planetf1.com

It is currently Sun Oct 22, 2017 10:59 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jan 03, 2017 7:04 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3416
One thing McLaren need to do is get on the front foot with some of these innovations on suspension (or anything for that matter). Stalling the rear wing and allowing them to run more downforce with less penalty would have been a godsend in their situation.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2765
Just saw this very interesting video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9E8N6yXUig

This is why Redbull is still the king of aero. Apparently the only cars that could take 130r flat out during the race were the Redbulls. Funny how the Merc (Hamilton) keeps almost the same cornering speed even while lifting...Mclaren does not show horrible top speed here, but perhaps aided by the slipstream... Rosberg was cruising so much during that race I don't think his shots are very representative. But one can clearly see that the top 3 cars in the championship standings are in their own league even at that corner.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 7:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2013 11:29 am
Posts: 574
Does anyone know how long McLaren's contract with Honda is for? If this season's engine is rubbish yet again I wonder if there is some sort of performance clause in the engine contract that allows one or the other to pull the plug early, as it was Ron Dennis who wanted Honda back and he's no longer involved I'd think they might possibly decide to call it quits.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20631
owenmahamilton wrote:
Does anyone know how long McLaren's contract with Honda is for? If this season's engine is rubbish yet again I wonder if there is some sort of performance clause in the engine contract that allows one or the other to pull the plug early, as it was Ron Dennis who wanted Honda back and he's no longer involved I'd think they might possibly decide to call it quits.

It's only one page back...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:44 am 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12031
owenmahamilton wrote:
Does anyone know how long McLaren's contract with Honda is for? If this season's engine is rubbish yet again I wonder if there is some sort of performance clause in the engine contract that allows one or the other to pull the plug early, as it was Ron Dennis who wanted Honda back and he's no longer involved I'd think they might possibly decide to call it quits.


No chance. Mclaren's reasons for giving up the customer Mercedes for works Honda were sound 3 years ago and nothing has changed. Mclaren made a brave choice not to turn into Williams. Now they have suffered the pain for that they aren't about to just give in.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 11:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:42 am
Posts: 893
owenmahamilton wrote:
Does anyone know how long McLaren's contract with Honda is for? If this season's engine is rubbish yet again I wonder if there is some sort of performance clause in the engine contract that allows one or the other to pull the plug early, as it was Ron Dennis who wanted Honda back and he's no longer involved I'd think they might possibly decide to call it quits.


Dennis in or out, I don't see why they would want to do that given Honda's progress in the past year but if they do...........
they better reverse the propaganda on how good their chasis is as nobody would want to supply them lastest engines :] , bar Renault


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:45 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3416
owenmahamilton wrote:
Does anyone know how long McLaren's contract with Honda is for? If this season's engine is rubbish yet again I wonder if there is some sort of performance clause in the engine contract that allows one or the other to pull the plug early, as it was Ron Dennis who wanted Honda back and he's no longer involved I'd think they might possibly decide to call it quits.


10yrs. Dennis and Whitmarsh did well to actually get a works deal, when was the last time a new or returning manufacturer entered the sport as a supplier or team before Honda in 2015?. Toyota 2002 I think. To get a works deal with that sort of commitment was quite an achievement really.

They won't leave, having a works deal is too important and they don't want to be a customer team. And they are through the worse of the PU problems. Unfortunately they had to do most of their development on track rather than in a factory for 3 years before hitting the track like Mercedes/Ferrari and Renault.

They'll get in the ballpark sooner rather than later i'm sure, hopefully by the end of this season now that the token system has gone.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2765
mikeyg123 wrote:
owenmahamilton wrote:
Does anyone know how long McLaren's contract with Honda is for? If this season's engine is rubbish yet again I wonder if there is some sort of performance clause in the engine contract that allows one or the other to pull the plug early, as it was Ron Dennis who wanted Honda back and he's no longer involved I'd think they might possibly decide to call it quits.


No chance. Mclaren's reasons for giving up the customer Mercedes for works Honda were sound 3 years ago and nothing has changed. Mclaren made a brave choice not to turn into Williams. Now they have suffered the pain for that they aren't about to just give in.


I disagree. I think it was possible to win with the Mercedes engines. That was one of the worse knee jerk reactions ever. Mercedes also knew this and that is why they refused to supply Redbull in 2015. They knew Redbull could beat them with their own engine. Getting rid of the Mercedes power unit was probably the worst decision Mclaren has made recently.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 9:02 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3416
kleefton wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
owenmahamilton wrote:
Does anyone know how long McLaren's contract with Honda is for? If this season's engine is rubbish yet again I wonder if there is some sort of performance clause in the engine contract that allows one or the other to pull the plug early, as it was Ron Dennis who wanted Honda back and he's no longer involved I'd think they might possibly decide to call it quits.


No chance. Mclaren's reasons for giving up the customer Mercedes for works Honda were sound 3 years ago and nothing has changed. Mclaren made a brave choice not to turn into Williams. Now they have suffered the pain for that they aren't about to just give in.


I disagree. I think it was possible to win with the Mercedes engines. That was one of the worse knee jerk reactions ever. Mercedes also knew this and that is why they refused to supply Redbull in 2015. They knew Redbull could beat them with their own engine. Getting rid of the Mercedes power unit was probably the worst decision Mclaren has made recently.


Not without using Petronas and Whitmarsh refused to dump long term parnters Esso/Mobil.

Unfortunately they didn't show the same kind of loyalty in return.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 10:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 8:04 am
Posts: 1764
kleefton wrote:
Just saw this very interesting video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9E8N6yXUig

This is why Redbull is still the king of aero. Apparently the only cars that could take 130r flat out during the race were the Redbulls. Funny how the Merc (Hamilton) keeps almost the same cornering speed even while lifting...Mclaren does not show horrible top speed here, but perhaps aided by the slipstream... Rosberg was cruising so much during that race I don't think his shots are very representative. But one can clearly see that the top 3 cars in the championship standings are in their own league even at that corner.


To be honest the rest of the cars were carrying more speed into the corner than RedBull with exit speeds being almost same or even higher most of the times for others with exception of when there were cars in front and when Hamilton misjudged it once.

So yeah, Redbull aero might be strong allowing them to be at full throttle, but at lower average speeds even at full throttle.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 04, 2017 11:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2765
Lotus49 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
owenmahamilton wrote:
Does anyone know how long McLaren's contract with Honda is for? If this season's engine is rubbish yet again I wonder if there is some sort of performance clause in the engine contract that allows one or the other to pull the plug early, as it was Ron Dennis who wanted Honda back and he's no longer involved I'd think they might possibly decide to call it quits.


No chance. Mclaren's reasons for giving up the customer Mercedes for works Honda were sound 3 years ago and nothing has changed. Mclaren made a brave choice not to turn into Williams. Now they have suffered the pain for that they aren't about to just give in.


I disagree. I think it was possible to win with the Mercedes engines. That was one of the worse knee jerk reactions ever. Mercedes also knew this and that is why they refused to supply Redbull in 2015. They knew Redbull could beat them with their own engine. Getting rid of the Mercedes power unit was probably the worst decision Mclaren has made recently.


Not without using Petronas and Whitmarsh refused to dump long term parnters Esso/Mobil.

Unfortunately they didn't show the same kind of loyalty in return.


They still would have been much better off than going in the unknown with honda, which had been out of the sport for 6 years. They started 2014 running mercedes engine with a double podium finish and let williams outdevelop them the rest of the year. That had nothing to do with fuel or power unit then didnt it? Why cant people admit mclaren has been doing a bad job?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2765
funkymonkey wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Just saw this very interesting video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9E8N6yXUig

This is why Redbull is still the king of aero. Apparently the only cars that could take 130r flat out during the race were the Redbulls. Funny how the Merc (Hamilton) keeps almost the same cornering speed even while lifting...Mclaren does not show horrible top speed here, but perhaps aided by the slipstream... Rosberg was cruising so much during that race I don't think his shots are very representative. But one can clearly see that the top 3 cars in the championship standings are in their own league even at that corner.


