What is the gap now vs the end of last season?
And it is definitely not a simple thing to catch up to Mercedes.
I would say it's more a cultural thing than an ignorant leadership thing.ringo wrote: ↑10 Jun 2017, 02:34from listening to this discussion; Honda's problem may well be bureaucratic in nature. The engineers may know the right thing to do and how much resources they need to do it. However, they probably have no power to influence the leadership; who may well be ignorant to what it takes to get results out of an F1 program.
This also explains why we say it should be easy to make heads and pistons in a week etc etc. but Honda just doesn't seem to be able to do it. Maybe they have a very cumbersome approval process to get the work moving?
Last year Alonso was 1.52 off pole, he was 1.3sec off RAI in FP2, if the gap is maintained they're essentially .2 closer to the lead as they were last year.MrPotatoHead wrote: ↑10 Jun 2017, 03:35What is the gap now vs the end of last season?
And it is definitely not a simple thing to catch up to Mercedes.
godlameroso wrote: ↑10 Jun 2017, 05:51Last year Alonso was 1.52 off pole, he was 1.3sec off RAI in FP2, if the gap is maintained they're essentially .2 closer to the lead as they were last year.MrPotatoHead wrote: ↑10 Jun 2017, 03:35What is the gap now vs the end of last season?
And it is definitely not a simple thing to catch up to Mercedes.
It's a hell of a feat if they're able to compete for points in spite of the power unit. It's hard to say, the Honda engine is much more compact than last year's engine and has much better weight distribution which can't be ignored. On the other hand McLaren has been working on this chassis for a few years. I'd say the chassis is closer to being competitive than the power of the engine, but both still need some work.makecry wrote: ↑10 Jun 2017, 05:53godlameroso wrote: ↑10 Jun 2017, 05:51Last year Alonso was 1.52 off pole, he was 1.3sec off RAI in FP2, if the gap is maintained they're essentially .2 closer to the lead as they were last year.MrPotatoHead wrote: ↑10 Jun 2017, 03:35What is the gap now vs the end of last season?
And it is definitely not a simple thing to catch up to Mercedes.
How much of that could be the chassis improvement and how much PU? What do you reckon, I hope the Q3 surprises us. I feel McLaren spoke up a bit early, they should have waited how the Canada race goes.
I wouldn't say that longer split turbo has marginal benefits. This affects the cooling, the mass balance of the car, and the potential size of the compressor. What we see this year as Ferrari leveling Mercedes is more due to their successful work with the tires, not because they have more powerful or drivable PU.McHonda wrote: ↑09 Jun 2017, 20:01With good reason I'm afraid. The longer split turbo has only marginal benefits and was singularly the trickiest part of the entire Mercedes concept. Taking it on was a fools errand I'm afraid, especially when you are trying to master other unfamiliar concepts such as the combustion concept at the same time and you're still playing catch up to the other manufacturers.j.yank wrote: ↑09 Jun 2017, 19:26We still hadn't seen what is the level of Honda this year - they are in process of development of split turbo Mercedes style and prechamber ignition, all of this in single year - if they succeed, this will be serious achievement. No other team has done this before. Also, still if you compare McLaren form this year with Ferrari last year, my claim is still valid - this year is 4th for McLaren, and the last year was 5th for Ferrari. This is natural to have reliability issues with such steep curve of learning.makecry wrote: ↑09 Jun 2017, 19:11
Not really. Ferrari last year was better than Honda this year. You are not getting the whole situation correctly assessed. Honda's PU is slow and sucks in reliability. The season is 1/3rd in and they already are taking penalties, this has not happened for any other PU manufacturer, even Renault.
There's a very good reason Ferrari, even with their dozens of former Mercedes PU engineers, still completely ignored it. It's just not needed to catch or better the Mercedes design and it takes far too long to master with too many knock-on effects until you do so.
The idea is to try and speed up the recovery process to catch the other manufacturers rather than create unnecessary hurdles for yourself. Refusing to copy the proven combustion techniques in favour of running R&D on your own ones but happily copying the hardest but low yielding component like the longer split turbo is just unfathomable to a F1 teams mindset. It's purely engineering posturing instead. Hence Brown's comments about appearing lost and needing an F1 culture in Sakura.
