engine deals by writers but left off for the old engines.
true enough from the teams POV, however, from the engine builders it's certainly NOT cheaper.Now RBR spend $46m on a Renault deal whether they use 9 engines (4 race engines per driver plus a test engine) or 20. The other thing is that the journalists often quote the price of a crate V10 vs a full support V6PU and drive train. Those gearboxes are not cheap either yet are added onto the cost of the current engine deals by writers but left off for the old engines.
Even if they get full money from all their customers, it will not come close to the costs they are running up developing and making them.
Gaz. said:
Both Renault & Honda said recently they were spending $160m per year every year on the V8s. The Mercedes PU at $26m per team with three customers per season for 7 seasons will cost Mercedes-Benz $182m (the cost of supplying the works team) until the end of 2020. This assumes Manor pay the sticker price for their PU & support.
Renault on the other hand probably are losing money hand over fist as their customer base has collapsed, their business model was to supply 4 customer teams for seven seasons for $46m, but Lotus left their stable, Caterham folded and RBR have thrown theirs and STR's toys out of the pram.
The other supplier who pushed for the 4cyl hybrids were Cosworth.
you may be right, but the money Merc have spent to develop these PU's is massively more than that!Renault on the other hand probably are losing money hand over fist as their customer base has collapsed, their business model was to supply 4 customer teams for seven seasons for $46m, but Lotus left their stable, Caterham folded and RBR have thrown theirs and STR's toys out of the pram.
The other supplier who pushed for the 4cyl hybrids were Cosworth.
Ferrari are also, not that far behind on spend (having had to play catchup) and even Renault had done well over $350M at the start of 2014.
Whatever the engine builders get from the teams is nothing like enough to pay for the development, the idea was with the engine freeze, years 2,3,4 &5 would go someway to paying back the development costs, but this all went to pot when it was realised just how far off the 2014 engines were, and costs since then have escalated massively.
I don't think even Merc can afford to see the engine regs change for at least another 3-4 years.
The 'sport' of F1 is a total mess.
Too confusing even for me, and I've been watching it since I was a child. That wouldn't matter as such but the cars sound rubbish, they really do, so my interest is waning.
I would argue F1 is always expensive by nature, but now it really has no 'soul' either.
14 years ago I could actually go and see F1 cars probably 15 days a year, with Hakkinen, Montoya, Alesi etc driving, 12 days of which would be free/£5 (Silverstone testing).
Can't do that anymore because of 'costs' and no testing.
Now we have a 'sport' that is flawed because of 'cost-saving' as the participants can't develop their cars, the cars only run 3 days a year (excluding 'young' driver test) and it costs the same as 2 weeks holiday to 'attend', only to queue for hours in traffic and again queue for access, queue for food, queue for toilets and get covered in mud. All the time surround by people wearing official replica team clothing. No chance of seeing or meeting drivers, or even looking at a car.
Then when the cars come out some might not run, or break down, and they all sound broken.
Tokens? What is that about? My only understanding of tokens is Milk Tokens or Travel Tokens, normally buses. Not very cutting-edge is it?
If hybrid (hate the word) technology is the 'way' forward why don't we see electric fighter planes? Can you imagine seeing one fly past with hardly any sound?
F1 is broken. Looking at Honda as the 'norm' rather than the exception might be a better way to view things. If 50% of the grid can't get their engines working-Honda and Renault, both famed for their brilliant engineering, then why would any other manufacturer get involved under the current regime? When I say they can't get them working, they are not allowed to change them. Utterly stupid.
If there was no money, or costs are limited, why do we have the giant hospitality units and massive driver salaries? You can only use 'x' amount of engines a year, to keep costs down, but you can spend £50 million on drivers to drive the cars that don't actually work.
Can you imagine if Ferrari were in Honda's position? I'm sure the rules would be changed then.
Too confusing even for me, and I've been watching it since I was a child. That wouldn't matter as such but the cars sound rubbish, they really do, so my interest is waning.
I would argue F1 is always expensive by nature, but now it really has no 'soul' either.
14 years ago I could actually go and see F1 cars probably 15 days a year, with Hakkinen, Montoya, Alesi etc driving, 12 days of which would be free/£5 (Silverstone testing).
Can't do that anymore because of 'costs' and no testing.
Now we have a 'sport' that is flawed because of 'cost-saving' as the participants can't develop their cars, the cars only run 3 days a year (excluding 'young' driver test) and it costs the same as 2 weeks holiday to 'attend', only to queue for hours in traffic and again queue for access, queue for food, queue for toilets and get covered in mud. All the time surround by people wearing official replica team clothing. No chance of seeing or meeting drivers, or even looking at a car.
