This forum contains threads to discuss teams themselves. Anything not technical about the cars, including restructuring, performances etc belongs here.
It took 6 years to improve their engine to a competitive level after 2015. Not sure what is "incredible" about that.
The time to catch up will be determined by how much potential is left for the top manufacturers to exploit. If there is a siginficant amount of performance left for the others to find I don't think Honda will catch up at all during this engine regulation (which looks to be short-lived). But if they are already near the ceiling of what is possible Honda may be able to get to a decent level in the next couple of years.
Lol seriously? You think going from by far the worst PU, starting considerably later than others, with zero facilities or infrastructure, to arguably the best PU of the field, all while the others are developing at the same time is not impressive? You somehow think that isn't a clear demonstration of incredible development speed and potential? Wild take.
This isn't exactly starting from ground zero with the engine as it was 2015. I can't see it taking the same timeframe. Yes, the situation is worse than expected at the start, the car itself is all new, as are facilities and design methods, personnel and also the beginnings of a relationship between two international partners. Let's see how the team handle progression and development in the first half of the season before we start chanting "death to Honda" or "bad management decision choosing Honda" lol...
When you start 100 HP behind and you can follow the design choices of other manufacturers your development speed will obviously be quicker in terms of gained HP/year or however you want to measure it. But in terms of taking 6 years to become competitive from their debut, no I would not describe that as "incredible development speed". I'm not saying it was unimpressive what they did, you had the likes of Renault that never caught up, but I wasn't blown away by the speed of it. You have to remember, Honda was saying things like "we'll be on the podium in the second half of 2015" at the start of 2015. They raised people's expectations and their internal timeframe was ridiculous, so when you contrast that with what really happened there's nothing "incredible" about it.
It seems to me that Honda is still heavily blamed for the Honda-McLaren era, while the realities revealed by Honda's performance with the Toro Rosso team and McLaren's weakness even with a Mercedes engine are constantly ignored. Instead, people continue to comment based on what was initially learned and seen from the McLaren-Honda partnership. However, over time we learned that McLaren was under very poor management at the time, and even its own employees suffered from this.
Furthermore, after overcoming the initial cooling or MGU-H issues, we learned that with a good chassis, even if they couldn't compete for the championship, they were at a level where they wouldn't look bad. Of course, seeing people fixated on this makes me think I'm writing all this in vain again.
Honda later changed its concept and completely switched to the Mercedes concept. So this wasn't simply a 6-year development process, but rather a process of rebuilding the engine at a certain point. ( Furthermore, the statement that Honda performed well after 6 years shows that the person saying this only considers it to perform well when it works well with Red Bull. And even if it works at the highest engine level on a lower-level chassis, they tend to ignore it, which is a rather superficial view.)
Meanwhile, it's quite strange that despite Pat Symonds' statement that "we envisioned this engine having a passive pre-combustion chamber," no manufacturer other than Mercedes started with PPC.
Regarding the current situation, I remember Alonso saying that when the battery is fully charged at the start, we are on par with others as power. Even if we consider that the Honda pu can't be run at its highest capacity, I don't think that makes a huge difference. Based on Alonso's statement, I can say that the issue is the kinetic energy recovery level. This is something that can be quickly reduced to a certain level with things like durability and software. In fact, the term "lower power mode" might even mean less electrical recovery in this power unit configuration. So maybe when durability is there, their power deficit would be visible clearly. We are talking about a power already there but can not be used.
So, Honda needs to see exactly where they are before they start developing, and this will become clear with the performance of the MGU-K and ICE when they are running at full capacity.
It seems to me that Honda is still heavily blamed for the Honda-McLaren era, while the realities revealed by Honda's performance with the Toro Rosso team and McLaren's weakness even with a Mercedes engine are constantly ignored. Instead, people continue to comment based on what was initially learned and seen from the McLaren-Honda partnership. However, over time we learned that McLaren was under very poor management at the time, and even its own employees suffered from this.
Furthermore, after overcoming the initial cooling or MGU-H issues, we learned that with a good chassis, even if they couldn't compete for the championship, they were at a level where they wouldn't look bad. Of course, seeing people fixated on this makes me think I'm writing all this in vain again.
Honda later changed its concept and completely switched to the Mercedes concept. So this wasn't simply a 6-year development process, but rather a process of rebuilding the engine at a certain point. ( Furthermore, the statement that Honda performed well after 6 years shows that the person saying this only considers it to perform well when it works well with Red Bull. And even if it works at the highest engine level on a lower-level chassis, they tend to ignore it, which is a rather superficial view.)
Meanwhile, it's quite strange that despite Pat Symonds' statement that "we envisioned this engine having a passive pre-combustion chamber," no manufacturer other than Mercedes started with PPC.
