15 replies to this topic

[Bakeryman]

McLaren declare that the engine for their new MP4-12C road car is designed and made by themselves. I am not aware that their undoubted skills encompass design and manufacture of high performance engines. If McLaren themselves are being coy about their engine, then who actually is responsible? I recall that Cosworth didn't always receive due acknowledgement from their clients who perhaps were too proud to admit having sought help from Keith Duckworth.

[McGuire]

Well, nobody does an engine totally in-house, not even GM or Toyota. From initial design studies to development to manufacturing, vendors and consultants are typically involved in every step of the process. The role of suppliers and consultants tends to be underestimated by outsiders looking in. For example, when you need a piston you don't want to ring up the world's leading piston supplier and stuff a drawing down their throats. That's probably a bad idea as there isn't a whole lot you can tell them about pistons. So you ask them what you need and partner up. From there, the supplier's role may expand into input on ring packages, oil squirters, etc. The process is collaborative.

Sometimes a Cosworth, Ricardo, MTC, or similar company comes in to serve as a central managerial authority (or close to it), the hub of the program if you will. That's generally closer to what it means when a car is marketed as having say, a "Cosworth engine." The consultancy firm is directing the collaborative, through its network of suppliers and expertise. And sometimes the automaker takes on that role itself -- which is the question posed here, I suppose. As a rule, except for racing nobody ever does a complete, turn-key engine for the global OEs. If nothing else they will be butting in throughout the process.

If McLaren has taken the central role in this case, I have to believe it would rely to a greater extent on vendors and outsourcing than a larger company might. Since we can presume that McLaren will not be introducing a new engine every year or so, it makes little sense for the company to own the complete suite of engineering expertise required to do an engine from scratch, which is closer to what a global OE might have. That's a lot of overhead and while they sure have a swell building, the overall size of the company is not all that large by auto industry standards. Or perhaps McLaren is building the expertise in the hope of marketing it to others, just as a Cosworth does... and maybe that's why it's important for the company to now herald itself as a bona fide engine maker. Meanwhile, who does what on a particular program might be closely-held information. If the automaker decides it is in its best interests to take all the credit, it then becomes in the best interest of the contractors to make sure that happens. This is how these companies make their living.

[imaginesix]

Thanks McG

[McGuire]

Thanks McG

You're very welcome. This is the world I work and live in so I am happy to blab about it all day... but then I would have to leave out almost all the details. Later today I am headed over to a firm that has four separate entrances, one for each of its major clients. Inside, on one side of a wall is a product under development for a global OE. On the other side of the wall is a product under development for a leading competitor. The walls are mounted on casters so the security areas can be expanded or collapsed as dictated by the size of the respective programs.

It's all about outsourcing these days, just as it is for all industries anymore, I suppose. For example, when the OEs did complete facelifts or reskins on their models every year it made sense to have hundreds of clay modelers etc on the permanent payroll. Now these types of specialized expertise are increasingly out of house, which for me is rather unsettling in some ways as there are core competencies that every automaker should own. Or at least I tend to think so.

[Greg Locock]

Agree with the general thrust.

I think packaging and initial cncept work should be in house. Oddly of your examples styling (clay modelling) has a long and glorious history of being outsourced, although I'd say the best in-house designs are as good.

Engine design (for an OEM) is heavily constrained by the manufacturing process that is available. Many companies even as late as the 80s were able to design a complete dog of an engine when given the freedom of a blank sheet of paper, no wonder a new engine design is regarded with fear by program planners (7 years for an OEM engine).

There was a fad a few years back for the OEMs to become system integrators, and let the Tier one suppliers handle the subsystem design. Sometimes, say with alternators, pistons, brakes and perhaps shock absorbers, that is successful. We have one steering rack ex-supplier who can tie his own bootlaces as well. However in my opinion in general Tier ones tend to gold plate their core solutions and ignore the hard bits of the rest. So if your tier one driveline supplier is good at diffs you'll get a good diff but the halfshafts will be cheap rubbish, etc.

[gruntguru]

McLaren declare that the engine for their new MP4-12C road car is designed and made by themselves. I am not aware that their undoubted skills encompass design and manufacture of high performance engines. If McLaren themselves are being coy about their engine, then who actually is responsible? I recall that Cosworth didn't always receive due acknowledgement from their clients who perhaps were too proud to admit having sought help from Keith Duckworth.

Does Nicholson have anything to do with this? They were modifying Cosworths in the 70's (with world championship success).

[McGuire]

I think packaging and initial cncept work should be in house. Oddly of your examples styling (clay modelling) has a long and glorious history of being outsourced, although I'd say the best in-house designs are as good.

Here in the States we have always had independent studios to service the independents and little guys, and as an alternative for the OEs when parallel or outside development paths are useful. Lately, especially with the recent downsizing, I wonder how much in-house capability is left. The OEs had to downsize, that had to happen or there was no tomorrow, but at some point job buyouts and layoffs became indiscriminate by necessity, essentially wiping out entire departments in some cases. People have come back as contractors and consultants but brain drain is a problem. The expertise is out there but it's harder to round up.

[Bakeryman]

Here in the States we have always had independent studios to service the independents and little guys, and as an alternative for the OEs when parallel or outside development paths are useful. Lately, especially with the recent downsizing, I wonder how much in-house capability is left. The OEs had to downsize, that had to happen or there was no tomorrow, but at some point job buyouts and layoffs became indiscriminate by necessity, essentially wiping out entire departments in some cases. People have come back as contractors and consultants but brain drain is a problem. The expertise is out there but it's harder to round up.

McGuire - Thanks for most interesting reply to my original topic. Having recently read "Cosworth, the Search for Power" by Graham Robson made me realise what a genius Keith Duckworth was in his time in his ability to apply thought from first principles to great effect. Perhaps after he showed the way ahead, there is nowadays not much left to discover in terms of basics and all the blind alleys have been explored. Today perhaps it's all about pushing at the edges of the envelope in terms of high temperature materials, lubrication, fuel and cooling efficiency, weight saving and packaging. Having worked in the aircraft industry all my life I find the technical side of F1 absorbing. Pity it's so well concealed!

[mariner]

I have always understood that building a new engine is the biggest design/manfacturabilty job an OEM can take on and several years ago one measure of concern about UK engineering was that no new engines had been designed and put into production in several years. I think that has changed now with Jaguar and the Ford Dunton operations.

The thing I have no feel of is how many engineers does it take to develop an engine including the manufacturabilty part. Cosworth road engines was never a huge busines and has only one centre in Northampton ( putting aside the castings technology side). A J Melling did a whole engine for TVR with, it would seem, a man and a dog but it did go into production. F1 teams seem to have about 300 staff and whilst they only produce a few engines each year I would guess that is the equivalent of OEM protoyping.

So my guess is that it takes about 500 people to do a full new OEM engine and if it takes seven years then, alowing for programme ramp up and run down I would gues 400 average head* 6 years = 2400 manyears for one new engine. That would include sub contractors but exclude all the supplier support and plant start up. Does that sound right?

[Terry Walker]

I wonder how many were involved in the new 6.75 litre V8 Bentley engine? This is a new design, retaining the old bore and stroke, but making full use of all the new technology including manufacturing, which has evolved since the first 6.23 litre V8 RR/Bentley engine came out in 1959. The brief was, basically, "we're gonna make a new 6.75 using the old bore and stroke, and pushrods, because the '59 engine has reached the limits of development after just 50 years. Go for it."

This interest me to a degree because from time to time I drive around behind several different versions of the old V8, depending if I'm in my own car or someone else's. Bentley aren't exactly filling the media with masses of detail. VW engineers would have had a lot to do with it.

I love punting around behind 6.23 litres of V8 (my car was in early 1970 built 3 months before the 6.75 was introduced) because, despite the vast weight of the car (over 2 tons with a tank of fuel) it just wafts along on a hint of throttle with all that torque to make life easy. The paying customers of new cars love it too, because it was massive pressure from the customers that forced Bentley to bring back the old V8 in the Arnage Red Label because the smaller BMW didn't have the right Bentley feel.

Given that they have the VW sourced 6 litre W12 on tap, there must have been a powerful incentive for Bentley to redesign the trusty V8. I guess with VW backing, they now had the resources.

Edit. you can tell it's Friday night and I'm working on a six-pack of beer!

Edited by Terry Walker, 19 March 2010 - 11:10.

[NTSOS]

MP4-12C + Jenson and Lewis @ Goodwood

[cheapracer]

Nice posting Mac, you can "blab on" anytime

I doubt most people realize how much work Porsche do for other manufacturers including their own opposition.

[Tenmantaylor]

Great post McGuire. Its important for any design or engineering company to set up collaborations when working in areas they arent experts. Its just sometimes difficult to get collaborating companies to part with information that could be used against them. Which leads me onto the McLaren and Mercedes parting ways.

James Allen says in his latest article

"[the MP4-12C] is powered by a engine built for McLaren by Ricardo."

and that,

"The MP4/12 car was also partially responsible for the collapse of the relationship between McLaren and Mercedes, as the objectives of the two companies were “not aligned” according to Mercedes."

Now go back to the years when the McLaren SLR was built at the MTC. In that time Im sure McLaren learned alot about building sports for production...

[McGuire]

So my guess is that it takes about 500 people to do a full new OEM engine and if it takes seven years then, alowing for programme ramp up and run down I would gues 400 average head* 6 years = 2400 manyears for one new engine. That would include sub contractors but exclude all the supplier support and plant start up. Does that sound right?

Yes, somewhere around that as a grand total for a truly new engine from scratch, I imagine, though it would be difficult to do an actual headcount, not that I have ever tried. Generally, the engine is broken down into subsystems each led by a DRE (design responsible engineer) with any number of people under him/her. (DRE is a GM term. At Ford they adopted the title "Expert." Think how fabulous it would be to have that title on your card.) Lubrication, valvetrain, camshaft, air and fuel, cylinder head, cylinder case, ignition, FEAD, testing, vehicle integration, etc -- with vendors and consultants (what I do) moving in and out and around as required. Some subsystems (say, VVT) might be handled by their suppliers, who might move right in and work in the same space, so it can be hard to tell who is whom at times. At meetings I try to collect business cards so I know who everyone is and where they are coming from.

You can see this is an actual bureaucracy so the exact count depends on how far down into the mechanism you want to drill, I guess. That said, a key group could be identified which might number around 50 to 100 people. And then there is this... When doing the obligatory facility tour, one might ask the equally obligatory question: How many people work here? The guide may decide to go with the standard comical answer: "Oh, about half of them."

[Greg Locock]

Nice posting Mac, you can "blab on" anytime

I doubt most people realize how much work Porsche do for other manufacturers including their own opposition.

Lotus did some roadnoise work on the 911 while I was there. We also did a bit on an Audi LWB.

[primer]

The mid-engine 2-seater will use a compact, twin-turbo V-8 that McLaren designed together with Ricardo; it will be built by Ricardo in England.

Automobile.

But I also recall reading somewhere that the block and pistons are sourced from Mahle. Whatevs.