63 replies to this topic

[F1Lurker]

Ultimately, now that Mclaren is a full fledged sports car manufacturer they clearly need to explore (get on with it) making their own F1 PU. Of course this is easier said than done but it is clearly necessary for their automotive business and their general brand.

 

Not to mention that if Honda under-performs for the next 4 years that might prove fatal to Mclaren as a F1 team and brand. It must be excruciating to have your very fate wholly dependent on someone who is doing a less than great job. Especially because there is no guarantee that Honda will ever be at the level of a Mercedes.

 

The problem is with the huge capital and lead time required for McLaren to go this route.

[FerrariV12]

Aren't the McLaren sportscar engines badge jobs built by Ricardo? I'm probably over-simplifying there but I doubt McLaren have engine-building facilities on the scale of the other manufacturers.

 

That's not to say they couldn't either badge a racing engine, or buy a specialist engine shop outright (like Merc did with the original Ilmor).

 

But ultimately it's a results business and if they feel they are better equipped (in the long term, no matter how bad they are now, and surely they'd have the same growing pains with their own motor) with works support from Honda, that's what they'll do.

[Imateria]

It's a none starter, the money required to set up the facilities for F1 engines coupled to the fact that they'd loose their main backer (Honda) means it's never going to happen.

[Ross Stonefeld]

If Honda and Renault are struggling, why would an independent at their first attempt do better?

 

If an engine company struggles as a constructor(Honda), why would a constructor want to try engines(McLaren)?

[Ross Stonefeld]

ps how are they going to pay for their own engines?

[FredF1]

ps how are they going to pay for their own engines?

 

I'm sure the McLaren F1 team can spare one or two of their many sponsors.

[pdac]

Please ...

 

Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault were the first to try to create one of these new PUs. Mercedes did a good job, but both Ferrari and Renault failed. Ferrari seem to be getting on top of things after 1 year, but Renault still can't. Honda have tried and are still struggling to get anywhere.

 

So why do people keep thinking that Honda or Audi or some other lot are going to do it. They can't. Get over this "my team has a poor PU so they must ditch their current supplier and get someone to make one from scratch".

[MrAerodynamicist]

Well I'd be more confident in Audi/Porsche/Toyota having a less troublesome entry, given they have all have actual experience in running ERS systems in a challenging motorsport environment. 

[RainyAfterlifeDaylight]

McLaren receive free power unit from HONDA like RedBull from RENAULT. I imagine the costs of power unit designing and developing will be very high and as some members mentioned there is no guarantee that McLaren have the ability to produce better power unit than HONDA.

Edited by RYARLE, 08 June 2015 - 17:52.

[GrumpyYoungMan]

Won't happen.

 

In my opinion all the manufacters ICE, are more or less on the same level, the only major differences is how all the components of the PU intergrate with each other and then the chassis.

[F1Lurker]

I am not saying that it is easy or cheap. But the reality is that if Mclaren is going to continue with an automotive division their goal must be to emulate Ferrari and to become a complete manufacturer. I am not talking about chucking Honda tomorrow. But certainly in the medium to long term Mclaren really should develop their own engines and associated technology.

 

Basically, Mclaren is structured in a way that success in auto racing is crucial to their business model. Imagine what happens to McLaren and their brand if Honda never builds a competitive PU. Good business strategy requires them to consider that possibility and to have contingency plans. Even Red Bull (which is not in the automotive business) is/was considering moving their PU manufacturing in house. I think certain technologies like 3D printing (which can now be done with practically any material (titanium, stainless steel ..etc), can reduce some of the costs associated with traditional manufacturing.

[GrumpyYoungMan]

Maybe if they actually built a road car engine I could see them making a jump to a F1 PU, but I can not see it happening.

 

They would have to surly walk before they can run, so would need to start by making aleast a engine in house, with some Hybrid stuff attached. (jumpimg straight to a V6T is a road to ruin...)

 

Mercedes has spent a lot of time on this electric Hybird technology before they got locked into the F1 2014 and on rules...

Edited by GrumpyYoungMan, 08 June 2015 - 18:46.

[RedBaron]

Why do McLaren get the Honda engine for free and Red Bull get Renault free? (Probably one for the Stupid Question Thread)

 

Did they get free Mercedes engines when they ran them?

[GrumpyYoungMan]

Why do McLaren get the Honda engine for free and Red Bull get Renault free? (Probably one for the Stupid Question Thread)

 

Did they get free Mercedes engines when they ran them?

It is probably in return for the Infiniti/Honda branding on the car...

[Paco]

Why do McLaren get the Honda engine for free and Red Bull get Renault free? (Probably one for the Stupid Question Thread)

Did they get free Mercedes engines when they ran them?

