2016 McLaren F1 Team - Honda

[DiogoBrand]

Of coursa Honda has a big part of the blame for McLaren's lack of performance, more than 50% from my point of view, I think anyone that hasn't acknowledged that is either a Honda fanatic or lacks knowledge (fortunately I've never seen anybody state that). The only thing being discussed here, at least from my side, is that there's a lot of people that ignore the fact that McLaren also has a big share of the blame.

Let's not forget that McLaren has not won a world championship since 2008, so basically since the aero makeover they've always been a step behind the opposition. Before Honda, on 2013 with closely matched engines, and 2014 with the best engine of the grid, they didn't finish past 5th on constructors'. So even prior to partnering with Honda they were already lost at sea with their concepts. Also, the ones that chose to partner with an engine supplier without guarantees of performance was McLaren, and when Wazari says it was McLaren who asked for the size zero unit (with the blame on Honda for accepting it out of pride), it makes total sense. All of which just shows that McLaren has gotten where they are by themselves, and as said, they certainly need Honda much more than Honda needs them.

Then comes 2015, Prodromou moves into the team, as well as Honda's flawed power unit, and everybody just assumes that hadn't it been for the lack of power they'd be pushing for the World Championship. To me that just seems quite naive.

The chassis looks very good from the outside, and also has never shown any fundamental flaw, but a team doesn't go from 5th to a championship winning chassis over one winter. Red Bull was only so dominant because they were working on their design even prior to the rules being established, and even so didn't dominate right from the start. It took Mercedes 3 or 4 years to develop both the chassis and Power Unit that made them one of the most dominant teams in history. I stand convinced that even with Mercedes power this chassis wouldn't be a strong contender for the World Championships and it just sounds too ingenuous to think it would.

[Sayeman]

I don't understand why comments are being downrated? It's ok if you don't agree with what someone is saying but downrating is not the right thing to do. A person has the right to express his/her opinions and feels like people with higher reputation here are abusing their downvoting privilege .

[Vasconia]

The 2015 chasis had its flaws but it wasnt that bad. Its obviously imposible to come from a bad chasis(2013-2014) to an spectacular one in only one season. They need time and a room to check things which it didnt exist during the last season, due to the absolute lack of reliability.

Now they are improving the chasis with a good pace, as McLaren has done always, which makes me feel hopeful about a good second half f the season. Anyway, they must concenctrate on the nex season and check as many thing as they can because nex season is the year to fight for something big.

[Jef Patat]

I don't understand why comments are being downrated? It's ok if you don't agree with what someone is saying but downrating is not the right thing to do. A person has the right to express his/her opinions and feels like people with higher reputation here are abusing their downvoting privilege .

Let's keep that discussion in the correct thread
http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewto ... =7&t=18363

[Steven]

Again, Honda and McLaren (Boullier) have confirmed that the size zero concept is entirely Honda's idea, and that both parties were perfectly happy with that route.
Boullier said (to me, among others) at Barcelona's pre-season test that McLaren did not specify ANY requirements in terms of dimensions to Honda.

The Japanese may have made some design mistakes, but just like everybody else, they are perfectly aware of the advantages that a compact power unit can offer to the entire car.
It should be now be clear to all that Honda are firm believers of their own ideas, and prefer not to copy or rely on anybody else. It was only until they hit the track in 2015 that both parties realised the power unit's problems more much more substantial than just being 'a bit underpowered at the start of their campaign'.

Edit: For completeness, here is Eric's explanation from Feb:
"We have never ever imposed anything on Honda, they do what they want. If they come with an engine like this then we have to accommodate this in our size zero, which would not be a size zero any more. There is absolutely no constraint and if we keep this concept because we are happy with it and we believe in the concept, it will help us catch up quicker faster than any others."

[Sayeman]

Will Torro Rosso be using Honda PU from next year?
http://www.thisisf1.com/2016/05/09/toro ... hisisF1%29

[Wazari]

I came up with a whole explanation and timeline of drawings and constraints given to us by McLaren but later decided that would have been against my better judgment.


Consider the following food for thought about EB's statement.

Date of statement
"our size zero" - time and money spent on this concept. Really ready to scrap idea if Honda says no???
"no constraint" - token system, time
What is the purpose of even making those remarks??

[FW17]

I came up with a whole explanation and timeline of drawings and constraints given to us by McLaren but later decided that would have been against my better judgment.


Consider the following food for thought about EB's statement.

Date of statement
"our size zero" - time and money spent on this concept. Really ready to scrap idea if Honda says no???
"no constraint" - token system, time
What is the purpose of even making those remarks??

Wazari, If Honda took a wrong turn (based on inputs from Mclaren) with engine in 2015, why did they feel necessary to carry on that path for 2016?

What is size zero anyway? Is it in terms of the length of the engine?