To be honest the rest of the cars were carrying more speed into the corner than RedBull with exit speeds being almost same or even higher most of the times for others with exception of when there were cars in front and when Hamilton misjudged it once.

So yeah, Redbull aero might be strong allowing them to be at full throttle, but at lower average speeds even at full throttle.


They were carrying more speed into the corner because Redbull just cannot match Ferrari or Mercedes in straight line speed. From what I could see, while only counting the clean air laps Ricciardo was doing between 310-316 at the apex. Verstappen was doing 305-314. Vettel 309-316 Rai 307-313. Hamilton 302-314.
The Ferrari seemed to have at least 5kph advantage over the Redbull down the main straight, The Merc had 10kph advantage over Redbull.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:28 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3416
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
owenmahamilton wrote:
Does anyone know how long McLaren's contract with Honda is for? If this season's engine is rubbish yet again I wonder if there is some sort of performance clause in the engine contract that allows one or the other to pull the plug early, as it was Ron Dennis who wanted Honda back and he's no longer involved I'd think they might possibly decide to call it quits.


No chance. Mclaren's reasons for giving up the customer Mercedes for works Honda were sound 3 years ago and nothing has changed. Mclaren made a brave choice not to turn into Williams. Now they have suffered the pain for that they aren't about to just give in.


I disagree. I think it was possible to win with the Mercedes engines. That was one of the worse knee jerk reactions ever. Mercedes also knew this and that is why they refused to supply Redbull in 2015. They knew Redbull could beat them with their own engine. Getting rid of the Mercedes power unit was probably the worst decision Mclaren has made recently.


Not without using Petronas and Whitmarsh refused to dump long term parnters Esso/Mobil.

Unfortunately they didn't show the same kind of loyalty in return.


They still would have been much better off than going in the unknown with honda, which had been out of the sport for 6 years. They started 2014 running mercedes engine with a double podium finish and let williams outdevelop them the rest of the year. That had nothing to do with fuel or power unit then didnt it? Why cant people admit mclaren has been doing a bad job?


Not even with hindsight is that true. McLaren had no intention of being a customer in an engine formula as it would have meant accepting playing second fiddle to Mercedes in an engine dominant formula and being down on power and efficiency through using the wrong fuels and lubricants because they wouldn't drop Esso/Mobil and always behind the curve on software.

The only difference if they'd have been staying with Mercedes from 2014 would be they wouldn't have got shut out from the Mercedes engineers and the telemetry as they were during that year. They got no help at all that year because they were leaving, not even with throttle maps.

And Williams didn't outdevelop them, they were already quicker from the off in the races but the Williams was poorer in the wet and the first two qualies were wet so they had to come through the field. Massa was taken out at the first corner in Oz and Bottas who was lapping quicker than the McLaren pair hit the wall and gave himself a puncture.

Williams were quicker all year except when it rained really. Their car was a very good low drag car while McLaren had those daft suspension blockers which gave them more downforce but had a higher drag penalty. And yes they were down on power too because they were using Esso and Williams used Petronas like Mercedes had wanted McLaren to.

People can admit when McLaren do a bad job(I hope anyway). 2013 for example and the decision to go for revolution over evolution of the 2012 car. The suspension blockers in 2014 chasing peak downforce was also a mistake. Their strategies have been the source of ridicule for years now with good reason. Their pit stops were particularly woeful in 2015 and the car wasn't very good either in the opening rounds that year, JB called it scary after the Spanish GP.

All bad and all solely on McLaren's head. The problem only comes when you're blaming them for things that either aren't true or don't make sense and people are going to point that out I'm afraid.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 1:34 am 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12031
kleefton wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
owenmahamilton wrote:
Does anyone know how long McLaren's contract with Honda is for? If this season's engine is rubbish yet again I wonder if there is some sort of performance clause in the engine contract that allows one or the other to pull the plug early, as it was Ron Dennis who wanted Honda back and he's no longer involved I'd think they might possibly decide to call it quits.


No chance. Mclaren's reasons for giving up the customer Mercedes for works Honda were sound 3 years ago and nothing has changed. Mclaren made a brave choice not to turn into Williams. Now they have suffered the pain for that they aren't about to just give in.


I disagree. I think it was possible to win with the Mercedes engines. That was one of the worse knee jerk reactions ever. Mercedes also knew this and that is why they refused to supply Redbull in 2015. They knew Redbull could beat them with their own engine. Getting rid of the Mercedes power unit was probably the worst decision Mclaren has made recently.


Only in the very, very short term. McLaren can't compete with the budget of the big guys as a customer team. Sure, they may have picked up the odd win over the last few years but to secure themselves a future as major players they had to find a works deal. Joining forces with Honda was a no brained. Just look at Williams and you have the perfect of example of what happens to a huge team without a works deal.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 8:34 am 
Online

Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:40 pm
Posts: 62
Echo the comments around McLaren needing to be a works team for them to be a potential world champion in this current era of engines. As previously stated being a customer team of Mercedes whilst would have allowed McLaren to finish higher in the constructors championship over recent years they would never achieved their goal of being world champions again. Whilst we all expected Honda to struggle in their return with the complexity of the new engines, I don't think we all expected them to struggle as much as they did.

As I previously stated at the start of this thread I think McLaren are lacking a top quality engineer alongside prodrimou to propel the chassis and McLaren side of the McLaren Honda partnership forward and competitive for potential world championships.

However I think McLaren's first worry should be the signing of an oil/fuel supplier with the loss of Esso/Exxon.....which has now been removed from mclsrens website as an official partner. Whilst rumours are rife that they will align with BP, the problem with this is that they are also rumoured to be sponsoring Renault too with their deal being more lucrative, surely meaning their energy, time and focus will be spent firstly on Renault?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 6:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2765
mikeyg123 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
owenmahamilton wrote:
Does anyone know how long McLaren's contract with Honda is for? If this season's engine is rubbish yet again I wonder if there is some sort of performance clause in the engine contract that allows one or the other to pull the plug early, as it was Ron Dennis who wanted Honda back and he's no longer involved I'd think they might possibly decide to call it quits.


No chance. Mclaren's reasons for giving up the customer Mercedes for works Honda were sound 3 years ago and nothing has changed. Mclaren made a brave choice not to turn into Williams. Now they have suffered the pain for that they aren't about to just give in.


I disagree. I think it was possible to win with the Mercedes engines. That was one of the worse knee jerk reactions ever. Mercedes also knew this and that is why they refused to supply Redbull in 2015. They knew Redbull could beat them with their own engine



Only in the very, very short term. McLaren can't compete with the budget of the big guys as a customer team. Sure, they may have picked up the odd win over the last few years but to secure themselves a future as major players they had to find a works deal. Joining forces with Honda was a no brained. Just look at Williams and you have the perfect of example of what happens to a huge team without a works deal.


Since when is Williams a big team? They spend about a third of what the top teams spend. They were never going to challenge Merc. If the 2014 mclaren chassis was good enough it could have challenged Merc for sure.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 6:37 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12031
kleefton wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
owenmahamilton wrote:
Does anyone know how long McLaren's contract with Honda is for? If this season's engine is rubbish yet again I wonder if there is some sort of performance clause in the engine contract that allows one or the other to pull the plug early, as it was Ron Dennis who wanted Honda back and he's no longer involved I'd think they might possibly decide to call it quits.


