2016 McLaren F1 Team - Honda

[KingHamilton01]

Into Q3 on merit and not by anyone else's misfortune, good step forward hopefully can get some points 2morrow and Honda can work on a solution for best using remaining tokens.

[techman]

good stuff my mclaren honda, went to Q3 on merit and not true other misfotune link in monaco, where max crash out make alonso to get into Q3. looks like mclaren are running higher downforce setting compared to other, according what alonso said in an interview maybe there thinking that it will rain tommorrow, and can capitalize with good strategy

[erlik]

I am afraid they will be shooting ducs on the straight and they will not be able to overtake in S1 an S2.

[proteus]

This was a very nice surprise indeed. Both cars are so much slower on the main straight and jet they gain so much time everywhere else. Both the chasis and the engine are aparently working great together in corners. The asphalt surface is smooth so tyres might not be the problem + cold temperatures, but as allways silly DRS might destroy the chances for points...Upgrades which they are introducing are slowly but steadily showing progress. Full quali mode is still atleast 0.5sec off, but otherwise a solid performance.

[ME4ME]

...
The chassis seems to work very well, but I wonder if they aren't over-doing things with all these front wing iterations. It seems they are manufacturing wings for each marginal step they can see in the wind tunnel, but resource-efficiency wise that cannot be optimal.
...

The costs from a manufacturing perspective will be negligible. They need the person who produces the carbon work anyway and the carbon fibre itself costs comparatively nothing. Their manufacturing costs are pretty much fixed anyway when they produce the parts themselves. And therefore it would not be smart not to make use of new knowledge. And McLaren should have a strong enough aero department to actually find improvements.

It's not a single person who works in the carbon shop. It's a group of people, working in shifts. Manufacturing cost might be fixed, but fixed at an unnessasarily high level. Over-capacity is waste.

The amount of design iterations also indicate an trail and error approach. Now every team will do this, but Mclaren to a greater extent. The amount of tweaks they bring seem to suggest that their start-of-season wing wasn't very good, and/or they are unsure of the effictiveness of the upgrades, and which development direction to follow.

[lebesset]

nice to see team mates thanking each other for help !
first hamilton thanking rosberg for letting him past at monaco [ yes , I know it was team orders but an acknowledgement doesn't hurt
now alonso thanking button for giving him a tow in Q2 and allowing him to squeeze into Q3 at montreal ...pity button made a small mistake on that lap and missed by a whisper ! both cars in Q3 ! how would that have been !!!

[Sayeman]

Were they running higher downforce compared to the other teams? One commentator was talking about it.
Maybe that's why they have been so good on the first 2 sector.

[the EDGE]

nice to see team mates thanking each other for help !
first hamilton thanking rosberg for letting him past at monaco [ yes , I know it was team orders but an acknowledgement doesn't hurt
now alonso thanking button for giving him a tow in Q2 and allowing him to squeeze into Q3 at montreal ...pity button made a small mistake on that lap and missed by a whisper ! both cars in Q3 ! how would that have been !!!

Unfortunatley that wouldn't have happened, Had Button got into top 10 it would have knocked Alonzo out

[McG]

Yes great to see this progress from Honda. And I guess the fuel upgrade has made a difference too.

Congrats to Honda, more competitive at this power circuit than at Monaco

[OviJohn]

Were they running higher downforce compared to the other teams? One commentator was talking about it.
Maybe that's why they have been so good on the first 2 sector.

Alonso sugested this on his post qualy interview. I believe they bet hard on wet race and setup accordingly.

Sad thing is tho, rain chances are now at 25%, and if it does rains, it´ll be very light

[godlameroso]

...
The chassis seems to work very well, but I wonder if they aren't over-doing things with all these front wing iterations. It seems they are manufacturing wings for each marginal step they can see in the wind tunnel, but resource-efficiency wise that cannot be optimal.
...

The costs from a manufacturing perspective will be negligible. They need the person who produces the carbon work anyway and the carbon fibre itself costs comparatively nothing. Their manufacturing costs are pretty much fixed anyway when they produce the parts themselves. And therefore it would not be smart not to make use of new knowledge. And McLaren should have a strong enough aero department to actually find improvements.

It's not a single person who works in the carbon shop. It's a group of people, working in shifts. Manufacturing cost might be fixed, but fixed at an unnessasarily high level. Over-capacity is waste.

