Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 11 votes

Honda starting to improve as Mclaren switches to Renault


  • Please log in to reply
1198 replies to this topic

Poll: Honda starting to improve as Mclaren switches to Renault (576 member(s) have cast votes)

Which will be the better PU for 2018 season

  1. Honda (132 votes [22.92%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 22.92%

  2. Renault (444 votes [77.08%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 77.08%

Will Mclaren regret leaving Honda

  1. Yes (211 votes [36.63%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 36.63%

  2. No (365 votes [63.37%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 63.37%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1151 Fatgadget

Fatgadget
  • Member

  • 5,453 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 12 April 2019 - 14:35

They would still have the Honda engine. I believe the jury is still out on whether it's a Jewel or not.

^ In it's current iteration its  no rough diamond neither is it?



Advertisement

#1152 pup

pup
  • Member

  • 1,388 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 12 April 2019 - 14:51

Let's just say it's been polished, but what exactly they've been polishing is still up for debate.


Edited by pup, 12 April 2019 - 14:53.


#1153 MastaKink

MastaKink
  • Member

  • 4,164 posts
  • Joined: April 14

Posted 12 April 2019 - 14:55

No, but think of what 200m and extra Bahraini funding would have done WITH the 100m from Honda? 

 

That's assuming they get Latifi money and extra Bahrain money which is unlikely if they still have Honda because there's now no reason to fill a hole. Its like pretending if Honda had stayed with McLaren they'd have still pumped in all this extra money into the engine as well that the divorce had freed up.

 

You also should be considering the hole Exxon and Tag left in the Macca budget and the loss of prize money and the role Honda played in losing that chunk of change if we're playing a what if finances game.

 

Having that money lost ate into the benefit of Honda's contribution in the first place which Zak talked about in 2017. By 2017 Honda were just effectively covering the lost sponsorship and prize money and could've been a potential hurdle to attracting new ones so if you get the bosses to cover Honda's nut and you can attract new ones then you can actually be better off post split which I'm sure played a role in the decision. 

 

That it seems to have worked out well for both parties on that front might upset some people but they both seem to be on the right track now so I don't see a problem. 



#1154 Tenmantaylor

Tenmantaylor
  • Member

  • 12,268 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 12 April 2019 - 14:58

The interesting trend from FP1 and 2 for is the resurgence of Renault powered teams vs Ferrari and Mercedes powered B teams (FI/Haas). Renault and McLaren looking strong at track with a huge straight.



#1155 DeKnyff

DeKnyff
  • Member

  • 1,382 posts
  • Joined: November 13

Posted 12 April 2019 - 15:01

^ In it's current iteration its  no rough diamond neither is it?

 

Don't forget that Honda had one full year for experimentation with Toro Rosso, without the slightest pressure for results, before joining Red Bull. McLaren not having a B-team for experiments, the engine would still be close to one year behind what is now if the hadn't split. And despite six years of development since 2013 and one year of free practice with Toro Rosso, it's still the worse engine on the grid. Of course, the law of diminishing returns will equalize the engines in the long term, but we are not there yet.

 

I can understand the financial side of it and everything, but I think McLaren was done with Honda and they didn´t believe they could properly develop the engine. The fact that McLaren shareholders preferred to put more money on the table and break the deal confirms it.



#1156 Fatgadget

Fatgadget
  • Member

  • 5,453 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 12 April 2019 - 15:08

Don't forget that Honda had one full year for experimentation with Toro Rosso, without the slightest pressure for results, before joining Red Bull. McLaren not having a B-team for experiments, the engine would still be close to one year behind what is now if the hadn't split. And despite six years of development since 2013 and one year of free practice with Toro Rosso, it's still the worse engine on the grid. Of course, the law of diminishing returns will equalize the engines in the long term, but we are not there yet.

 

I can understand the financial side of it and everything, but I think McLaren was done with Honda and they didn´t believe they could properly develop the engine. The fact that McLaren shareholders preferred to put more money on the table and break the deal confirms it.

