McLaren's problems

Principessa · Post 15 Sep 2005, 21:24

The only thing that I find weird about the engine change of Monty is that a brand new engine can have flaw without being used once. How is that possible??
I can't understand that McLaren is in second position in the Constructor's championship after so many engine changes this year. This is one of the best F1 Teams, but they always seem to have a problem with their engine and if they don't have a problem with the engine, they have a problem controlling one of their drivers private life (well, not really private life, more of a tabloid life) or they have a problem with a driver who is dissappointed because he had to listen to team orders and therefor lost his leading position in the race to his team mate. (I don't blame JP)
There are more problems at McLaren, but most of them are like a taboo.
For example...Monty said that Raikkonen is on his own and that he will do anything to win some more races this season. Monty wins at Monza and the week after that we could read on the website of McLaren that Monty will do anything to help Raikkonen.

Ron Dennis probably has nothing to do with Monty's last statement

But that's just my idea about this stuff

Post 15 Sep 2005, 21:37

Well the MP4-18 series has had some engine trouble since the very beginning of its testing / racing life. First it was said the problems were because of integration problems which resulted in blown up engines.

If I am right (there's slight doubt as of a brain malfunction up here) Mario Illien left the Merc camp and as a result the engine department may have needed some reorganisation. Possibly not very much, but it could have been enough.

Anyway, since Hungary there don't seem to be anymore other problems apart from engine failures so they are definitely going in the right direction.

manchild · Post 15 Sep 2005, 21:50

Illmor makes only lower part of the engine while Mercedes makes cyl. heads and those are parts on the engine where most of the problems occured.
Personally, I find it shameful that one of the biggest corporations - Daimler_Chrysler isn't capable of making their own engine but pays specialist to make parts they can't. Now they've bought the Illmor but that still isn't the same thing.

Principessa · Post 15 Sep 2005, 22:17

Still don't have an answer on my question... How is it possible that a BRAND new engine needs to be changed because they've found a flaw? Maybe a stupid question, but I don't think that's normal.

Guest · Post 15 Sep 2005, 22:27

Because they suspected that there was something wrong with it =)

The statement from Norbert was something like " a suspected problem with the cam treatment". I know very little on the mechanical side but I suspect a modern F1 engine is probably pretty sensitive.

/ Fx

Apex · Post 15 Sep 2005, 22:35

I read (cant remember where) that they detected a possible flaw on the cam-shaft finishing.

So they thought there may be a problem, and switched the engine as a precaution. I dont see why this is causing such a fuss?

Principessa · Post 15 Sep 2005, 22:40

I don't want to make a fuss but I expected that if a new engine comes from the supplier, the engine needs to be checked and re-checked to make sure there are no flaws. You have to say that it's not normal that McLaren had to make so many engine switches this year. There must be some kind of problem...of course the engines don't blow up anymore, but the engine switches keep on coming.

jaslfc · Post 16 Sep 2005, 00:58

new engines have flaws all the time.. problems caused by the assembling and sometimes the parts are defects.. thats why they run shakedowns.. same as road cars thats why they advice to 'run in' the road cars..so that there are not much stress in the engine and problems can be found. things like this always happen. we normally dont hear of it because they test the engines back in the factory.. maybe this problem happen later.. davidson had a similar problem while testing the jordan this weeks.. the engine gave problem in the instalation lap!

manchild · Post 16 Sep 2005, 02:26

The engine could have been damaged during installation running in pits.

It is possible because they did run that engine in pits during preparations for first practice. Every time when there is enough time endoscopes are inserted into engine block, into cylinders trough sparkplug bearings and wherever it can be done the situation is checked out.

wowf1 · Post 16 Sep 2005, 15:13

One thing i've always wondered is how the FIA actually enforce this 1-engine-per-2-race-meeting rule. It's very easy to just say in the rules 'the same engine must complete 2 race weekends', but who, and when, and how do they check the engines?

All the teams lug their cars back to the factory after a race, and I assume dis-assemble them as much as they can (gearbox, differential, electronics, brakes, cooling system etc.) to inspect them. Ok, so there will be serial numbers on the block, and maybe all the engine parts, but the team could take the engine to pieces and replace, say the rods, or crankshaft. Then they could sling it back together, same serial number on the block so FIA don't know any different? Surely the FIA don't make the team dismantle the engine and check every piece?

Another thought i had was that teams (if they're feeling cheeky

) could put the same serial number on more than 1 block (or whatever the component is) That way, they could replace the block after a race, when the FIA check, same serial number as before so everything's cool right?

Maybe there's an obvious answer, but i'm a bit in the dark lol.

rob

manchild · Post 16 Sep 2005, 15:42

There are special FIA seals used between (connecting) parts where the engine is assembled (sump & engine block, engine block & cyl. heads etc) so the engine can't be opened. Seals are also used on engine ECU.

These seals are than checked by stewards before and after the qualifying and race.

Missing or damaged seal means disqualification!

Teams are only forbidden to mess with engine internals while things like fuel injection, exhaust or clutch can be changed.

This is not done just since 2 races one engine rule but for ages and in almost all sorts of racing because of possible post-race appeals regarding legality of the engine that was used etc.

Spencifer_Murphy · Post 19 Sep 2005, 15:35

Speaking of Mclaren's Problem's I guess an iminate problem they may have to face is holding onto Kimi. Ferrari are showing a lot of interest in Kimi, and Mclaren's disapproval of "colourful behaviour" and their lack of reliability could be just too much for him. If i were Kimi though I'd be staying at Mclaren. Ferrari are now beginning to change era's, Rory Byrne and Michael Schumacher both look like calling it a day sometime soon...the Ferari Dream-Team is beginning to breakdown. And now is not the time for Kimi to go there, i think.

Principessa · Post 19 Sep 2005, 21:04

Yes, that's a possibility, but I have to say that I guess it won't be the case for the 2006 season. Ok, the reliability isn't what it has to be, but at this point the McLaren car is must faster than the Ferrari...so I guess that Kimi will stay another year at McLaren.

jaslfc · Post 20 Sep 2005, 00:19

a fast and reliable car may not be the only motivation for kimi to leave mclaren to ferrari.There is the issue of being the number 1 driver and building the car and all the engineers attention around u!! then lets not forget the MONEY factor. Ferrari probly is willing to double or triple what kimi is getting in mclaren!!

DaveKillens · Post 20 Sep 2005, 02:49

The evolution of an engine from concept to hardware in the race is a long and hard process. Construction, testing, analysis, redesign, over and over and over. And the teams use every available method to ensure reliability versus performance. Statistycal analysis, non-destructive testing (NDT), destructive testing (let's randomly yank a part and cut it in pieces to see inside) and any other method that may seem implausable or improbable. Heck, maybe at some factory they have a fortune teller or psychic on the payroll. But no matter how hard you try, as they say, "--- happens", and parts fail. Did you know that on the American Space Shuttle the switches are test cycled hundreds of thousands of times, then if proven good, installed? The theory is that if you cycle a switch 100,000 times, the odds are that it won't fail on the 100,001st attempt. I bet a number of you assumed the switches were installed right out of a box, brand new.
One of the weird paradoxes of racing is that if you develop what appears to be a 100% reliable component, the people in charge of competition ask for that part to be redesigned, because it obviously could be made lighter. "It's reliable, so it must have excess mass, doesn't it?" That statement is probably heard thousands of times in thousands of places, each year.
All the enginers can do is test, analyze, redesign, and continue the cycle forever. And pray that the failure occurs on a test stand, instead of at the track.