Partners not suppliers. Works engines are typically free.. To get all the latest and greatest and attract customer to pay the costs. It's a marketing effort remember 1st and foremost.

[Rasputin]

McLaren as an engine manufacturer?

 

[Fatgadget]

Why do McLaren get the Honda engine for free and Red Bull get Renault free? (Probably one for the Stupid Question Thread)

 

Did they get free Mercedes engines when they ran them?

LOL!...There is no such thing as a FREE lunch matey! 

 

Anyway,I cant see them succeeding. Perhaps if they collaborated with Red Bull and Williams and Cosworth, they might come up with a half decent customer engine.

Edited by Fatgadget, 08 June 2015 - 19:29.

[KingTiger]

McLaren haven't made a good car in 3 years. They won't make a PU that could take on Mercedes and Hamilton.

[F1Lurker]

McLaren haven't made a good car in 3 years. They won't make a PU that could take on Mercedes and Hamilton.

Look I somewhat agree. Firstly, they probably don't have the capital in the short-term to even begin a F1 level PU program. My point is that strategically McLaren needs to have this as a medium to long term goal. They can start with their road cars then probably in 3-5 years begin work on an F1 PU.

Edited by F1Lurker, 08 June 2015 - 20:46.

[Talisman]

I am not saying that it is easy or cheap. But the reality is that if Mclaren is going to continue with an automotive division their goal must be to emulate Ferrari and to become a complete manufacturer. I am not talking about chucking Honda tomorrow. But certainly in the medium to long term Mclaren really should develop their own engines and associated technology.

Basically, Mclaren is structured in a way that success in auto racing is crucial to their business model. Imagine what happens to McLaren and their brand if Honda never builds a competitive PU. Good business strategy requires them to consider that possibility and to have contingency plans. Even Red Bull (which is not in the automotive business) is/was considering moving their PU manufacturing in house. I think certain technologies like 3D printing (which can now be done with practically any material (titanium, stainless steel ..etc), can reduce some of the costs associated with traditional manufacturing.

You talk as if developing engines whether for road or racecars is easy. McLaren is a small company in the grand scheme of things and it could take one dud road engine to sink the entire company like TVR. They need to start providing hybrids which they cannot do on their own.

I understand that their current f1 problems have people deriding Honda as incompetent. Have you not noted how hard it is for a multinational engineering lead engine company to get the v6t right? How do you think a tiny newbie like McLaren would fare assuming they could raise the billion or so dollars it would take?

[Clatter]

Why do McLaren get the Honda engine for free and Red Bull get Renault free? (Probably one for the Stupid Question Thread)

 

Did they get free Mercedes engines when they ran them?

Apart from the last couple of years yes.

[PAGATRON]

Didn't TWR-Arrows use in-house engines back in 98 I think? They didn't do to badly, they just needed an 'engine sponsor' to help with development.

Maybe that's a possibility, build the PU and get somone to 'badge' it.

Just an idea.

[PayasYouRace]

Didn't TWR-Arrows use in-house engines back in 98 I think? They didn't do to badly, they just needed an 'engine sponsor' to help with development.

Maybe that's a possibility, build the PU and get somone to 'badge' it.

Just an idea.

 

Their in house engines were just them putting their name to Brian Hart's units after Yamaha pulled out.

[PAGATRON]

Well yes after they purchased his company, the point is they didn't do to badly with limited resources and they weren't as big as Mclaren.

[Fastcake]

McLaren building their own engines was feasible back in the V8 days. It was a fairly basic design for an engine, and the engine freeze meant they wouldn't be out-developed by the large manufacturers. The hybrid units though are a hugely complex, and have been a massive challenge even for established engine manufacturers. And that's assuming they even have the financial resources to start an engine programme - it certainly isn't cheap.

[Ricardo F1]

I suspect this was the original intent when the roadcar program went into engines ; but it's still a long way off.

[Alonsofan007]

scale of McLaren's road car operation doesn't make sense for them to invest in such a huge r&d which is very costly, its different for others as they are huge auto-manufacturers (ferrari is much bigger and is owned by FIAT in case you were wondering) can afford it, pass it on to roadcars and recoup it easily compared to McLaren. For eg, merc spent 150m pounds(according to rumors) on current engine tech which is quarter of Mclaren's total revenues, its just not affordable.

[F1Lurker]

scale of McLaren's road car operation doesn't make sense for them to invest in such a huge r&d which is very costly, its different for others as they are huge auto-manufacturers (ferrari is much bigger and is owned by FIAT in case you were wondering) can afford it, pass it on to roadcars and recoup it easily compared to McLaren. For eg, merc spent 150m pounds(according to rumors) on current engine tech which is quarter of Mclaren's total revenues, its just not affordable.