I still maintain McLaren dropped a major bollock ditching exclusive Honda works status that Ron Dennis worked so hard to entice . All they will win as a customer team  is just the scraps from the table and not being humiliated by the likes of Racing point and Haas...Oh wait.That has already happened..


Edited by Fatgadget, 12 April 2019 - 15:27.


#1157 DeKnyff

DeKnyff
  • Member

  • 1,382 posts
  • Joined: November 13

Posted 12 April 2019 - 15:13

I still maintain McLaren dropped a major bollock ditching exclusive Honda works status that Ron Dennis worked so hard to entice . All they will win as a customer team  is just the scraps from the table .

Not if this metaphysical concept of "works status" doesn't translate into on-track results.



#1158 New Britain

New Britain
  • Member

  • 2,003 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 12 April 2019 - 15:35

It wouldn't have done anything.  They have the same budget, just that the shortfall from leaving Honda is coming from the investors.  Better to ask the king of Bahrain what he'd otherwise have done with the money.  Maybe renovate his yacht or something.

 

If the investors ever say enough is enough, and McLaren slashes their budget, then the subject becomes relevant.  Until then, it's just a means to steer talk away from Honda's engine.

Yes and no. I think the reality is somewhere between the notion that without the extra $100m/yr McLaren are in the deep stuff and the notion that McLaren are owned by incredibly rich people to whom an extra $100m/yr is just a rounding error.

 

Put it this way - if the Honda money that they turned away didn't much matter, they never would have sold off 10% of the company to Latifi. They did that expressly to get more funding into the company.

Yes, Bahrain is a rich country, but Mumtalakat is a sovereign investment fund, their McLaren stake is one of their biggest holdings, they have held it now for 12 years - a long time in the private equity world - and by now normally they would have sold it off rather than having to add to it.

Less is known about the Ojjeh family wealth (I believe their other primary asset, at least in the UK, is Farnborough Airport), but when the shareholders bought out Ron two years ago they funded it with a debt flotation, not with additional equity.

Zak's statement in late 2017 that the shareholders were prepared to fill the Honda funding gap for three years was undoubtedly made with the prospect of a 2021 cost cap in mind.

On the other hand, the one thing we don't know is whether Honda's $100m (or whatever), which I am convinced was an accurate approximation for 2015-17, was going to continue for the remaining 7 years of the contract. For example, if as rumoured Honda were paying half of Alonso's $40m salary, once Alonso left the team the Honda contribution was going to decline by $20m (and McLaren's own costs to decline by a goodly amount; what do they pay Sainz - supposedly $4m?). And perhaps after the first few years of such a big subsidy, Honda were contracted for the balance to provide just a free PU supply, or maybe $50m/yr. We just don't know.

Zak has also said on many occasions in the last 18 months that a cost cap is crucial for the future of F1. In contrast, Ron was opposed to a cost cap.

In sum, McLaren aren't in the sorry position that Williams are now in, and that in recent years Sauber and Force India were in, but don't kid yourself - money is an issue down there.



#1159 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 35,054 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 12 April 2019 - 15:40

Don't forget that Honda had one full year for experimentation with Toro Rosso, without the slightest pressure for results, before joining Red Bull. McLaren not having a B-team for experiments, the engine would still be close to one year behind what is now if the hadn't split. And despite six years of development since 2013 and one year of free practice with Toro Rosso, it's still the worse engine on the grid. Of course, the law of diminishing returns will equalize the engines in the long term, but we are not there yet.

I can understand the financial side of it and everything, but I think McLaren was done with Honda and they didn´t believe they could properly develop the engine. The fact that McLaren shareholders preferred to put more money on the table and break the deal confirms it.

I don't believe that's entirely correct. With the number of penalties mclaren had to endure there was ample opportunity to bring updates. The problem was that Honda simply could not make the updates available to even try.

Edited by Clatter, 12 April 2019 - 16:22.


Advertisement

#1160 Fatgadget

Fatgadget
  • Member

  • 5,453 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 12 April 2019 - 16:12

Not if this metaphysical concept of "works status" doesn't translate into on-track results.