No chance. Mclaren's reasons for giving up the customer Mercedes for works Honda were sound 3 years ago and nothing has changed. Mclaren made a brave choice not to turn into Williams. Now they have suffered the pain for that they aren't about to just give in.


I disagree. I think it was possible to win with the Mercedes engines. That was one of the worse knee jerk reactions ever. Mercedes also knew this and that is why they refused to supply Redbull in 2015. They knew Redbull could beat them with their own engine



Only in the very, very short term. McLaren can't compete with the budget of the big guys as a customer team. Sure, they may have picked up the odd win over the last few years but to secure themselves a future as major players they had to find a works deal. Joining forces with Honda was a no brained. Just look at Williams and you have the perfect of example of what happens to a huge team without a works deal.


Since when is Williams a big team? They spend about a third of what the top teams spend. They were never going to challenge Merc. If the 2014 mclaren chassis was good enough it could have challenged Merc for sure.


Do you not see that is the exact point I am making? They were a huge team. However not being able to get a works deal consigned them to a slow decline into the midfield with very little hope of getting out of that situation.

That is what I mean when I say look what happened to a huge team.

The same thing that happened to Williams would have happened to Mclaren had they decided to play safe and stick with Mercedes. Sure they may have won a few races over the past few years but in the long run the team would have not been able to compete and slowly slide into midfield irrelevance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 6:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20631
kleefton wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
owenmahamilton wrote:
Does anyone know how long McLaren's contract with Honda is for? If this season's engine is rubbish yet again I wonder if there is some sort of performance clause in the engine contract that allows one or the other to pull the plug early, as it was Ron Dennis who wanted Honda back and he's no longer involved I'd think they might possibly decide to call it quits.


No chance. Mclaren's reasons for giving up the customer Mercedes for works Honda were sound 3 years ago and nothing has changed. Mclaren made a brave choice not to turn into Williams. Now they have suffered the pain for that they aren't about to just give in.


I disagree. I think it was possible to win with the Mercedes engines. That was one of the worse knee jerk reactions ever. Mercedes also knew this and that is why they refused to supply Redbull in 2015. They knew Redbull could beat them with their own engine



Only in the very, very short term. McLaren can't compete with the budget of the big guys as a customer team. Sure, they may have picked up the odd win over the last few years but to secure themselves a future as major players they had to find a works deal. Joining forces with Honda was a no brained. Just look at Williams and you have the perfect of example of what happens to a huge team without a works deal.


Since when is Williams a big team? They spend about a third of what the top teams spend. They were never going to challenge Merc. If the 2014 mclaren chassis was good enough it could have challenged Merc for sure.

According to Ecclestone customer teams don't get the same power, which would make it a lot harder for customers to challenge.

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2016/01/13/ferrari-and-mercedes-engine-customers-get-a-lot-less-power-ecclestone/

Are you also forgetting the split turbo concept? It's been documented that none of the 2014 customer teams were made aware of the innovative design until too late in the process and the engine mounting points set. Which was always one of the big reasons given why Mercedes held such a huge advantage over their customers. McLaren didn't stand a prayer of catching them and Ron knew this.

That's not to say the 2014 McLaren chassis was great, but let's be fair here. No customer could have challenged Mercedes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 7:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2765
Lotus49 wrote:

Not even with hindsight is that true. McLaren had no intention of being a customer in an engine formula as it would have meant accepting playing second fiddle to Mercedes in an engine dominant formula and being down on power and efficiency through using the wrong fuels and lubricants because they wouldn't drop Esso/Mobil and always behind the curve on software.

The only difference if they'd have been staying with Mercedes from 2014 would be they wouldn't have got shut out from the Mercedes engineers and the telemetry as they were during that year. They got no help at all that year because they were leaving, not even with throttle maps.

And Williams didn't outdevelop them, they were already quicker from the off in the races but the Williams was poorer in the wet and the first two qualies were wet so they had to come through the field. Massa was taken out at the first corner in Oz and Bottas who was lapping quicker than the McLaren pair hit the wall and gave himself a puncture.

Williams were quicker all year except when it rained really. Their car was a very good low drag car while McLaren had those daft suspension blockers which gave them more downforce but had a higher drag penalty. And yes they were down on power too because they were using Esso and Williams used Petronas like Mercedes had wanted McLaren to.

People can admit when McLaren do a bad job(I hope anyway). 2013 for example and the decision to go for revolution over evolution of the 2012 car. The suspension blockers in 2014 chasing peak downforce was also a mistake. Their strategies have been the source of ridicule for years now with good reason. Their pit stops were particularly woeful in 2015 and the car wasn't very good either in the opening rounds that year, JB called it scary after the Spanish GP.

All bad and all solely on McLaren's head. The problem only comes when you're blaming them for things that either aren't true or don't make sense and people are going to point that out I'm afraid.


All i know is that Williams and Mclaren were only a tenth apart in qualifying at the beginning of that year. By abu dhabi the gap was one second. But you want to say that williams didnt outdevelop them.
Sure.

All im saying is that mclaren has been underperforming for a long time now and i keep hearing its all Honda's fault when its clearly not true. Mclarens claim that they were the 3rd best car is completely ludicrous. Toro rosso and FI had similar level chassis, arguably better too.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 7:41 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12031
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

Not even with hindsight is that true. McLaren had no intention of being a customer in an engine formula as it would have meant accepting playing second fiddle to Mercedes in an engine dominant formula and being down on power and efficiency through using the wrong fuels and lubricants because they wouldn't drop Esso/Mobil and always behind the curve on software.

The only difference if they'd have been staying with Mercedes from 2014 would be they wouldn't have got shut out from the Mercedes engineers and the telemetry as they were during that year. They got no help at all that year because they were leaving, not even with throttle maps.

And Williams didn't outdevelop them, they were already quicker from the off in the races but the Williams was poorer in the wet and the first two qualies were wet so they had to come through the field. Massa was taken out at the first corner in Oz and Bottas who was lapping quicker than the McLaren pair hit the wall and gave himself a puncture.

Williams were quicker all year except when it rained really. Their car was a very good low drag car while McLaren had those daft suspension blockers which gave them more downforce but had a higher drag penalty. And yes they were down on power too because they were using Esso and Williams used Petronas like Mercedes had wanted McLaren to.

People can admit when McLaren do a bad job(I hope anyway). 2013 for example and the decision to go for revolution over evolution of the 2012 car. The suspension blockers in 2014 chasing peak downforce was also a mistake. Their strategies have been the source of ridicule for years now with good reason. Their pit stops were particularly woeful in 2015 and the car wasn't very good either in the opening rounds that year, JB called it scary after the Spanish GP.

All bad and all solely on McLaren's head. The problem only comes when you're blaming them for things that either aren't true or don't make sense and people are going to point that out I'm afraid.


All i know is that Williams and Mclaren were only a tenth apart in qualifying at the beginning of that year. By abu dhabi the gap was one second. But you want to say that williams didnt outdevelop them.
Sure.

All im saying is that mclaren has been underperforming for a long time now and i keep hearing its all Honda's fault when its clearly not true. Mclarens claim that they were the 3rd best car is completely ludicrous. Toro rosso and FI had similar level chassis, arguably better too.


How do you know this? Mclaren were able to compete with FI a bit in 2016. Considering the huge gap in engine performance, I think that would suggest the Mclaren chassis to be far superior.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jan 05, 2017 7:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2765
mikeyg123 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

Not even with hindsight is that true. McLaren had no intention of being a customer in an engine formula as it would have meant accepting playing second fiddle to Mercedes in an engine dominant formula and being down on power and efficiency through using the wrong fuels and lubricants because they wouldn't drop Esso/Mobil and always behind the curve on software.