The amount of design iterations also indicate an trail and error approach. Now every team will do this, but Mclaren to a greater extent. The amount of tweaks they bring seem to suggest that their start-of-season wing wasn't very good, and/or they are unsure of the effictiveness of the upgrades, and which development direction to follow.

McLaren is a very data driven team, and they have the facilities and budget to bring new parts to every race. If they can make the part, and the indications are that the part will improve performance they'd be dumb not to introduce it. This is how they work, they make iterative steps and refine the package. With current regulations you can't expect a half second improvement every race, at least not solely from the chassis side. What you can do is bring updates that bring a tenth, or half a tenth every race, or you bring updates that will allow other components to work better, all these little updates start adding up. 4 or 5 races later they've improved by half a second relative to their competition, and as they begin to understand the chassis more and more, the engineers and drivers can squeeze more time from the car.

It's only a matter of time before they start out-developing their rivals in the mid-field, will it be enough to get them to the sharp end of the grid, maybe, maybe not.

“I have them in my calculations for the rest of the season to be honest,” said Hulkenberg.

“I knew that every weekend it seems like they pretty much bring something [new].

“It looks like that’s working well for them at the moment.”

[Pierce89]

Congrats to Honda, more competitive at this power circuit than at Monaco

Do you really believe the power unit is the reason they're decent here? Anyone who has an even slightly nuanced view of f1 knew that Mclaren's strength in 2nd and 3rd gear corners this season would make them strong here, chassis wise.They've also stated thatwith the Honda PU their aero developmenthas been more efficiency targeted than in the past(when they could afford to use less efficient df because they didn't have a power deficit). That aero work was always going to pay itself back at tracks like this one (though they admitted their unwillingness to add draggy df hurt them at Monaco.)

[flmkane]

...
The chassis seems to work very well, but I wonder if they aren't over-doing things with all these front wing iterations. It seems they are manufacturing wings for each marginal step they can see in the wind tunnel, but resource-efficiency wise that cannot be optimal.
...

The costs from a manufacturing perspective will be negligible. They need the person who produces the carbon work anyway and the carbon fibre itself costs comparatively nothing. Their manufacturing costs are pretty much fixed anyway when they produce the parts themselves. And therefore it would not be smart not to make use of new knowledge. And McLaren should have a strong enough aero department to actually find improvements.

It's not a single person who works in the carbon shop. It's a group of people, working in shifts. Manufacturing cost might be fixed, but fixed at an unnessasarily high level. Over-capacity is waste.

The amount of design iterations also indicate an trail and error approach. Now every team will do this, but Mclaren to a greater extent. The amount of tweaks they bring seem to suggest that their start-of-season wing wasn't very good, and/or they are unsure of the effictiveness of the upgrades, and which development direction to follow.

Wait a sec... This is modern F1. Simulations are insanely advanced but testing is banned. You do perhaps a few hundred design iterations in the simulators but ultimately you HAVE to test it and that involves bolting parts onto the car. Since testing is banned you can only do it during the race weekend. Hence so many front wings.

Nobody complains when Red Bull brings so many front wings. Apparently McLaren is real easy to hate.

Considering how screwed they were last year they are doing great. Alonso a q3 regular now. Points are regular. Tokens left in the bag. This is not bad at all

[Mad]

Congrats to Honda, more competitive at this power circuit than at Monaco

Do you really believe the power unit is the reason they're decent here? Anyone who has an even slightly nuanced view of f1 knew that Mclaren's strength in 2nd and 3rd gear corners this season would make them strong here, chassis wise.They've also stated thatwith the Honda PU their aero developmenthas been more efficiency targeted than in the past(when they could afford to use less efficient df because they didn't have a power deficit). That aero work was always going to pay itself back at tracks like this one (though they admitted their unwillingness to add draggy df hurt them at Monaco.)

Well they are running higher downforce which is partially responsible for lower top speed. The PU work gets easily neglected amid all the aero work talk.
Hamilton had a top speed of 330km/h yesterday, 3 more than button but a lot down compared to williams and manor, doesnt mean he has worse PU.

[Paul]

It makes sense to bring updates as often as possible, even if they are part of a bigger update and don't improve times by themselves. That way it is possible to validate the numbers early in the development process and avoid blind alleys of development, where big updates cost a lot of resources, but bring less than estimated.