3979 replies to this topic

[Disgrace]

Parts I and II here. Following on from China...

[Flyhigh]

DeKnyff, on 17 Apr 2016 - 06:27, said:

Quickshifter, thanks for your positive spirit, but I'm afraid you're way too optimistical (see my comments in red):

 

 

I'm really disappointed about McLaren performance today. As someone pointed out in a previous post, both cars finished nearly 15 secs off the 10th place.

 

Well, the McLaren-Honda project is well into his second year (or third year since the partnership was signed) and still unable to make to Q3 or finish in the points on merit. Surely not what McLaren, Honda, Alonso or Button expected two years ago...

Sobering post. Unfortunately this thread is not going to do the optimistic potentiality trick today for me. This race showed the naked reality, the car on its own does not have the pace to be on points, but more importantly, still has fundamental flaws, eating up the tires new nightmare and the engine is still visible below par, even to Renault, making it the easiest car to pass out there by far.   

At some point, you got to look at this project/partnership from a macro perspective. At what point is worth to keep trading your lunch for the hopes of having a more juicy dinner? Running years as low end team for the "potential" bigger results to come. I mention last year, but there was still the compelling argument of the rookie year, that next year could show great progress, clearly not the case.

It seem there was a possibility of as small but significant upgrade initially this year, where the cars would be inside q3, fighting well inside the top 10 for points in the race. Which while not great, this would help to keep the hope of descent strides going forward, but even this does not seem the case anymore, fundamental flaws remain.

We are not on the inside of Mclaren, we don't know what their A,B,C options are, specially considering fundamental financial backing questions. From the outside, going for a competitive engine while joining RBR in the political lobbying to change this engine F1 formula, would seem like an appealing option to me. Look at RBR, they have managed to remain close to the top, while at the same time fighting a hard political battle. Which would gain much weight with Mclaren's backing.

I agreed with Ron 100% when he said you are not getting Championships with a customer engine, but this Honda partnership is just not happening, even looking from the outside, is visible something is inheritable not working. People constantly bring the "more time" argument, is a simpleton argument that a lot of people buy up, makes sense only superficially, when you look deeper and the track record in F1 shows this is not the case. Look at RBR start with F1,  Mercedes, BMW, look at Toyota as counter, to mention a few. In F1, team/partnerships that deliver strong, show what they come for not overnight, but rather quickly, not by developing their way from the back, literally.

And in all, as an F1 fan, is just such a waste, burning through Alonso and Button's precious time, where they should be delivering their racing master craft at the front, even at a Toro Rosso their talents would be more interesting to see. I would love to be proven wrong on this, but I don't quite believe in the overall success of this partnership anymore, the trade off just doesn't make sense.

[Marklar]

Started by Disgrace? Oh dear. This will go terribly wrong

[TIFOlonSO]

Back to disgrace ;)

Rip gilles4ever 

[jimmonson]

That was a disappointing result . It seems that for all the progress McLarenHonda have made over the past 12 months ,its simply no more than the other teams have done . A bit of a reality check . This year the cars finished 12th & 13th in China , and last years result in China ? 12th &13th . 

[RainyAfterlifeDaylight]

 

Rip gilles4ever 

Yes. Everytime I see his name, I feel so strange and mysterious that I can't explain really.

[ZOne]

 

In F1, team/partnerships that deliver strong, show what they come for not overnight, but rather quickly, not by developing their way from the back, literally.

 

 

No. Look at Mercedes how long they were nowhere with lots of issues. It takes time.

 

But still: Even if Honda stays behind the Mercedes, catching up to the RedBull is McLarens business. Something is wrong with the car.

[Amphicar]

That was a disappointing result . It seems that for all the progress McLarenHonda have made over the past 12 months ,its simply no more than the other teams have done . A bit of a reality check . This year the cars finished 12th & 13th in China , and last years result in China ? 12th &13th . 

The difference is that last year Alonso and Button only finished 12th and 13th (before Button's penalty) because 4 faster cars retired (a Toro Rosso, a Lotus, a Red Bull and a Force India). Without that they would have finished 17th and 18th, ahead only of the Marussias, which is where they started. This year there were no retirements so at least the 12th and 13th places were genuine. Not much comfort, I know but there has been some progress - but not nearly enough.

