planetf1.com

It is currently Wed Sep 20, 2017 5:42 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 6:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1444
Location: Miami, Florida
Herb Tarlik wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
justbeingmiko wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Right now IS NOT the right time to venture away from Honda and all their Milyuns… Aaaaand MILYUNS of the H's Money.
With the current sponsorship climate in F1 being what it is, even the mighty McLaren has struggled to find a title sponsor and that honda money goes an EXTREMELY long way towards helping them continue on in the sport without being cash strapped. THAT is a huge commodity that no team can afford to do without. Leaving something that is iron clad which assures their existence for several years to come is far more important than winning and/or dominating.

With Porsche rumored to be heavily weighing on entering F1 as an engine supplier from 2021 on, it would be wise for McLaren to wait and see what may be a serious viable option. Afterall, Porsche is one of V-Dubs best and most established brands and the technology and experience they would brings would also include the sister brand who dominated WEC unlike any team has ever dominated in any sport the world over, and IF V-Dub decides to enter F1 in any capacity, I don't see how they hold back in any regard, so all technologies and proven systems will be pooled together to produce the absolute best product to enter the sport with.

They've already suffered the huge embarrassment of Emisionsgate that cost them hundreds of millions so I'd assume they would only want to enter F1 in the most positive of ways.

I say McLaren bides their time, makes due of a bad situation, keep a tight lip, and wait until 2020 before making a move. By then it's quite possible the Honda, given their new take on working philosophies, bringing in outside help just may get things going in the right direction. And if not, at least they'll have endured the long haul on Honda's buck rather than their own.


just my $0.02


Why not bide their time with Renault - can't be any worse, can it and if there is some success, they will be better position to negotiate with Porsche :)


A perfectly reasonable approach.

Is it though really?


McLaren Honda Points YTD: 11
Red Bull Renault points YTD: 212

I fully expect McLaren to perform at or near the level of Red Bull once they have an engine equal to them.

If scoring 11 points is a sign that Honda is on the road to success, then I am blind to that fact.

F1 MERCENARY wrote:
So the question is not whether they can afford to continue being mediocre until 2021, but rather, can they risk continuing to do so without the additional guaranteed money Honda brings, should they opt to run Renault and still not fare any better?


The owners of McLaren are a group of phenomenally wealthy individuals. The fact that they are ready and willing to jettison Honda shows to me that money is of no concern to them.

I guess you missed that bit about them being beaten by a Red Bull team that was running a Renault engine that was so unreliable and under powered that RB & Renault were literally at war with one another over it, resulting in Red Bull almost not having an engine for the following season! And McLaren had the very best engine in that car by a country mile! If they couldn't beat Red Bull with a far superior engine, what makes you think they could even hang with them running the same engine???

Please explain the logic behind that statement. McLaren and their drivers have said the chassis is "excellent" all season long, but as far as we all know it's nothing more than smoke in mirrors to place the blame for their lack of overall performance solely on Honda. And while I agree Honda has fallen short of the mark since rejoining with McLaren, This season they have mead strides to improve performance and have recently reached out to other engine manufacturers for assistance in the development of their engine and it has gotten significantly faster and more powerful since the first race of the season. According to those whom are helping Honda, Honda's major issues stem from them testing a single cylinder in seeking ultimate performance and although those tests proved extremely successful, it is once the engine is working as a whole that all the other issues arise, most notably the excessive vibration that was destroying components all over the place. They've now switched to testing complete layouts of the engine in order to cure the rest of the vibration issues and are also looking to additive components to improve the overall reliability and power output and as long as the engine is running they're actually not all that bad. Alonso and Vandoorne have run at the front of the rest of the pack a few times on merit now so the improvements are definitely there, but reliability is still not where ti needs to be.

_________________
HAMILTON :: VETTEL :: ROSBERG :: RAIKKONEN :: VERSTAPPEN :: SAINZ :: MASSA :: BOTTAS :: NASR
ALONSO :: BUTTON :: PEREZ :: RICCIARDO :: GROSJEAN :: KVYAT :: HULKENBERG :: MALDONADO
THE REST… THERE ARE FAR BETTER DRIVERS THAT SHOULD BE IN FORMULA 1


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 7:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1225
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
justbeingmiko wrote:

Why not bide their time with Renault - can't be any worse, can it and if there is some success, they will be better position to negotiate with Porsche :)


A perfectly reasonable approach.

Is it though really?


McLaren Honda Points YTD: 11
Red Bull Renault points YTD: 212

I fully expect McLaren to perform at or near the level of Red Bull once they have an engine equal to them.

If scoring 11 points is a sign that Honda is on the road to success, then I am blind to that fact.

F1 MERCENARY wrote:
So the question is not whether they can afford to continue being mediocre until 2021, but rather, can they risk continuing to do so without the additional guaranteed money Honda brings, should they opt to run Renault and still not fare any better?


The owners of McLaren are a group of phenomenally wealthy individuals. The fact that they are ready and willing to jettison Honda shows to me that money is of no concern to them.

I guess you missed that bit about them being beaten by a Red Bull team that was running a Renault engine that was so unreliable and under powered that RB & Renault were literally at war with one another over it, resulting in Red Bull almost not having an engine for the following season! And McLaren had the very best engine in that car by a country mile! If they couldn't beat Red Bull with a far superior engine, what makes you think they could even hang with them running the same engine???

Please explain the logic behind that statement. McLaren and their drivers have said the chassis is "excellent" all season long, but as far as we all know it's nothing more than smoke in mirrors to place the blame for their lack of overall performance solely on Honda. And while I agree Honda has fallen short of the mark since rejoining with McLaren, This season they have mead strides to improve performance and have recently reached out to other engine manufacturers for assistance in the development of their engine and it has gotten significantly faster and more powerful since the first race of the season. According to those whom are helping Honda, Honda's major issues stem from them testing a single cylinder in seeking ultimate performance and although those tests proved extremely successful, it is once the engine is working as a whole that all the other issues arise, most notably the excessive vibration that was destroying components all over the place. They've now switched to testing complete layouts of the engine in order to cure the rest of the vibration issues and are also looking to additive components to improve the overall reliability and power output and as long as the engine is running they're actually not all that bad. Alonso and Vandoorne have run at the front of the rest of the pack a few times on merit now so the improvements are definitely there, but reliability is still not where ti needs to be.


You can bring up history all you want, but I'm going with 212 vs 11. You can choose the engine that gets all of 11 points this year as your ticket to success. I hope that McLaren does not and chooses an engine that can produce 212 championship points.

Fernando Alonso sees no hope with Honda and has as much vested interest in this decision as anyone. You dramatically overstated any so called "improvements" that Honda has made. Fernando continues to criticize the engine for being slow. "I've never raced with less power in my life". Classic.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 7:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20148
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
No, you're not. You're making an assumption. Not to mention a strawman. My position has consistently been that McLaren are better off sticking with Honda as a Works team. So why are you trying to muddy the waters by claiming I'm anti-manufacturer?

