4028 replies to this topic

[Risil]

Yeah, keep going if you like. 

Part III here.

[Maustinsj]

First!

[Marklar]

Oh another McLaren thread....oh wait.

[LuckyStrike1]

More reliable than the engine ... 

[rabbitleader]

The obvious concern is that Honda are eating up at least the first half of 2017 fixing reliability whilst other teams keep moving forward with more power gains.

Why oh why did Honda think their PU in 2015 had more potential than the Mercedes styled split turbo compressor???? 2.5 years wasted. And is it only since last year that Honda started to look at pre ignition???

[kosmos]

[DS27]

[Marklar]

The Dreams of Power - Part IV

[vassilispapadop]

Very surprised of RBR speed. There were 25km/h down on top speed but still quite competitive.

I doubt if McLaren used the Renault PU would be a match to them

[f1paul]

Still waiting...

[Joseki]

Very surprised of RBR speed. There were 25km/h down on top speed but still quite competitive.

I doubt if McLaren used the Renault PU would be a match to them

 

2 seconds off the pace doesn't seem that competitive.

[DrFurby]

Guys:

McLaren Bentley sounds nice.

But...

McLaren Bugatti = Porn actress 2
McLaren Toyota = c'mon

[GrumpyYoungMan]

And just think about how MUCH data all the other PU manufactures have, actual REAL world data from actual races...

[LuckyStrike1]

Every cloud and its silver lining and all that 

 

NO ONE has more data on being slow and unreliable than McLaren-Honda though. So they have that. Now they just need to do the opposite of what their data shows and they will be fast and reliable. Plus they have Sauber. 

The Power of Dreams. 

[Sestre]

 

No. Power of nightmares.

[ArchieTech]

Yeah, keep going if you like.

...alternatively, just break down on the parade lap   

[Petroltorque]

The fact that Honda have produced two different PUS in 3 years is a testament to their resource. Arai's concept would have guaranteed a midfield drive train but the powers that be deemed they could not beat Mercedes with Arabs concept. So now we are in year one of a new PU. Th social media generation expect immediate success, if only it were that simple. I'd deem success if this year Honda could match or supercede the Renault unit.

[chhatra]

The fact that Honda have produced two different PUS in 3 years is a testament to their resource. Arai's concept would have guaranteed a midfield drive train but the powers that be deemed they could not beat Mercedes with Arabs concept. So now we are in year one of a new PU. Th social media generation expect immediate success, if only it were that simple. I'd deem success if this year Honda could match or supercede the Renault unit.

What an excellent post. Thank you.

I'm sure it's a typo in the middle and you meant Arai not Arabs ;)

[Stephan666]

The lack of public condemnation of HRD today males me suspect Alonso's failure was more McLaren than HRD.

[Treads]

The lack of public condemnation of HRD today males me suspect Alonso's failure was more McLaren than HRD.

Evidence?

Or just McLaren bashing?

[pdac]

The lack of public condemnation of HRD today males me suspect Alonso's failure was more McLaren than HRD.

 

You just go on thinking what you want. The rest of us will operate in the real world.

[LuckyStrike1]

The lack of public condemnation of HRD today males me suspect Alonso's failure was more McLaren than HRD.

 

ERS by McLaren? 

[LuckyStrike1]

The fact that Honda have produced two different PUS in 3 years is a testament to their resource. Arai's concept would have guaranteed a midfield drive train but the powers that be deemed they could not beat Mercedes with Arabs concept. So now we are in year one of a new PU. Th social media generation expect immediate success, if only it were that simple. I'd deem success if this year Honda could match or supercede the Renault unit.

 

Imagine if they would have built one good engine instead ... 

[stringyb92]

Its good news that Honda have another team on board now, as I feel that was a vital link missing in trying to get the PU upto scratch. Hopefully McLaren see this project through to the end and Honda have a good engine unit. My overriding feeling is that Ron jumped ship to Honda far too early, and should have given them a few years to develop a unit and then sign the deal, rather than jumping over straight away and publicly testing and getting it wrong every few weeks. 

 

I do feel both sides have to take a good share of blame for this, not just Honda

[DeKnyff]

The fact that Honda have produced two different PUS in 3 years is a testament to their resource. Arai's concept would have guaranteed a midfield drive train but the powers that be deemed they could not beat Mercedes with Arabs concept. So now we are in year one of a new PU. Th social media generation expect immediate success, if only it were that simple. I'd deem success if this year Honda could match or supercede the Renault unit.

 

It will be a testament to their resource if/when the engine actually fights for wins and poles. Until then, it will be a failing project. I'm sorry, but they are already on their fourth year of development, if they don't get things right quickly, they'll run out of credit.

