2017 Mclaren F1 Team - Honda

[ZakB]

What causes my displeasure towards Boullier and the Fat Yank, are their ways of management. The way they talk bad of their partners in public is absolutely not done.

I've found Zak Brown nothing but professional.

Indeed, I think they've been far too nice in the last two years. Honda are a bunch of no good amateurs that wanted to do their own way. They lack budget, expertise, resources and are located in the wrong place.

[ZakB]

Really dissappointed as a longtime fan of this team.. I wished we could get the fat Yank and Frenchman out and make Ron return. That's the true McLaren leader.

R.I.P.
1966-2017

Everything in the past always looks better, which is the reason people still expect that Honda will deliver. Honda has 110 winless races now, F1 record is 119 (Honda). Good luck with that. McLaren just wants three good years and after that a lot will change in F1.

McLaren will not have 3 good years, going with Renault. They will be 4th team at max. Without a title sponsor, without prize money, without sufficient funds, without top personnel, becoming Williams 2.0. Good luck with that! =D>

Sufficient funds? Says who? Their top staff is going to leave if they are running around with these --- stains in the back. McLaren will be fine financially, more sponsor income, more prize money, just imagine how much money they actually lost thanks to Honda. Just look at the facilities and the company McLaren is, no way they are going to become the new Williams. Fighting for podiums would already be a major improvement, but keep thinking that Honda will deliver the most powerful engine in the coming three years. Mercedes and Ferrari didn't want to provide McLaren with engines, because they are not Williams, but a force to be reckoned with.

[Phil]

When Mercedes sold its McLaren shares and bought Brawn, they got downgraded from works team to customer team. At the time (and still), the only way to still be a works team is Honda. That’s why RedBull might be up for a Honda deal with STR, so they can abandon Renault in the near future to get the full works team privileges and status again.

In hindsight the Honda PU was a bad deal. At the time it was the only deal that made sense.

I may be wrong, but how Ron underlined the significance of needing more than simply a customer-engine made it sound like the break up with Mercedes ran deeper than just "engines". Wasn't Mercedes initially interested in taking over the Woking team? Ron didn't want any of that and Mercedes ended up buying Brawn instead.

Then in the years 2010 to 2012, Mercedes continued with large investments, poaching engineers left right and center too. This climaxed in late 2012 when they brought Lewis Hamilton on board as well as senior staff and engineers. There were many articles about Mercedes having too many cooks that would ruin the "soup", but from McLaren's point of view, that can't have been seen as too positive, watching their initial partner of many years outgrow them at an alarming rate. I don't know, but from late 2012 on, it just seemed the break-up between McLaren and Mercedes was followed by a bit of bad blood too, which gave Ron a lot of reason to hype up the significance of the old successful relationship with Honda.

No doubt, being in a customer-relationship was always going to present a handicap in an "engine formula". RedBull, Sauber... any team that had a sub par engine felt the significance of that. But since then, the gap between the engines has narrowed and the significance decreased. Doesn't mean a works-team such as Mercedes can't still get a substantial advantage out of their package by optimizing their entire car around it.

What has me wondering is; McLaren did want to have that "specialized" engine. That's why they partnered Honda. The only sense in having a works-engine, is if the car design team has an insight to the engine, the dimensions, the specification to achieve an advantage in packaging and aero efficiency. If this is what McLaren wanted, how can Honda be alone responsible for a failing product if that product is as much a result of McLarens specification?

Disclaimer: I am not suggesting Honda didn't fall short by lack of their own understanding and ability. I am questioning if the requirements set by McLaren over engine size and specification was just too high for Honda to achieve realistically? McLaren and Honda are not in a customer relationship. As such, it's impossible to put the blame on one party alone. That engine, as a result of that partnership, must be every bit of a product by McLaren as it is by Honda.



I suppose this highlights the problem when you have a joint venture with two companies taking control of different aspects of the car. The engine manufacturer might force the car team for a compromise and vice-versa. The car/aero team wants a small engine with zero packaging because every bit of it means an aero compromise. The engine team wants the opposite. A joint venture requires both to make the right compromises between packaging, power, weight and efficiency to come out with the best potential.

[mclaren111]

Really dissappointed as a longtime fan of this team.. I wished we could get the fat Yank and Frenchman out and make Ron return. That's the true McLaren leader.

R.I.P.
1966-2017

Everything in the past always looks better, which is the reason people still expect that Honda will deliver. Honda has 110 winless races now, F1 record is 119 (Honda). Good luck with that. McLaren just wants three good years and after that a lot will change in F1.

McLaren will not have 3 good years, going with Renault. They will be 4th team at max. Without a title sponsor, without prize money, without sufficient funds, without top personnel, becoming Williams 2.0. Good luck with that! =D>

Agree 200% - Honda is only way forward. How people think Renault will be better is beyond comprehension

[ZakB]

When Mercedes sold its McLaren shares and bought Brawn, they got downgraded from works team to customer team. At the time (and still), the only way to still be a works team is Honda. That’s why RedBull might be up for a Honda deal with STR, so they can abandon Renault in the near future to get the full works team privileges and status again.

In hindsight the Honda PU was a bad deal. At the time it was the only deal that made sense.

I may be wrong, but how Ron underlined the significance of needing more than simply a customer-engine made it sound like the break up with Mercedes ran deeper than just "engines". Wasn't Mercedes initially interested in taking over the Woking team? Ron didn't want any of that and Mercedes ended up buying Brawn instead.

Then in the years 2010 to 2012, Mercedes continued with large investments, poaching engineers left right and center too. This climaxed in late 2012 when they brought Lewis Hamilton on board as well as senior staff and engineers. There were many articles about Mercedes having too many cooks that would ruin the "soup", but from McLaren's point of view, that can't have been seen as too positive, watching their initial partner of many years outgrow them at an alarming rate. I don't know, but from late 2012 on, it just seemed the break-up between McLaren and Mercedes was followed by a bit of bad blood too, which gave Ron a lot of reason to hype up the significance of the old successful relationship with Honda.

No doubt, being in a customer-relationship was always going to present a handicap in an "engine formula". RedBull, Sauber... any team that had a sub par engine felt the significance of that. But since then, the gap between the engines has narrowed and the significance decreased. Doesn't mean a works-team such as Mercedes can't still get a substantial advantage out of their package by optimizing their entire car around it.

What has me wondering is; McLaren did want to have that "specialized" engine. That's why they partnered Honda. The only sense in having a works-engine, is if the car design team has an insight to the engine, the dimensions, the specification to achieve an advantage in packaging and aero efficiency. If this is what McLaren wanted, how can Honda be alone responsible for a failing product if that product is as much a result of McLarens specification?

Disclaimer: I am not suggesting Honda didn't fall short by lack of their own understanding and ability. I am questioning if the requirements set by McLaren over engine size and specification was just too high for Honda to achieve realistically? McLaren and Honda are not in a customer relationship. As such, it's impossible to put the blame on one party alone. That engine, as a result of that partnership, must be every bit of a product by McLaren as it is by Honda.



I suppose this highlights the problem when you have a joint venture with two companies taking control of different aspects of the car. The engine manufacturer might force the car team for a compromise and vice-versa. The car/aero team wants a small engine with zero packaging because every bit of it means an aero compromise. The engine team wants the opposite. A joint venture requires both to make the right compromises between packaging, power, weight and efficiency to come out with the best potential.

Yeah, let's blame McLaren, lol. You are dealing with a Japanese culture, they don't want help from the outside. McLaren should have run their engine program and the R&D development should have been located in the UK. Honda didn't have the budget, staff and facilities to compete with the others.

Everything in the past always looks better, which is the reason people still expect that Honda will deliver. Honda has 110 winless races now, F1 record is 119 (Honda). Good luck with that. McLaren just wants three good years and after that a lot will change in F1.

McLaren will not have 3 good years, going with Renault. They will be 4th team at max. Without a title sponsor, without prize money, without sufficient funds, without top personnel, becoming Williams 2.0. Good luck with that! =D>

Agree 200% - Honda is only way forward. How people think Renault will be better is beyond comprehension

Yeah, the last three years have been great.

[erlik]

I suppose this highlights the problem when you have a joint venture with two companies taking control of different aspects of the car. The engine manufacturer might force the car team for a compromise and vice-versa. The car/aero team wants a small engine with zero packaging because every bit of it means an aero compromise. The engine team wants the opposite. A joint venture requires both to make the right compromises between packaging, power, weight and efficiency to come out with the best potential.

I think it was pointed out before that Mclaren supposedly demanded compact engine but Honda is to blame because they accepted that challenge, task they could not finish successfully. Anyway, with different politics, mentality, pride, more resources in engine development, outside experts... situation might be different now, but it is what it is.

[Thunder]

People thinking Funds will be a huge Problem if they divorce with Honda -> https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/mcla ... al-947922/

"We're here to win, that's what makes us successful, so we're going to take a sporting decision. We can't afford not to be on the podium – it's a big decision that has lots of elements to it, and economics are one.

"Fortunately we have extremely committed shareholders that we can make a sporting decision and deal with the economics. We're not financially challenged, so we can navigate any financial situation.

[Phil]

Thanks Thunders. While I don't disagree that the shareholders of McLaren are very wealthy, I do have my doubts over if "podium finishes" will be any more of a probability with a Renault engine. We have 2 Mercedes engined cars and 2 Ferrari. Statistically, these cars will already occupy the top 4 spots as a result of a better engine. With a Renault engine, they will be in direct competition with RedBull, who, I'm sorry to say, just seems more capable. Even if we assume they could equal RedBull (which would be very impressive in my book), it still means they'd be fighting for position 5 to 8 more often than not.

Renault engine or not, there's no way I can see them battling for wins even under the most optimistic circumstances. And when that sets in AND they've dumped the millions by Honda, what then?

[Alonso Fan]

I'm kind of torn between whether I think Honda or Renault is a better option for next year. Although I think the likelihood of Renault coming good is more than Honda coming good.

Perhaps it's a good short term option.

Slightly OT but who here still thinks a red bull Honda works deal is sweet and lucrative?

[Jolle]

When Mercedes sold its McLaren shares and bought Brawn, they got downgraded from works team to customer team. At the time (and still), the only way to still be a works team is Honda. That’s why RedBull might be up for a Honda deal with STR, so they can abandon Renault in the near future to get the full works team privileges and status again.

In hindsight the Honda PU was a bad deal. At the time it was the only deal that made sense.

I may be wrong, but how Ron underlined the significance of needing more than simply a customer-engine made it sound like the break up with Mercedes ran deeper than just "engines". Wasn't Mercedes initially interested in taking over the Woking team? Ron didn't want any of that and Mercedes ended up buying Brawn instead.

Then in the years 2010 to 2012, Mercedes continued with large investments, poaching engineers left right and center too. This climaxed in late 2012 when they brought Lewis Hamilton on board as well as senior staff and engineers. There were many articles about Mercedes having too many cooks that would ruin the "soup", but from McLaren's point of view, that can't have been seen as too positive, watching their initial partner of many years outgrow them at an alarming rate. I don't know, but from late 2012 on, it just seemed the break-up between McLaren and Mercedes was followed by a bit of bad blood too, which gave Ron a lot of reason to hype up the significance of the old successful relationship with Honda.

No doubt, being in a customer-relationship was always going to present a handicap in an "engine formula". RedBull, Sauber... any team that had a sub par engine felt the significance of that. But since then, the gap between the engines has narrowed and the significance decreased. Doesn't mean a works-team such as Mercedes can't still get a substantial advantage out of their package by optimizing their entire car around it.

What has me wondering is; McLaren did want to have that "specialized" engine. That's why they partnered Honda. The only sense in having a works-engine, is if the car design team has an insight to the engine, the dimensions, the specification to achieve an advantage in packaging and aero efficiency. If this is what McLaren wanted, how can Honda be alone responsible for a failing product if that product is as much a result of McLarens specification?

Disclaimer: I am not suggesting Honda didn't fall short by lack of their own understanding and ability. I am questioning if the requirements set by McLaren over engine size and specification was just too high for Honda to achieve realistically? McLaren and Honda are not in a customer relationship. As such, it's impossible to put the blame on one party alone. That engine, as a result of that partnership, must be every bit of a product by McLaren as it is by Honda.



I suppose this highlights the problem when you have a joint venture with two companies taking control of different aspects of the car. The engine manufacturer might force the car team for a compromise and vice-versa. The car/aero team wants a small engine with zero packaging because every bit of it means an aero compromise. The engine team wants the opposite. A joint venture requires both to make the right compromises between packaging, power, weight and efficiency to come out with the best potential.

Ron Dennis, Mercedes and it demise goes a lot deeper then just F1....

It's easier to understand to see it as different teams.

In 80-ish Ron Dennis merged his racing team with help from investors with McLaren and dominated all the way until Honda pulled out at the end of 92. After a few years of searching (Ford customer engine and a Peugeot), F1 had changed. Ferrari had an no limits budget and one by one the old teams just gave in. First Benneton, then Williams, etc etc. The new era of F1 was big car companies with bigger budgets then any titel sponsor could give you. This made way for Toyota, BMW and Mercedes.

Mercedes decided to go all in and bought a majority stake in McLaren. Although Ron Dennis was CEO, it wasn't his company. It was a part of Mercedes. Thats why we had the SLR, the A-West McLaren and so on. This was before AMG was hot. Thats also why Haug was always there, etc etc etc. Hamilton (and Rosberg) were in fact Mercedes junior drivers, just like Schumacher and Werlinger before them (and in their time raced for Sauber in sports cars and F1)

Then came the big break up. The story goes there were two reasons. One was spy gate (loads of bad press) and the other one was the development of the MP4-12C and the SLS. Mercedes wanted a two seater sportscar, the vison of McLaren and Mercedes didn't "work" and Ron Dennis was ambitious and wanted to be a car manufacturer. So, just after Lewis Hamilton signed his net 3 year contract, Mercedes decided to start over again, selling its McLaren shares back to Dennis and the other shareholders, pulling out all of their support and finance in steps until it's final completion in 2012 somewhere.

Mercedes saw the mess after Spygate and the stubbornness of Dennis and activated plan B: buy another team (the old Honda team had great potential), "beefed" up AMG to make their sportscar with help from Steyr and one by one they got all their talents back.

And then we're at the McLaren of today, Ron Dennis promised the other shareholders he would refinance the Mercedes shares his co-owners bought and he would buy them. This went wrong and is the biggest reason he had to go, nothing to do with Honda (but it didn't help of course).

so... it doesn't make any sense to compare McLaren from today with the Hakkinen, Raikkonen and Hamilton days because it wasn't McLaren at the time... it was Mercedes.

Besides that. Looking at all the other teams it's pretty clear you need a joint effort to make the package work, as a works outfit. Even RedBull, who has the works team money but not the "work as one" relation ship with Renault just can't really compete with Mercedes (or Ferrari).

[Avocado]

So McLaren renounced to using best PU because they were a customer team, and now they´ll use third best PU as third customer team.... great deal McLaren!!!

Red Bull - 212 points
McLaren - 11 points

Red Bull - 7 podiums, they won in Azerbaijan
McLaren - 0

Yes, fantastic deal.

[radosav]

After seing Ric at Monza i am looking forward to see what can Prodromu do with Renault engine.
He has good history with Renault.

[adrianjordan]

I just wish they'd announce one way or the other just to stop all the will they won't they split guessing...

[damager21]

Everything in the past always looks better, which is the reason people still expect that Honda will deliver. Honda has 110 winless races now, F1 record is 119 (Honda). Good luck with that. McLaren just wants three good years and after that a lot will change in F1.

McLaren will not have 3 good years, going with Renault. They will be 4th team at max. Without a title sponsor, without prize money, without sufficient funds, without top personnel, becoming Williams 2.0. Good luck with that! =D>

Agree 200% - Honda is only way forward. How people think Renault will be better is beyond comprehension

McLaren are better off working with Honda till end of their contract than relying on Renault. If McLaren is not winning, 4th or 8th in the constructors does not matter much. By being 4th in the constructors, I don't expect McLaren to earn 100mn in sponsorship and revenue share. Honda is already offering huge monies plus free engines and paying for Alonso's salary

If we were to assume that Renault will be taking a big leap forward in 2018 and will be closer to Mercedes and Ferrari next year, I don't see why in such a situation Torro Rosso would consider switching to Honda.

Hence McLaren should stick with Honda

For Honda, its time to up the investments and resources in F1 because this really embarrassing. They need to do whatever it takes to have a strong engine in 2018

[diffuser]

Both sides of the argument are overstating their case:

Before the Honda partnership, McLaren was already on a downwards slope. They had the most powerful engine in 2013 but they couldn't win. In 2014 they started well in Australia, but inexplicably fell off a cliff afterwards. It's possible they used the wrong fuel and lubricants, but they also acknowledged they had other issues. So they acquired new design talent. The consensus around the paddock seems to be that their chassis is competitive.

Before the McLaren partnership, Honda unsuccessfully ran its own F1 operation. When they withdrew, Brawn took over their operation, and shoehorned a Mercedes engine into the chassis at the eleventh hour. Rubens Barichello expressed surprise at how powerful and easy-to-drive the Mercedes engine was. They won both the WDC and WCC in 2009. That team was bought by Mercedes and we know the rest.

Nobody has ever explained to me why Brawn decided to keep the chassis but ditch the engine (not trivial, considering the sort of design tolerances F1 deals with).

I'm not saying Honda is incompetent, or McLaren bears no share of the blame. But Honda is one of the largest manufacturers in the world, they have the talent and resources, yet they still can't get the job done. It seems to me the problem runs much deeper.

There is a lot of Renault bashing going on here, but the statistics show that their PU isn't all that bad. Their attempt to improve on the 2014 design failed spectacularly in 2015, but in 2014 and 2016 they powered RBR to 2nd place in the WCC. Based on RBR's performance in Monza today, I wouldn't be surprised if Renault actually leapfrogs Ferrari .

Brawn was hired by Honda a couple years before. He was running the Honda team. The whole year before Honda had no updates, At the time (Honda chassis/Brawn) was putting everything into the following year. When economic issues hit and Honda decided to leave F1. They left Brawn with whatever funding they had paid him and pulled PU. Brawn pleaded with Honda to no avail. He said they had a really good car/chassis and would be very close to the top. At that point he got the PU from Merc and rebranded the car Brawn.

In reality it was the Brawn Designed chassis with Honda funding that won that year.