Because you take the line that you can't win unless you are aligned with a manufacturer, the manufacturers are too dominant, they give out inferior engines that kind of thing, yet neither Ferrari or Mercedes want to supply either Red Bull or McLaren for some reason?
I take the line that being a manufacturer gives you an immense advantage and not being one severely limits any title aspirations. I'm at a loss as to how this translates to being anti-manufacturer, though.

pokerman wrote:
I see your recent post saying the engine manufacturers give their customers hand me down updates but no you wouldn't be anti-manufacturer?
No, it's common sense. There's no judgement in that post. If a manufacturer comes out with an update then it's only logical that they'd prioritise themselves first. You're drawing conclusions where there are none.

And in any event, my views on manufacturers are irrelevant to the points being made in this thread. If I say that being a manufacturer has its advantages, then my position on whether or not that's a good thing is irrelevant (unless I form an opinion on it in that or subsequent posts).

You need to stop making assumptions and take the time to read things without constantly looking for a hidden agenda. It was the same in another recent thread where I criticised the FIA for how they wrote the rules and you immediately assumed it was an attack on Mercedes, despite the fact that I took pains to highlight it was the FIA I was critiquing. Please don't jump to conclusions all the time

Your posts generally seem to be negative towards the engine manufacturers, you said that if Renault produce a competitive car than their customer teams will receive a poorer service, then the term hand me down updates are basically something you give out once you moved on to something better, it's very emotive.

I think you're reaching here. Do you doubt that first choice goes to the manufacturer teams? Trying to make it an anti-manufacturer stance is absurd. How does that reconcile with me arguing for McLaren staying with Honda?

But again, this is all highly irrelevant to the point at hand. Your erroneous interpretation of my position on manufacturers notwithstanding, how I feel about them has nothing whatsoever to do with the discussion at hand. It's a complete strawman


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7490
Herb Tarlik wrote:

You can bring up history all you want, but I'm going with 212 vs 11. You can choose the engine that gets all of 11 points this year as your ticket to success. I hope that McLaren does not and chooses an engine that can produce 212 championship points.

Fernando Alonso sees no hope with Honda and has as much vested interest in this decision as anyone. You dramatically overstated any so called "improvements" that Honda has made. Fernando continues to criticize the engine for being slow. "I've never raced with less power in my life". Classic.




But if Mclaren had Renault engines this year, Red bull would still be there, and some of the Renault units that failed Red Bull could have been the ones allocated to Mclaren so RBR would have (say) 50 more points. Mclaren do not want to be fighting for 5 or 4 or 3 or second in the championship and do not want to win a few races now and again. If they are equally as good as red bull it will be down to luck who has more points at season end. Even if they are better than RBR it means they will take points off red bull and Red Bull will take points off them so the Force Indias would probably be above them and they would be fighting Williams.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 1561
Alonso's 2nd stint with McLaren has yielded him more retirements (22) than he managed between 2004 and 2013 (21).

But sure, let's pretend Renault are as bad.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 4191
Location: Michigan, USA
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
I guess you missed that bit about them being beaten by a Red Bull team that was running a Renault engine that was so unreliable and under powered that RB & Renault were literally at war with one another over it, resulting in Red Bull almost not having an engine for the following season! And McLaren had the very best engine in that car by a country mile! If they couldn't beat Red Bull with a far superior engine, what makes you think they could even hang with them running the same engine???

The Red Bull of 2014 was a good chassis, and the 2014 McLaren wasn't. But that doesn't mean Macca can never build a chassis on Red Bull's level; they have in the past, and for all we know they have this year. Everyone knows that their 2013 and 2014 cars weren't very good, but that's not any sort of proof that they'll never beat Red Bull on equal terms.

Last year's Ferrari got beat by Red Bull with a weaker engine, but this year it's by far the quicker car. Team performance is even less static than driver performance, and that should be clear.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2017: Don't Ask| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
Wins: 3 | Podiums: 11

PF1 Top Three Constructor's Championship
2015 (No Limit Excedrin Racing): CHAMPIONS


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:59 pm
Posts: 197
GingerFurball wrote:
Alonso's 2nd stint with McLaren has yielded him more retirements (22) than he managed between 2004 and 2013 (21).

But sure, let's pretend Renault are as bad.

I'm not pretending Renault are as bad, but will they get McLaren back to the sharp end of the grid? Probably not...

Honda had improved towards the end of last year, showing they can work through problems, and it's the change of concept that dropped them back. If they have figured out the Dyno to track correlation problems (even if not yet fixed) and are bringing in more knowledgeable engineers I do see a works deal with them a better long term prospect than Renault.
A season or two more pain with Honda is preferable to consigning themselves to the midfield with a Renault customer engine. If it doesn't work out then sorting issues with Merc or Ferrari is a must, even though customer status is still a handicap...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 18, 2006 11:54 am
Posts: 113
I think you're right, but how much longer can the finances/sponsors last/accept the way things have gone over the last three years...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3193
simonr23 wrote:
I think you're right, but how much longer can the finances/sponsors last/accept the way things have gone over the last three years...


This is the problem really. If this was the first season they'd just hang on and aim for the next regs in a couple of years but they can't because they've been on the ropes for 3/4 seasons already and have already lost their bespoke fuel supplier, title sponsor,big sponsors and a lot of prize money.

It's not sustainable for them anymore because the last things to go is the talent with the drivers and technical departments key names. Lose them they lose the visibility for the remaining sponsors and ability to produce the best cars and get results.

And then it doesn't matter if you've got a good engine or not, works support or not, if you can't produce a car better than the midfield then you're still going to lose to the likes of Ferrari/Mercedes even if your engine is better. Think of McLaren vs Red Bull in 2014.

So it becomes pointless to keep the works support if the turnaround in performance can't come before the exodus and with Alonso's contract and Renault's recruitment drive it's obviously the time that McLaren feel to draw a line under it and start the recovery.

Even if they have to accept customer supply until the next regs if Prod and the team deliver and Alonso and Stoff can show what they can do then they can start getting sponsors back, keep visibility high and try and attract a fuel supplier maybe and start making yourself an attractive option again for the next regs if a new manufacturer wants to enter.

Time just ran out for Honda to show they can offer this next year basically.

_________________
"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  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 3:22 pm
Posts: 1569
Herb Tarlik wrote:
You can bring up history all you want, but I'm going with 212 vs 11. You can choose the engine that gets all of 11 points this year as your ticket to success. I hope that McLaren does not and chooses an engine that can produce 212 championship points.

Fernando Alonso sees no hope with Honda and has as much vested interest in this decision as anyone. You dramatically overstated any so called "improvements" that Honda has made. Fernando continues to criticize the engine for being slow. "I've never raced with less power in my life". Classic.