Regarding the current situation, I remember Alonso saying that when the battery is fully charged at the start, we are on par with others as power. Even if we consider that the Honda pu can't be run at its highest capacity, I don't think that makes a huge difference. Based on Alonso's statement, I can say that the issue is the kinetic energy recovery level. This is something that can be quickly reduced to a certain level with things like durability and software. In fact, the term "lower power mode" might even mean less electrical recovery in this power unit configuration. So maybe when durability is there, their power deficit would be visible clearly. We are talking about a power already there but can not be used.
So, Honda needs to see exactly where they are before they start developing, and this will become clear with the performance of the MGU-K and ICE when they are running at full capacity.
Hard to argue with the 13 DNFs and 2 DNSs in 2017. The first year of the redesign. They would go on to finish 4th in a race the next year with torro rosso. McLaren never gave the new redesigned Honda PU a chance. It's almost like McLaren didn't understand what the regs had done to Honda.
People trying to compare this back to 2015 just don't understand just how much simpler the regs are. They don't need to redesign the block, It's pretty much an updated version of what they've been using since 2017. Piston top, heads, turbo and intake all work together for combustion, they're weakness. It's the part that MIGHT need to be redesigned to improve combustion and power. I say might cause development of the combustion will effect if and how those parts will change.
It seems to me that Honda is still heavily blamed for the Honda-McLaren era, while the realities revealed by Honda's performance with the Toro Rosso team and McLaren's weakness even with a Mercedes engine are constantly ignored. Instead, people continue to comment based on what was initially learned and seen from the McLaren-Honda partnership. However, over time we learned that McLaren was under very poor management at the time, and even its own employees suffered from this.
The engine in the Toro Rosso was a later spec and much more competitive. McLaren improved significantly with Renault and then improved even more with Merc. Honda deserved to be blamed for their poor performance with McLaren and McLaren was also delusional about the quality of its chassis, two things can be true at once. It's not unlike the current situation at AMR in that sense.
If there is no one to understand then talking is not make sense as I already wrote.
If someone can't say, "So the new formula isn't so simple after all," or compare whether the engine performs better in the new chassis or the chassis performs better with the new engine...
If there is no one to understand then talking is not make sense as I already wrote.
If someone can't say, "So the new formula isn't so simple after all," or compare whether the engine performs better in the new chassis or the chassis performs better with the new engine...
Don't bother, it's not worth your time.
Just sit back and enjoy watching Honda bring another Golden Era of F1 to a team like it did for Williams, McLaren and Red Bull. You don't go 11/12 and 21/22 wins in a season without a jewel of an engine. Sure, it starts off as a rough diamond or a lump of coal.
I'm rooting for AMR and Newey to get it right and flourish under Honda power.
It seems to me that Honda is still heavily blamed for the Honda-McLaren era, while the realities revealed by Honda's performance with the Toro Rosso team and McLaren's weakness even with a Mercedes engine are constantly ignored. Instead, people continue to comment based on what was initially learned and seen from the McLaren-Honda partnership. However, over time we learned that McLaren was under very poor management at the time, and even its own employees suffered from this.
The engine in the Toro Rosso was a later spec and much more competitive. McLaren improved significantly with Renault and then improved even more with Merc. Honda deserved to be blamed for their poor performance with McLaren and McLaren was also delusional about the quality of its chassis, two things can be true at once. It's not unlike the current situation at AMR in that sense.
The TR was the same spec with tweaks. I guess it all depends what you think spec means. The final year with McLaren was the new PU, new architecture, when they introduced the SPLIT TURBO. They obviously made a ton of reliability changes for 2018 and 2019 but the architecture didn't change.
McLaren did improve but finished ahead of Honda only once, 2018. They finished behind Honda from 2019 - 2023.
No matter what we say here will not change what will actually happen.
I don't know how much time Honda is costing AM. But even with the best Mercedes engine, they won't be able to fight at the front. People like to talk about Honda out of hatred, yet they turn a blind eye to the chassis's shortcomings. And we already know how this will end: when Honda improves the engine during the season and we still have a 2-second gap to the leaders, people will continue blaming Honda.
It seems to me that Honda is still heavily blamed for the Honda-McLaren era, while the realities revealed by Honda's performance with the Toro Rosso team and McLaren's weakness even with a Mercedes engine are constantly ignored. Instead, people continue to comment based on what was initially learned and seen from the McLaren-Honda partnership. However, over time we learned that McLaren was under very poor management at the time, and even its own employees suffered from this.
The engine in the Toro Rosso was a later spec and much more competitive. McLaren improved significantly with Renault and then improved even more with Merc. Honda deserved to be blamed for their poor performance with McLaren and McLaren was also delusional about the quality of its chassis, two things can be true at once. It's not unlike the current situation at AMR in that sense.