Then when the cars come out some might not run, or break down, and they all sound broken.
Tokens? What is that about? My only understanding of tokens is Milk Tokens or Travel Tokens, normally buses. Not very cutting-edge is it?
If hybrid (hate the word) technology is the 'way' forward why don't we see electric fighter planes? Can you imagine seeing one fly past with hardly any sound?
F1 is broken. Looking at Honda as the 'norm' rather than the exception might be a better way to view things. If 50% of the grid can't get their engines working-Honda and Renault, both famed for their brilliant engineering, then why would any other manufacturer get involved under the current regime? When I say they can't get them working, they are not allowed to change them. Utterly stupid.
If there was no money, or costs are limited, why do we have the giant hospitality units and massive driver salaries? You can only use 'x' amount of engines a year, to keep costs down, but you can spend £50 million on drivers to drive the cars that don't actually work.
Can you imagine if Ferrari were in Honda's position? I'm sure the rules would be changed then.
Yep agree with BlimeyCharlie on this!
The amount of cars that breakdown on their way to the grid is terrible and just makes a small grid even smaller. The sound from the cars sends me to sleep and the constant management from the drivers is boring. Plus when the cars are actually working and a driver is told to "race" for a change, they can't even do that due to the aero causing their car to slide too much, over heat and destroy the tires.
I am tempted to jack in my Sky F1 package and follow the WEC next year. Its cheaper to watch, sounds better, racing tends to be closer and they can actually over take one another!
The amount of cars that breakdown on their way to the grid is terrible and just makes a small grid even smaller. The sound from the cars sends me to sleep and the constant management from the drivers is boring. Plus when the cars are actually working and a driver is told to "race" for a change, they can't even do that due to the aero causing their car to slide too much, over heat and destroy the tires.
I am tempted to jack in my Sky F1 package and follow the WEC next year. Its cheaper to watch, sounds better, racing tends to be closer and they can actually over take one another!
BlimeyCharlie said:
Then when the cars come out some might not run, or break down, and they all sound broken.
...
If 50% of the grid can't get their engines working-Honda and Renault, both famed for their brilliant engineering, then why would any other manufacturer get involved under the current regime? When I say they can't get them working, they are not allowed to change them. Utterly stupid.
...cars that don't actually work.
I hate to bring some fact into this rant but has it escaped you that at the Japanese grand prix less than two weeks ago all cars were classified in the finishing results for the first time in recent memory (possibly ever?) ...
If 50% of the grid can't get their engines working-Honda and Renault, both famed for their brilliant engineering, then why would any other manufacturer get involved under the current regime? When I say they can't get them working, they are not allowed to change them. Utterly stupid.
...cars that don't actually work.
Did you just stop watching in 2014?
I have been watching Suzi and Murray's programs on racing rivalrys and have been struck by how grand prix cars used to drop like flies with mechanical failures back in the day, only a handful of cars finishing and the winner lapping all but two or three of them.
and that was if they started at all. Often, several entrants didn't qualify fast enough to compete because their cars and drivers were just too inferior to the front runners.
When was the 'golden era' upon which you look with your rose tinted spectacles?
I agree that the formula needs change but to criticise the reliability is just ridiculous this season and specifically immediately after Japan
Could you point the finger at McLaren for insisting on the size zero approach then, Honda have clearly taken inspiration from merc in the split turbo approach but it would appear McLaren thought a smaller compressor would be out weighed by better aerodynamics, seems to have back fired somewhat!
Without inside knowledge it isn't possible to say who made the decision but I suspect it would be a joint one as would be expected within a partnership. Maybe McLaren said they would like it to be as small as possible and Honda said how they thought that could be achieved which McLaren were agreeable with - not sure where any blame would lie in that situation.
Sounds like it was a good idea in principle that didn't work out as planned - nothing ventured, nothing gained! Trouble is nothing was gained this year.
Sounds like it was a good idea in principle that didn't work out as planned - nothing ventured, nothing gained! Trouble is nothing was gained this year.
HustleRussell said:
BlimeyCharlie said:
Then when the cars come out some might not run, or break down, and they all sound broken.
...
If 50% of the grid can't get their engines working-Honda and Renault, both famed for their brilliant engineering, then why would any other manufacturer get involved under the current regime? When I say they can't get them working, they are not allowed to change them. Utterly stupid.
...cars that don't actually work.
I hate to bring some fact into this rant but has it escaped you that at the Japanese grand prix less than two weeks ago all cars were classified in the finishing results for the first time in recent memory (possibly ever?) ...
If 50% of the grid can't get their engines working-Honda and Renault, both famed for their brilliant engineering, then why would any other manufacturer get involved under the current regime? When I say they can't get them working, they are not allowed to change them. Utterly stupid.