The only difference if they'd have been staying with Mercedes from 2014 would be they wouldn't have got shut out from the Mercedes engineers and the telemetry as they were during that year. They got no help at all that year because they were leaving, not even with throttle maps.

And Williams didn't outdevelop them, they were already quicker from the off in the races but the Williams was poorer in the wet and the first two qualies were wet so they had to come through the field. Massa was taken out at the first corner in Oz and Bottas who was lapping quicker than the McLaren pair hit the wall and gave himself a puncture.

Williams were quicker all year except when it rained really. Their car was a very good low drag car while McLaren had those daft suspension blockers which gave them more downforce but had a higher drag penalty. And yes they were down on power too because they were using Esso and Williams used Petronas like Mercedes had wanted McLaren to.

People can admit when McLaren do a bad job(I hope anyway). 2013 for example and the decision to go for revolution over evolution of the 2012 car. The suspension blockers in 2014 chasing peak downforce was also a mistake. Their strategies have been the source of ridicule for years now with good reason. Their pit stops were particularly woeful in 2015 and the car wasn't very good either in the opening rounds that year, JB called it scary after the Spanish GP.

All bad and all solely on McLaren's head. The problem only comes when you're blaming them for things that either aren't true or don't make sense and people are going to point that out I'm afraid.


All i know is that Williams and Mclaren were only a tenth apart in qualifying at the beginning of that year. By abu dhabi the gap was one second. But you want to say that williams didnt outdevelop them.
Sure.

All im saying is that mclaren has been underperforming for a long time now and i keep hearing its all Honda's fault when its clearly not true. Mclarens claim that they were the 3rd best car is completely ludicrous. Toro rosso and FI had similar level chassis, arguably better too.


How do you know this? Mclaren were able to compete with FI a bit in 2016. Considering the huge gap in engine performance, I think that would suggest the Mclaren chassis to be far superior.


Its just my opinion. An opnion based on how they performed throughout the year at different venues.
Force india was always quicker than mclaren everywhere and even monaco fyi.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 1:12 am 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12031
kleefton wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

Not even with hindsight is that true. McLaren had no intention of being a customer in an engine formula as it would have meant accepting playing second fiddle to Mercedes in an engine dominant formula and being down on power and efficiency through using the wrong fuels and lubricants because they wouldn't drop Esso/Mobil and always behind the curve on software.

The only difference if they'd have been staying with Mercedes from 2014 would be they wouldn't have got shut out from the Mercedes engineers and the telemetry as they were during that year. They got no help at all that year because they were leaving, not even with throttle maps.

And Williams didn't outdevelop them, they were already quicker from the off in the races but the Williams was poorer in the wet and the first two qualies were wet so they had to come through the field. Massa was taken out at the first corner in Oz and Bottas who was lapping quicker than the McLaren pair hit the wall and gave himself a puncture.

Williams were quicker all year except when it rained really. Their car was a very good low drag car while McLaren had those daft suspension blockers which gave them more downforce but had a higher drag penalty. And yes they were down on power too because they were using Esso and Williams used Petronas like Mercedes had wanted McLaren to.

People can admit when McLaren do a bad job(I hope anyway). 2013 for example and the decision to go for revolution over evolution of the 2012 car. The suspension blockers in 2014 chasing peak downforce was also a mistake. Their strategies have been the source of ridicule for years now with good reason. Their pit stops were particularly woeful in 2015 and the car wasn't very good either in the opening rounds that year, JB called it scary after the Spanish GP.

All bad and all solely on McLaren's head. The problem only comes when you're blaming them for things that either aren't true or don't make sense and people are going to point that out I'm afraid.


All i know is that Williams and Mclaren were only a tenth apart in qualifying at the beginning of that year. By abu dhabi the gap was one second. But you want to say that williams didnt outdevelop them.
Sure.

All im saying is that mclaren has been underperforming for a long time now and i keep hearing its all Honda's fault when its clearly not true. Mclarens claim that they were the 3rd best car is completely ludicrous. Toro rosso and FI had similar level chassis, arguably better too.


How do you know this? Mclaren were able to compete with FI a bit in 2016. Considering the huge gap in engine performance, I think that would suggest the Mclaren chassis to be far superior.


Its just my opinion. An opnion based on how they performed throughout the year at different venues.
Force india was always quicker than mclaren everywhere and even monaco fyi.


Which is what you would expect given the engine discrepancies.

Why do you think the majority of people in the know disagree with your opinion?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 8:48 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3416
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

Not even with hindsight is that true. McLaren had no intention of being a customer in an engine formula as it would have meant accepting playing second fiddle to Mercedes in an engine dominant formula and being down on power and efficiency through using the wrong fuels and lubricants because they wouldn't drop Esso/Mobil and always behind the curve on software.

The only difference if they'd have been staying with Mercedes from 2014 would be they wouldn't have got shut out from the Mercedes engineers and the telemetry as they were during that year. They got no help at all that year because they were leaving, not even with throttle maps.

And Williams didn't outdevelop them, they were already quicker from the off in the races but the Williams was poorer in the wet and the first two qualies were wet so they had to come through the field. Massa was taken out at the first corner in Oz and Bottas who was lapping quicker than the McLaren pair hit the wall and gave himself a puncture.

Williams were quicker all year except when it rained really. Their car was a very good low drag car while McLaren had those daft suspension blockers which gave them more downforce but had a higher drag penalty. And yes they were down on power too because they were using Esso and Williams used Petronas like Mercedes had wanted McLaren to.

People can admit when McLaren do a bad job(I hope anyway). 2013 for example and the decision to go for revolution over evolution of the 2012 car. The suspension blockers in 2014 chasing peak downforce was also a mistake. Their strategies have been the source of ridicule for years now with good reason. Their pit stops were particularly woeful in 2015 and the car wasn't very good either in the opening rounds that year, JB called it scary after the Spanish GP.

All bad and all solely on McLaren's head. The problem only comes when you're blaming them for things that either aren't true or don't make sense and people are going to point that out I'm afraid.


All i know is that Williams and Mclaren were only a tenth apart in qualifying at the beginning of that year. By abu dhabi the gap was one second. But you want to say that williams didnt outdevelop them.
Sure.

All im saying is that mclaren has been underperforming for a long time now and i keep hearing its all Honda's fault when its clearly not true. Mclarens claim that they were the 3rd best car is completely ludicrous. Toro rosso and FI had similar level chassis, arguably better too.


Different tracks,different strengths and different gaps. It wasn't a matter of being out developed, the Williams were always quicker in the dry, they were a much better package and had a better car throughout the year. If you want to limit that to just being better development then fair enough but I very much disagree.

No chance FI and STR had better cars to go along with their PU advantage, particularly FI who's power advantage was huge. McLaren would have got blown away by them all year at every track instead of McLaren beating them comfortably at Hungary and Singapore when the emphasis on power was cut. If STR and FI had better cars too it would have been the opposite there, they would have been further away. (At Japan they certainly had better cars though of course).

As you know I thought they were 4th personally behind Ferrari but it's not just McLaren claiming they were 3rd so I don't know why you insist on pretending it is, James Allen wrote that rival engineers felt the McLaren was 3rd for example. All the teams have access to GPS traces, they will know better than me or you.

It got praise all year from journo's,trackside observers,the paddock and more importantly the drivers with 1 and a half notable exceptions, Japan and JB's car in Brazil when they messed up his set up.

The drivers are arguably the most compelling piece of evidence amongst it all. They are without doubt two of the most critical drivers on the grid when it comes to their cars, they've never pulled punches before with McLaren- Honda (2015) and even in race winning equipment throughout their careers, yet they both praised it outside of those examples.