 

Yes you are right, I looked up revenues for both Ferrari and McLaren today. Ferrari is  ~ 3b usd while mclaren is ~ 400m usd. Huge difference. My idea is not feasible until Mclaren has annual sales exceeding 2500 to 3000 cars. However, at that size they really should be making their road car engines in house. I expect them to grow to that point by 2020.

[Christophe77]

We'll, building an F1 engine inhouse isimpossible right now but maybe, in the future and in a partnership with Ricardo, or Cosworth it might be a possibility.

After all, building your own engine brings some significant advantages:

- better integration between engine and chassis (ex: mercedes, ferrari)

- independency in the long run

 

Also, note that Mclaren is now actually planning to add their own resources to Honda so that way they might learn some interesting things along the way.

[V8 Fireworks]

Did they get free Mercedes engines when they ran them?

 

McLaren purchased their shares back from Mercedes; in lieu of paying for their engines (if that makes sense), as Mercedes was still the sponsor of McLaren

 

http://www.theguardi...res-formula-one

Edited by V8 Fireworks, 09 June 2015 - 15:51.

[Requiem84]

So these guys at Mclaren can buikt the most complex cars, electrical systems and also KERS etc, but they can't build an engine:

What makes it so difficuilt to build an engine? And, couldnt they hire expertise (Mario Illien etc)?

[BRG]

I don;t know why some people have so much trouble differentiating between road car manufacture and race cars?

 

Yes, McLaren build complex road cars, including the engines, which are made under contract by Ricardo.  Why does this oblige them to build their own F1 engine?  Just because Ferrari do it, doesn't mean McLaren have to follow suit.  

[Timstr11]

So these guys at Mclaren can buikt the most complex cars, electrical systems and also KERS etc, but they can't build an engine:

What makes it so difficuilt to build an engine? And, couldnt they hire expertise (Mario Illien etc)?

 

*SIGH*

 

That's because to setup this >>>

 

 

 

...not only requires a monumental investment financially, it will take eons of learning before a new startup can get to the level of engine manufacturers who have been in this business for decades.

[Nathan]

Won't happen.

 

In my opinion all the manufacters ICE, are more or less on the same level

 

You haven't heard the Honda engine yet, have you?

[GrumpyYoungMan]

*SIGH*

 

That's because to setup this >>>

 

 

 

...not only requires a monumental investment financially, it will take eons of learning before a new startup can get to the level of engine manufacturers who have been in this business for decades.

I have been there a good few years back, they were showing the German GP and had a open day for staff!

 

They had a few old engines lined up in an reception area... Sadly no photos were allowed...

Edited by GrumpyYoungMan, 09 June 2015 - 18:13.

[MikeV1987]

Honda gets too much **** around here.

[Clatter]

So these guys at Mclaren can buikt the most complex cars, electrical systems and also KERS etc, but they can't build an engine:

What makes it so difficuilt to build an engine? And, couldnt they hire expertise (Mario Illien etc)?

Even Merc didn't build their own F1 engines in house, they bought a company that had the expertise. And Mac don't build a lot of that stuff in house, it's outsourced to specialist companies.

[Alonsofan007]

So these guys at Mclaren can buikt the most complex cars, electrical systems and also KERS etc, but they can't build an engine:

What makes it so difficuilt to build an engine? And, couldnt they hire expertise (Mario Illien etc)?

its not matter of expertise, its too costly, they cannot afford it, check previous posts for costs related info

[oetzi]

McLaren haven't made a good car in 3 years. They won't make a PU that could take on Mercedes and Hamilton.

They've only made four or five genuinely competitive cars in the past 15 years. And none in the past 3, as you said.

 

It's a huge leap to suggest the problem is all engine, and a much bigger one to entertain the idea they could design, staff and tool up for, and produce a competitive engine at all, let alone in the next year or two.

 

As plenty of people have said, they can't afford it. And it probably wouldn't be as good as what they get for free. There are more entertaining ways to bankrupt a company than that.

[oetzi]

its not matter of expertise

No, of course not. It's obviously really easy.

[oetzi]

I don;t know why some people have so much trouble differentiating between road car manufacture and race cars?

 

Yes, McLaren build complex road cars, including the engines, which are made under contract by Ricardo.  Why does this oblige them to build their own F1 engine?  Just because Ferrari do it, doesn't mean McLaren have to follow suit.  

You do realise that this means that Ricardo make the engines, and McLaren don't?

[oetzi]

Mclaren is structured in a way that success in auto racing is crucial to their business model. 

So how come they're not bust? Seeing as they've basically won jack in 15 years.

[IqbalM]

So how come they're not bust? Seeing as they've basically won jack in 15 years.