I'm sorry man, but I think you're basing your outlook very much on the history of McLaren rather than the reality of McLaren.

McLaren have wealthy individuals, but they're also a business and there is nothing there to suggest they can come close to competing with the Big 3 financially without the backing of a manufacturer.

A switch to Renault is 100% an improvement short term, I don't think anyone will deny this. But the suggesting that McLaren could become McLaren-Renault WCC is dreaming. Renault now have their own team, which they'll back when they get up to speed; Red Bull have a Renault engine, and can outspend McLaren (and suspect they will look to get away from Renault as the works team progresses); McLaren have most likely lost a lot of very important talent to some of the big teams following their demise.

They need either a complete overhaul of F1, or manufacturer backing. Honda is the biggest gamble with no short term success, but is probably the only option they have which could have them hunting WDC/WCCs in 5 or 10 years. Going with Renault is accepting 4th place, possibly 5th if Renault are pursuing their own Mercedes-style project.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1225
Ennis wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
You can bring up history all you want, but I'm going with 212 vs 11. You can choose the engine that gets all of 11 points this year as your ticket to success. I hope that McLaren does not and chooses an engine that can produce 212 championship points.

Fernando Alonso sees no hope with Honda and has as much vested interest in this decision as anyone. You dramatically overstated any so called "improvements" that Honda has made. Fernando continues to criticize the engine for being slow. "I've never raced with less power in my life". Classic.


I'm sorry man, but I think you're basing your outlook very much on the history of McLaren rather than the reality of McLaren.

McLaren have wealthy individuals, but they're also a business and there is nothing there to suggest they can come close to competing with the Big 3 financially without the backing of a manufacturer.

A switch to Renault is 100% an improvement short term, I don't think anyone will deny this. But the suggesting that McLaren could become McLaren-Renault WCC is dreaming. Renault now have their own team, which they'll back when they get up to speed; Red Bull have a Renault engine, and can outspend McLaren (and suspect they will look to get away from Renault as the works team progresses); McLaren have most likely lost a lot of very important talent to some of the big teams following their demise.

They need either a complete overhaul of F1, or manufacturer backing. Honda is the biggest gamble with no short term success, but is probably the only option they have which could have them hunting WDC/WCCs in 5 or 10 years. Going with Renault is accepting 4th place, possibly 5th if Renault are pursuing their own Mercedes-style project.


What you and others are ignoring is the fact that just having a manufacturer backing a team is no guarantee of success. Plenty of teams have had full backing of a manufacturer and not only failed, but some faded away into obscurity. Going from memory here: Arrows Porsche, Larrousse Lamborghni, Jordan Yamaha, McLaren Peugot, Ligier Renault, Jordan Honda, etc.

Plenty of teams have had manufacturer backing and failed miserably. Several with Honda. Honda was a failure when they were a full works team.

There's no reason to suspect Honda has what it takes to produce a championship winning engine. All available data says that they are far behind and incapable of overcoming this deficit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2690
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
I guess you missed that bit about them being beaten by a Red Bull team that was running a Renault engine that was so unreliable and under powered that RB & Renault were literally at war with one another over it, resulting in Red Bull almost not having an engine for the following season! And McLaren had the very best engine in that car by a country mile! If they couldn't beat Red Bull with a far superior engine, what makes you think they could even hang with them running the same engine???

Please explain the logic behind that statement. McLaren and their drivers have said the chassis is "excellent" all season long, but as far as we all know it's nothing more than smoke in mirrors to place the blame for their lack of overall performance solely on Honda. And while I agree Honda has fallen short of the mark since rejoining with McLaren, This season they have mead strides to improve performance and have recently reached out to other engine manufacturers for assistance in the development of their engine and it has gotten significantly faster and more powerful since the first race of the season. According to those whom are helping Honda, Honda's major issues stem from them testing a single cylinder in seeking ultimate performance and although those tests proved extremely successful, it is once the engine is working as a whole that all the other issues arise, most notably the excessive vibration that was destroying components all over the place. They've now switched to testing complete layouts of the engine in order to cure the rest of the vibration issues and are also looking to additive components to improve the overall reliability and power output and as long as the engine is running they're actually not all that bad. Alonso and Vandoorne have run at the front of the rest of the pack a few times on merit now so the improvements are definitely there, but reliability is still not where ti needs to be.


What strides have they made this season though? They started the year with a power unit that was inferior to what they had last year.This is a team that still can't get both cars to the checkered flag with any consistency. They are still miles behind in straight line speeds. We just saw the worst driver on the grid, Jolyon Palmer attacking and ultimately overtaking Alonso at Monza with what is the second worst power unit in a car that is clearly not on the same level as the Mclaren chassis wise. Where is the progress?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20148
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Ennis wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
You can bring up history all you want, but I'm going with 212 vs 11. You can choose the engine that gets all of 11 points this year as your ticket to success. I hope that McLaren does not and chooses an engine that can produce 212 championship points.

Fernando Alonso sees no hope with Honda and has as much vested interest in this decision as anyone. You dramatically overstated any so called "improvements" that Honda has made. Fernando continues to criticize the engine for being slow. "I've never raced with less power in my life". Classic.


I'm sorry man, but I think you're basing your outlook very much on the history of McLaren rather than the reality of McLaren.

McLaren have wealthy individuals, but they're also a business and there is nothing there to suggest they can come close to competing with the Big 3 financially without the backing of a manufacturer.

A switch to Renault is 100% an improvement short term, I don't think anyone will deny this. But the suggesting that McLaren could become McLaren-Renault WCC is dreaming. Renault now have their own team, which they'll back when they get up to speed; Red Bull have a Renault engine, and can outspend McLaren (and suspect they will look to get away from Renault as the works team progresses); McLaren have most likely lost a lot of very important talent to some of the big teams following their demise.

They need either a complete overhaul of F1, or manufacturer backing. Honda is the biggest gamble with no short term success, but is probably the only option they have which could have them hunting WDC/WCCs in 5 or 10 years. Going with Renault is accepting 4th place, possibly 5th if Renault are pursuing their own Mercedes-style project.


What you and others are ignoring is the fact that just having a manufacturer backing a team is no guarantee of success. Plenty of teams have had full backing of a manufacturer and not only failed, but some faded away into obscurity. Going from memory here: Arrows Porsche, Larrousse Lamborghni, Jordan Yamaha, McLaren Peugot, Ligier Renault, Jordan Honda, etc.

Plenty of teams have had manufacturer backing and failed miserably. Several with Honda. Honda was a failure when they were a full works team.

There's no reason to suspect Honda has what it takes to produce a championship winning engine. All available data says that they are far behind and incapable of overcoming this deficit.

Nobody is ignoring it, because nobody has actually made that claim. The position is that not having manufacturer backing makes it that much difficult, if not impossible, to challenge for titles. That's nowhere near the same as saying having manufacturer backing guarantees it


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2690
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Ennis wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
You can bring up history all you want, but I'm going with 212 vs 11. You can choose the engine that gets all of 11 points this year as your ticket to success. I hope that McLaren does not and chooses an engine that can produce 212 championship points.