From aero point of view is there any benefit in having a shorter wheelbase by 6 inches? currently all engineers seem to be stretching the car like a limo, what was the benefit?

[NL_Fer]

Boulier is being political here. Sure McLaren did not force any dimensions one the engine and ofcourse anybody understands smaller is better. But still McLaren could have showed Honda some targets and calculations on the Merc PU in 2014. There was a focus on total hp. But how can ers deployment be so unnoticed?

Even from the first race in 2014 McLaren engineers would have noticed there was allot more ers deployment available then 33s and the mgu-h was harvesting massive. I cannot imagine Mclaren and Honda did not study the calculations and performance of the Merc 2014 PU.

Also to end another discussion, there is enough reason to believe Honda wil dump current turbocharger in 2017 and copy a Renault/Ferrari kind of setup.

[Andres125sx]

Wazari, If Honda took a wrong turn (based on inputs from Mclaren) with engine in 2015, why did they feel necessary to carry on that path for 2016?

I´m not Wazari, but I guess it´s not needed to realice the token system did not allow for such a big change

They changed all they could with the tokens they had

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Meanwhile 23 front wings were designed, manufactured, windtunnel tested, manufactured at real scale, tested and used. Same for 12 floors, 18 rear wings, 8 brake ducts..... It´s all invented obviously, just trying to show how absurd the token system is when they can spend all they want on aero


While most people blame Honda, I blame FIA too. To me Honda is just a victim. Ok they made a mistake, like any other manufacturer in any other motorsport. Only that manufacturers are usually allowed to solve their problems. Honda is not due to the token system

[FW17]

, but I guess it´s not needed to realice the token system did not allow for such a big change

There is no additional penalty for change of compressor position when the compressor was redesigned. They would have spent just 2 tokens for the compressor redesign, something that they could have done last year too.


Quiet sure that alarm bells should have been sounded in November 2014 when the MP4-29H failed to run, yet nothing changed after 3 months

[Sonador]

I came up with a whole explanation and timeline of drawings and constraints given to us by McLaren but later decided that would have been against my better judgment.


Consider the following food for thought about EB's statement.

Date of statement
"our size zero" - time and money spent on this concept. Really ready to scrap idea if Honda says no???
"no constraint" - token system, time
What is the purpose of even making those remarks??

So EB's statements are false?
Or are correct, but twisted in a way that Mclaren looks blameless?

How about my earlier reply to Sasha, is there regret from Honda that they joined up with Mclaren instead of Sauber/red bull/torro rosso? Or is it just someting that lives among employees?

I am hoping moral is high within Honda and also Mclaren!
To me it is a dream partnership, just wish the blamegame would stop ....

[kasio]

I don't understand why comments are being downrated? It's ok if you don't agree with what someone is saying but downrating is not the right thing to do. A person has the right to express his/her opinions and feels like people with higher reputation here are abusing their downvoting privilege .

they are saying other people are lying withot proof just based on their belief and we are not here to read that. its technical forum. i dont want to read insults here.

[ringo]

Again, Honda and McLaren (Boullier) have confirmed that the size zero concept is entirely Honda's idea, and that both parties were perfectly happy with that route.
Boullier said (to me, among others) at Barcelona's pre-season test that McLaren did not specify ANY requirements in terms of dimensions to Honda.

Edit: For completeness, here is Eric's explanation from Feb:
"We have never ever imposed anything on Honda, they do what they want. If they come with an engine like this then we have to accommodate this in our size zero, which would not be a size zero any more. There is absolutely no constraint and if we keep this concept because we are happy with it and we believe in the concept, it will help us catch up quicker faster than any others."

I don't understand Eric's statement here. He does confirm this size zero concept being invented by Mclaren. He claims it is not a design constraint for Honda, but yet he says the consequence of accomodating a larger than size zero will defeat the purpose of the concept. Which to me, is just circumlocution that Honda had to stay as small as possible to maintain the design philosophy.
So it's fair to say Mclaren did impose restrictions, and Honda took on the challenge. Those restrictions may not have been specific however they may have been put forward as something Honda must try their best to do, more than anything else. Seeing that Honda are probably guilty of believing in their own hype, they may have well took on the challenge and took it a step too far.

Steven i would like to know who you beleive. Wazari or EB?
It seems you are leaning towards what seems to be a very political EB.

I think Honda hung their hat where they could not reach it, but were dared, tempted and flattered by Mclaren.

[Wazari]

Length and height restraints, all documented.

As I mentioned before, people in EB's shoes speak company agenda, personal agenda and then the facts, in that order. The first two rarely are truthful. Think about all the statements issued by team leaders over the last 30 years. I would guess less than 25% ended up being factual.

The decision makers decided to stay with the current layout at the end of last year. A layout change is at least a 6 month process.

Again the layout of the current PU was Honda's idea. Moral at HRD is good.