26 replies to this topic

[Fizzicist]

Does anyone know why Honda seem to be a different company nowadays?

The early 90's saw Honda engines that were simply incredible and now they seem to be concerned with the detriment that a blown engine may have on civic sales. What's changed at the top?

[ray b]

MAYBE just $$$$$$$ japan has been in recession longer than anyone else
10 to 20% cuts hurt year after year

[Ali_G]

Anyone ever think that back in the 80's there were turbo engines. To get more power out of a turbo engine you are looking to increase boost.

In a N/A engine you are looking to increase RPM.

It all went sour in 91 for Honda when they introduced their V12 engine. Ironically (correct me if I'm wrong) Renault introduced their V10 in the same season.

Anyways, the V12 wasn't a great engine. While fairly poweful it was far too heavy, a sign of Honda engines, always.

Powerful but heavy.

Niall

[Halfwitt]

Originally posted by Ali_G
Anyways, the V12 wasn't a great engine. While fairly poweful it was far too heavy, a sign of Honda engines, always.

Powerful but heavy.

Niall

Wow, if I had that kind of knowledge and insight I could have been an astrologer, or a fortune-teller.

I wonder if Honda knew they were doomed from the outset? All those new engineers and new technology, and all the time they were going to make a heavy engine because the V12 was a big lump all them years ago. Incredible.

Niall, you could have warned them not to be so stupid; it would have saved them millions

[random]

It's generally accepted that the game has gotten a lot harder since Honda's halcyon days. In fact, Honda is likely putting a lot more effort into their current engine programe than they were in the 90's.

The quailty of their competition has just gotten that much better.

[desmo]

I agree random, and I wonder as well if Soichiro's passing may have cost them some of their focus. Racing was in his blood and it was hence a real priority. It takes real commitment and passion as well as cubic dollars to run a successful F1 engine program.

[AyePirate]

In addition to other previously mentioned factors;
McLaren, Williams & Lotus were more competent partners than
BAR & Jordan. Senna/Prost didn't hurt either.

[Pingu]

Originally posted by Ali_G

Anyways, the V12 wasn't a great engine. While fairly poweful it was far too heavy, a sign of Honda engines, always

Niall

Indeed Nill, not a great engine. Actually a pretty BAD engine. So bad in fact, that it won both the 1991 Constructor's Championship for Mclaren and the 1991 Driver's Championship for Ayrton Senna.

Have you heard the expression: "engage brain before opening mouth"?

[Top Fuel F1]

The Honda racing engine development operation has a unique culture of involving engineers who will also at some point in time be involved with their commercial engine development. That may have been successful in more ways than one in the past. Who knows, maybe today it takes more focus of the people on strictly working toward a successful race engine without thinking about experience spin off to the commercial business.

[Nathan]

Originally posted by random
It's generally accepted that the game has gotten a lot harder since Honda's halcyon days. In fact, Honda is likely putting a lot more effort into their current engine programe than they were in the 90's.

The quailty of their competition has just gotten that much better.

mmmm I had read in a biography I think on Senna that at peak Honda had nearly or over 1000 engineers working on its F-1 program in the late 80's.

[random]

Originally posted by Nathan
mmmm I had read in a biography I think on Senna that at peak Honda had nearly or over 1000 engineers working on its F-1 program in the late 80's.

And Honda is spending a reported $200 million a year on the current programe.

Although I've seen no reports on the actual number of engineers on the current project, they could easily afford the services of 1,000 engineers with that budget.

[Ali_G]

Originally posted by Pingu


Indeed Nill, not a great engine. Actually a pretty BAD engine. So bad in fact, that it won both the 1991 Constructor's Championship for Mclaren and the 1991 Driver's Championship for Ayrton Senna.

Have you heard the expression: "engage brain before opening mouth"?

For a start, compared to the engine of the year before, the 91 engine wasn't not all it was cracked up to be. MClarena and Senna in particular were not very impressed, and yes it was supposed to be a little too heavy. I have heard many say this, even the 1991 FIA Review has it in it.

Niall

[Halfwitt]

Originally posted by Ali_G


For a start, compared to the engine of the year before, the 91 engine wasn't not all it was cracked up to be. MClarena and Senna in particular were not very impressed, and yes it was supposed to be a little too heavy. I have heard many say this, even the 1991 FIA Review has it in it.

Niall

Yes, Nil has a point, and I think his point is:

This year's Honda engine is heavy because Senna's 1991 engine was heavy.

[Ali_G]

Originally posted by Halfwitt


Yes, Nil has a point, and I think his point is:

This year's Honda engine is heavy because Senna's 1991 engine was heavy.

Jes*s Chri*t.

I have heard many TV pundits and other say that while Honda's engine have nearly always been very powerful they have been slightly ont he heavy side.

I'm only saying what others have said.