Fernando Alonso sees no hope with Honda and has as much vested interest in this decision as anyone. You dramatically overstated any so called "improvements" that Honda has made. Fernando continues to criticize the engine for being slow. "I've never raced with less power in my life". Classic.


I'm sorry man, but I think you're basing your outlook very much on the history of McLaren rather than the reality of McLaren.

McLaren have wealthy individuals, but they're also a business and there is nothing there to suggest they can come close to competing with the Big 3 financially without the backing of a manufacturer.

A switch to Renault is 100% an improvement short term, I don't think anyone will deny this. But the suggesting that McLaren could become McLaren-Renault WCC is dreaming. Renault now have their own team, which they'll back when they get up to speed; Red Bull have a Renault engine, and can outspend McLaren (and suspect they will look to get away from Renault as the works team progresses); McLaren have most likely lost a lot of very important talent to some of the big teams following their demise.

They need either a complete overhaul of F1, or manufacturer backing. Honda is the biggest gamble with no short term success, but is probably the only option they have which could have them hunting WDC/WCCs in 5 or 10 years. Going with Renault is accepting 4th place, possibly 5th if Renault are pursuing their own Mercedes-style project.


What you and others are ignoring is the fact that just having a manufacturer backing a team is no guarantee of success. Plenty of teams have had full backing of a manufacturer and not only failed, but some faded away into obscurity. Going from memory here: Arrows Porsche, Larrousse Lamborghni, Jordan Yamaha, McLaren Peugot, Ligier Renault, Jordan Honda, etc.

Plenty of teams have had manufacturer backing and failed miserably. Several with Honda. Honda was a failure when they were a full works team.

There's no reason to suspect Honda has what it takes to produce a championship winning engine. All available data says that they are far behind and incapable of overcoming this deficit.


I've got to agree here with Herb

Does anyone remember Toyota?

Being works is no path to guaranteed success. That is one of the biggest fallacies being spread around this forum. Yes there are advantages to having works status, but you need the manufacturer to be competent. In Honda's case, much like Toyota, they are clearly not.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 12:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20148
kleefton wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Ennis wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
You can bring up history all you want, but I'm going with 212 vs 11. You can choose the engine that gets all of 11 points this year as your ticket to success. I hope that McLaren does not and chooses an engine that can produce 212 championship points.

Fernando Alonso sees no hope with Honda and has as much vested interest in this decision as anyone. You dramatically overstated any so called "improvements" that Honda has made. Fernando continues to criticize the engine for being slow. "I've never raced with less power in my life". Classic.


I'm sorry man, but I think you're basing your outlook very much on the history of McLaren rather than the reality of McLaren.

McLaren have wealthy individuals, but they're also a business and there is nothing there to suggest they can come close to competing with the Big 3 financially without the backing of a manufacturer.

A switch to Renault is 100% an improvement short term, I don't think anyone will deny this. But the suggesting that McLaren could become McLaren-Renault WCC is dreaming. Renault now have their own team, which they'll back when they get up to speed; Red Bull have a Renault engine, and can outspend McLaren (and suspect they will look to get away from Renault as the works team progresses); McLaren have most likely lost a lot of very important talent to some of the big teams following their demise.

They need either a complete overhaul of F1, or manufacturer backing. Honda is the biggest gamble with no short term success, but is probably the only option they have which could have them hunting WDC/WCCs in 5 or 10 years. Going with Renault is accepting 4th place, possibly 5th if Renault are pursuing their own Mercedes-style project.


What you and others are ignoring is the fact that just having a manufacturer backing a team is no guarantee of success. Plenty of teams have had full backing of a manufacturer and not only failed, but some faded away into obscurity. Going from memory here: Arrows Porsche, Larrousse Lamborghni, Jordan Yamaha, McLaren Peugot, Ligier Renault, Jordan Honda, etc.

Plenty of teams have had manufacturer backing and failed miserably. Several with Honda. Honda was a failure when they were a full works team.

There's no reason to suspect Honda has what it takes to produce a championship winning engine. All available data says that they are far behind and incapable of overcoming this deficit.


I've got to agree here with Herb

Does anyone remember Toyota?

Being works is no path to guaranteed success. That is one of the biggest fallacies being spread around this forum. Yes there are advantages to having works status, but you need the manufacturer to be competent. In Honda's case, much like Toyota, they are clearly not.

It's not even a fallacy that's being spread around this forum, let alone one of the biggest. Literally no-one is claiming that


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7490
To put it simply, If you go with a supplier who only supply you, you are only fighting other manufacturers, any benefit comes to you, not to others.

If you go with someone who not only supply you, but another team and their own team, you are fighting everyone else, the supplier, and have no priority over the other team using the same engine.

As a 'works' team you can ask for things to be done that favour your car, and you get the benefit.
As a customer, they will first and foremost make alterations that fit in with THEIR requirements irrespective of any damage to you, they also have to consider requests from the other customer team, which again may not be beneficial to you.

The manufacturer will also control the operating window and not allow you to run outside it. They however can. They also get first dibs at new or modified engines, and will let you have them when they see fit. If they are fighting you, this many take a few races.

At the moment, the Renault engine is better than the Honda, but when the Renault improves, 3 teams improve. If Honda improves, just Mclaren improves.


It is not just a simple matter of looking at an engine and saying that one is best


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 22323
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
No, you're not. You're making an assumption. Not to mention a strawman. My position has consistently been that McLaren are better off sticking with Honda as a Works team. So why are you trying to muddy the waters by claiming I'm anti-manufacturer?

Because you take the line that you can't win unless you are aligned with a manufacturer, the manufacturers are too dominant, they give out inferior engines that kind of thing, yet neither Ferrari or Mercedes want to supply either Red Bull or McLaren for some reason?
I take the line that being a manufacturer gives you an immense advantage and not being one severely limits any title aspirations. I'm at a loss as to how this translates to being anti-manufacturer, though.

pokerman wrote:
I see your recent post saying the engine manufacturers give their customers hand me down updates but no you wouldn't be anti-manufacturer?
No, it's common sense. There's no judgement in that post. If a manufacturer comes out with an update then it's only logical that they'd prioritise themselves first. You're drawing conclusions where there are none.

And in any event, my views on manufacturers are irrelevant to the points being made in this thread. If I say that being a manufacturer has its advantages, then my position on whether or not that's a good thing is irrelevant (unless I form an opinion on it in that or subsequent posts).

