General Honda F1 Topic

[techman]

i am happy honda updated the mgu h. i am pretty sure all the engine manufacturers will suffer some sort of reliability problems in 2018 , it is bound to happen. lots of races and the systems will pop. personally i hope honda doesnt stop their performance development and keep driving through.

Edit Thunder: Let's not get personal.

[ivanlesk]

i am happy honda updated the mgu h. i am pretty sure all the engine manufacturers will suffer some sort of reliability problems in 2018 , it is bound to happen. lots of races and the systems will pop. personally i hope honda doesnt stop their performance development and keep driving through.

What was actually updated?

[etusch]

You are saying Hartley has 3 and Gasly has 2 PU ( Gasly started to use 2d and 1 unused ) But everybody forget something. Honda planning strategic penalties. Renault also declared such a plan. So they are not see themselves restricted with 3. I think that other 2 has a "B" plan for using 4th engine in season.
Another thing is Honda says his engine performance will be seen second part of season. Reliability was good at tests so this engine can run longer or can breake in the first use. It is not in best condition but it is not that bad too.

strategic penalties after race 1? are you delusional

You are extacting what you want from it. But I and nobody said that failure is good. It is unexpected.No body said planned for it. Lets say they were planning 2 penalties but they have to take 3 ? Thats too bad ? lets say they were planning 2 penalties. Do you have any data to show they will be forced to take more because of that failure? You just watched one race. But you are very detirmined to forget test.

[etusch]

You are saying Hartley has 3 and Gasly has 2 PU ( Gasly started to use 2d and 1 unused ) But everybody forget something. Honda planning strategic penalties. Renault also declared such a plan. So they are not see themselves restricted with 3. I think that other 2 has a "B" plan for using 4th engine in season.
Another thing is Honda says his engine performance will be seen second part of season. Reliability was good at tests so this engine can run longer or can breake in the first use. It is not in best condition but it is not that bad too.

Sorry, but after 4 years in development and having to change 3 components after first race is far from "not that bad".

Honda racing for 4 years. I see that you have any intend to accept second architecture so you have to say 5 or 6 years. Development and racing are different things.

[ivanlesk]

You are saying Hartley has 3 and Gasly has 2 PU ( Gasly started to use 2d and 1 unused ) But everybody forget something. Honda planning strategic penalties. Renault also declared such a plan. So they are not see themselves restricted with 3. I think that other 2 has a "B" plan for using 4th engine in season.
Another thing is Honda says his engine performance will be seen second part of season. Reliability was good at tests so this engine can run longer or can breake in the first use. It is not in best condition but it is not that bad too.

strategic penalties after race 1? are you delusional

You are extacting what you want from it. But I and nobody said that failure is good. It is unexpected.No body said planned for it. Lets say they were planning 2 penalties but they have to take 3 ? Thats too bad ? lets say they were planning 2 penalties. Do you have any data to show they will be forced to take more because of that failure? You just did one race. But you are very detirmined to forget test.

Strategic penalty is one thing, forced penalty is jet another thing.
After all the problems in recent years and break down in first race doesn't look promising for Honda. After running (probably detuned) engine in testing in cold weather I will not build my hopes high.

If they can't produce reliable engine after 3 years, it doesn't really matter if it is even more year's in development. It's worse if it is more but still you have unreliable engine.

[techman]

it was a reliability update. so no big drama. i cant see any engine lasting the season without some sort of reliability problems. Last year honda i have to admit at the begining had some design flaws but they corrected them and looked very strong in the end of last year.

[PhillipM]

It's a reliability update because of a failure of a unit in the very first race of the season, it's a big drama, that's a hell of a failure rate from brand new units expected to last 7 races.

