41 replies to this topic

[pacwest]

Seeing Barry's comments on Merc power and the amazing pace on this chassis has been enlightening. I heard that horrendous Honda mill at last year's CDN GP and everyone in the stands made the same sour face as it went by "WTH is wrong with that car?"

Looking back does it seem that the Chassis development was strong, carrying over to this year and the addition of Merc power has created an excellent testing combination? Race trim is unknown at the moment.

Was that awful sounding motor their issue in 2008?

[Madras]

Originally posted by pacwest


Looking back does it seem that the Chassis development was strong, carrying over to this year and the addition of Merc power has created an excellent testing combination? Race trim is unknown at the moment.

Last year's chassis was not very strong, the drivers said it was not nice to drive. It did not carry over to this year because the huge rule changes meant they started from scratch.

The Honda engine is rumoured to have been quite poor though.

[Clatter]

The engine may not have been the best, but no way can the problems Honda were having be blamed on it. Even the best of engines can look bad in a poor chassis, you only have to look at FI for proof, they looked poor with a Ferrari and they look poor with the Merc.

[The Ragged Edge]

Originally posted by Clatter
The engine may not have been the best, but no way can the problems Honda were having be blamed on it. Even the best of engines can look bad in a poor chassis, you only have to look at FI for proof, they looked poor with a Ferrari and they look poor with the Merc.

[David M. Kane]

Without putting the Merc engine in last year's car how will we ever know?

[Imperial]

Were Super Aguri using the same engine as the main team while kicking their ass using a different chassis?

Perhaps there lies the answer...

[Madras]

Originally posted by Imperial
Were Super Aguri using the same engine as the main team while kicking their ass using a different chassis?

Perhaps there lies the answer...

In 2007. In 2008 Super Aguri were way off the pace.

[Clatter]

Originally posted by Madras


In 2007. In 2008 Super Aguri were way off the pace.

And what chassis were they using.;)

[Scotracer]

Pfft, the Honda unit was the best sounding engine of 2008!

But yes, it seriously lacked peak power (something around only 700BHP when the others were around 800BHP)

[Cindy]

It was down on power, along with Renault. They and Renault complained they followed the engine freeze, and didn't do any changes to their engines that would increase power.

While Mercedes and Ferrari were granted "Reliablity Changes" under the freeze, that just happened to give them 30 to 60 hp advantage.

Both Honda and Renault were granted to do the same changes for 2009 to level the field. Honda would have implemented those changes should they have stayed on, Renault already has.

[Philzippy]

Originally posted by Clatter
you only have to look at FI for proof, they looked poor with a Ferrari and they look poor with the Merc.

Not a 100% fair comment in that:

a) FI were running the lower-spec Ferrari engine (STR's performance only really kicked in once Berger managed to get works-spec engines)

b) They've done so little testing - so we'll have to wait till Melbourne before knowing how well they perform with Mercedes engines.

[Madras]

Originally posted by Scotracer
Pfft, the Honda unit was the best sounding engine of 2008!

But yes, it seriously lacked peak power (something around only 700BHP when the others were around 800BHP)

Was it really? How do you know this? Rubens said it was not very smooth.

[AFCA]

Originally posted by AFCA
...

The fact the Mercedes F0108W engine (+ 45 bhp) has come to replace that of Honda is obviously a great boost as well. Simulations (in Brackley) with comparative data regarding cornering speeds, acceleration and topspeeds point out that even with last year's car Button and Barrichello would have made it to Q3 during each GP in case they would have had a different engine.

...

[Clatter]

Originally posted by Madras


Was it really? How do you know this? Rubens said it was not very smooth.

Maybe because he listened to it? RB's comments are in relation to it's performance, not it's sound.

[Madras]

Interesting AFCA, thanks.

[Scotracer]

The amount of power the Honda was down is a matter for debate as it's been rated at everything between 30BHP and 70BHP. The Honda unit by my reckoning had a very steep torque curve resulting in a peaky car that a) was underpowered b) difficult to drive.

[Craven Morehead]

Rated at 30 to 70 bhp? Geez, my Triumph spitfire made more than that, maybe they can call me and I'll arrange for an old British Leyland lump.

