Honda F1 project leader Yusuke Hasegawa has outlined a number of reasons why Honda has been struggling so badly in the beginning of the 2017 Formula One season. He confirmed that lots of problems were not discovered while running on the dynamo meter.
Do you have a video example?GhostF1 wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 02:28This cannot come soon enough so they can work on turning up the wick and introducing performance. That engine is turned down so far that this whole "130R every car losing 50kph and revs dropping looks bad" chat, the Honda's sounded woefully low revving and there was some resonance that onboards sounded like the engine had a big end knock lol. It was depressing.
I'm keeping my expectations low. They also say in the article that neither the chassis nor the power unit can be significantly updated in the near future.GhostF1 wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 02:28Ok so it appears they did indeed test something and "the item" was successful in greatly reducing the vibrations but they chose not to implement it during subsequent sessions and the race on "reliability grounds". Interesting whatever this fix is that it concerned them enough to not use it for the moment.
But they now believe it's a hugely positive sign and they know what needs to be done between now and Miami. Mike Krack now believes the vibration issue will be completely solved by Miami and this conversation will be a thing of the past.
https://jp.motorsport.com/f1/news/aston ... /10809478/
That's basically what Krack said, he had doubts about the reliability of the part. The current version wasn't designed to be raced. That they'll have a racable version for Miami. That's my interpretation at least.collindsilva wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 08:25Maybe a temporary fix run during practice, they tested to check if it was working, with 1 month break we can expect cars some performance and potential of the chassis..ElliotDelgado wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 08:21Good! finally some encouraging signs, it's interesting that they decided not to use them for Q and R due to reliability concerns, that makes me think that whatever the changes are they are not in the fixing points it's got to be something internal, in my mind at least.GhostF1 wrote: ↑30 Mar 2026, 02:28Ok so it appears they did indeed test something and "the item" was successful in greatly reducing the vibrations but they chose not to implement it during subsequent sessions and the race on "reliability grounds". Interesting whatever this fix is that it concerned them enough to not use it for the moment.
But they now believe it's a hugely positive sign and they know what needs to be done between now and Miami. Mike Krack now believes the vibration issue will be completely solved by Miami and this conversation will be a thing of the past.
https://jp.motorsport.com/f1/news/aston ... /10809478/
This cannot come soon enough so they can work on turning up the wick and introducing performance. That engine is turned down so far that this whole "130R every car losing 50kph and revs dropping looks bad" chat, the Honda's sounded woefully low revving and there was some resonance that onboards sounded like the engine had a big end knock lol. It was depressing.
thanks for keeping this thread with posts like this guys!
This might be a trick of the angles but... is Ferrari's MGU-K in the vee of the ICE???Brahmal wrote: ↑09 Apr 2026, 03:30https://www.automotivepowertraintechnol ... x863-1.jpg
Honda
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HELnTNWaIAI ... name=small
RBPT
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HElwYzqXsAA ... name=large
Ferrari
The MGUK is offset to the side with all power units, but Honda looks to be the furthest outboard. I wonder if length of the linkage contributes to vibrations.
It's the perspective, I believe, and typical of longer camera lens "stacking" compressing effect in this scenario.GhostF1 wrote: ↑09 Apr 2026, 08:24This might be a trick of the angles but... is Ferrari's MGU-K in the vee of the ICE???Brahmal wrote: ↑09 Apr 2026, 03:30https://www.automotivepowertraintechnol ... x863-1.jpg
Honda
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HELnTNWaIAI ... name=small
RBPT
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HElwYzqXsAA ... name=large
Ferrari
The MGUK is offset to the side with all power units, but Honda looks to be the furthest outboard. I wonder if length of the linkage contributes to vibrations.
If I were them, I would place the MGU-K right in front of the crankshaft, precisely in the middle of the engine. The battery packs would be on either side, and if necessary, some on top of the MGU-K, instead of on the side like Honda's; they've already placed another pack on top.Farnborough wrote: ↑09 Apr 2026, 08:45It's the perspective, I believe, and typical of longer camera lens "stacking" compressing effect in this scenario.GhostF1 wrote: ↑09 Apr 2026, 08:24This might be a trick of the angles but... is Ferrari's MGU-K in the vee of the ICE???Brahmal wrote: ↑09 Apr 2026, 03:30https://www.automotivepowertraintechnol ... x863-1.jpg
Honda
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HELnTNWaIAI ... name=small
RBPT
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HElwYzqXsAA ... name=large
Ferrari
The MGUK is offset to the side with all power units, but Honda looks to be the furthest outboard. I wonder if length of the linkage contributes to vibrations.
The MGU is much longer than it appears here (in flattened perspective) the length of It's casing at oblique angle to the camera image plane.
It does show though, that it's sited almost halfway up the LHS cylinder bank (you can see the camshaft housing for that bank just above it) showing that MGU is not in the central V of engine. But, it is lifted from the base level of crankshaft/crankcase and looks to project forwards ABOVE the battery store area typical for the designs we've seen previously. That's unlike the Honda installation that appears to be at lowest point and BESIDE the battery store.