[Quickshifter]

As Alonso said in the post race interview they needed a normal  race where both cars finished so that they can reference the strengths and weaknesses of the car/engine against the competitors in similar conditions.  You cannot replicate that in testing. Mclaren Honda need races like this where the result and performance may be painful but this will give them not only an exact idea of their competitiveness relative to the cars they are racing but also plenty of data to analyze and improve the car. In terms of competitiveness this was not a great race but in terms of data gathering and understanding this was very vital.

 

The power unit in Alonso's car has finished two problem free weekends so that is a positive where they could run it reliably without any issues. The power unit is still in it's homologation spec so there is plenty to come from the upgrades. As Alonso mentioned they need half a second to be regularly in points and that is definitely attainable as the chassis and power unit will both improve in the coming races. It was in public knowledge that the initial fly away grandprix were always going to be about data gathering and understanding the car and the power unit. In that view nothing has changed.

 

Yes we all want the package to be more competitive but at least the team can now exactly pin point what the deficit is and the source of it. I admit i was a touch disappointed as soon as the race got over but progress is definitely being made. there were no botched up pit stops and things went smoothly. Big steps are necessary about which there is no doubt but at least the season has started on a solid base. The car can at least race in the midfield even if it is not good good enough to net points on merit at this point in time. The power unit upgrades will definitely help Mclaren to run a bit more downforce to take care of tires better also Mclaren will be burning the midnight oil to optimize the suspension and general settings to get on top of tire wear from their side.

Edited by Quickshifter, 17 April 2016 - 20:49.

[AlexS]

As Alonso said in the post race interview they needed a normal  race where both cars finished so that they can reference the strengths and weaknesses of the car/engine against the competitors in similar conditions.  You cannot replicate that in testing. Mclaren Honda need races like this 

 

Alonso BS. So they know if they are in front of Haas based on this race? This race is just one more data point, 

[Flyhigh]

No. Look at Mercedes how long they were nowhere with lots of issues. It takes time.

 

But still: Even if Honda stays behind the Mercedes, catching up to the RedBull is McLarens business. Something is wrong with the car.

This is simply not the case, Mercedes joined F1 as a strong midfield team that was quickly developing and becoming a threat year by year, so much that even Hamilton joined them before they were close to being what they are today. The issues they did have were in another league from McHonda, I remember the year where they were suffering a lot with the tire degradation in the races, at the same time were putting the car in the top 3, getting poles, podiums and even a victory.  

For Mclaren to get close to RBR, Honda needs to make an engine that is on par with Renault and I still feel this is not the case. 

Edited by Flyhigh, 17 April 2016 - 22:41.

[Quickshifter]

Alonso BS. So they know if they are in front of Haas based on this race? This race is just one more data point,

Exactly why do you need data. Also what does Alonso know? Who is he? He is just a clueless double world champion who has been in Formula one for over a decade. How does it matter what he says.

[Lemans]

Who is this 'Alonso' person?

[teejay]

I thought their engine performance seemed decent yesterday in terms of peak power and straight line speed. 

 

Time for some development on the chassis perhaps. 

[Alonsofan007]

Alonso BS. So they know if they are in front of Haas based on this race? This race is just one more data point, 

way off of what was said buddy.

Hes not talking about results or who is in front or behind, when running in the pack they can gather more data on other cars to compare, now they are in better position to judge and determine what improvements are needed.

[Muzzyf1]

What is evident is the car chews through the tyres.
This is why they went to a2 stop race on the mediums.

The engine is not that bad the only reason they where getting mugged was because of the poor exit leading onto the straight.

[mclarensmps]

Alonso BS. So they know if they are in front of Haas based on this race? This race is just one more data point, 

 

https://youtu.be/EHXu876EZ2c

[teejay]

What is evident is the car chews through the tyres.
This is why they went to a2 stop race on the mediums.

The engine is not that bad the only reason they where getting mugged was because of the poor exit leading onto the straight.

