Mclaren Honda 2015

[proteus]

The engine itself is aparently better, while the electric part is well down the power

[alexx_88]

He's not lying, just using PR talk. As I explained in a previous post, peak power on these power units is not the most important number. It's much more important to be able to use the MGU-K for (preferably) the entire lap. Peak power of the units is ICE + 160HP from the MGU-K. So Arai is probably not lying when he says that Honda have 20HP more than Renault (more powerful ICE), but he's conveniently not saying that Renault can probably run their MGU-K for longer at peak power, as they have a better energy recovery system. This is information that was passed on by Eric Boulier and hinted at by the drivers after Spa.

I don't think Honda's issues come from lack of testing, but from lack of freedom in applying upgrades and lack of money. Engines are developed mostly on dynos, so there's nothing stopping any manufacturer in developing an excellent PU, other than the inability to apply upgrades and lack of money. In the end, Mercedes had the most resources, followed by Ferrari and Renault. Honda have probably similar per year budget, but started 2 years later, so unless they put a bit more in it, they will only start catching up as the others are hitting the development limits.

[nanocustic]

I guess that, logistically, they can't really return to Mercedes engines..can't they?

[alexx_88]

They can, as the mounting points are fixed for all PUs, but the problem is "would they be able to beat the works team?". My guess, with the budget level of Mercedes as well as the headstart they got in this formula, that would be extremely unlikely.

[Thunder18]

I guess that, logistically, they can't really return to Mercedes engines..can't they?

Unless it was a full works package, then no, RD has already stated his objections to having a Customer MB engine.

Singapore will reap better results, but they won't be fighting for a podium anytime soon, (I say this while secretly trying to maintain my belief in the McHonda partnership). 2016 can't come quick enough!

[j.yank]

Here is comparison between Alonso and Riciardo on formula1.com As you see the worst performance of McLaren-Honda is in braking (the same 1.0 value was for Button during the entire race). This means that both cars had to braking earlier when their competitors are still driving at full throttle. I guess that costs a lot of time. Probably they weren't able to fight RedBul on the straights because of this? Any ideas why the braking is so bad on McLaren-Honda?

[kptaylor]

Well the only car I saw breaking was Alonso's and Rosberg's...

Wonder if this poor braking performance was due to an attempt to improve the ES by lift & coast?

[diffuser]

He's not lying, just using PR talk. As I explained in a previous post, peak power on these power units is not the most important number. It's much more important to be able to use the MGU-K for (preferably) the entire lap. Peak power of the units is ICE + 160HP from the MGU-K. So Arai is probably not lying when he says that Honda have 20HP more than Renault (more powerful ICE), but he's conveniently not saying that Renault can probably run their MGU-K for longer at peak power, as they have a better energy recovery system. This is information that was passed on by Eric Boulier and hinted at by the drivers after Spa.

I don't think Honda's issues come from lack of testing, but from lack of freedom in applying upgrades and lack of money. Engines are developed mostly on dynos, so there's nothing stopping any manufacturer in developing an excellent PU, other than the inability to apply upgrades and lack of money. In the end, Mercedes had the most resources, followed by Ferrari and Renault. Honda have probably similar per year budget, but started 2 years later, so unless they put a bit more in it, they will only start catching up as the others are hitting the development limits.

Nope, It's lack of testing.

They didn't have the PU ready till that first PR test in November 2014. It didn't go so well but the did get some running. The second PR test was a complete disaster. They didn't test again till February at which time they had a ton of issues. If they had unlimited testing, they would have been able to iron out many issues before the first race. The other thing I hear is that lead time on PU parts are alot longer that chassis/aero parts. 3 test in around a months time, If you have major issues, you'll never get fixes implemented for the last test.

[lio007]

Here is comparison between Alonso and Riciardo on formula1.com As you see the worst performance of McLaren-Honda is in breaking (the same 1.0 value was for Button during the entire race). This means that both cars had to break earlier when their competitors are still driving at full throttle. I guess that costs a lot of time. Probably they weren't able to fight RedBul on the straights because of this? Any ideas why the breaking is so bad on McLaren-Honda?
http://clubs1.bg/forums/uploads/1441047 ... _44309.jpg

What about those values...high => good, low => bad?

[j.yank]

Here is comparison between Alonso and Riciardo on formula1.com As you see the worst performance of McLaren-Honda is in breaking (the same 1.0 value was for Button during the entire race). This means that both cars had to break earlier when their competitors are still driving at full throttle. I guess that costs a lot of time. Probably they weren't able to fight RedBul on the straights because of this? Any ideas why the breaking is so bad on McLaren-Honda?
http://clubs1.bg/forums/uploads/1441047 ... _44309.jpg

What about those values...high => good, low => bad?

"Braking - measures how hard a driver is braking into corners - a high score means that they reduced their speed quickly."

[vantage87]

[McG]

McLaren had to brake earlier because they were running the lowest downforce.

Honda are just terrible. Still.

[alexx_88]

Nope, It's lack of testing.

They didn't have the PU ready till that first PR test in November 2014. It didn't go so well but the did get some running. The second PR test was a complete disaster. They didn't test again till February at which time they had a ton of issues. If they had unlimited testing, they would have been able to iron out many issues before the first race. The other thing I hear is that lead time on PU parts are alot longer that chassis/aero parts. 3 test in around a months time, If you have major issues, you'll never get fixes implemented for the last test.

Question: How would you be able to tell the difference between lack of testing (i.e. having the PU ready 2 weeks early and waiting for the test session) vs lack of resources/time (i.e. barely having the PU in a runnable state for the test)?

Moreover, their issues have been strictly performance-related, something which is gauged on the dyno, you don't need official F1 tests to tell you that your ERS is not capable of recovering more than X MJ from the turbo. Just compare the state of their PU in January 2015 at the first test with Mercedes' just a year before.

They lacked the time, they lacked the experience, they lacked the OEM power of Mercedes. And now, besides that, they lack the ability to change the components of their PU because of the tokens. It's ridiculous. Unless you want to cheat and bring in a sister company, the token system gives you only one chance to get it right.

[lio007]

"Braking - measures how hard a driver is braking into corners - a high score means that they reduced their speed quickly."

Thank you, and what do the others mean? I'd appreciate your explanations.

[j.yank]

"Braking - measures how hard a driver is braking into corners - a high score means that they reduced their speed quickly."

Thank you, and what do the others mean? I'd appreciate your explanations.

"Throttle - measures how much throttle a driver uses relative to their speed - higher speed means that they are using more throttle to achieve that speed".

"Steering - measures how many steering adjustments a driver is making - higher score means the driver is working harder at the steering wheel."

"Cornering - measures the latitudinal (side-to-side) G-Force on the car - higher score suggests the driver is cornering harder."

"Aggression - measures longitudinal (back-and-forth) G-Force on the car - a higher score suggests more aggressive acceleration/deceleration."