Where's your evidence to the contrary about the car being poor and FI and STR having better chassis's?.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 12:41 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3416
First news of the new Honda's performance on the dyno's has come out from Hasegawa and it's not good. Roughly translated from a native speaker on another site is that it's been on the dyno's for a while but there are considerable problems. (Me and my big mouth from the previous page)

Also on TJI that they are trialing lots of possibilities but that doing the same as everyone else means you can't surpass them.(FML)

Confirms Size Zero was Honda's idea as much as McLaren and while they did increase Turbo size for 2016 the overall package was more compact compared to 2015 and will get considerably more compact again for 2017.(Are you ******* kiddin' me)


Google translate misses some nuances but you can get the gist here https://www.as-web.jp/f1/76425/3


Well there goes my optimism. :lol:

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 1:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7703
With Hindsight, Possibly they should have taken a page from Honda's previous, where they came in with Spirit, and bough out someone like Manor between them to get the first year out of the way. and also double their available development options. The Honda engine was defiantly under developed first year and Mclaren and Honda have suffered due to bad results


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 2:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 1:22 am
Posts: 1810
Location: Brisbane, Australia
moby wrote:
With Hindsight, Possibly they should have taken a page from Honda's previous, where they came in with Spirit, and bough out someone like Manor between them to get the first year out of the way. and also double their available development options. The Honda engine was defiantly under developed first year and Mclaren and Honda have suffered due to bad results

They could have tripled the number of engines on track for last year if they hadn't boycott RBR and Toro Rosso from purchasing Honda engines, but that would probably only have made things worse for them in the end. The engine is further behind than need be, but they are the fastest ones using it! That's a win... Right?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
Podiums: 1st Spa '16, 1st Bahrain '15, 1st China '14, 1st Malaysia '14
Championship position 2014: 13th | | 2015: 10th (heading the right way)
PF1 Autosport GP Predictor 2014: Second 2015: Second


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 2:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 1:22 am
Posts: 1810
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Ok ok, I've got a crazy idea here which definitely isn't going to solve ALL of McLarens problems but I think it might help. So the surface of a formula one car is generally pretty big and flat. Right now all McLaren are using the skin of their cars for is to generate parasitic drag more or less. Now a other thing I've noticed is that the races are televised (not so much on television anymore, but it's a figure of speech) so there are people all over the world who can see the cars in real time.

Now this is where it gets complicated. If they could somehow convince a bunch of businesses around the world that if they put a sticker on one of their cars then people at home will see those stickers and become more familiar to their company they might be able to convince them to pay for it. Some form of stickers for money deal could be made and in exchange the businesses might sell more stuff too. And provided the profit from that stuff is more than the sticker fee they will actually make money from that deal!

Now as for McLaren that money loaded into a car would actually slow it down if anything BUT! Money can also be exchanged for goods and services among the community. So I propose that they exchange the money with people who can design the car to go faster. If it's faster than all the other cars they might win! It's worked pretty well for Mercedes for a few years so I think it's worth a shot really

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
Podiums: 1st Spa '16, 1st Bahrain '15, 1st China '14, 1st Malaysia '14
Championship position 2014: 13th | | 2015: 10th (heading the right way)
PF1 Autosport GP Predictor 2014: Second 2015: Second


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 2:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7703
Blackhander wrote:
moby wrote:
With Hindsight, Possibly they should have taken a page from Honda's previous, where they came in with Spirit, and bough out someone like Manor between them to get the first year out of the way. and also double their available development options. The Honda engine was defiantly under developed first year and Mclaren and Honda have suffered due to bad results

They could have tripled the number of engines on track for last year if they hadn't boycott RBR and Toro Rosso from purchasing Honda engines, but that would probably only have made things worse for them in the end. The engine is further behind than need be, but they are the fastest ones using it! That's a win... Right?



They would have been stupid to allow RBR to use the Honda, even worse than being No2 to Merc


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 3:19 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3416
Blackhander wrote:
moby wrote:
With Hindsight, Possibly they should have taken a page from Honda's previous, where they came in with Spirit, and bough out someone like Manor between them to get the first year out of the way. and also double their available development options. The Honda engine was defiantly under developed first year and Mclaren and Honda have suffered due to bad results

They could have tripled the number of engines on track for last year if they hadn't boycott RBR and Toro Rosso from purchasing Honda engines, but that would probably only have made things worse for them in the end. The engine is further behind than need be, but they are the fastest ones using it! That's a win... Right?


You seriously think RB and TR wanted Honda engines in 2015?. Frying pan and fire springs to mind. You get fed up with Renault for falling behind Ferrari and go to the PU that doesn't have a working ERS system and is way behind Renault?. It's nonsense.

And they didn't boycott RB and TR, there were no actual approaches, just hot air from Bernie and Horner when they were throwing their toys out of the pram about arguing with Renault.

Ron said he would follow Ferrari and Mercedes and veto RB if they did approach Honda though(No mention of STR). Honda then said they weren't ready to supply anyone yet anyway.

No-one approached them in 2016 either, completely unsurprisingly. Sauber have been the only ones flirting for 2018 and Hasegawa has said the cut off to supply for 2018 is this summer so I guess we'll see who approaches them now.

If it works properly and uses some of the same technology the others are using it might help them find someone so fingers crossed.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 4:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2765
mikeyg123 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

Not even with hindsight is that true. McLaren had no intention of being a customer in an engine formula as it would have meant accepting playing second fiddle to Mercedes in an engine dominant formula and being down on power and efficiency through using the wrong fuels and lubricants because they wouldn't drop Esso/Mobil and always behind the curve on software.

The only difference if they'd have been staying with Mercedes from 2014 would be they wouldn't have got shut out from the Mercedes engineers and the telemetry as they were during that year. They got no help at all that year because they were leaving, not even with throttle maps.

And Williams didn't outdevelop them, they were already quicker from the off in the races but the Williams was poorer in the wet and the first two qualies were wet so they had to come through the field. Massa was taken out at the first corner in Oz and Bottas who was lapping quicker than the McLaren pair hit the wall and gave himself a puncture.

Williams were quicker all year except when it rained really. Their car was a very good low drag car while McLaren had those daft suspension blockers which gave them more downforce but had a higher drag penalty. And yes they were down on power too because they were using Esso and Williams used Petronas like Mercedes had wanted McLaren to.

People can admit when McLaren do a bad job(I hope anyway). 2013 for example and the decision to go for revolution over evolution of the 2012 car. The suspension blockers in 2014 chasing peak downforce was also a mistake. Their strategies have been the source of ridicule for years now with good reason. Their pit stops were particularly woeful in 2015 and the car wasn't very good either in the opening rounds that year, JB called it scary after the Spanish GP.

All bad and all solely on McLaren's head. The problem only comes when you're blaming them for things that either aren't true or don't make sense and people are going to point that out I'm afraid.


All i know is that Williams and Mclaren were only a tenth apart in qualifying at the beginning of that year. By abu dhabi the gap was one second. But you want to say that williams didnt outdevelop them.
Sure.

All im saying is that mclaren has been underperforming for a long time now and i keep hearing its all Honda's fault when its clearly not true. Mclarens claim that they were the 3rd best car is completely ludicrous. Toro rosso and FI had similar level chassis, arguably better too.


How do you know this? Mclaren were able to compete with FI a bit in 2016. Considering the huge gap in engine performance, I think that would suggest the Mclaren chassis to be far superior.


Its just my opinion. An opnion based on how they performed throughout the year at different venues.
Force india was always quicker than mclaren everywhere and even monaco fyi.


Which is what you would expect given the engine discrepancies.

Why do you think the majority of people in the know disagree with your opinion?


Redbull could beat williams in 2014 at certain tracks with an even bigger engine discrepancy. Heck, mclaren beat Haas last year even with the engine discrepancy. Redbull beat ferrari also in 2016 with an engine discrepancy. It happens all the time even in this "engine" formula but people seem to ignore it.