 

Could be result of a poor power curve spinning tyres up

[Alonsofan007]

What is evident is the car chews through the tyres.
This is why they went to a2 stop race on the mediums.

The engine is not that bad the only reason they where getting mugged was because of the poor exit leading onto the straight.

jenson had no choice but to go 2 Med after starting on SS (assuming last SS stop was unplanned), but fernando could have done S on last stint i thot (he went S16-M16-M22).

 

 

Also, they might be running lean wing which can boost top-speeds but can affect tire-wear, until they solve power issues we'll not know for sure if tire issues are real or are result of compromised set-up.

Edited by Alonsofan007, 18 April 2016 - 02:29.

[chhatra]

This is simply not the case, Mercedes joined F1 as a strong midfield team that was quickly developing and becoming a threat year by year, so much that even Hamilton joined them before they were close to being what they are today. The issues they did have were in another league from McHonda, I remember the year where they were suffering a lot with the tire degradation in the races, at the same time were putting the car in the top 3, getting poles, podiums and even a victory.

For Mclaren to get close to RBR, Honda needs to make an engine that is on par with Renault and I still feel this is not the case.

Agreed, but remember Mercedes still had the best engine back then in an era of stable regulations. Even a Williams managed to win a race, it was much closer.

[FirstWatt]

Alonso BS. So they know if they are in front of Haas based on this race? This race is just one more data point,

You don't have a clue how valuable a proper comparison is, and a race is ultimately the only one. In testing or FP anyone cooks their own thing, it's not well comparable.
F1 (as most other competitions) are never absolute, always relative to the others. And this NEEDS a comparison. And it's not only about in which place you end the race. But in a bunch of data points, not one.
In the race, all are running at the exact same time, in the same fuel amount conditions, and some also with same tyres.
There is a lot to compare, and it shows your relative weaknesses.

[Petroltorque]

One can hardly make a comparison about the Honda PU by making a comparison to Red Bull. Red Bull arguably have the best chassis on the grid with Mercedes AMG having the best overall package. In any case would you not think that if the Renault PU was so much better, the Renault works team would be closer to McLaren. There is something else causing the tyre deg we saw in China, higher mandated tyre pressures?

[Rudex]

Im a bit disappointed. Maybe in this race they didnt get the full perfomance of package for bad management of tyres. We already saw like in FP2 the long runs was horrible. In Australia The medium works very good, in china the pace was very bad.

I hope to get better tyre  degradation on Sochi.

 

Its true that with half a second they will be there but We need to keep in mind the rest of team will be improve. For Spain FI will come new aero and all the teams. For Canada seem renault will take the upgrade engine, and Renault team will improve too, so it is possible Renault will be to same pace than Mclaren if Honda no give upgrades.

 

Also I believe the engine on Alonso car is detuned, and I dont know clearly if for Button too. With the problem of Button ICE from bearing in camshaft, the new ICE I dont know if already take the new piece for reliability.

 

If We check lap times, the last stint Alo was no long from Massa/Bottas , and 0.4s or so from Sainz. You can check here:

http://en.mclarenf-1...Valtteri Bottas

 

The problem here is some teams today need to save tyres, save fuel, cruising... and We dont know the real pace to compare. The last stint start similar between Alo with Sainz, and others put the medium some laps before like Massa,Bottas, Ham, Perez,...

 

I hope in sochi we can see another step with setting and be near of front teams.

 

I would like to read the interview of Honda for Japanese media.

Edited by Rudex, 18 April 2016 - 06:35.

[restless]

For Mclaren to get close to RBR, Honda needs to make an engine that is on par with Renault and I still feel this is not the case. 

I feel that Honda engine is on same level as Renault. RB were running low-downforce wings in China. So?

[restless]

One can hardly make a comparison about the Honda PU by making a comparison to Red Bull. Red Bull arguably have the best chassis on the grid with Mercedes AMG having the best overall package. In any case would you not think that if the Renault PU was so much better, the Renault works team would be closer to McLaren. There is something else causing the tyre deg we saw in China, higher mandated tyre pressures?

Why not?

Mc is shooting to be top-dog.