[Skizo]

It will be a testament to their resource if/when the engine actually fights for wins and poles. Until then, it will be a failing project. I'm sorry, but they are already on their fourth year of development, if they don't get things right quickly, they'll run out of credit.

If you mean the mother company will stop wasting more money on the F1 if this team continue to fail without any success,yes that's possible.But they would "never" run out of credit.They could probably buy F1 as a whole multiple times,just like Mercedes or Renault or any big manufacturer if they wanted to burn money.They are lot bigger than this or any motorsport.

[DeKnyff]

If you mean the mother company will stop wasting more money on the F1 if this team continue to fail without any success,yes that's possible.But they would "never" run out of credit.They could probably buy F1 as a whole multiple times,just like Mercedes or Renault or any big manufacturer if they wanted to burn money.They are lot bigger than this or any motorsport.

 

I don't mean "credit" in a financial sense, but as "the quality of being believable or trustworthy" (from the Collins dictionary).

[Jon83]

The lack of public condemnation of HRD today males me suspect Alonso's failure was more McLaren than HRD.

 

ERS Failure. 

 

Do you still have your initial suspicions? 

[RainyAfterlifeDaylight]

Very surprised of RBR speed. There were 25km/h down on top speed but still quite competitive.

I doubt if McLaren used the Renault PU would be a match to them

It is really hard to say and I guess you know you have no idea what you are talking about based on the used emoji at the end of your sentence.

[muramasa]

 

Spoiler

it's Honda's special contents for dog owners

http://www.honda.co.jp/dog/

 

[Stephane]

So we still don't know if H or K, or CE or ES...

[F1Champion]

Kinda think now, forget the penalties and the whole cycle of introducing engines in certain windows. If they have a fix, bring it to both cars and accept the back of the grid penalties, because there's more chance from the back of the grid with a decent engine, then at the back of the grid with a weak/unreliable unit. New PU every race if needs be.

Edited by F1Champion, 01 May 2017 - 11:53.

[Pete_f1]

I wonder if this Honda 'issue' was the final nail in the coffin for Ron Dennis?
I would love to know what's going on at boardroom level.

[Nova]

I have asked before and got the answer that it might not be the best way to develop, but given that this engine is not going to deliver this year, why not use this as a development year? Put out a new engine as soon as you have developed something, take the grid penalties, and start the next year with a better engine. Who care if you start every race at the back end if it give you a more powerful and reliable engine.

[pizzalover]

I wonder if this Honda 'issue' was the final nail in the coffin for Ron Dennis?
I would love to know what's going on at boardroom level.

 

Of course it was. If they'd have done well and been in the top three he'd still be there.

 

As a Ron Dennis admirer, I think he let emotion cloud his judgement regarding the situation with Mercedes. He was too quick to bring Honda in without first making sure everything/everyone was in place and up to speed. 

 

He took a massive roll of the dice and lost. 

[DrFurby]

Of course it was. If they'd have done well and been in the top three he'd still be there.

As a Ron Dennis admirer, I think he let emotion cloud his judgement regarding the situation with Mercedes. He was too quick to bring Honda in without first making sure everything/everyone was in place and up to speed.

He took a massive roll of the dice and lost.

Totally agree. As a manager, you take risks, and sometimes the only relief for boiling pressure is either resign or getting rondennised.

Edited by DrFurby, 01 May 2017 - 12:34.

[DeKnyff]

Of course it was. If they'd have done well and been in the top three he'd still be there.

 

As a Ron Dennis admirer, I think he let emotion cloud his judgement regarding the situation with Mercedes. He was too quick to bring Honda in without first making sure everything/everyone was in place and up to speed. 

 

He took a massive roll of the dice and lost. 

 Well, in principle, the Honda deal was no brainer decision for McLaren: first internal combustion engine manufacturer, plenty of financial and technical resources, a manufacturer with a history of success (although their previous F1 stint had been a failure) in motor racing two or four wheels, back to manufacturer's team status, one of the best, if not the best, driver line-up on the grid, hiring Peter Prod and other highly qualified people... All seemed perfect in 2013 when the deal was announced. No one would have remotely thought that Honda was so massively going to fail. I don't think that Ron made the wrong decision back than and I don't think he should be held accountable for that.