[Kenaltgr]

Only the Renault RS27 was allowed to upgrade after it was tested and agreed among all the teams, not the Honda engine. This was as few moths before Honda pulled out.

[Tenmantaylor]

Look at the difference in pace between the Brawn and the McLaren over most of testing with the same engine. Im more inclined to think Hondas aero/chassis was the biggest weak link last two years.

[mclarensmps]

Originally posted by Scotracer
Pfft, the Honda unit was the best sounding engine of 2008!

That, and the BMW... I was in Canada too, and those two engines sounded absolutely EPIC.

[primer]

I am convinced that the weak link was the Honda's motor. Everyone who had heard it commented that it sounded different to other engines. Honda must have been trying something different and it didn't work out for them.

No doubt, the chassis too might have improved, but that alone can not explain the amazing change of pace.

The engine played the biggest part in Honda's lack of competetiveness, that's my theory.

[Cindy]

Originally posted by primer
I am convinced that the weak link was the Honda's motor. Everyone who had heard it commented that it sounded different to other engines. Honda must have been trying something different and it didn't work out for them.

No doubt, the chassis too might have improved, but that alone can not explain the amazing change of pace.

The engine played the biggest part in Honda's lack of competetiveness, that's my theory.

Doubtful. The 2009 car is a completely different car from 2008. How do you compare an engine with two very different chassis/aero?

Yes their pace is greatly improved so far, but how can you tell the reason why when the majority of the car is completely different? Too many variables besides the new engine.

Also, Honda was working on this car back in 2007, and they gave up half of last year to only develop this 2009 car. Obviously all that hard work and development account for the majority of the improvements, and not just a Merc engine.

If it's just the engine, then what does that say about the McLaren?

[Mauseri]

Maybe 0.5 sec from the engine. These revolution limitations hurt Honda most. They were always going for top end power.

[AFCA]

Originally posted by Kenaltgr
Only the Renault RS27 was allowed to upgrade after it was tested and agreed among all the teams, not the Honda engine. This was as few moths before Honda pulled out.

I really don't think this decision was taken months before Honda pulled out, as far as I'm aware the decision was taken around the time/a little after Honda pulled out. It took so long simply because the discussions within the FOTA about the engines wouldn't stop not coming to an agreement. Had Honda stayed in the sport they would have most definately been allowed to upgrade their engine as well, their's being even worse than that of the Renault...

[Gregor Marshall]

I'd be surprised if the Honda engine was that bad - what is the one thing Honda are known for in F1 and passengers cars? Good high-revving engines.
Maybe they went the wrong way in development but I'd be surprised.

[tkulla]

Originally posted by Gregor Marshall
I'd be surprised if the Honda engine was that bad - what is the one thing Honda are known for in F1 and passengers cars? Good high-revving engines.
Maybe they went the wrong way in development but I'd be surprised.

Really? I thought it was pretty much common knowledge that Honda was on bottom end of the engine scale. The only real debate is how many HP they were down versus the top engines.

[Gregor Marshall]

Whose common knowledge? You me, the internet and the man on the street? If only F1 was so simple!!

[Slowinfastout]

Originally posted by Gregor Marshall
Whose common knowledge? You me, the internet and the man on the street? If only F1 was so simple!!

Originally posted by AFCA
The fact the Mercedes F0108W engine (+ 45 bhp) has come to replace that of Honda is obviously a great boost as well. Simulations (in Brackley) with comparative data regarding cornering speeds, acceleration and topspeeds point out that even with last year's car Button and Barrichello would have made it to Q3 during each GP in case they would have had a different engine.

Given that Honda is still paying the bills, I think it's safe to assume the engine was crap when the team says it was..

[Gregor Marshall]

Which team; Honda F1 or Brawn F1? Mmmhh, I wonder what one might say and one might not. Funny how the Brawn is the fastest (or at least the top6) so far and it has no sponsors to show - I don't ever remember any F1 team ever doing that before.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a good car (I was at Silverstone for it's first run and no I wasn't hidden) and the drivers are good and I thin it'll be a top 10 car but too much is read into these things and there's no way the Honda engine was that bad and there's no way their engines didn't "develop" over '08 but things released to the press are done so to make things sound better or worse than I, just to manage expectations.