The majority of people are spinning off what mclaren is saying in the media but there are some who question it as well. Anyway i dont expect "the majority" to agree with my opinion. Regardless i believe i am right and nothing being posted here has made me change my mind.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 5:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2765
Lotus49 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

Not even with hindsight is that true. McLaren had no intention of being a customer in an engine formula as it would have meant accepting playing second fiddle to Mercedes in an engine dominant formula and being down on power and efficiency through using the wrong fuels and lubricants because they wouldn't drop Esso/Mobil and always behind the curve on software.

The only difference if they'd have been staying with Mercedes from 2014 would be they wouldn't have got shut out from the Mercedes engineers and the telemetry as they were during that year. They got no help at all that year because they were leaving, not even with throttle maps.

And Williams didn't outdevelop them, they were already quicker from the off in the races but the Williams was poorer in the wet and the first two qualies were wet so they had to come through the field. Massa was taken out at the first corner in Oz and Bottas who was lapping quicker than the McLaren pair hit the wall and gave himself a puncture.

Williams were quicker all year except when it rained really. Their car was a very good low drag car while McLaren had those daft suspension blockers which gave them more downforce but had a higher drag penalty. And yes they were down on power too because they were using Esso and Williams used Petronas like Mercedes had wanted McLaren to.

People can admit when McLaren do a bad job(I hope anyway). 2013 for example and the decision to go for revolution over evolution of the 2012 car. The suspension blockers in 2014 chasing peak downforce was also a mistake. Their strategies have been the source of ridicule for years now with good reason. Their pit stops were particularly woeful in 2015 and the car wasn't very good either in the opening rounds that year, JB called it scary after the Spanish GP.

All bad and all solely on McLaren's head. The problem only comes when you're blaming them for things that either aren't true or don't make sense and people are going to point that out I'm afraid.


All i know is that Williams and Mclaren were only a tenth apart in qualifying at the beginning of that year. By abu dhabi the gap was one second. But you want to say that williams didnt outdevelop them.
Sure.

All im saying is that mclaren has been underperforming for a long time now and i keep hearing its all Honda's fault when its clearly not true. Mclarens claim that they were the 3rd best car is completely ludicrous. Toro rosso and FI had similar level chassis, arguably better too.


Different tracks,different strengths and different gaps. It wasn't a matter of being out developed, the Williams were always quicker in the dry, they were a much better package and had a better car throughout the year. If you want to limit that to just being better development then fair enough but I very much disagree.

No chance FI and STR had better cars to go along with their PU advantage, particularly FI who's power advantage was huge. McLaren would have got blown away by them all year at every track instead of McLaren beating them comfortably at Hungary and Singapore when the emphasis on power was cut. If STR and FI had better cars too it would have been the opposite there, they would have been further away. (At Japan they certainly had better cars though of course).

As you know I thought they were 4th personally behind Ferrari but it's not just McLaren claiming they were 3rd so I don't know why you insist on pretending it is, James Allen wrote that rival engineers felt the McLaren was 3rd for example. All the teams have access to GPS traces, they will know better than me or you.

It got praise all year from journo's,trackside observers,the paddock and more importantly the drivers with 1 and a half notable exceptions, Japan and JB's car in Brazil when they messed up his set up.

The drivers are arguably the most compelling piece of evidence amongst it all. They are without doubt two of the most critical drivers on the grid when it comes to their cars, they've never pulled punches before with McLaren- Honda (2015) and even in race winning equipment throughout their careers, yet they both praised it outside of those examples.

Where's your evidence to the contrary about the car being poor and FI and STR having better chassis's?.


I am done going in circles with you man. Look; you see things your way and i see them another. To you the power unit is all that counts and you believe the mclaren chassis is a gem based on what experts are saying. You basically only hear what you want to hear. For example when alonso is screaming at his engineer in the radio and telling him to do his job it does not ring a bell with you. When button is looking like narain kartekian in brazil you think its simple setup issues. When mclaren has their worst performance at their home track which rewards a good car you shrug it off. You discount everything that might bring some doubt into your opinion. I get you man. You are a mclaren fanboy. I just disagree with you. Strongly might I add.
I just pray that honda will have a second team in f1 at some point then we can finally put this circle jerk show to bed once and for all. And I have a pretty good idea how it would turn out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 5:34 pm 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12031
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

Not even with hindsight is that true. McLaren had no intention of being a customer in an engine formula as it would have meant accepting playing second fiddle to Mercedes in an engine dominant formula and being down on power and efficiency through using the wrong fuels and lubricants because they wouldn't drop Esso/Mobil and always behind the curve on software.

The only difference if they'd have been staying with Mercedes from 2014 would be they wouldn't have got shut out from the Mercedes engineers and the telemetry as they were during that year. They got no help at all that year because they were leaving, not even with throttle maps.

And Williams didn't outdevelop them, they were already quicker from the off in the races but the Williams was poorer in the wet and the first two qualies were wet so they had to come through the field. Massa was taken out at the first corner in Oz and Bottas who was lapping quicker than the McLaren pair hit the wall and gave himself a puncture.

Williams were quicker all year except when it rained really. Their car was a very good low drag car while McLaren had those daft suspension blockers which gave them more downforce but had a higher drag penalty. And yes they were down on power too because they were using Esso and Williams used Petronas like Mercedes had wanted McLaren to.

People can admit when McLaren do a bad job(I hope anyway). 2013 for example and the decision to go for revolution over evolution of the 2012 car. The suspension blockers in 2014 chasing peak downforce was also a mistake. Their strategies have been the source of ridicule for years now with good reason. Their pit stops were particularly woeful in 2015 and the car wasn't very good either in the opening rounds that year, JB called it scary after the Spanish GP.

All bad and all solely on McLaren's head. The problem only comes when you're blaming them for things that either aren't true or don't make sense and people are going to point that out I'm afraid.


All i know is that Williams and Mclaren were only a tenth apart in qualifying at the beginning of that year. By abu dhabi the gap was one second. But you want to say that williams didnt outdevelop them.
Sure.

All im saying is that mclaren has been underperforming for a long time now and i keep hearing its all Honda's fault when its clearly not true. Mclarens claim that they were the 3rd best car is completely ludicrous. Toro rosso and FI had similar level chassis, arguably better too.


Different tracks,different strengths and different gaps. It wasn't a matter of being out developed, the Williams were always quicker in the dry, they were a much better package and had a better car throughout the year. If you want to limit that to just being better development then fair enough but I very much disagree.

No chance FI and STR had better cars to go along with their PU advantage, particularly FI who's power advantage was huge. McLaren would have got blown away by them all year at every track instead of McLaren beating them comfortably at Hungary and Singapore when the emphasis on power was cut. If STR and FI had better cars too it would have been the opposite there, they would have been further away. (At Japan they certainly had better cars though of course).

As you know I thought they were 4th personally behind Ferrari but it's not just McLaren claiming they were 3rd so I don't know why you insist on pretending it is, James Allen wrote that rival engineers felt the McLaren was 3rd for example. All the teams have access to GPS traces, they will know better than me or you.

It got praise all year from journo's,trackside observers,the paddock and more importantly the drivers with 1 and a half notable exceptions, Japan and JB's car in Brazil when they messed up his set up.

The drivers are arguably the most compelling piece of evidence amongst it all. They are without doubt two of the most critical drivers on the grid when it comes to their cars, they've never pulled punches before with McLaren- Honda (2015) and even in race winning equipment throughout their careers, yet they both praised it outside of those examples.

Where's your evidence to the contrary about the car being poor and FI and STR having better chassis's?.