[F1Lurker]

 Well, in principle, the Honda deal was no brainer decision for McLaren: first internal combustion engine manufacturer, plenty of financial and technical resources, a manufacturer with a history of success (although their previous F1 stint had been a failure) in motor racing two or four wheels, back to manufacturer's team status, one of the best, if not the best, driver line-up on the grid, hiring Peter Prod and other highly qualified people... All seemed perfect in 2013 when the deal was announced. No one would have remotely thought that Honda was so massively going to fail. I don't think that Ron made the wrong decision back than and I don't think he should be held accountable for that.

I would add to this, that before the deal was announced Ron went and inspected the Sakura facilities and an ICE on the dyno. He clearly had representations from Honda to the effect that performance would not be an issue in 2015. He shared these representations with the world and no-one from Honda stepped up to gainsay him. Arai was even talking about podiums in 2015, wins in 2016 and a championship challenge in 2017.

[DrFurby]

Well, in principle, the Honda deal was no brainer decision for McLaren: first internal combustion engine manufacturer, plenty of financial and technical resources, a manufacturer with a history of success (although their previous F1 stint had been a failure) in motor racing two or four wheels, back to manufacturer's team status, one of the best, if not the best, driver line-up on the grid, hiring Peter Prod and other highly qualified people... All seemed perfect in 2013 when the deal was announced. No one would have remotely thought that Honda was so massively going to fail. I don't think that Ron made the wrong decision back than and I don't think he should be held accountable for that.

In the corporate world, all decisions are a no brainer until they fail. You'll always find a rationale behind every single catastrophic decision that was made. Ron made it, and he's accountable for it, no matter if it was justified or not. Not being the case would be against common practice in corp world: no manager nor politician would ever resign because "my decision was logic at the time". That's not how it works.

[DrFurby]

I would add to this, that before the deal was announced Ron went and inspected the Sakura facilities and an ICE on the dyno. He clearly had representations from Honda to the effect that performance would not be an issue in 2015. He shared these representations with the world and no-one from Honda stepped up to gainsay him. Arai was even talking about podiums in 2015, wins in 2016 and a championship challenge in 2017.

Ron inspecting the Sakura facility and the ICE on the dyno is as reliable as The Queen of England inspecting a F16 jet or a Porsche factory.

[Joseki]

 

Spoiler

it's Honda's special contents for dog owners

http://www.honda.co.jp/dog/

 

 

Is Fernando a dog owner? Some may say that the PU is a dog.

[EthanM]

Ron going to Honda was a sound decision. McLaren was in decline (which allowed Ron to stage his own coup) and they were never going to recover as Mercedes' C team. The problem is precisely because McLaren was already in decline and precisely because Ron had staged a coup the performance expectations were insanely unrealistic. Don't you people even remember that hilarious Alonso to McLaren from 2014 where people were seriously convinced McLaren would be out there wining  races long before Ferrari ever won again?

 

And Honda played a part in that too. They wanted to arrive with a bang and Alonso driving the car, they made (or allowed Ron to make) all those outrageous claims regarding the competitiveness of the engine and all the wins they 'd be fighting for on year 2 of the project, and obviously when Honda massively underperformed it blew up in their collective faces. If they had a lower key 'long term' approach to this it might have fared better for Ron. And that was the more realistic approach, the writing was on the wall if you only looked at Renault

[BJHF1]

In the corporate world, all decisions are a no brainer until they fail. You'll always find a rationale behind every single catastrophic decision that was made. Ron made it, and he's accountable for it, no matter if it was justified or not. Not being the case would be against common practice in corp world: no manager nor politician would ever resign because "my decision was logic at the time". That's not how it works.

I agree. There was more than enough writing on the wall to suggest it was a massive leap of faith at the very least.

All you need to do is look at Honda's modern day track record, and the fact that they got started on the project so late (against seriously competent opposition), and you could be led to believe only a crazy man would expect Honda to topple Merc.

I remember Ron saying how Honda built the most ICE's of any manufacturer or something along those lines...Well unfortunately F1 is a whole different ball game in terms of technology.

[pdac]

I have asked before and got the answer that it might not be the best way to develop, but given that this engine is not going to deliver this year, why not use this as a development year? Put out a new engine as soon as you have developed something, take the grid penalties, and start the next year with a better engine. Who care if you start every race at the back end if it give you a more powerful and reliable engine.

 

Have you considered that this might be what they are doing. We have no idea how long it is taking them to develop new things.

[CPR]

I have asked before and got the answer that it might not be the best way to develop, but given that this engine is not going to deliver this year, why not use this as a development year? Put out a new engine as soon as you have developed something, take the grid penalties, and start the next year with a better engine. Who care if you start every race at the back end if it give you a more powerful and reliable engine.

 

This has been discussed a bit.