[RZS10]

Gotta love the unrelenting optimism and confidence in Honda's competence (or rather delusion)

There's no way that they managed to update/fix a part (properly) within 1.5 weeks (so fault analysis, development, production, implementation, testing) so it is an update they had in the pipeline which they probably did not want to introduce so early in the season ... ergo they had a rubbish part which could not take a hit from a curb (lmao) they had to replace with an updated one and they can only hope for it to be better than the last one

[techman]

It's a reliability update because of a failure of a unit in the very first race of the season, it's a big drama, that's a hell of a failure rate from brand new units expected to last 7 races.

if the mgu h problem persist which i dont think, then its a concern. but it looks like the bump had a bearing on this mgu h failure. so iam not concern. there will be no manufacturer that will not suffer reliability in this season of some sort.

the people that want this to be a big drama are those who want honda to fail. so negativity from them is not suprising.

[ivanlesk]

it was a reliability update. so no big drama. i cant see any engine lasting the season without some sort of reliability problems. Last year honda i have to admit at the begining had some design flaws but they corrected them and looked very strong in the end of last year.

That's my problem with it. I don't think it was reliability update. It's probably update that was planned for later in season and i hope is tested enough.

[McHonda]

It's a reliability update because of a failure of a unit in the very first race of the season, it's a big drama, that's a hell of a failure rate from brand new units expected to last 7 races.

if the mgu h problem persist which i dont think, then its a concern. but it looks like the bump had a bearing on this mgu h failure. so iam not concern. there will be no manufacturer that will not suffer reliability in this season of some sort.

the people that want this to be a big drama are those who want honda to fail. so negativity from them is not suprising.

Source?

[loner]

That's my problem with it. I don't think it was reliability update. It's probably update that was planned for later in season and i hope is tested enough.

no one gives a slightest fly STR is test bed for RBR-Honda 2019 let them iron whatever needs to be fixed
if they can reach some ponies more than Renault, RBR chassis will breakthrow i need some one to dogfight Hamilton on
a weekly basis for the sake of some action.

[GhostF1]

I seem to recall last year everyone wanting Honda to just take the mindset of "don't take reliability risks to avoid penalties, just introduce things asap, don't try and stretch the chance of it surviving a race".

This is EXACTLY what they are doing now. Tanabe said that the ICE was functional after the Turbo/MGU-H failure however there was evidence to suggest it had damaged the ICE and they are not interested in the risk of running that. I am 100% behind them with that decision. Their mindset last year, likely also with McLaren's input, was to save every component and they would of run the ICE with the new MGU-H.

Whoever previously stated that "a turbo failure that can cause a knock on effect to the ICE is a poor design"... I think maybe you don't understand the principles of what a turbocharger is and its relationship with the induction and exhaust systems.. 100% prevention with zero effect on the units capability is nigh on impossible, especially with the constraints of weight, materials etc placed on them.

And the 50% reliability comment is.. well laughable, there is what? 2 engines on the field versus 6 for each other manufacturer? So yes, while being statistically true during the GP's this year it's a foolish number. Let's include the whole year shall we. Through Honda's stellar running in testing, how many Renault's went bust and how often? There was a few Ferrari issues also? I'm also hearing a lot of Merc's with heat issues considering it's been one GP, Hamilton having to back off, Valteri PU running hot, Stroll needing a replacement engine as well, possible issues arising? Bahrain will be interesting. Like if you want to call the kettle black, let's call the kettle black.

I want Honda to use 10 engines if necessary, Toro Rosso have made it clear that's what they are letting them do, so just do it. James Key has said he's more excited for the STR14 and Honda are excited for the late version of the RA618 and by extension the 619 in the first fully integrated STR-Honda chassis.

Their reliability OVERALL based on this ONE race is still too hard to make solid conclusions.

[gshevlin]

The rule change to 3 sets of powerplant components is shaping up to be a disaster. Mario Ilien in an interview last year warned that it would drive costs up, not down. We have 2 powerplant suppliers already talking of "strategic" penalties, Lewis Hamilton being limited in his chase of Sebastian Vettel due to engine life concerns. This is making Formula 1 look bush league.

[johnny comelately]

circa 1987 -
"............, Honda’s engineers took some wrong turnings over the next few seasons – the company’s policy of rotating its design groups every few years worked wonders for education but not always so well for race results...."