Certainly does. Guess who is top of the pile as we speak...If not 4 works teams.


Edited by Fatgadget, 12 April 2019 - 16:20.


#1161 Fatgadget

Fatgadget
  • Member

  • 5,453 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 12 April 2019 - 16:30

I'm not fussed about McLaren.

 

It's all about Toro Rosso - Honda, and later Red Bull - Honda.  :up:

 

It was terribly nice of those McLaren chaps to help out with the tough slog and poor results of the development period on the Honda power unit:up:   :)

Ouch! Better not visit the McLaren site with that kind of talk...Liable to get lynched mate! :lol:


Edited by Fatgadget, 12 April 2019 - 16:37.


#1162 Laminar

Laminar
  • Member

  • 70 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 13 April 2019 - 06:43

:lol:  :wave:



#1163 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 5,145 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 14 April 2019 - 19:58

Honda still surprisingly reliable actually.

Much much more reliable than Renault and almost on par with Ferrari and Merc. The power seems to be pretty decent too, although not top class.

They really came from far, but right now they are the 3rd best PU on merit and they closed the initial massive gap to the best PU’s massively.

Very intrigued how they will improve during the season.

#1164 Heyli

Heyli
  • Member

  • 1,974 posts
  • Joined: May 17

Posted 14 April 2019 - 20:08

Honda still surprisingly reliable actually.

Much much more reliable than Renault and almost on par with Ferrari and Merc. The power seems to be pretty decent too, although not top class.

They really came from far, but right now they are the 3rd best PU on merit and they closed the initial massive gap to the best PU’s massively.

Very intrigued how they will improve during the season.

More reliable than Ferrari so far, no?

 

Still only 3 races in though, a lot can still happen. So far it´s looking good, let´s hope they can keep that up.



#1165 Ivanhoe

Ivanhoe
  • Member

  • 6,010 posts
  • Joined: November 15

Posted 14 April 2019 - 20:59

Anything on Kvyat’s DNF?

#1166 eREr

eREr
  • Member

  • 1,415 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 14 April 2019 - 21:12

More reliable than Ferrari so far, no?

Still only 3 races in though, a lot can still happen. So far it´s looking good, let´s hope they can keep that up.


Really? Why Kvyat's whole PU was changed? Not just one part of it, but the whole was. Any reasoning for this radical step?

#1167 FullOppositeLock

FullOppositeLock
  • Member

  • 4,816 posts
  • Joined: September 15

Posted 14 April 2019 - 21:18

Really? Why Kvyat's whole PU was changed? Not just one part of it, but the whole was. Any reasoning for this radical step?

 

“A tricky first day in China,” summarised Toyoharu Tanabe, Honda’s F1 Technical Director.

“We spotted an irregularity on the data from Daniil’s car and decided to change the PU before FP2. Inevitably, this meant Daniil was unable to go out at the start of the session, but well done to the team for getting him back on track for the final 45 minutes. We will now send the original PU back to HRD-Sakura for further investigation and also we will analyse the data here at the track.”

 

Having said that, I fon't think much can be read in Toro Rosso's power unit usage this year, same as last year when some were adamant that their component usage was a sign of Honda being unreliable when we hardly ever saw them retire through reliability issues. Red Bull and Honda will keep using them as their test mule this year, which means that on any occasion where they want to test something new I can see them installing it regardless of penalties, all for the greater good of making sure that whenever Red Bull take a new power unit they will have some relevant data on how it runs in race weekend conditions.



#1168 ArrowsLivery

ArrowsLivery
  • Member

  • 2,833 posts
  • Joined: March 17

Posted 14 April 2019 - 21:20

Honda still surprisingly reliable actually.

Much much more reliable than Renault and almost on par with Ferrari and Merc. The power seems to be pretty decent too, although not top class.

They really came from far, but right now they are the 3rd best PU on merit and they closed the initial massive gap to the best PU’s massively.