 

In general, development takes time. It's not like you can come up with a new combustion concept every week. I don't have a problem with the team taking penalties if they were unlikely to score points anyway. However, throwing away points for a 1 hp gain (for example) would be bonkers. Once the PU is good enough that scoring points is likely then I would like to see them take a more normal approach to development. They need to ensure that their development processes are reliable as well.

[F1Lurker]

In the corporate world, all decisions are a no brainer until they fail. You'll always find a rationale behind every single catastrophic decision that was made. Ron made it, and he's accountable for it, no matter if it was justified or not. Not being the case would be against common practice in corp world: no manager nor politician would ever resign because "my decision was logic at the time". That's not how it works.

This is actually completely wrong.

 

Investment managers make decisions on investments/projects all the time based upon best available information. Some projects succeed and some fail (spectacularly so). Yes, rewards are given on the quality of returns, but organizations accept the risk of failure. You are talking about a guarantee of success which is rubbish.

 

Accountability in the corporate world is based upon following corporate policies and procedures and arriving at solid reasonable conclusions. It seems to me that Ron did all of this right. Moreover, the deal with Honda would have been a collective one and approved by the board of directors. Even now Mansour and the Bahraini's are continuing with Honda.

[hasika]

well.....

https://sportiva.shu...t_7/index_5.php

according to the article,The engine upgrade will come in the next few races as soon as they are ready,but not the next race.

It seems canada is their target.

[DrFurby]

This is actually completely wrong.

 

Investment managers make decisions on investments/projects all the time based upon best available information. Some projects succeed and some fail (spectacularly so). Yes, rewards are given on the quality of returns, but organizations accept the risk of failure. You are talking about a guarantee of success which is rubbish.

 

Accountability in the corporate world is based upon following corporate policies and procedures and arriving at solid reasonable conclusions. It seems to me that Ron did all of this right. Moreover, the deal with Honda would have been a collective one and approved by the board of directors. Even now Mansour and the Bahraini's are continuing with Honda.

 

First of all, you are confusing investment management with core business management.  Different worlds, with different risk profiles and strategies. McLaren deciding to invest in a footwear factory in South East Asia is invest management. McLaren deciding to split with Merc and switching to Honda is core business management.

 

Second,  in regards to core business management, there's no bulletproof vest.  Even if you follow corporate policies and procedures, it's a high risk job and if you screw things  badly,  for the most part, you and you're board of directors can be forced to resign, specially if you used your all your weight and personal credt for achivieng green light in a risky scenario when there's a lobby inside your corp (which USUALLY exists) that is explicitly against your decision. 

 

Also, when you affirm "approved by the board of directors" sounds so nice. I'll explain you a typical example I've found in real life:  

 

    - CEO:  Because we're doing X, Y and Z. Any questions?

    - Director A: But Sir,  are you sure that... blah bla blah? I think it's too risky... maybe...

    - CEO: Do you want to continue being a member of this board, don't you? Then, you better support me clearly. Lie to the stock holders if you want, but next discrepancy and you're out.

 

Certainly, not everybody can do this. But Ron Dennis seems the kind of guy with enough power to force all the board of directors to approve something, they agree or not.

 

But sometimes, in this forum, I don't know if some of you speak by real world experience or by "bussiness for dummies pocket edition" experience 

Edited by DrFurby, 01 May 2017 - 13:34.

[HermannH]

Worst engine ever

[CPR]

well.....
https://sportiva.shu...t_7/index_5.php
according to the article,The engine upgrade will come in the next few races as soon as they are ready,but not the next race.
It seems canada is their target.

 
That's actually on the previous page:
https://sportiva.shu...t_7/index_4.php
 

「ベンチ上ではけっこう（成果が）見えているタマが出てきているので、近いうちに実戦投入できればと思っていますし、準備が出来次第、投入したいと思っていますが、次のレースということではありません」（長谷川総責任者）

　そうなるとICEのアップデートは第６戦・モナコGPか第７戦・カナダGPが当面の目標となるが、このアップデートでいきなりライバルとの差を縮めることは難しく、あるチーム関係者は「最初のアップデートでは昨年型を少し上回る程度まで挽回するのがせいぜいではないか」と見ている。つまり、メルセデスAMGとはまだ60馬力程度の差が残るというわけだ。

Yes, it won't be at Barcelona. The text speculates that the ICE update will likely either be at Monaco or Canada but all Hasegawa said is "it'll be ready when it's ready and it won't be ready at the next race" (paraphrasing).

 

There is an unsourced insider quote that says that the update will at least surpass last year's engine and the text says that means that there'll still be a gap of 60 hp to the Mercedes with the update (no idea if they're talking about race or quali).