The TR was the same spec with tweaks. I guess it all depends what you think spec means. The final year with McLaren was the new PU, new architecture, when they introduced the SPLIT TURBO. They obviously made a ton of reliability changes for 2018 and 2019 but the architecture didn't change.
McLaren did improve but finished ahead of Honda only once, 2018. They finished behind Honda from 2019 - 2023.
No matter what we say here will not change what will actually happen.
Lol, 2018 was Torro Rosso's worst season at that time. They had the worst reliability on the grid.
The f**king rose tinted glasses about how awful the Honda was is ridiculous.
And now they have stuffed another team. Honda need to genuinely change how they approach motorsports as a whole.
You would have thought Repsol pulling the plug on MotoGP after terrible results would have woken them up.
But here we are, Honda apologists arguing against facts again.
Even if they're pink, glasses that show something are still infinitely better than sleep goggles.
I consider myself a good MotoGP audience. I know how long it took Ducati and Aprilia to get to where they are today. And I'm aware of the changes that bring they to the top.
People tend to say that the rules are the same for everyone. Let's assume that now, while keeping the rules the same for everyone, we reduce everyone's ice power and energy recovery to the level of the lowest powered pu level. Yes, the rules are same for everyone, but who would suffer from this? Yes, even you can probably guess that.
Honda's situation in MotoGP or Indy is not bad. They were a little behind the changes in MotoGP, of course. But they tried everything they could, even gettin chassis from outside. If they had done in a year or two what Ducati worked on for years, it would be superhuman job. If it wasn't superhuman, then Ducati's resources and hard work would be ridiculous for such an easy job. But none of that is true. Ducati and Aprilia worked hard and succeeded; now it's Honda's and Yamaha's turn to try to catch up. This is how is the things turns in the world. Of course, there's always room for improvement, and there are always mistakes.
What I find odd about this engine issue is for Honda to publicly display their PU2026 design to show the double stack battery design and also the position of the MGU-K.
As I know, none of other engine manufacturers have publicly display their engine design and layout.
If this Honda way to saying, Look this is what AMR wanted from Honda.
What I find odd about this engine issue is for Honda to publicly display their PU2026 design to show the double stack battery design and also the position of the MGU-K.
As I know, none of other engine manufacturers have publicly display their engine design and layout.
If this Honda way to saying, Look this is what AMR wanted from Honda.
How does the picture say it Newey's idea? It says Honda everywhere?
If the battery and/or the MGU-K are the problem, it isn't the idea that is the problem, it's the execution.
What I find odd about this engine issue is for Honda to publicly display their PU2026 design to show the double stack battery design and also the position of the MGU-K.
As I know, none of other engine manufacturers have publicly display their engine design and layout.
If this Honda way to saying, Look this is what AMR wanted from Honda.
How does the picture say it Newey's idea? It says Honda everywhere?
If the battery and/or the MGU-K are the problem, it isn't the idea that is the problem, it's the execution.
I am trying to understand the motivation behind Honda revealing their 2026 PU engine design even before the start of the season.
In F1, its not uncommon have innovative ideas which have fundamental flaws due to the natural law of physics.
McLaren MP4-18 was one good example.
What I find odd about this engine issue is for Honda to publicly display their PU2026 design to show the double stack battery design and also the position of the MGU-K.
As I know, none of other engine manufacturers have publicly display their engine design and layout.
If this Honda way to saying, Look this is what AMR wanted from Honda.
How does the picture say it Newey's idea? It says Honda everywhere?
If the battery and/or the MGU-K are the problem, it isn't the idea that is the problem, it's the execution.
I am trying to understand the motivation behind Honda revealing their 2026 PU engine design even before the start of the season.
In F1, its not uncommon have innovative ideas which have fundamental flaws due to the natural law of physics.
McLaren MP4-18 was one good example.
They blurred out all the important stuff like the turbo and the intake. It might also be an old picture of the MGU-K and how it's connected or MGU-K and transmission are AI generated. Who knows.
How does the picture say it Newey's idea? It says Honda everywhere?
If the battery and/or the MGU-K are the problem, it isn't the idea that is the problem, it's the execution.
I am trying to understand the motivation behind Honda revealing their 2026 PU engine design even before the start of the season.
In F1, its not uncommon have innovative ideas which have fundamental flaws due to the natural law of physics.
McLaren MP4-18 was one good example.
They blurred out all the important stuff like the turbo and the intake. It might also be an old picture of the MGU-K and how it's connected or MGU-K and transmission are AI generated. Who knows.
Hope to see similar picture of Merc Audi and Ferrari engine soon.