[Blythy]

At silverstone there was a definate difference in sound between the hondas and the rest of the field. I don't want to sound like I have synthsesia or anything, but the honda engine sounded more... red

[wingwalker]

As bad as their engine was, Honda aero department scored a major **** up in 2007. The engine was the same as in 2006+rev limit (it was before little 'reliability' fixes kicked off) but the car was a total dog. I recall quotes from drivers and engineers about how screwed up the aero was: way too much drag in a straight line, not enough downforce in corners and sudden balance shifts in breaking zones.

[primer]

Originally posted by Gregor Marshall
Funny how the Brawn is the fastest (or at least the top6) so far and it has no sponsors to show - I don't ever remember any F1 team ever doing that before.

Well it is pretty unprecedented for a backmarker team to become winners over one winter, and on top of that the chaos of 'rebirth'. If Brawn pole and win in Australia, it would be the highlight of the season no matter what happens through the year. The team will be overwhelmed with prospective sponsors. They will be in a position to pick and choose on best terms.

[pingu666]

i remmber the super aguri guys saying the 2007 car they had vibrated so much they could barely see

[pacwest]

Originally posted by Blythy
At silverstone there was a definate difference in sound between the hondas and the rest of the field. I don't want to sound like I have synthsesia or anything, but the honda engine sounded more... red

To me it sounded very brown. Since I associate brown with things that stink.

[AFCA]

In terms of top speeds I think the Honda drivers were often the slowest of the whole field...

[Peter Perfect]

Originally posted by AFCA
In terms of top speeds I think the Honda drivers were often the slowest of the whole field...

Yep.

I always thought it was a combination of poor/unpredictable aero and poor engine i.e. to make the car more predictable and drivable they'd have to load on the downforce, and therefore give the car huge amounts of drag.

[Just waiting]

perhaps those computer downloads that Ross took with him when he left....oh no, that could not be it, i am sure

but for sure, it was not like rb was screwing up the ferrari designs while he was there...maybe there was a reason why MS was winning so many races....and add in the mercedes, may be now there will be a new real WDC contender....and not just sort of a "I coulda ben a contendar"

Methinks if I had been Luca, I might have tried to keep Brawn around.....or tied him up for about five years.

[Mauseri]

Originally posted by Gregor Marshall
I'd be surprised if the Honda engine was that bad - what is the one thing Honda are known for in F1 and passengers cars? Good high-revving engines.

As I said, they lost the plot when high revving era ended a couple years ago.

[HoldenRT]

It's a common thing to blame parties on your shortfalls if they are no longer with you.

Super Aguri showed in 2007 that the engine wasn't to blame for ALL of Honda's problems. Sato overtook Alonso in Canada at one point. Then in 2008 with the new chassis, SA were nowhere.

The chassis was as much to blame as the engine, but the engine was definately a weak point. The Renault engine was a weak point last season but look at all the points RBR and Renault scored.

[wati]

I think the car would be even faster with a honda engine in the back, it was constructed for that engine. Honda blew it big time by pulling out.

[Slowinfastout]

Originally posted by wati
I think the car would be even faster with a honda engine in the back, it was constructed for that engine. Honda blew it big time by pulling out.

..according to the team itself, which has a fair bit of its operating costs still paid by Honda, the engine was crap..

People can disagree with the team but, really, why?

[Cindy]

Originally posted by Slowinfastout


..according to the team itself, which has a fair bit of its operating costs still paid by Honda, the engine was crap..

People can disagree with the team but, really, why?

It's not fair to compare their 08' engine to the spec they would have used in 2009.

Their revised engine (should Honda have stayed in F1) would not have been crap, it would have all the updates that was allowed Renault. Essentially all the "Reliablity" changes that Mercedes and Ferrari used to gain a power advantage during the engine freeze.

They would not have to compromise the fit to the chassis since the chassis was designed for the Honda engine.

They would also have had Honda's advanced KERS system, which was integrated with the transmission which meant it could not be used with the Merc engine.