Very intrigued how they will improve during the season.

 

Yes, Max was even able to get a run on Vettel when they both had the same tires on. 

 

Anything on Kvyat’s DNF?

 

Probably just to save the car and get a new gearbox. He obviously wasn't going to get any points that race. 



#1169 eREr

eREr
  • Member

  • 1,415 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 14 April 2019 - 21:38

“A tricky first day in China,” summarised Toyoharu Tanabe, Honda’s F1 Technical Director.
“We spotted an irregularity on the data from Daniil’s car and decided to change the PU before FP2. Inevitably, this meant Daniil was unable to go out at the start of the session, but well done to the team for getting him back on track for the final 45 minutes. We will now send the original PU back to HRD-Sakura for further investigation and also we will analyse the data here at the track.”

Having said that, I fon't think much can be read in Toro Rosso's power unit usage this year, same as last year when some were adamant that their component usage was a sign of Honda being unreliable when we hardly ever saw them retire through reliability issues. Red Bull and Honda will keep using them as their test mule this year, which means that on any occasion where they want to test something new I can see them installing it regardless of penalties, all for the greater good of making sure that whenever Red Bull take a new power unit they will have some relevant data on how it runs in race weekend conditions.


It had an issue, that's clear. But this statement doesn't explain why the whole PU was changed and not just e.g the ICE.

At this point of the year all Honda powered cars use the same spec afaik. So the issue might affect the other 3 too (ok, Albon got also new PU, but the reason for that is well known). This was not an experimental, next spec PU. We will see.

#1170 FullOppositeLock

FullOppositeLock
  • Member

  • 4,816 posts
  • Joined: September 15

Posted 14 April 2019 - 21:54

I have no idea how you can claim what spec of Honda PU went into Kvyat's car unless you have sources within Honda or the team but okay, if you say so. I do agree however that it's possible that the same issue may affect the other cars/power units. Still, Red Bull is 6 for 6 for race finishes and without a single component failing. Looking at Renault and McLaren's record in the opening three races I'd suggest it's doubtful they would have managed this had they still paid Renault for the privilege of delivering them a sub par product ;)


Edited by FullOppositeLock, 14 April 2019 - 21:57.


#1171 ArrowsLivery

ArrowsLivery
  • Member

  • 2,833 posts
  • Joined: March 17

Posted 14 April 2019 - 22:21

It had an issue, that's clear. But this statement doesn't explain why the whole PU was changed and not just e.g the ICE.

At this point of the year all Honda powered cars use the same spec afaik. So the issue might affect the other 3 too (ok, Albon got also new PU, but the reason for that is well known). This was not an experimental, next spec PU. We will see.

 

An issue doesn't mean that it's catastrophic. Leclerc obviously had an issue in Bahrain, yet his PU was just fine in China. Honda have decided to investigate the issue but it does not mean that PU will never be used again if they find out there wasn't any damage. 



#1172 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 5,145 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 15 April 2019 - 05:46

Really? Why Kvyat's whole PU was changed? Not just one part of it, but the whole was. Any reasoning for this radical step?


The PU has had zero in race failures. That is MASSIVELY better than Renault who has had at least one failure per race, sometimes multiple failures as well as mapping issues in Q.

For RB, this is problaby the biggest reliability step in years.

Ferrari has had 1 in race reliability issue and changed CE’s on 4 cars (Alfa to follow). So Honda is close on reliability with them.

Why change all components on Kvyat’s car? I suspect a possible ICE issue. Gave them the chance to swap everything so that they can inspect all PU componebts in Sakura for wear...

Like I told you last year a few times, Honda was on upward reliability path whereas Renault was still struggling.

#1173 Heyli

Heyli
  • Member

  • 1,974 posts
  • Joined: May 17

Posted 15 April 2019 - 06:56

Really? Why Kvyat's whole PU was changed? Not just one part of it, but the whole was. Any reasoning for this radical step?

I forgot about that exchange.