If they really want to be on the top they have set current top dog(s) as target.

RB-good chassis, Mercedes-good engine

 

 

I expect Sochi to be more of the same - maybe one car in Q3, or both, but 6th-7th team in race-pace

Edited by restless, 18 April 2016 - 06:57.

[Nicktendo86]

Well, to say yesterday was a disappointment is an understatement. I was convinced both cars would be in the points!

 

The car appears to have some decent one lap speed but race pace is not great. Why? I think the most likely culprits are tyre wear and/or fuel saving. I honestly don't know how much of the deficit is down to the engine, the chassis or a combination of both, all I do know is that red bull chassis is mighty. Must be the best on the grid, I'm convinced if they had a works Merc engine they would be dominating.

 

A few people say the 31 looks under developed compared to rivals. That would make sense as it is a new concept that only started last year but I think they mean because it lacks all of the winglets and stuff that the Mercs have. Well, Red Bull also lacks those and our car seems to following a similar route to that so I'm not worried about it looking more simple than the Merc. I do think they are struggling to get to grips with the new suspension though.

 

All of this is just rambling though, none of us really know what's going on.

[blacky]

jenson had no choice but to go 2 Med after starting on SS (assuming last SS stop was unplanned), but fernando could have done S on last stint i thot (he went S16-M16-M22).

 

 

ALO couldn't go on soft in the last stint because they had no soft tyres anymore, simple as that.

 

before the race for both drivers:

2x medium, 1x soft, 4x supersoft

[Owen]

Well, to say yesterday was a disappointment is an understatement. I was convinced both cars would be in the points!

 

The car appears to have some decent one lap speed but race pace is not great. Why? I think the most likely culprits are tyre wear and/or fuel saving. I honestly don't know how much of the deficit is down to the engine, the chassis or a combination of both, all I do know is that red bull chassis is mighty. Must be the best on the grid, I'm convinced if they had a works Merc engine they would be dominating.

 

A few people say the 31 looks under developed compared to rivals. That would make sense as it is a new concept that only started last year but I think they mean because it lacks all of the winglets and stuff that the Mercs have. Well, Red Bull also lacks those and our car seems to following a similar route to that so I'm not worried about it looking more simple than the Merc. I do think they are struggling to get to grips with the new suspension though.

 

All of this is just rambling though, none of us really know what's going on.

Mark me down as another one convinced we could get points in China. I will re-adjust my expectation for Russia. 

[f1rules]

I feel that Honda engine is on same level as Renault. RB were running low-downforce wings in China. So?

 

maybe you can refer to a picture where the low df wing is shown, because they used the same as the other gp's, which is not low df

[Rinehart]

I thought their engine performance seemed decent yesterday in terms of peak power and straight line speed. 

 

Time for some development on the chassis perhaps. 

It clearly wasn't. It's ok whilst they're holding onto a pack of cars in front running in the slipstream with DRS but as soon as they are running in clear air the power disadvantage is evident. But as the team including Honda has been categorical about this issue, it doesn't matter what it looks like. We know there are developments coming. 

 

I think the main thing is to get the whole weekend together. The competition is too good and too close for mistakes/misfortune. IF McLaren had not missed out on a Q2 lap, I think they'd have got into Q3 and qualified roughly 8/9. If they'd then started on SS, avoided the lap one shenanigans and mirrored the straightforward, optimal strategy running on S, I think they had enough speed to hold onto lower points positions. Alonso only finished 10 seconds outside the points and that was with the SC handing everyone on SS a free pitstop. 

[RainyAfterlifeDaylight]

Comparing McLaren chassis with RedBull chassis is unfair IMO because:

 

• RedBull have developed their chassis with the same Renault powerunit since 2012/2013.

But

• McLaren had developed their chassis with Mercedes powerunit and later they switched to Honda powerunit and we know that even 2015 McLaren chassis didn't have Peter Prodromou's full input.

 

It is safe to say that RedBull chassis is two years more developed compare to McLaren Chassis. To be honest It is a huge gap to fill.