You need to stop making assumptions and take the time to read things without constantly looking for a hidden agenda. It was the same in another recent thread where I criticised the FIA for how they wrote the rules and you immediately assumed it was an attack on Mercedes, despite the fact that I took pains to highlight it was the FIA I was critiquing. Please don't jump to conclusions all the time

Your posts generally seem to be negative towards the engine manufacturers, you said that if Renault produce a competitive car than their customer teams will receive a poorer service, then the term hand me down updates are basically something you give out once you moved on to something better, it's very emotive.

I think you're reaching here. Do you doubt that first choice goes to the manufacturer teams? Trying to make it an anti-manufacturer stance is absurd. How does that reconcile with me arguing for McLaren staying with Honda?

But again, this is all highly irrelevant to the point at hand. Your erroneous interpretation of my position on manufacturers notwithstanding, how I feel about them has nothing whatsoever to do with the discussion at hand. It's a complete strawman

The first post is you saying that McLaren going with Renault means that they are accepting being 2nd best, then someone points out that Red Bull the customer team is beating the Renault works team, I then come in with the anti-manufacturer statement.

Further posts from you include that if Renault become more competitive they will start to provide a poorer service to their customers with hand me down updates, and then further on that it's almost impossible for a customer team to beat the factory team.

So my reply had no merit?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: Currently 14th

Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1225
moby wrote:
To put it simply, If you go with a supplier who only supply you, you are only fighting other manufacturers, any benefit comes to you, not to others.

If you go with someone who not only supply you, but another team and their own team, you are fighting everyone else, the supplier, and have no priority over the other team using the same engine.

As a 'works' team you can ask for things to be done that favour your car, and you get the benefit.
As a customer, they will first and foremost make alterations that fit in with THEIR requirements irrespective of any damage to you, they also have to consider requests from the other customer team, which again may not be beneficial to you.

The manufacturer will also control the operating window and not allow you to run outside it. They however can. They also get first dibs at new or modified engines, and will let you have them when they see fit. If they are fighting you, this many take a few races.

At the moment, the Renault engine is better than the Honda, but when the Renault improves, 3 teams improve. If Honda improves, just Mclaren improves.


It is not just a simple matter of looking at an engine and saying that one is best



Back in the Ford era, more than half the field ran the DFV engine. Teams were able to make a car that differentiated themselves against competitors. I am sure that McLaren fans believe that their team can build a better car than any other Renault powered teams. That's part of the fun of the sport.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1225
Zoue wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Ennis wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
You can bring up history all you want, but I'm going with 212 vs 11. You can choose the engine that gets all of 11 points this year as your ticket to success. I hope that McLaren does not and chooses an engine that can produce 212 championship points.

Fernando Alonso sees no hope with Honda and has as much vested interest in this decision as anyone. You dramatically overstated any so called "improvements" that Honda has made. Fernando continues to criticize the engine for being slow. "I've never raced with less power in my life". Classic.


I'm sorry man, but I think you're basing your outlook very much on the history of McLaren rather than the reality of McLaren.

McLaren have wealthy individuals, but they're also a business and there is nothing there to suggest they can come close to competing with the Big 3 financially without the backing of a manufacturer.

A switch to Renault is 100% an improvement short term, I don't think anyone will deny this. But the suggesting that McLaren could become McLaren-Renault WCC is dreaming. Renault now have their own team, which they'll back when they get up to speed; Red Bull have a Renault engine, and can outspend McLaren (and suspect they will look to get away from Renault as the works team progresses); McLaren have most likely lost a lot of very important talent to some of the big teams following their demise.

They need either a complete overhaul of F1, or manufacturer backing. Honda is the biggest gamble with no short term success, but is probably the only option they have which could have them hunting WDC/WCCs in 5 or 10 years. Going with Renault is accepting 4th place, possibly 5th if Renault are pursuing their own Mercedes-style project.


What you and others are ignoring is the fact that just having a manufacturer backing a team is no guarantee of success. Plenty of teams have had full backing of a manufacturer and not only failed, but some faded away into obscurity. Going from memory here: Arrows Porsche, Larrousse Lamborghni, Jordan Yamaha, McLaren Peugot, Ligier Renault, Jordan Honda, etc.

Plenty of teams have had manufacturer backing and failed miserably. Several with Honda. Honda was a failure when they were a full works team.

There's no reason to suspect Honda has what it takes to produce a championship winning engine. All available data says that they are far behind and incapable of overcoming this deficit.

Nobody is ignoring it, because nobody has actually made that claim. The position is that not having manufacturer backing makes it that much difficult, if not impossible, to challenge for titles. That's nowhere near the same as saying having manufacturer backing guarantees it


Honda is a proven incompetent engine builder. They have NO track record of success. The engineers who made the fabulous V-6 turbo from the early 80's and NA V10's are long retired. Their works team failed so bad it was sold off for scrap (for 1 pound sterling!!).

So fine, it's one thing to think that you have to have a manufacturing behind your team. That by itself I can accept, because a competent manufacturer has enormous resources and technical skills. What is clear as day is that Honda does not fall into that category.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20148
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Because you take the line that you can't win unless you are aligned with a manufacturer, the manufacturers are too dominant, they give out inferior engines that kind of thing, yet neither Ferrari or Mercedes want to supply either Red Bull or McLaren for some reason?
I take the line that being a manufacturer gives you an immense advantage and not being one severely limits any title aspirations. I'm at a loss as to how this translates to being anti-manufacturer, though.

pokerman wrote:
I see your recent post saying the engine manufacturers give their customers hand me down updates but no you wouldn't be anti-manufacturer?
No, it's common sense. There's no judgement in that post. If a manufacturer comes out with an update then it's only logical that they'd prioritise themselves first. You're drawing conclusions where there are none.

And in any event, my views on manufacturers are irrelevant to the points being made in this thread. If I say that being a manufacturer has its advantages, then my position on whether or not that's a good thing is irrelevant (unless I form an opinion on it in that or subsequent posts).

You need to stop making assumptions and take the time to read things without constantly looking for a hidden agenda. It was the same in another recent thread where I criticised the FIA for how they wrote the rules and you immediately assumed it was an attack on Mercedes, despite the fact that I took pains to highlight it was the FIA I was critiquing. Please don't jump to conclusions all the time

Your posts generally seem to be negative towards the engine manufacturers, you said that if Renault produce a competitive car than their customer teams will receive a poorer service, then the term hand me down updates are basically something you give out once you moved on to something better, it's very emotive.

I think you're reaching here. Do you doubt that first choice goes to the manufacturer teams? Trying to make it an anti-manufacturer stance is absurd. How does that reconcile with me arguing for McLaren staying with Honda?

But again, this is all highly irrelevant to the point at hand. Your erroneous interpretation of my position on manufacturers notwithstanding, how I feel about them has nothing whatsoever to do with the discussion at hand. It's a complete strawman

The first post is you saying that McLaren going with Renault means that they are accepting being 2nd best, then someone points out that Red Bull the customer team is beating the Renault works team, I then come in with the anti-manufacturer statement.