 

Still, they´re not breaking down on track so far. They already said pre this season that they are calculating with penalties. So I stand by what I said, so far it´s looking quite good. 



#1174 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 9,451 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 15 April 2019 - 07:52

It had an issue, that's clear. But this statement doesn't explain why the whole PU was changed and not just e.g the ICE.

At this point of the year all Honda powered cars use the same spec afaik. So the issue might affect the other 3 too (ok, Albon got also new PU, but the reason for that is well known). This was not an experimental, next spec PU. We will see.

 

Swapping out a complete rear end is easier and are ready made in the paddock, while unbolting and rebolting only the ICE takes much more time and would mean Kvyat misses FP2. It was a tactic in LeMans a decade or so ago. Just swap the complete rear and service the engine in the pit. That was forbidden later on, you have to use 1 engine/race instead of 2. 



#1175 eREr

eREr
  • Member

  • 1,415 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 15 April 2019 - 11:17

I have no idea how you can claim what spec of Honda PU went into Kvyat's car unless you have sources within Honda or the team but okay, if you say so. I do agree however that it's possible that the same issue may affect the other cars/power units. Still, Red Bull is 6 for 6 for race finishes and without a single component failing. Looking at Renault and McLaren's record in the opening three races I'd suggest it's doubtful they would have managed this had they still paid Renault for the privilege of delivering them a sub par product ;)

 

I said most probably the same spec WAS in all Honda powered cars until this PU change. That's why the other cars might be affected later on with the same issue. We all know well the current issues of Renault PU. I want to get now more info about the Honda PU, but it seems noone knows which part failed or was close to it.



#1176 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 9,451 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 15 April 2019 - 11:55

The engine is sent to Japan to investigate. So bar some things on telemetry, nobody knows. If it is fine, it will return to the pool of available engines (just like with Leclerc).



#1177 Talisman

Talisman
  • Member

  • 5,480 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 15 April 2019 - 12:18

I said most probably the same spec WAS in all Honda powered cars until this PU change. That's why the other cars might be affected later on with the same issue. We all know well the current issues of Renault PU. I want to get now more info about the Honda PU, but it seems noone knows which part failed or was close to it.

 

Yes you're right, the PUs are all the same spec for all RBRs and STRs.

 

What happened is that Honda encountered some anomalies in the data coming from Kvyat's engine and replaced it rather than trying to work through the issue and returning the car to the track.  This could be anything from a spurious reading from a wayward sensor to a potentially catastrophic failure though I suspect the former than the latter.  The engine will go back to Japan if it isn't there already to be assessed and if its fine then it will be returned to the pool.

 

IMO what happened with Kvyat doesn't raise concerns with any potential flaws with the unit but with the way Honda operates.  We saw with McLaren and STR that Honda have a very low threshold for taking an engine out of the car and replacing it with a new one rather than seeing if they can get by with or rectify issues on that engine on the fly.  Most of those engines turned out not to have significant issues.

 

That is fine when the car isn't competitive but I suspect RBR will get bored very quickly if they have engines taken out and replaced, get penalties only to be told it was an iffy sensor afterwards, nothing significant.  That is what I hope Honda resolves, not the engine design itself.


Edited by Talisman, 15 April 2019 - 12:18.


#1178 Stephane

Stephane
  • Member

  • 1,941 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 15 April 2019 - 12:23

Well, they had so many on track failures the first years, it's understandable they can be a bit too cautious at the moment.

 

They have to learn how to gauge the "warnings" better.



#1179 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 35,054 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 15 April 2019 - 13:10

Yes you're right, the PUs are all the same spec for all RBRs and STRs.

 

What happened is that Honda encountered some anomalies in the data coming from Kvyat's engine and replaced it rather than trying to work through the issue and returning the car to the track.  This could be anything from a spurious reading from a wayward sensor to a potentially catastrophic failure though I suspect the former than the latter.  The engine will go back to Japan if it isn't there already to be assessed and if its fine then it will be returned to the pool.