[f1rules]

Comparing McLaren chassis with RedBull chassis is unfair IMO because:

 

• RedBull have developed their chassis with the same Renault powerunit since 2012/2013.

But

• McLaren had developed their chassis with Mercedes powerunit and later they switched to Honda powerunit and we know that even 2015 McLaren chassis didn't have Peter Prodromou's full input.

 

It is safe to say that RedBull chassis is two years more developed compare to McLaren Chassis. To be honest It is a huge gap to fill.

 

yeap agree, any talk of mclaren having the best chassis reaching europe is BS in my opinion, it seems ok, but RB really created a monster chassis again

[Nicktendo86]

Comparing McLaren chassis with RedBull chassis is unfair IMO because:

 

• RedBull have developed their chassis with the same Renault powerunit since 2012/2013.

But

• McLaren had developed their chassis with Mercedes powerunit and later they switched to Honda powerunit and we know that even 2015 McLaren chassis didn't have Peter Prodromou's full input.

 

It is safe to say that RedBull chassis is two years more developed compare to McLaren Chassis. To be honest It is a huge gap to fill.

 

Peter started work during 2014 so I think did have full influence over the 2015 chassis, unless you mean he didn't have time to change the suspension etc? Either way you're right, McLaren are behind the development curve due to scrapping concepts and starting again. It's why I'm looking forward to 2017 and a bank page, I hope the rules get sorted and fixed soon. The main thing for me this year to see Honda make clear HP gains.

[Cheekytee86]

And Boullier said Alonso will have noticed the progress McLaren-Honda has made so far in 2016, revealing: “We are seeing light at the end of the tunnel now.

“By Monaco we will have one of the best chassis and we could reach the podium, why not?” he added.

He dismissed the suggestion McLaren is actually a formerly great team on a downwards spiral, demonstrated by the fact the Woking team has failed to sign up a title sponsor.

“No problem,” said Boullier. “We have a group of sponsors that is enough, including Honda, so we do not mind not having a title sponsor.

“Last year we did not win (much) money being ninth place in the world championship, but this year being around fifth, we will,” he added. McLaren-Honda is currently eighth in the standings with a single point.

“The team, as a company, has always made money,” Boullier explained.


I've found this online. Any truth to it? Can Mclaren really challenge for podiums by Monaco?

[autof1fan]

The reality is Mclaren chassis is not aero efficient as the redbull, they are far behind and, the redbull, is a refined masterpiece by the genius Newey.. just look at renault f1 team, they are behind mclaren f1 at the moment,  no wonder ron deniss blocked honda from supplying redbull with engine. mclaren f1 will be embarrasesed by a redbull honda, that the reality. Just like rebull with renault engine embarrassing renault f1 team

Edited by autof1fan, 18 April 2016 - 09:46.

[RainyAfterlifeDaylight]

Peter started work during 2014 so I think did have full influence over the 2015 chassis, unless you mean he didn't have time to change the suspension etc? Either way you're right, McLaren are behind the development curve due to scrapping concepts and starting again. It's why I'm looking forward to 2017 and a bank page, I hope the rules get sorted and fixed soon. The main thing for me this year to see Honda make clear HP gains.

Peter Prodromou officially started to work at McLaren in 2014/09/15 but his arrival was already late to really have a full influence on McLaren's 2015 chassis.

 

Here is what Matt Somerfield said during that time:

 

"Peter Prodromou’s arrival from Red Bull has been a massive coup and he undoubtedly tried to help influence the design of the 2015 challenger. However, changes of this magnitude cannot happen overnight, with both working and aerodynamic philosophies taking time to install. You could argue that the MP4-30 was just a simple copy and paste of the Red Bull that Peter helped to design in the past, but at the core it was still very much a McLaren design-led chassis, which leads to compromises, with Peter arriving too late into the design phase of the MP4-30 to have full influence."

[Nicktendo86]

I've found this online. Any truth to it? Can Mclaren really challenge for podiums by Monaco?

 

I have no idea but this year I'm not taking anything anyone says as gospel.

[AlexS]

You don't have a clue how valuable a proper comparison is, and a race is ultimately the only one. In testing or FP anyone cooks their own thing, it's not well comparable.
F1 (as most other competitions) are never absolute, always relative to the others. And this NEEDS a comparison. And it's not only about in which place you end the race. But in a bunch of data points, not one.
In the race, all are running at the exact same time, in the same fuel amount conditions, and some also with same tyres.
There is a lot to compare, and it shows your relative weaknesses.

 

 

I didn't wrote about testing. But about races. The fact that both cars finished doesn't mean that necessarely that race is better than a race where one car finished to access the situation.In China there was an accident and safety car and in Bahrain no. In Bahrain was at night, in Melbourne and China no. etc etc etc...

Tracks are still are quite different and affect teams differently.

Mclaren know very where they stood before this race: near points. And it can't be more precise than this because said variations.

 

If the cars didn't change until the end from now, i would say that Mclaren might have some instances on points based on merit because there will be some circuits which will suit the car. Would those circuits represent better Mclaren position because 2 cars finished?

 

Maybe  Alonso got the Mclaren culture of over accounting for everything. Sometimes it is a waste going into further detail.

[restless]

maybe you can refer to a picture where the low df wing is shown, because they used the same as the other gp's, which is not low df

Claimed by RB and Horner themselves.

[Owen]

And Boullier said Alonso will have noticed the progress McLaren-Honda has made so far in 2016, revealing: “We are seeing light at the end of the tunnel now.

“By Monaco we will have one of the best chassis and we could reach the podium, why not?” he added.

He dismissed the suggestion McLaren is actually a formerly great team on a downwards spiral, demonstrated by the fact the Woking team has failed to sign up a title sponsor.

“No problem,” said Boullier. “We have a group of sponsors that is enough, including Honda, so we do not mind not having a title sponsor.

“Last year we did not win (much) money being ninth place in the world championship, but this year being around fifth, we will,” he added. McLaren-Honda is currently eighth in the standings with a single point.

“The team, as a company, has always made money,” Boullier explained.


I've found this online. Any truth to it? Can Mclaren really challenge for podiums by Monaco?

Not so much 'by' Monaco we could reach the podium, more like 'at' Monaco we could reach the podium.

This would be more accurate IMO and I think is more in the spirit of what he was trying to say.

[chhatra]

Aiming for a podium anywhere would require some serious upgrades to both car and engine. China was the reality check we all needed to keep our expectations grounded.

If we can finish the season 5th in the constructors that would be about right.

Next year with hopefully new rules and open engine development should give us the opportunity we need.

Edited by chhatra, 18 April 2016 - 13:51.

[f1rules]

Claimed by RB and Horner themselves.

 

ok, thank you, i just noticed they didnt change the wing

[F1sMyDrug]

Hi guys,

 

I´ve calculated the average race pace for the different drivers in Chinese GP (obviously excluding laps behind the SafetyCar and inlap/outlap in the averages). 

 

 

Sereval things to take into account when looking at the results:

- RITMO = Race pace / Diferencias = Gaps / 101,537s = 1:41.537s and so on

- In the strategy for the drivers that had a first lap incident (Hamilton, Raikkonen, Grosjean, Nasr) I excluded the tyre they started with (because they changed it in that first lap).

- Usually the more pitstops a driver does the better race pace it gets (because they can stress out each set of tyre much more) although in the race it can finish behind (Perez vs Hulkenberg it is the perfect example of this).

- In China softs was the better race tyre. McLaren and Sauber only had 1 set of soft tyres available for the entire race so they were forced to use the mediums much more than the other teams. That had an impact on their race pace because a 2 stop strategy on mediums was the slowest combination in terms of numbers.

 

Conclusion:

Taking into account McLaren´s deficit in 2015 was 2.55 seconds compared to the winner (Hamilton), they have recovered around 0.5 seconds at this circuit (and that using a slower strategy with mediums compared to the one used by Rosberg or for example the Toro Rossos).

 

Race pace here in the end was very close to Force India and not too far away from ToroRosso. Williams are a bit of an unknown because their performance changes a lot depending on the tyre and with mediums Massa/Bottas were pretty average.

[pizzalover]

^^ Still a p*** poor performance whatever why you care to present it. Let's hope it was not representative of where they really are, because progress, from so far back, shouldn't be this slow.

 

Looks like they didn't employ the right people at the start of the project, and this is the inevitable result. Instead of hitting the ground running, they've fallen flat, and are still foundering.

 

Any recovery to be on par with the top teams will be heroic. But why hobble yourself to begin with? Isn't winning at F1 hard enough without making life even more difficult?

 

Feel sorry for the Honda engineers who seem to have been given a near impossible task.

 

Will be interesting to see what this ex-VW man has to say. Fingers crossed he kicks arse.

Edited by pizzalover, 19 April 2016 - 01:40.

[levi1700]

IMHO the poor performance was due to the high tyre pressure. Haas also suffered a lot this weekend.
​For sure there's a lot of work to do on both PU and chassis.
​What are the advised pressures for Russia? Hope we'll see good improvement and better tire-life.

[Owen]

Jenson Button: Hopefully we just got the strategy wrong

http://www.espn.co.u...-strategy-wrong

[autof1fan]

Eric Boullier should be fired. Mclaren chasis is average at best but he rather point fingers at Honda to save his job, shame on him,  this is his quote to spanish media, that mclaren want to win tommorow but honda wants to win but not necessarily  tommorrow. . I hope Ron get rid of this joke Eric B. Mclaren trying to hide behind honda again. This is similar to reanult F1 and redbull renault. look at the difference, renault f1 even slower than mclaren . redbull chasis made all the difference.

[Sebastien007]

"Spanish media" ,

we all know that they are not telling the truth

 

what I read was the official statement after the chinese gp, + the same at F1imagazine

 

http://en.f1i.com/ne...onda-plans.html

 

"So our friends at Honda should be lauded for that achievement. Equally, we’re encouraged by the power unit developments they have in the pipeline, and as a result we’re confident that our overall performance will continue to improve apace."

 

I just want to know what is in the pipeline

[alpes]

[quote name="F1sMyDrug" post="7509171" timestamp="1461010331"]

Hi guys,

I´ve calculated the average race pace for the different drivers in Chinese GP (obviously excluding laps behind the SafetyCar and inlap/outlap in the averages).
....

[alpes]

Hi guys,

 

I´ve calculated the average race pace for the different drivers in Chinese GP (obviously excluding laps behind the SafetyCar and inlap/outlap in the averages). 

 

 

Sereval things to take into account when looking at the results:

- RITMO = Race pace / Diferencias = Gaps / 101,537s = 1:41.537s and so on

- In the strategy for the drivers that had a first lap incident (Hamilton, Raikkonen, Grosjean, Nasr) I excluded the tyre they started with (because they changed it in that first lap).

- Usually the more pitstops a driver does the better race pace it gets (because they can stress out each set of tyre much more) although in the race it can finish behind (Perez vs Hulkenberg it is the perfect example of this).

- In China softs was the better race tyre. McLaren and Sauber only had 1 set of soft tyres available for the entire race so they were forced to use the mediums much more than the other teams. That had an impact on their race pace because a 2 stop strategy on mediums was the slowest combination in terms of numbers.

 

Conclusion:

Taking into account McLaren´s deficit in 2015 was 2.55 seconds compared to the winner (Hamilton), they have recovered around 0.5 seconds at this circuit (and that using a slower strategy with mediums compared to the one used by Rosberg or for example the Toro Rossos).

 

Race pace here in the end was very close to Force India and not too far away from ToroRosso. Williams are a bit of an unknown because their performance changes a lot depending on the tyre and with mediums Massa/Bottas were pretty average.

 

I like the way you have calculated and compared race pace.

 

From these numbers it is clear that McLaren needs 0.5 sec in race pace to be in front of midfield group of FI, Williams and TR.
Biggest chunk of that 0.5 sec, if not all of it,  can come from better tyre management.

I can see them with normal development to be able by mid season to fight at the front of midfield and by the end of year to be clearly fourth best team.

I can't say I am happy with fourth but the three best teams are just on a  different level right now

Edited by alpes, 19 April 2016 - 10:12.