Further posts from you include that if Renault become more competitive they will start to provide a poorer service to their customers with hand me down updates, and then further on that it's almost impossible for a customer team to beat the factory team.

So my reply had no merit?

Your reply had absolutely no merit. I'm stating what I believe to be the reality of the situation, not voicing an opinion on whether it is good or bad. That alone makes your reply without merit. But to answer your points:

    1. I said they would be accepting 2nd best because they would no longer be a Works team, which is critical to the argument about whether or not they should stay with Honda. I don't see how this may possibly be construed as an attack on manufacturers. If anything, it's an appeal to remain a Works team with Honda, which kind of tears a gaping big hole in your point

    2. Red Bull being a customer team beating Renault means nothing. Renault have just started their Works team and are not in competition with Red Bull yet. The fact they are so far down shows how poor their chassis is, but this should change over time. Again, seems strange to equate this with an anti-manufacturer stance.

    All of the above was written before you made your rather odd claims. So yes, emphatically your reply had no merit. You are drawing conclusions without basis

    3. I said once Renault get competitive, their customers would likely get update hand-me-downs. This was to illustrate that being a Works team had its advantages. Again, there is no basis to conclude that this is an attack on manufacturers. It's simply the reality of the situation. You're the one assigning a preference to it.

    4. I did say that it's almost impossible for a customer to beat a manufacturer. But I didn't say that makes the manufacturers evil, or that they should be penalised, etc etc. It's simply a a statement that being a manufacturer team is preferable to the alternative. How are you pulling the opposite conclusion from this?

In short, nothing I have written substantiates your claim that it is an anti-manufacturer stance. On the contrary, the discussions I have been having with people are from the position that McLaren should remain a Works team with Honda, which is about as contrary to your claim as you can get. You have your wires very firmly crossed, I'm afraid.

Now I've explained it more than once, so I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't still insist on it any further. I think you need to admit that you got it completely wrong and your interpretation of my stance was misguided.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20148
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Ennis wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
You can bring up history all you want, but I'm going with 212 vs 11. You can choose the engine that gets all of 11 points this year as your ticket to success. I hope that McLaren does not and chooses an engine that can produce 212 championship points.

Fernando Alonso sees no hope with Honda and has as much vested interest in this decision as anyone. You dramatically overstated any so called "improvements" that Honda has made. Fernando continues to criticize the engine for being slow. "I've never raced with less power in my life". Classic.


I'm sorry man, but I think you're basing your outlook very much on the history of McLaren rather than the reality of McLaren.

McLaren have wealthy individuals, but they're also a business and there is nothing there to suggest they can come close to competing with the Big 3 financially without the backing of a manufacturer.

A switch to Renault is 100% an improvement short term, I don't think anyone will deny this. But the suggesting that McLaren could become McLaren-Renault WCC is dreaming. Renault now have their own team, which they'll back when they get up to speed; Red Bull have a Renault engine, and can outspend McLaren (and suspect they will look to get away from Renault as the works team progresses); McLaren have most likely lost a lot of very important talent to some of the big teams following their demise.

They need either a complete overhaul of F1, or manufacturer backing. Honda is the biggest gamble with no short term success, but is probably the only option they have which could have them hunting WDC/WCCs in 5 or 10 years. Going with Renault is accepting 4th place, possibly 5th if Renault are pursuing their own Mercedes-style project.


What you and others are ignoring is the fact that just having a manufacturer backing a team is no guarantee of success. Plenty of teams have had full backing of a manufacturer and not only failed, but some faded away into obscurity. Going from memory here: Arrows Porsche, Larrousse Lamborghni, Jordan Yamaha, McLaren Peugot, Ligier Renault, Jordan Honda, etc.

Plenty of teams have had manufacturer backing and failed miserably. Several with Honda. Honda was a failure when they were a full works team.

There's no reason to suspect Honda has what it takes to produce a championship winning engine. All available data says that they are far behind and incapable of overcoming this deficit.

Nobody is ignoring it, because nobody has actually made that claim. The position is that not having manufacturer backing makes it that much difficult, if not impossible, to challenge for titles. That's nowhere near the same as saying having manufacturer backing guarantees it


Honda is a proven incompetent engine builder. They have NO track record of success. The engineers who made the fabulous V-6 turbo from the early 80's and NA V10's are long retired. Their works team failed so bad it was sold off for scrap (for 1 pound sterling!!).

So fine, it's one thing to think that you have to have a manufacturing behind your team. That by itself I can accept, because a competent manufacturer has enormous resources and technical skills. What is clear as day is that Honda does not fall into that category.
None of which invalidates the point that no-one is claiming that having manufacturer backing guarantees success.

I'm still waiting for you to explain how I'm confused about my own logic, by the way


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7490
Herb Tarlik wrote:
moby wrote:
To put it simply, If you go with a supplier who only supply you, you are only fighting other manufacturers, any benefit comes to you, not to others.

If you go with someone who not only supply you, but another team and their own team, you are fighting everyone else, the supplier, and have no priority over the other team using the same engine.

As a 'works' team you can ask for things to be done that favour your car, and you get the benefit.
As a customer, they will first and foremost make alterations that fit in with THEIR requirements irrespective of any damage to you, they also have to consider requests from the other customer team, which again may not be beneficial to you.

The manufacturer will also control the operating window and not allow you to run outside it. They however can. They also get first dibs at new or modified engines, and will let you have them when they see fit. If they are fighting you, this many take a few races.

At the moment, the Renault engine is better than the Honda, but when the Renault improves, 3 teams improve. If Honda improves, just Mclaren improves.


It is not just a simple matter of looking at an engine and saying that one is best



Back in the Ford era, more than half the field ran the DFV engine. Teams were able to make a car that differentiated themselves against competitors. I am sure that McLaren fans believe that their team can build a better car than any other Renault powered teams. That's part of the fun of the sport.


And there was no Ford team to favour.

They supplied a bare engine. That does not happen today, you get the set and do not split it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1225
Zoue wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Ennis wrote:


I'm sorry man, but I think you're basing your outlook very much on the history of McLaren rather than the reality of McLaren.

McLaren have wealthy individuals, but they're also a business and there is nothing there to suggest they can come close to competing with the Big 3 financially without the backing of a manufacturer.

A switch to Renault is 100% an improvement short term, I don't think anyone will deny this. But the suggesting that McLaren could become McLaren-Renault WCC is dreaming. Renault now have their own team, which they'll back when they get up to speed; Red Bull have a Renault engine, and can outspend McLaren (and suspect they will look to get away from Renault as the works team progresses); McLaren have most likely lost a lot of very important talent to some of the big teams following their demise.

They need either a complete overhaul of F1, or manufacturer backing. Honda is the biggest gamble with no short term success, but is probably the only option they have which could have them hunting WDC/WCCs in 5 or 10 years. Going with Renault is accepting 4th place, possibly 5th if Renault are pursuing their own Mercedes-style project.