 

They (McLaren) provided Lewis with a car good enough to win a drivers world championship in 2008?

[Timstr11]

its not matter of expertise, its too costly, they cannot afford it, check previous posts for costs related info

It has everything to do with expertise.

[oetzi]

They (McLaren) provided Lewis with a car good enough to win a drivers world championship in 2008?

Yes, but that's not much of a return, is it? One championship from the 30 they've entered this century (or one from the last 45, if you count each driver as a separate entry).

 

Last century, they entered from '66 to '99, and won 18 of the 100 (150) they entered.

 

Perhaps more to the point, they won 3 titles between 1966 and 1984, 13 titles between 1984 and 1991, and 4 titles between 1992 and 2015 (I think we can safely say they're not winning this year).

 

So over the course of 50 years, about 65% of their championship victories came in an 8 year period. Or, sliced another way, 14 of their 20 championships came in the first 25 years, and only 6 in the second 25.

 

If their business model really does depend on their on-track success, they'd better get R&D working on a time machine.

Edited by oetzi, 10 June 2015 - 07:52.

[Requiem84]

So, the arguments in the topic why Mclaren cannot become an engine manufacture are summarized as follows:

 

- It is too costly

- They do not have the expertise

 

Argument 1, costs.
I think it can be divided into two aspects:

1.1: costs to setup the facility, purchase the engineering equipment, hire the staff, build a factory etc etc. This expense is immense indeed.

1.2: costs for continuous R&D. Still a huge amount of money. I believe I read somewhere that Mercedes spent some 500 million euro's into R&D as of 2011-2014 to develop their engine. That amount will drop significantly of course, and a large sum should be covered by the customer teams who basically are paying now for this R&D.

 

Argument 2. expertise

They currently have no experience in building engines. As mentioned, Mercedes also outsourced the engine building for a part (?). Mclaren could acquire such a company which has experience (Costworth? etc). In addition, they can hire staff from Ferrari, Mercedes, Renault, Honda etc.. it is quite common in F1 to chase employees of competitors. 

 

Concluding: 

Expertise should not be an issue, there is expertise available in the market, or in other company's. 

 

The conclusion then is that money is the obstacle. Although the budget's are tight now without a title sponsor for Mclaren, I do believe they have enough liquidity to fund big investments (just an assumption). With external investors, loans, etc etc, it should be possible to make such an investment. The question then is;
- What benefit does it bring from a competition point of view? Will their own F1 engine be competitive? And when? Would it take 4 years to develop? 
- Can the incurred costs be compensated by benefits to their road-car section development, or perhaps even customer teams with a 'mclaren engine'? 

 

If their engine proves to be good, I'm sure they can tie a know with a smaller team, also increasing their influence in F1, bigger bargoning power, perhaps some influence on one driver this team should hire (Vandoorne etc). It would also provide them with a strong source of income. I'm not sure how relevant the F1 R&D would be for their road car engines... 

 

All in all it seems quite complicated, but on first sight, it seems to be a route Mclaren should want to explore to assess the idea. 

[GrumpyYoungMan]

 

...

 

All in all it seems quite complicated, but on first sight, it seems to be a route Mclaren should want to explore to assess the idea. 

They probably have and cannot bank roll it...

[Fatgadget]

Honda gets too much **** around here.

Maybe its because their current F1 engine is poo!

[sergeym]

Maybe its because their current F1 engine is poo!

 

The problem is making your own engine does not gurantee any success. Ferrari or Mercedes have a lot of experience at engine construction and at the same time they have strong finacial backing from road cars division. 

[Talisman]

Yes, but that's not much of a return, is it? One championship from the 30 they've entered this century (or one from the last 45, if you count each driver as a separate entry).

 

Last century, they entered from '66 to '99, and won 18 of the 100 (150) they entered.

 

Perhaps more to the point, they won 3 titles between 1966 and 1984, 13 titles between 1984 and 1991, and 4 titles between 1992 and 2015 (I think we can safely say they're not winning this year).

 

So over the course of 50 years, about 65% of their championship victories came in an 8 year period. Or, sliced another way, 14 of their 20 championships came in the first 25 years, and only 6 in the second 25.

 

If their business model really does depend on their on-track success, they'd better get R&D working on a time machine.

 

Their business model, or rather their brand building is based on their heritage though isn't it rather than recent success?  Ferrari's brand didn't suffer that much from winning no championships over 20 years through the 70's to late 90's.

 

Senna (the movie) and the movie about Hunt vs Lauda (can't remember the name just now) or loads of media coverage of Hamilton wearing McLaren gear is enough isn't it?  For Joe Bloggs, even for rich guys who have a passing interest in motorsport surely McLaren have done enough brandbuilding to get their roadcars marketable?