I am done going in circles with you man. Look; you see things your way and i see them another. To you the power unit is all that counts and you believe the mclaren chassis is a gem based on what experts are saying. You basically only hear what you want to hear. For example when alonso is screaming at his engineer in the radio and telling him to do his job it does not ring a bell with you. When button is looking like narain kartekian in brazil you think its simple setup issues. When mclaren has their worst performance at their home track which rewards a good car you shrug it off. You discount everything that might bring some doubt into your opinion. I get you man. You are a mclaren fanboy. I just disagree with you. Strongly might I add.
I just pray that honda will have a second team in f1 at some point then we can finally put this circle jerk show to bed once and for all. And I have a pretty good idea how it would turn out.


Is that not exactly what you are doing? Discounting expert opinion?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 6:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2765
Lotus49 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

Not even with hindsight is that true. McLaren had no intention of being a customer in an engine formula as it would have meant accepting playing second fiddle to Mercedes in an engine dominant formula and being down on power and efficiency through using the wrong fuels and lubricants because they wouldn't drop Esso/Mobil and always behind the curve on software.

The only difference if they'd have been staying with Mercedes from 2014 would be they wouldn't have got shut out from the Mercedes engineers and the telemetry as they were during that year. They got no help at all that year because they were leaving, not even with throttle maps.

And Williams didn't outdevelop them, they were already quicker from the off in the races but the Williams was poorer in the wet and the first two qualies were wet so they had to come through the field. Massa was taken out at the first corner in Oz and Bottas who was lapping quicker than the McLaren pair hit the wall and gave himself a puncture.

Williams were quicker all year except when it rained really. Their car was a very good low drag car while McLaren had those daft suspension blockers which gave them more downforce but had a higher drag penalty. And yes they were down on power too because they were using Esso and Williams used Petronas like Mercedes had wanted McLaren to.

People can admit when McLaren do a bad job(I hope anyway). 2013 for example and the decision to go for revolution over evolution of the 2012 car. The suspension blockers in 2014 chasing peak downforce was also a mistake. Their strategies have been the source of ridicule for years now with good reason. Their pit stops were particularly woeful in 2015 and the car wasn't very good either in the opening rounds that year, JB called it scary after the Spanish GP.

All bad and all solely on McLaren's head. The problem only comes when you're blaming them for things that either aren't true or don't make sense and people are going to point that out I'm afraid.


All i know is that Williams and Mclaren were only a tenth apart in qualifying at the beginning of that year. By abu dhabi the gap was one second. But you want to say that williams didnt outdevelop them.
Sure.

All im saying is that mclaren has been underperforming for a long time now and i keep hearing its all Honda's fault when its clearly not true. Mclarens claim that they were the 3rd best car is completely ludicrous. Toro rosso and FI had similar level chassis, arguably better too.


Different tracks,different strengths and different gaps. It wasn't a matter of being out developed, the Williams were always quicker in the dry, they were a much better package and had a better car throughout the year. If you want to limit that to just being better development then fair enough but I very much disagree.

No chance FI and STR had better cars to go along with their PU advantage, particularly FI who's power advantage was huge. McLaren would have got blown away by them all year at every track instead of McLaren beating them comfortably at Hungary and Singapore when the emphasis on power was cut. If STR and FI had better cars too it would have been the opposite there, they would have been further away. (At Japan they certainly had better cars though of course).

As you know I thought they were 4th personally behind Ferrari but it's not just McLaren claiming they were 3rd so I don't know why you insist on pretending it is, James Allen wrote that rival engineers felt the McLaren was 3rd for example. All the teams have access to GPS traces, they will know better than me or you.

It got praise all year from journo's,trackside observers,the paddock and more importantly the drivers with 1 and a half notable exceptions, Japan and JB's car in Brazil when they messed up his set up.

The drivers are arguably the most compelling piece of evidence amongst it all. They are without doubt two of the most critical drivers on the grid when it comes to their cars, they've never pulled punches before with McLaren- Honda (2015) and even in race winning equipment throughout their careers, yet they both praised it outside of those examples.

Where's your evidence to the contrary about the car being poor and FI and STR having better chassis's?.


I am done going in circles with you man. Look; you see things your way and i see them another. To you the power unit is all that counts and you believe the mclaren chassis is a gem based on what experts are saying. You basically only hear what you want to hear. For example when alonso is screaming at his engineer in the radio and telling him to do his job it does not ring a bell with you. When button is looking like narain kartekian in brazil you think its simple setup issues. When mclaren has their worst performance at their home track which rewards a good car you shrug it off. You discount everything that might bring some doubt into your opinion. I get you man. You are a mclaren fanboy. I just disagree with you. Strongly might I add.
I just pray that honda will have a second team in f1 at some point then we can finally put this circle jerk show to bed once and for all. And I have a pretty good idea how it would turn out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 6:16 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:40 pm
Posts: 62
The 2017 Honda engine with it being completely restructured is going to go 1 of 2 ways in my opinion.....boom or bust (excuse the pun)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 6:27 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3416
Lotus49 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

Not even with hindsight is that true. McLaren had no intention of being a customer in an engine formula as it would have meant accepting playing second fiddle to Mercedes in an engine dominant formula and being down on power and efficiency through using the wrong fuels and lubricants because they wouldn't drop Esso/Mobil and always behind the curve on software.

The only difference if they'd have been staying with Mercedes from 2014 would be they wouldn't have got shut out from the Mercedes engineers and the telemetry as they were during that year. They got no help at all that year because they were leaving, not even with throttle maps.

And Williams didn't outdevelop them, they were already quicker from the off in the races but the Williams was poorer in the wet and the first two qualies were wet so they had to come through the field. Massa was taken out at the first corner in Oz and Bottas who was lapping quicker than the McLaren pair hit the wall and gave himself a puncture.

Williams were quicker all year except when it rained really. Their car was a very good low drag car while McLaren had those daft suspension blockers which gave them more downforce but had a higher drag penalty. And yes they were down on power too because they were using Esso and Williams used Petronas like Mercedes had wanted McLaren to.

People can admit when McLaren do a bad job(I hope anyway). 2013 for example and the decision to go for revolution over evolution of the 2012 car. The suspension blockers in 2014 chasing peak downforce was also a mistake. Their strategies have been the source of ridicule for years now with good reason. Their pit stops were particularly woeful in 2015 and the car wasn't very good either in the opening rounds that year, JB called it scary after the Spanish GP.

All bad and all solely on McLaren's head. The problem only comes when you're blaming them for things that either aren't true or don't make sense and people are going to point that out I'm afraid.


All i know is that Williams and Mclaren were only a tenth apart in qualifying at the beginning of that year. By abu dhabi the gap was one second. But you want to say that williams didnt outdevelop them.
Sure.

All im saying is that mclaren has been underperforming for a long time now and i keep hearing its all Honda's fault when its clearly not true. Mclarens claim that they were the 3rd best car is completely ludicrous. Toro rosso and FI had similar level chassis, arguably better too.


Different tracks,different strengths and different gaps. It wasn't a matter of being out developed, the Williams were always quicker in the dry, they were a much better package and had a better car throughout the year. If you want to limit that to just being better development then fair enough but I very much disagree.

No chance FI and STR had better cars to go along with their PU advantage, particularly FI who's power advantage was huge. McLaren would have got blown away by them all year at every track instead of McLaren beating them comfortably at Hungary and Singapore when the emphasis on power was cut. If STR and FI had better cars too it would have been the opposite there, they would have been further away. (At Japan they certainly had better cars though of course).

As you know I thought they were 4th personally behind Ferrari but it's not just McLaren claiming they were 3rd so I don't know why you insist on pretending it is, James Allen wrote that rival engineers felt the McLaren was 3rd for example. All the teams have access to GPS traces, they will know better than me or you.

It got praise all year from journo's,trackside observers,the paddock and more importantly the drivers with 1 and a half notable exceptions, Japan and JB's car in Brazil when they messed up his set up.

The drivers are arguably the most compelling piece of evidence amongst it all. They are without doubt two of the most critical drivers on the grid when it comes to their cars, they've never pulled punches before with McLaren- Honda (2015) and even in race winning equipment throughout their careers, yet they both praised it outside of those examples.

Where's your evidence to the contrary about the car being poor and FI and STR having better chassis's?.

Kleefton wrote:
I am done going in circles with you man. Look; you see things your way and i see them another. To you the power unit is all that counts and you believe the mclaren chassis is a gem based on what experts are saying. You basically only hear what you want to hear.


Pot meet kettle and I'd hardly call 4th best a gem. I listen to everyone's opinion and of course that includes experts(Shock horror I value expert opinion) but most importantly Honda's, and I form my opinion based on that.

Your disdain for expert opinion is hilarious by the way but explains a lot. Much better to just guess and spout made up BS I take it?. You must have loved Post-truth being the word of the year, very apt.


Quote:
For example when alonso is screaming at his engineer in the radio and telling him to do his job it does not ring a bell with you.


That rings several bells. He's moaned about getting pitted into traffic in his first stops at several GP's and of course unfortunately the fuel saving and lack of grunt on the straights. But he moaned about the car in Japan and Monaco too.


Quote:
When button is looking like narain kartekian in brazil you think its simple setup issues.



Of course. But that's because that's what JB blamed and the fact Alonso was able to go 2.5s a lap quicker would point to it being a set up issue specific to JB's car rather than a McLaren issue in general unless Alonso sneakily painted a different teams car and was driving that instead.

Quote:
When mclaren has their worst performance at their home track which rewards a good car you shrug it off.



By shrug it off you mean criticise them for it and agree it was the car that was the problem in Suzuka. Also shared a link as to what the specific problem was too and labelled it a flaw in that thread. Because that's what I did.

What you did was say you'd judge the car on whether it could put the midfield in it's rear view mirror in Hungary and when it did it comfortably you then went in the huff and buried your head in the sand instead of admit you were wrong about the car.


Quote:
You discount everything that might bring some doubt into your opinion.



No that's your job. Unfortunately you haven't shown me anything for me to discount in return because whenever you're asked what's making you think that you just reply "My opinion".

Even I've given more specific reasons during our debate across 4 threads to criticise McLaren than you have. I've criticised their rake,rear suspension and constant gambling on wet weather for example. You've literally given nothing but nonsense claims stated as fact like above in your reply to mikeyg where now apparently Renault were further away from another year 1 ICE than Honda has been to Year 3 ICE's running TJI this year.

Any reason for such a claim this time?.


Quote:
I get you man. You are a mclaren fanboy. I just disagree with you. Strongly might I add.



Not a McLaren fan as I've told you several times. Just following Honda's issues since it's return closely. If I was a McLaren fan I would say, I've got nothing to hide and haven't made any ridiculous claims like they've got the best car or anything like that.


Quote:
I just pray that honda will have a second team in f1 at some point then we can finally put this circle jerk show to bed once and for all. And I have a pretty good idea how it would turn out.



What would someone running Honda's 2018 or later version of their PU tell us about the MP4-31 or what powered it?. Makes no sense.

I'm not convinced you have a pretty good idea about any of this based on the above as you don't seem to even know what we're discussing in the first place.

I'll judge the 2017 car and PU on what I see for myself and what I read from those pesky experts and form an opinion of it then and only then.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 7:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2765
If you listen thoughtlessly to all those "experts" without having your own opinion you are well...thoughtless. What you read on James Allen is far from being gospel all the time. People in the media have their own agenda for saying what they say. I would hope one understands that.

2017 and beyond is still a hybrid era and we are discussing what it would take for mclaren to return to the top. So possible comparisons with another honda team in the near future will still be relevant. It will still prove what kind of car mclaren can put out and whether or not their constant moaning about the power unit can be completely justified.

You just refuse to believe that the chassis had anything to do with mclarens performance in 2016. You even posted a link that said it was the third best chassis. Now you aret backpedaling and say it was 4th best.

Newsflash: mclaren is not going back to the top with a 4th best chassis, no matter how much they improve the power unit.

You are bragging about your posting about this and that but may i inform you that i post mainly from an iphone. Finding links to my sources and quoting your every sentences is just not practical for me. So keep on patting yourself on the back for that i guess.

If you do not like what i post then disregard it. Simple as that. We are obviously going nowhere.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 8:22 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3416
kleefton wrote:
If you listen thoughtlessly to all those "experts" without having your own opinion you are well...thoughtless. What you read on James Allen is far from being gospel all the time. People in the media have their own agenda for saying what they say. I would hope one understands that.



My opinion is my own. It's formed from watching with my own eyes and listening to what those involved say, what experts have to say is part of it of course. I think it's silly to ignore those better informed and positioned than myself.


Quote:
2017 and beyond is still a hybrid era and we are discussing what it would take for mclaren to return to the top. So possible comparisons with another honda team in the near future will still be relevant. It will still prove what kind of car mclaren can put out and whether or not their constant moaning about the power unit can be completely justified.



On another year and car and PU we may be in agreement as it's the MP4-31 and Honda's PU in 2016 that we can't agree on.

I'm still not sure why you think something happening with different cars and PU's would put that particular argument to bed.


Quote:
You just refuse to believe that the chassis had anything to do with mclarens performance in 2016. You even posted a link that said it was the third best chassis. Now you aret backpedaling and say it was 4th best.



Of course it has something to do with their performance otherwise I'd be labelling it the best chassis on the grid. But I just don't think it's the reason they can't compete for the podium as I'm confident with equal PU's to the other big 3 they'd be on their coattails instead of the coattails of the Top 10 fighting with the likes of Haas.

And I'm not backpedaling at all. I gave you a source of someone other than McLaren praising the car because you were repeatedly making out that only McLaren rated it. They can rate it better than me if they want but I've maintained for a while now that I've viewed it as the 4th best.


Quote:
Newsflash: mclaren is not going back to the top with a 4th best chassis, no matter how much they improve the power unit.



If by top you mean winning titles then I completely agree.


Quote:
You are bragging about your posting about this and that but may i inform you that i post mainly from an iphone. Finding links to my sources and quoting your every sentences is just not practical for me. So keep on patting yourself on the back for that i guess.



Would it not make more sense to not make claims until you're in a position to back it up rather than be insulted when someone asks you to.


Quote:
If you do not like what i post then disregard it. Simple as that. We are obviously going nowhere.


I'm not looking to upset anyone or spend my life going in circles either so I'll happily dial back the sarcasm in my response but it's a forum, If you post something I don't believe is true I'm going to respond.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 8:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2765
If you do not like what i post...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 8:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2765
Ive canceled my subscrription to lotus49 magazine. Seriously i do not read your posts anymore so please dont even bother as ill make it a point not to read anything from you anymore from now on. When honda has another customer in f1 i may renew my subscription.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 06, 2017 9:00 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3416
kleefton wrote:
Ive canceled my subscrription to lotus49 magazine. Seriously i do not read your posts anymore so please dont even bother as ill make it a point not to read anything from you anymore from now on. When honda has another customer in f1 i may renew my subscription.


Still don't understand the BIB as they could have 2 customers beating a dog McLaren in 2018 and it still wouldn't change what happened in 2016 but fair enough... :uhoh:

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: flyboy10, Google Adsense [Bot], KingVoid, lamo, Llotyhy, Mayhem, mikeyg123, Option or Prime, sandman1347, ScottR267, wolfticket, Yellowbin74 and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group