What you and others are ignoring is the fact that just having a manufacturer backing a team is no guarantee of success. Plenty of teams have had full backing of a manufacturer and not only failed, but some faded away into obscurity. Going from memory here: Arrows Porsche, Larrousse Lamborghni, Jordan Yamaha, McLaren Peugot, Ligier Renault, Jordan Honda, etc.

Plenty of teams have had manufacturer backing and failed miserably. Several with Honda. Honda was a failure when they were a full works team.

There's no reason to suspect Honda has what it takes to produce a championship winning engine. All available data says that they are far behind and incapable of overcoming this deficit.

Nobody is ignoring it, because nobody has actually made that claim. The position is that not having manufacturer backing makes it that much difficult, if not impossible, to challenge for titles. That's nowhere near the same as saying having manufacturer backing guarantees it


Honda is a proven incompetent engine builder. They have NO track record of success. The engineers who made the fabulous V-6 turbo from the early 80's and NA V10's are long retired. Their works team failed so bad it was sold off for scrap (for 1 pound sterling!!).

So fine, it's one thing to think that you have to have a manufacturing behind your team. That by itself I can accept, because a competent manufacturer has enormous resources and technical skills. What is clear as day is that Honda does not fall into that category.
None of which invalidates the point that no-one is claiming that having manufacturer backing guarantees success.

I'm still waiting for you to explain how I'm confused about my own logic, by the way


I stated exactly why your logic failed and once again it missed you. Not wasting my time. Moving on.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1225
moby wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
moby wrote:
To put it simply, If you go with a supplier who only supply you, you are only fighting other manufacturers, any benefit comes to you, not to others.

If you go with someone who not only supply you, but another team and their own team, you are fighting everyone else, the supplier, and have no priority over the other team using the same engine.

As a 'works' team you can ask for things to be done that favour your car, and you get the benefit.
As a customer, they will first and foremost make alterations that fit in with THEIR requirements irrespective of any damage to you, they also have to consider requests from the other customer team, which again may not be beneficial to you.

The manufacturer will also control the operating window and not allow you to run outside it. They however can. They also get first dibs at new or modified engines, and will let you have them when they see fit. If they are fighting you, this many take a few races.

At the moment, the Renault engine is better than the Honda, but when the Renault improves, 3 teams improve. If Honda improves, just Mclaren improves.


It is not just a simple matter of looking at an engine and saying that one is best



Back in the Ford era, more than half the field ran the DFV engine. Teams were able to make a car that differentiated themselves against competitors. I am sure that McLaren fans believe that their team can build a better car than any other Renault powered teams. That's part of the fun of the sport.


And there was no Ford team to favour.

They supplied a bare engine. That does not happen today, you get the set and do not split it.


That might be the answer to this dilemma. 100% no difference between any engine that Mercedes, Ferrari, sell to others.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:59 pm
Posts: 197
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Ennis wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
You can bring up history all you want, but I'm going with 212 vs 11. You can choose the engine that gets all of 11 points this year as your ticket to success. I hope that McLaren does not and chooses an engine that can produce 212 championship points.

Fernando Alonso sees no hope with Honda and has as much vested interest in this decision as anyone. You dramatically overstated any so called "improvements" that Honda has made. Fernando continues to criticize the engine for being slow. "I've never raced with less power in my life". Classic.


I'm sorry man, but I think you're basing your outlook very much on the history of McLaren rather than the reality of McLaren.

McLaren have wealthy individuals, but they're also a business and there is nothing there to suggest they can come close to competing with the Big 3 financially without the backing of a manufacturer.

A switch to Renault is 100% an improvement short term, I don't think anyone will deny this. But the suggesting that McLaren could become McLaren-Renault WCC is dreaming. Renault now have their own team, which they'll back when they get up to speed; Red Bull have a Renault engine, and can outspend McLaren (and suspect they will look to get away from Renault as the works team progresses); McLaren have most likely lost a lot of very important talent to some of the big teams following their demise.

They need either a complete overhaul of F1, or manufacturer backing. Honda is the biggest gamble with no short term success, but is probably the only option they have which could have them hunting WDC/WCCs in 5 or 10 years. Going with Renault is accepting 4th place, possibly 5th if Renault are pursuing their own Mercedes-style project.


What you and others are ignoring is the fact that just having a manufacturer backing a team is no guarantee of success. Plenty of teams have had full backing of a manufacturer and not only failed, but some faded away into obscurity. Going from memory here: Arrows Porsche, Larrousse Lamborghni, Jordan Yamaha, McLaren Peugot, Ligier Renault, Jordan Honda, etc.

Plenty of teams have had manufacturer backing and failed miserably. Several with Honda. Honda was a failure when they were a full works team.

There's no reason to suspect Honda has what it takes to produce a championship winning engine. All available data says that they are far behind and incapable of overcoming this deficit.

Nobody is ignoring it, because nobody has actually made that claim. The position is that not having manufacturer backing makes it that much difficult, if not impossible, to challenge for titles. That's nowhere near the same as saying having manufacturer backing guarantees it


Honda is a proven incompetent engine builder. They have NO track record of success. The engineers who made the fabulous V-6 turbo from the early 80's and NA V10's are long retired. Their works team failed so bad it was sold off for scrap (for 1 pound sterling!!).

So fine, it's one thing to think that you have to have a manufacturing behind your team. That by itself I can accept, because a competent manufacturer has enormous resources and technical skills. What is clear as day is that Honda does not fall into that category.

The works team that had a well regarded Honda engine and designed a chassis that won the WCC with an engine it wasn't designed around?

They are currently struggling, and may not get through their problems, but even the previous incarnations that were successful had pain to begin with...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:59 pm
Posts: 197
Herb Tarlik wrote:
moby wrote:
To put it simply, If you go with a supplier who only supply you, you are only fighting other manufacturers, any benefit comes to you, not to others.

If you go with someone who not only supply you, but another team and their own team, you are fighting everyone else, the supplier, and have no priority over the other team using the same engine.

As a 'works' team you can ask for things to be done that favour your car, and you get the benefit.
As a customer, they will first and foremost make alterations that fit in with THEIR requirements irrespective of any damage to you, they also have to consider requests from the other customer team, which again may not be beneficial to you.

The manufacturer will also control the operating window and not allow you to run outside it. They however can. They also get first dibs at new or modified engines, and will let you have them when they see fit. If they are fighting you, this many take a few races.

At the moment, the Renault engine is better than the Honda, but when the Renault improves, 3 teams improve. If Honda improves, just Mclaren improves.


It is not just a simple matter of looking at an engine and saying that one is best



Back in the Ford era, more than half the field ran the DFV engine. Teams were able to make a car that differentiated themselves against competitors. I am sure that McLaren fans believe that their team can build a better car than any other Renault powered teams. That's part of the fun of the sport.