 

IMO what happened with Kvyat doesn't raise concerns with any potential flaws with the unit but with the way Honda operates.  We saw with McLaren and STR that Honda have a very low threshold for taking an engine out of the car and replacing it with a new one rather than seeing if they can get by with or rectify issues on that engine on the fly.  Most of those engines turned out not to have significant issues.

 

That is fine when the car isn't competitive but I suspect RBR will get bored very quickly if they have engines taken out and replaced, get penalties only to be told it was an iffy sensor afterwards, nothing significant.  That is what I hope Honda resolves, not the engine design itself.

 


I would expect there is more to learn from an engine that hasn't exploded, so if there is any doubt it makes sense to check it ASAP. The swap hasn't caused any track penalties, and the engine might still be usable.

Advertisement

#1180 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 5,145 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 15 April 2019 - 13:14

The TR looked pretty racey. Didnt Albon keep Grosjean behind whilst GRO was in DRS at the end?

#1181 AlcidioG

AlcidioG
  • Member

  • 596 posts
  • Joined: July 16

Posted 15 April 2019 - 13:20

The TR looked pretty racey. Didnt Albon keep Grosjean behind whilst GRO was in DRS at the end?

 


Albon lucked out at the end with them both being lapped and Grosjean losing time. But he deserved his point with that drive.

#1182 Talisman

Talisman
  • Member

  • 5,480 posts
  • Joined: January 05

Posted 15 April 2019 - 13:22


I would expect there is more to learn from an engine that hasn't exploded, so if there is any doubt it makes sense to check it ASAP. The swap hasn't caused any track penalties, and the engine might still be usable.


I agree and that is their rationale too. However I suspect there is a sliding scale of aggressiveness where different manufacturers balance replacing the PU with seeing if they can work it out on the fly and I think Honda are much more conservative than the others.

#1183 JimmyTheFox

JimmyTheFox
  • Member

  • 318 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 15 April 2019 - 13:36

Anything on Kvyat’s DNF?


Tost said as he went a lap down after the nose change they decided to retire the car to save engine mileage.

#1184 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 12,839 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 16 April 2019 - 11:50

And so it begins...

https://www.autospor...ress-speed-flaw



#1185 Stephane

Stephane
  • Member

  • 1,941 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 16 April 2019 - 11:57

Yep, everyone working in the same direction. That's how you progress.



#1186 bibliophagos

bibliophagos
  • Member

  • 131 posts
  • Joined: September 18

Posted 16 April 2019 - 11:58

 

Nah, this is how it began:

 

3    Red Bull    52
4    Renault    12
7    McLaren    8

 

I know you are desperate for Honda to fail, but I think McLaren and Renault have quite a bit of work to do themselves.



#1187 Owen

Owen
  • Member

  • 12,839 posts
  • Joined: September 06

Posted 16 April 2019 - 12:08

Nah, this is how it began:

 

3    Red Bull    52
4    Renault    12
7    McLaren    8

 

I know you are desperate for Honda to fail, but I think McLaren and Renault have quite a bit of work to do themselves.

I don't want Honda to fail (at all). But Christian Horner is being Christian Horner again... :rolleyes:



#1188 Jbleroi

Jbleroi
  • Member

  • 832 posts
  • Joined: March 15

Posted 16 April 2019 - 12:22

I don't want Honda to fail (at all). But Christian Horner is being Christian Horner again... :rolleyes:

 

have you read the complete article...... 



#1189 bibliophagos

bibliophagos
  • Member

  • 131 posts
  • Joined: September 18

Posted 16 April 2019 - 12:26

I don't want Honda to fail (at all). But Christian Horner is being Christian Horner again... :rolleyes:

 

I'm not too sure if it's a bad thing for a team principal to identify the shortcomings of his car and try to work on it.

 

On the other hand, I do think people in general do talk very harshly about Horner for antagonizing Renault, but if I buy an internet subscription for my phone, you bet I'm going to be a pain for my provider when I have no connection for even 10% of the time.



#1190 New Britain

New Britain
  • Member

  • 2,003 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 16 April 2019 - 12:44

I don't want Honda to fail (at all).