...cars that don't actually work.
Did you just stop watching in 2014?
I have been watching Suzi and Murray's programs on racing rivalrys and have been struck by how grand prix cars used to drop like flies with mechanical failures back in the day, only a handful of cars finishing and the winner lapping all but two or three of them.
and that was if they started at all. Often, several entrants didn't qualify fast enough to compete because their cars and drivers were just too inferior to the front runners.
When was the 'golden era' upon which you look with your rose tinted spectacles?
I agree that the formula needs change but to criticise the reliability is just ridiculous this season and specifically immediately after Japan
Hence the "GP2 engine" outburst by that novice Alonso, and Red Bull (novices again) not being happy with their engine.
F1 is not an endurance race, there is 'Endurance Racing' for that.
By all means point out that in Suzuka everyone finished. You obviously get your information and opinion from none other than Formula 1 Legends Suzi Perry and Murray Walker (you did quote them) who as far as I can remember (back to early 70's) didn't have much success in F1.
I am amazed how people can argue with even obvious things like Honda engines not working. If they worked they would not be left in the pits (Button earlier this year) or "GP engine" outbursts would not happen.
If F1 is about reliability then it'll be accepting entries for milkfloats soon.
I'm also not interested in what Suzi Perry and Murray Walker have to say either.
BlimeyCharlie said:
What part of Renault and Honda not supplying competitive engines don't you understand?
Hence the "GP2 engine" outburst by that novice Alonso, and Red Bull (novices again) not being happy with their engine.
F1 is not an endurance race, there is 'Endurance Racing' for that.
By all means point out that in Suzuka everyone finished. You obviously get your information and opinion from none other than Formula 1 Legends Suzi Perry and Murray Walker (you did quote them) who as far as I can remember (back to early 70's) didn't have much success in F1.
I am amazed how people can argue with even obvious things like Honda engines not working. If they worked they would not be left in the pits (Button earlier this year) or "GP engine" outbursts would not happen.
If F1 is about reliability then it'll be accepting entries for milkfloats soon.
I'm also not interested in what Suzi Perry and Murray Walker have to say either.
One interesting statistic in relation to reliability of cars now compared with previous periods was the statistic given in relation to Lewis Hamilton matching Ayrton Senna's number of wins. They both have 41 wins and very similar numbers of races, however Senna had 63 DNFs in his career, Hamilton has had just 22. Sure, the Honda has had a lot of retirements this year, but that is an exception now rather than the rule.Hence the "GP2 engine" outburst by that novice Alonso, and Red Bull (novices again) not being happy with their engine.
F1 is not an endurance race, there is 'Endurance Racing' for that.
By all means point out that in Suzuka everyone finished. You obviously get your information and opinion from none other than Formula 1 Legends Suzi Perry and Murray Walker (you did quote them) who as far as I can remember (back to early 70's) didn't have much success in F1.
I am amazed how people can argue with even obvious things like Honda engines not working. If they worked they would not be left in the pits (Button earlier this year) or "GP engine" outbursts would not happen.
If F1 is about reliability then it'll be accepting entries for milkfloats soon.
I'm also not interested in what Suzi Perry and Murray Walker have to say either.
andyps said:
One interesting statistic in relation to reliability of cars now compared with previous periods was the statistic given in relation to Lewis Hamilton matching Ayrton Senna's number of wins. They both have 41 wins and very similar numbers of races, however Senna had 63 DNFs in his career, Hamilton has had just 22. Sure, the Honda has had a lot of retirements this year, but that is an exception now rather than the rule.
blame the regs, only 4 engines means nobody is going to push it that much.same for gearboxes etc etc.
andyps said:
One interesting statistic in relation to reliability of cars now compared with previous periods was the statistic given in relation to Lewis Hamilton matching Ayrton Senna's number of wins. They both have 41 wins and very similar numbers of races, however Senna had 63 DNFs in his career, Hamilton has had just 22. Sure, the Honda has had a lot of retirements this year, but that is an exception now rather than the rule.
I'm not sure retirements is very relevant when comparing total wins since lost wins and inherited wins should, to a certain extent, even out.Mr_Thyroid said:
andyps said:
One interesting statistic in relation to reliability of cars now compared with previous periods was the statistic given in relation to Lewis Hamilton matching Ayrton Senna's number of wins. They both have 41 wins and very similar numbers of races, however Senna had 63 DNFs in his career, Hamilton has had just 22. Sure, the Honda has had a lot of retirements this year, but that is an exception now rather than the rule.
I'm not sure retirements is very relevant when comparing total wins since lost wins and inherited wins should, to a certain extent, even out.Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff