2018 Scuderia Toro Rosso F1 Team - Honda

[Sieper]

You weren't made fun of at all. You stated TR used a brake problem to COVER UP a Spec 3 issue. The spec 3 that at that point wasn't being run in the car, information that was readily available (to you as well) and that is what triggered the correct responses you got. I feel you shouldn't have made that statement at all and best would have retracted it instead of now going more or less "on the attack" again saying that you were made fun off.

Now with that out of the way, Gasly has stated again (it was quoted on a Dutch F1 site this morning) that he expects to race the Spec C this weekend so I am hoping for it to come true (otherwise why state that again, then best just keep mouth shut) but I too share some doubt if it will materialize, let's hope so. We don't have to wait so long.

[HPD]

Everybody who made fun of my comment, Tanabee just admitted there was some unusual behaviour of the engine af FP1 and 2 besides the "calibration" problem. Again, i hope that iḿ wrong. But i don believe they will use the new PU at Suzuka.

The negative is that the debut of Spec 3 was delayed. This was not in the plans.
If you're worried about reliability, Tanabe does not seem very worried. He said that 2 or 3 days of work would be enough to solve. But it's F1, and nothing is certain.

The positive is that they saw a step forward in performance.

[rogazilla]

Everybody who made fun of my comment, Tanabee just admitted there was some unusual behaviour of the engine af FP1 and 2 besides the "calibration" problem. Again, i hope that iḿ wrong. But i don believe they will use the new PU at Suzuka.

Not making fun of you but you misunderstood the timeline and what's on the car. Spec 3 was used on FRIDAY and they reverted back to Spec 2 for Saturday and Sunday.

The qualifying and race did not have Spec 3 on the car. FULL STOP. Therefore Sunday's Brake problem has no relation to the spec 3 engine. To indicate that the brake issue was used as a smoke screen on Sunday to mask the problem on the spec 3 engine is not correct.

[Edax]

This is from the FIA's parts replacement during Parc Fermé report. STR did change some things during Parc Fermé, including brake components, but they were all identical parts. Something went wrong with the installation perhaps?

Scuderia Toro Rosso Honda:

Car 28:
LHS floor tyre seal
LHS and RHS rear brake duct blanking

Car 10:
RHS forward floor livelock
Rear brake friction material
LHS and RHS rear brake duct blanking
Rear brake wear and caliper pressure sensor calibrations

Those parts indicate changes for the rear but the failures were in the front brakes. Maybe parts of the brake system suffered some kind of fault due to an installation error of a harness etc. That it happened in both cars seems more like a design or batch issue.

Looking at the spin IMHO it could have easily be caused by a rear brake failure. As far as I am aware the only reference to the front brake is from the quote, that is parroted by all the media.

Couldn’t it just be that they accidentally blanked the rear brakes on both cars too much and they got too hot.

Then it is simply the initial quote that is wrong, but the issue itself is reduced to a wrongly specified or botched work order on both cars. A guy putting a piece of tape in the wrong place sounds to me like a much simpler explanation then anything else.

[Big Tea]

This is from the FIA's parts replacement during Parc Fermé report. STR did change some things during Parc Fermé, including brake components, but they were all identical parts. Something went wrong with the installation perhaps?

Those parts indicate changes for the rear but the failures were in the front brakes. Maybe parts of the brake system suffered some kind of fault due to an installation error of a harness etc. That it happened in both cars seems more like a design or batch issue.

Looking at the spin IMHO it could have easily be caused by a rear brake failure. As far as I am aware the only reference to the front brake is from the quote, that is parroted by all the media.

Couldn’t it just be that they accidentally blanked the rear brakes on both cars too much and they got too hot.

Then it is simply the initial quote that is wrong, but the issue itself is reduced to a wrongly specified or botched work order on both cars. A guy putting a piece of tape in the wrong place sounds to me like a much simpler explanation then anything else.

It would be interesting to know how the wheels are cross-linked. If the fluid in one 'side' vaporised would it be opposite corner, one front one rear, or back/front only?

Standard is road going opposite sides front and rear, but that would be bad in a track car. Front/front and Rear/rear more sensible

[Jolle]

Those parts indicate changes for the rear but the failures were in the front brakes. Maybe parts of the brake system suffered some kind of fault due to an installation error of a harness etc. That it happened in both cars seems more like a design or batch issue.

Looking at the spin IMHO it could have easily be caused by a rear brake failure. As far as I am aware the only reference to the front brake is from the quote, that is parroted by all the media.

Couldn’t it just be that they accidentally blanked the rear brakes on both cars too much and they got too hot.

Then it is simply the initial quote that is wrong, but the issue itself is reduced to a wrongly specified or botched work order on both cars. A guy putting a piece of tape in the wrong place sounds to me like a much simpler explanation then anything else.

It would be interesting to know how the wheels are cross-linked. If the fluid in one 'side' vaporised would it be opposite corner, one front one rear, or back/front only?

Standard is road going opposite sides front and rear, but that would be bad in a track car. Front/front and Rear/rear more sensible

F1 cars’ brakes are front-front, with a very simple master cylinder to brake calipers setup and the rears linked with, next to a master cylinder a secondary cylinder linked to a control unit for the BBW.

[super cool]

There's a debate about Spec 3 for Japan. I guess it's more serious than it looked like.

[ispano6]

Stay off whatever you are smoking. They didnt use spec 3 in sat and sun. So why didn't the brakes fail in Sat if it was due to engine. Spec 3 clearly had harsh upshifts and potential oscillation issues causing harmful stress and wear. My hunch is the next race we might see a complete RedBull designed gearbox which syncs with the new spec.

The regulations state you can't change gear ratios during the season but what parts of the gear case can you change? I am under the impression you can't change much or any of the internals unless it's for gear mesh or better synchro?

[Snorked]

There's a debate about Spec 3 for Japan. I guess it's more serious than it looked like.

The issue seems to be high rpms on the upshift which is causing abnormal vibrations? I can't see the full interview but in the comments, the interviewer writes:

It is remarkable in foreign articles, but "vibration" is said to be received in the image that the vibration caused by the turning of the engine is intense and will be broken (it seems that the interviewer and the writer do not understand so) In the case of Honda, it is vibration due to the change in the number of revolutions during the upshift.

This is a control software issue?

https://members.f1-life.net/race/74697/

[ispano6]

That translation is pretty misleading. The paragraph basically reads
"while we said earlier there weren't any issues running the new PU, at closer inspection, there were signs that more calibration would be necessary before it should be used in a race."

The title says "oscillations during upshifts". interview at Sochi 9/30 night before the race.

The cliffhanger question asks is it something that deems it unraceable? answer behind pay wall.

There is no word like broken or intense in the context of the engine whatsoever. In otherwords, it's nothing we don't already know.

[M840TR]

There's a debate about Spec 3 for Japan. I guess it's more serious than it looked like.

The issue seems to be high rpms on the upshift which is causing abnormal vibrations? I can't see the full interview but in the comments, the interviewer writes:

It is remarkable in foreign articles, but "vibration" is said to be received in the image that the vibration caused by the turning of the engine is intense and will be broken (it seems that the interviewer and the writer do not understand so) In the case of Honda, it is vibration due to the change in the number of revolutions during the upshift.

This is a control software issue?

https://members.f1-life.net/race/74697/

By every revolution I think he means the ratio of engine revs compared to transmission revs. For every set amount of crank revs the transmission revs a set amount. So not a software issue.

[M840TR]

That translation is pretty misleading. The paragraph basically reads
"while we said earlier there weren't any issues running the new PU, at closer inspection, there were signs that more calibration would be necessary before it should be used in a race."

The title says "oscillations during upshifts". interview at Sochi 9/30 night before the race.

The cliffhanger question asks is it something that deems it unraceable? answer behind pay wall.

There is no word like broken or intense in the context of the engine whatsoever. In otherwords, it's nothing we don't already know.

It's safe to assume this extent of vibrations can cause serious damage to the engine and chassis. It's kind of like a plane in turbulence.

[dren]

There's a debate about Spec 3 for Japan. I guess it's more serious than it looked like.

The issue seems to be high rpms on the upshift which is causing abnormal vibrations? I can't see the full interview but in the comments, the interviewer writes:

It is remarkable in foreign articles, but "vibration" is said to be received in the image that the vibration caused by the turning of the engine is intense and will be broken (it seems that the interviewer and the writer do not understand so) In the case of Honda, it is vibration due to the change in the number of revolutions during the upshift.

This is a control software issue?

https://members.f1-life.net/race/74697/

By every revolution I think he means the ratio of engine revs compared to transmission revs. For every set amount of crank revs the transmission revs a set amount. So not a software issue.

Everything I've read quotes from, Tanabe said it is an issue that needs calibration to sort out. I took that as software tuning. My guess is it's in the algorithms used to match engine and gear speed when shifting. I wouldn't think the physical mounting of the PU to gearbox has changed with this new PU spec.

[maguetox]

Our friend Albert Fabrega is confirming the Spec 3 is ready for Susuka after the dyno adjustments. This Spec 3 is more powerfull than Renault's PU.

[!Technical]

Hope it is the truth! Now is the chassis decent enough to fight with Sauber?