Agreed...but it might not be so bad if Red Bull did.  ;)



#1191 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 35,054 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 16 April 2019 - 14:48

I don't want Honda to fail (at all). But Christian Horner is being Christian Horner again... :rolleyes:

At what again? He has been asked a question in an interview and given what looks like an honest answer as to where they currently stand. What exactly has he done wrong?

#1192 SparkPlug86

SparkPlug86
  • Member

  • 60 posts
  • Joined: March 18

Posted 16 April 2019 - 15:27

I think, based on the first 3 races of the year. Ferrari have the most powerful engine on the grid, depending on what mode they're running and if they have their special grapefruit fuel, but it's come at the cost of some reliability. Mercedes are pretty close behind, but more reliable. I think Mercedes have a more efficient PU overall. 

 

Renault, have done a massive step, performance wise with the PU but still have big issues with their MGU-K, so probably the least reliable engine but I think performance is getting close to the Mercedes.

 

Honda probably have the least performance so far, but a big upgrade from previous years. They seemed to have cracked a good compromise between power, reliability and efficiency. It remains to be seen if this will continue, but they have done very well to catch up. I think we are starting to see some parity in performance for all the engines now.



#1193 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 5,145 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 16 April 2019 - 15:49

Some were doubting last year whether Honda could perform decently in RB. 

 

I think the answer is quite clear, Honda has a respectable PU now. Perhaps not the best, but they are decent and they can bring the fight on track to the other PU's, although they still have a bit of catching up to do. 



#1194 FullOppositeLock

FullOppositeLock
  • Member

  • 4,816 posts
  • Joined: September 15

Posted 16 April 2019 - 18:47

I think, based on the first 3 races of the year. Ferrari have the most powerful engine on the grid, depending on what mode they're running and if they have their special grapefruit fuel, but it's come at the cost of some reliability. Mercedes are pretty close behind, but more reliable. I think Mercedes have a more efficient PU overall.

Renault, have done a massive step, performance wise with the PU but still have big issues with their MGU-K, so probably the least reliable engine but I think performance is getting close to the Mercedes.

Honda probably have the least performance so far, but a big upgrade from previous years. They seemed to have cracked a good compromise between power, reliability and efficiency. It remains to be seen if this will continue, but they have done very well to catch up. I think we are starting to see some parity in performance for all the engines now.

What exactly is this based on? Unless I’m mistaken a Mercedes powered car has won and finished second in all 3 races so far, and we are yet to see a Renault powered car even finish in the same stratosphere. I willl happily conceed Renault and Honda seem to be roughly equal in the power stakes (if not the reliability ones), but the front two are still miles ahead sadly.

Your bit regarding Honda is wrong too in my opinion. They haven’t made massive power gains on previous years - it’s been much more incremental than that, i.e. they were just never as bad near the end of 2017 or last year as many McLaren fans liked to pretend. Likewise Renault weren’t so bad either but they could just never make a significant step without compromising reliability, same as now seemingly.

Edited by FullOppositeLock, 16 April 2019 - 18:49.


#1195 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 9,451 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 16 April 2019 - 19:22

It also seems the Ferrari is a different beast in Q mode vs Race mode.

#1196 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 737 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 16 April 2019 - 19:26

What exactly is this based on? Unless I’m mistaken a Mercedes powered car has won and finished second in all 3 races so far, and we are yet to see a Renault powered car even finish in the same stratosphere. I willl happily conceed Renault and Honda seem to be roughly equal in the power stakes (if not the reliability ones), but the front two are still miles ahead sadly.

Your bit regarding Honda is wrong too in my opinion. They haven’t made massive power gains on previous years - it’s been much more incremental than that, i.e. they were just never as bad near the end of 2017 or last year as many McLaren fans liked to pretend. Likewise Renault weren’t so bad either but they could just never make a significant step without compromising reliability, same as now seemingly.

 

I don't disagree with you that he's lacking any evidence. Actually Renault have said they are still behind Merc and Ferrari in qualy in particular.

 

But we both know what you said doesn't have the right context. If the 1.5-2 second deficit of Renault powered cars was entirely down to the power unit, they would not be competitive at all against the likes of the Ferrari and Merc engined B-teams like Racing Point and Alfa. It would be quite obvious out on track. And actually, Renault have been locked onto 7th place when they don't break down.  It's the chassis that sucks.


Edited by ARTGP, 16 April 2019 - 19:27.


#1197 SparkPlug86

SparkPlug86
  • Member

  • 60 posts
  • Joined: March 18

Posted 16 April 2019 - 19:27

What exactly is this based on? Unless I’m mistaken a Mercedes powered car has won and finished second in all 3 races so far, and we are yet to see a Renault powered car even finish in the same stratosphere. I willl happily conceed Renault and Honda seem to be roughly equal in the power stakes (if not the reliability ones), but the front two are still miles ahead sadly.

Your bit regarding Honda is wrong too in my opinion. They haven’t made massive power gains on previous years - it’s been much more incremental than that, i.e. they were just never as bad near the end of 2017 or last year as many McLaren fans liked to pretend. Likewise Renault weren’t so bad either but they could just never make a significant step without compromising reliability, same as now seemingly.

 

I'm basing it on the top speed traces for the recent races, FP's and Quallys, plenty of stats out there which show all this. The Renault powered cars are pretty much up there and ahead of some Mercedes powered cars. Granted, lots of things inpact top speeds, such as drag, downforce levels etc but this gives a good indication that those levels have improved on the previous year when you look at RBR, Renault and Mclaren in '18. Also, the comments from the drivers have hinted that the PU has made a good step, which although you can take with a pinch of salt, is worth noting. As I said, it's what I think and I could be wrong... I don't work in F1, so I'm just someone on the outside looking in.  :smoking: It's a shame that their MUG-K is a constant weakness, but I also suspect it's also been a contributor to their increased outputs this year.

 

I think Honda has a decent engine in 2016 actually, but went a bit backwards in 2017. I never said they had made massive power gains, I was referring to the general performance i.e. driveability, reliability etc. RBR have had good things to say about the PU, and it seems that in a decent chassis can perform at a respectable level. I'm looking forward to seeing how this manifests itself later in the season.



#1198 FullOppositeLock

FullOppositeLock
  • Member

  • 4,816 posts
  • Joined: September 15

Posted 16 April 2019 - 22:46

I will take top speed traces with a huge pinch of salt if you don't mind. I distinctly remember Toro Rosso being quite high on them on numerous occassions last year. I’m sure Renault have gained performance, just that I think it’s adversely affected reliability and they will have to strike a balance again meaning they will drop back. Performance without reliability is ultimately not very meaningful.

#1199 Fatgadget

Fatgadget
  • Member

  • 5,453 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 16 April 2019 - 23:17

I'm basing it on the top speed traces for the recent races, FP's and Quallys, plenty of stats out there which show all this. The Renault powered cars are pretty much up there and ahead of some Mercedes powered cars. Granted, lots of things inpact top speeds, such as drag, downforce levels etc but this gives a good indication that those levels have improved on the previous year when you look at RBR, Renault and Mclaren in '18. Also, the comments from the drivers have hinted that the PU has made a good step, which although you can take with a pinch of salt, is worth noting. As I said, it's what I think and I could be wrong... I don't work in F1, so I'm just someone on the outside looking in.  :smoking: It's a shame that their MUG-K is a constant weakness, but I also suspect it's also been a contributor to their increased outputs this year.

 

I think Honda has a decent engine in 2016 actually, but went a bit backwards in 2017. I never said they had made massive power gains, I was referring to the general performance i.e. driveability, reliability etc. RBR have had good things to say about the PU, and it seems that in a decent chassis can perform at a respectable level. I'm looking forward to seeing how this manifests itself later in the season.

Top speed only tells part of the story. A slippery chassis can too play a significant part in a high top speed. So?