Niall

[wati]

Originally posted by Ali_G


It all went sour in 91 for Honda when they introduced their V12 engine. Ironically (correct me if I'm wrong) Renault introduced their V10 in the same season.

Niall

I thought renault introduced it's engine in '89.

Wattie

[12.9:1]

.




The 92, V12 may not have ben a winner, but at least it had a memorable compression ratio



.

[Ben]

Originally posted by Ali_G


Jes*s Chri*t.

I have heard many TV pundits and other say that while Honda's engine have nearly always been very powerful they have been slightly ont he heavy side.

I'm only saying what others have said.

Niall

That'll teach you to listen to TV pundits on tech issues.

Brundle's ok, but read Inside Racing (good book I've mentioned it twice today ) and you will realise how technically ignorant Mark Blundell is (damn good racer he was, but didn't understand the car)

It's always best to evaluate what you here and try and reason as to whether it's correct or not, rather than repeating it parrot fashion to all and sundry.

Ben

[MN]

Here some pics from Silverstone. (By K.Sawada)

[Rat_Fink]

Looks heavy to me !!

[FordFan]

In case anyone cares, EJ was asked about the new engine in the Thursday press conference, and he said clearly that the new engine was not heavier that the old, it was lighter. And, he said it was more powerful as well.

Seems like he should know.

[Ali_G]

Originally posted by Ben


That'll teach you to listen to TV pundits on tech issues.

Brundle's ok, but read Inside Racing (good book I've mentioned it twice today ) and you will realise how technically ignorant Mark Blundell is (damn good racer he was, but didn't understand the car)

It's always best to evaluate what you here and try and reason as to whether it's correct or not, rather than repeating it parrot fashion to all and sundry.

Ben

I think it was Tony Jardine who stated it on ITV's coverage.

I also remember Simon Taylor also heavily critisising the V12 engine on the 91 Review.

Niall

[jloehs777]

In case anyone cares, EJ was asked about the new engine in the Thursday press conference, and he said clearly that the new engine was not heavier that the old, it was lighter. And, he said it was more powerful as well.

That can be taken as gospel too because EJ's got no reason to lie

[zixxer]

Just my $.02 but could it be that limiting the design to a V10 hurts Honda more than others? They have always been so good at thinking outside the box. Look at Honda in motorcycle race engine design. They are miles ahead of everyone else. But they have a penchant for solving problems with unconventional answers. Their V5 is the business in Moto GP. When asked why they went that route, the key engineer said it was because they wanted to do something different!

[Ben]

Originally posted by Ali_G


I think it was Tony Jardine who stated it on ITV's coverage.

I also remember Simon Taylor also heavily critisising the V12 engine on the 91 Review.

Niall

As I said, hardly a stunning technical background there. Motorsport journos are rarely engineers.

Ben

[desmo]

I think the "old" Honda might well have nixxed the 10 cyl stipulation in the Concorde agreement.

Those are interesting photos, although I am dissappointed they wern't linked to higher-res versions. Kenji chose the wrong shots to put higher-res images up today IMO.

Looking at the photos we see a bank angle obviously significantly above 90 degrees- can't remember the official or rumored angle. This has forced a Renault-like twin rail FI setup. Also note how the airbox appears partitioned at its entry (or is this simply a mass flow wire? I don't think it is.) A partitioned airbox would be a whole new ballgame as far as intake resonances.

Note also the F2001ish assymmetrcal oil reservoir, presumably done for maintenance access?

Does look a might porky, but perhaps that is a result of the wide architecture or all the ancillaries right up front from this angle. Current F1 engine designs are very well finished. The era of cobby sand cast bits seems in the past.

[eoin]

The Honda engine that was used for the first half of the season was in the region of 120kg...compare this to the weight to the renault which is rumored to be under 80kg in Qual!!!!

[Ali_G]

Originally posted by desmo
I think the "old" Honda might well have nixxed the 10 cyl stipulation in the Concorde agreement.

Those are interesting photos, although I am dissappointed they wern't linked to higher-res versions. Kenji chose the wrong shots to put higher-res images up today IMO.

Looking at the photos we see a bank angle obviously significantly above 90 degrees- can't remember the official or rumored angle. This has forced a Renault-like twin rail FI setup. Also note how the airbox appears partitioned at its entry (or is this simply a mass flow wire? I don't think it is.) A partitioned airbox would be a whole new ballgame as far as intake resonances.

Note also the F2001ish assymmetrcal oil reservoir, presumably done for maintenance access?

Does look a might porky, but perhaps that is a result of the wide architecture or all the ancillaries right up front from this angle. Current F1 engine designs are very well finished. The era of cobby sand cast bits seems in the past.

Just to say that IIRC I heard that the new engine was only about 98 degrees. Not sure if that's true but it was mentioned on the boad quite a number of times.

Niall