A silly decision that could prove terminal to the relationship I fear.
The affect on the air from heat transfer is most likely minuscule compared to the heat added through the compression process. You should note that Ferrari's cooling package is more compact.j.yank wrote: ↑10 Jun 2017, 08:08I wouldn't say that longer split turbo has marginal benefits. This affects the cooling, the mass balance of the car, and the potential size of the compressor. What we see this year as Ferrari leveling Mercedes is more due to their successful work with the tires, not because they have more powerful or drivable PU.
Ferrari and Mercedes are running in little old lady mode in Friday practice, and Ferrari are most likely using old engines too.godlameroso wrote: ↑10 Jun 2017, 05:51Last year Alonso was 1.52 off pole, he was 1.3sec off RAI in FP2, if the gap is maintained they're essentially .2 closer to the lead as they were last year.MrPotatoHead wrote: ↑10 Jun 2017, 03:35What is the gap now vs the end of last season?
And it is definitely not a simple thing to catch up to Mercedes.
Honda nearly at Renault level - that surely is blind optimism?godlameroso wrote: ↑10 Jun 2017, 03:02If it was really that easy Renault wouldn't be consistently languishing behind the other power units. Renault has consistently been behind both Mercedes and Ferrari, and Honda is nearly at the same power as Renault. It's not as easy as people say, if it were Red Bull would be closer to the front. Honda is improving faster than everyone else, but they've changed their power unit to a greater extent than all the other manufacturers. They've essentially started again from scratch, what Mercedes has had 3 race seasons to develop and mature, Honda has had to do it in 6 months, and people are surprised this was going to happen? The gap to the front is .2 seconds less than it was at this time last year, regardless of what people say they have improved. Compare that to the start of the season when they were 2.6 seconds off the pace, the gains are there but McLaren is behind in pit crew and strategy which makes it even harder to maximize their opportunities.
Would you say that Renault also have cultural issues in trying to reach the performance levels of Mercedes and Ferrari? Or is it just that what those two are doing is pushing the limits of understanding of combustion and electrical control?MrPotatoHead wrote: ↑10 Jun 2017, 03:41I would say it's more a cultural thing than an ignorant leadership thing.ringo wrote: ↑10 Jun 2017, 02:34from listening to this discussion; Honda's problem may well be bureaucratic in nature. The engineers may know the right thing to do and how much resources they need to do it. However, they probably have no power to influence the leadership; who may well be ignorant to what it takes to get results out of an F1 program.
This also explains why we say it should be easy to make heads and pistons in a week etc etc. but Honda just doesn't seem to be able to do it. Maybe they have a very cumbersome approval process to get the work moving?
The Japanese are a very polite and respectful culture and they tend to follow leadership and not speak out and question them. Spend some time in Japan and you will see this.
Honda also has a lot of young engineers.
It's what the data says. Honda have been there or thereabouts with Renault for some time. Wazari said they finished last season with a difference to Renault of single figures (contrary to popular belief). They had a wobble at the start of the season while they got the pu working, but when it does its a match for Renault.
The gains are there for sure but reliability is not!godlameroso wrote: ↑10 Jun 2017, 03:02The gap to the front is .2 seconds less than it was at this time last year, regardless of what people say they have improved. Compare that to the start of the season when they were 2.6 seconds off the pace, the gains are there but McLaren is behind in pit crew and strategy which makes it even harder to maximize their opportunities.
.... and then came the Race on Sunday where they have to save Fuel like no one else...mrluke wrote: ↑10 Jun 2017, 10:05It's what the data says. Honda have been there or thereabouts with Renault for some time. Wazari said they finished last season with a difference to Renault of single figures (contrary to popular belief). They had a wobble at the start of the season while they got the pu working, but when it does its a match for Renault.
#aerogollumturbof1 wrote: YOU SHALL NOT......STALLLLL!!!