Back in the Ford DFV era the engine didn't need to be so closely integrated into the car meaning the issues of today weren't there, I'm sure with minor issues most lumps could be stuck in any chassis. Also as someone else has stated without a de faco works team favourtism is less likely


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:59 pm
Posts: 197
dompclarke wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
moby wrote:
To put it simply, If you go with a supplier who only supply you, you are only fighting other manufacturers, any benefit comes to you, not to others.

If you go with someone who not only supply you, but another team and their own team, you are fighting everyone else, the supplier, and have no priority over the other team using the same engine.

As a 'works' team you can ask for things to be done that favour your car, and you get the benefit.
As a customer, they will first and foremost make alterations that fit in with THEIR requirements irrespective of any damage to you, they also have to consider requests from the other customer team, which again may not be beneficial to you.

The manufacturer will also control the operating window and not allow you to run outside it. They however can. They also get first dibs at new or modified engines, and will let you have them when they see fit. If they are fighting you, this many take a few races.

At the moment, the Renault engine is better than the Honda, but when the Renault improves, 3 teams improve. If Honda improves, just Mclaren improves.


It is not just a simple matter of looking at an engine and saying that one is best



Back in the Ford era, more than half the field ran the DFV engine. Teams were able to make a car that differentiated themselves against competitors. I am sure that McLaren fans believe that their team can build a better car than any other Renault powered teams. That's part of the fun of the sport.

Back in the Ford DFV era the engine didn't need to be so closely integrated into the car meaning the issues of today weren't there, I'm sure with minor issues most lumps could be stuck in any chassis. Also as someone else has stated without a de faco works team favourtism is less likely

Though in the later Ford era with Cosworth and Zetec available the parity of supply was worse than now


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20148
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:

What you and others are ignoring is the fact that just having a manufacturer backing a team is no guarantee of success. Plenty of teams have had full backing of a manufacturer and not only failed, but some faded away into obscurity. Going from memory here: Arrows Porsche, Larrousse Lamborghni, Jordan Yamaha, McLaren Peugot, Ligier Renault, Jordan Honda, etc.

Plenty of teams have had manufacturer backing and failed miserably. Several with Honda. Honda was a failure when they were a full works team.

There's no reason to suspect Honda has what it takes to produce a championship winning engine. All available data says that they are far behind and incapable of overcoming this deficit.

Nobody is ignoring it, because nobody has actually made that claim. The position is that not having manufacturer backing makes it that much difficult, if not impossible, to challenge for titles. That's nowhere near the same as saying having manufacturer backing guarantees it


Honda is a proven incompetent engine builder. They have NO track record of success. The engineers who made the fabulous V-6 turbo from the early 80's and NA V10's are long retired. Their works team failed so bad it was sold off for scrap (for 1 pound sterling!!).

So fine, it's one thing to think that you have to have a manufacturing behind your team. That by itself I can accept, because a competent manufacturer has enormous resources and technical skills. What is clear as day is that Honda does not fall into that category.
None of which invalidates the point that no-one is claiming that having manufacturer backing guarantees success.

I'm still waiting for you to explain how I'm confused about my own logic, by the way


I stated exactly why your logic failed and once again it missed you. Not wasting my time. Moving on.

I'm afraid you didn't. Move on if you like, but it doesn't reflect well on you that you throw out accusations and are then exposed by being unable to back them up. If you were that convinced of it, it would be a matter of a moment to copy/paste it. So the fact you can't speaks volumes...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1225
dompclarke wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Ennis wrote:


I'm sorry man, but I think you're basing your outlook very much on the history of McLaren rather than the reality of McLaren.

McLaren have wealthy individuals, but they're also a business and there is nothing there to suggest they can come close to competing with the Big 3 financially without the backing of a manufacturer.

A switch to Renault is 100% an improvement short term, I don't think anyone will deny this. But the suggesting that McLaren could become McLaren-Renault WCC is dreaming. Renault now have their own team, which they'll back when they get up to speed; Red Bull have a Renault engine, and can outspend McLaren (and suspect they will look to get away from Renault as the works team progresses); McLaren have most likely lost a lot of very important talent to some of the big teams following their demise.

They need either a complete overhaul of F1, or manufacturer backing. Honda is the biggest gamble with no short term success, but is probably the only option they have which could have them hunting WDC/WCCs in 5 or 10 years. Going with Renault is accepting 4th place, possibly 5th if Renault are pursuing their own Mercedes-style project.


What you and others are ignoring is the fact that just having a manufacturer backing a team is no guarantee of success. Plenty of teams have had full backing of a manufacturer and not only failed, but some faded away into obscurity. Going from memory here: Arrows Porsche, Larrousse Lamborghni, Jordan Yamaha, McLaren Peugot, Ligier Renault, Jordan Honda, etc.

Plenty of teams have had manufacturer backing and failed miserably. Several with Honda. Honda was a failure when they were a full works team.

There's no reason to suspect Honda has what it takes to produce a championship winning engine. All available data says that they are far behind and incapable of overcoming this deficit.

Nobody is ignoring it, because nobody has actually made that claim. The position is that not having manufacturer backing makes it that much difficult, if not impossible, to challenge for titles. That's nowhere near the same as saying having manufacturer backing guarantees it


Honda is a proven incompetent engine builder. They have NO track record of success. The engineers who made the fabulous V-6 turbo from the early 80's and NA V10's are long retired. Their works team failed so bad it was sold off for scrap (for 1 pound sterling!!).

So fine, it's one thing to think that you have to have a manufacturing behind your team. That by itself I can accept, because a competent manufacturer has enormous resources and technical skills. What is clear as day is that Honda does not fall into that category.

The works team that had a well regarded Honda engine and designed a chassis that won the WCC with an engine it wasn't designed around?

They are currently struggling, and may not get through their problems, but even the previous incarnations that were successful had pain to begin with...


So successful that they sold the team for one British pound.

The chassis was good, the engine, nope, not good.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7490
Herb Tarlik wrote:
moby wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
moby wrote:
To put it simply, If you go with a supplier who only supply you, you are only fighting other manufacturers, any benefit comes to you, not to others.

If you go with someone who not only supply you, but another team and their own team, you are fighting everyone else, the supplier, and have no priority over the other team using the same engine.

As a 'works' team you can ask for things to be done that favour your car, and you get the benefit.
As a customer, they will first and foremost make alterations that fit in with THEIR requirements irrespective of any damage to you, they also have to consider requests from the other customer team, which again may not be beneficial to you.

The manufacturer will also control the operating window and not allow you to run outside it. They however can. They also get first dibs at new or modified engines, and will let you have them when they see fit. If they are fighting you, this many take a few races.

At the moment, the Renault engine is better than the Honda, but when the Renault improves, 3 teams improve. If Honda improves, just Mclaren improves.


It is not just a simple matter of looking at an engine and saying that one is best



Back in the Ford era, more than half the field ran the DFV engine. Teams were able to make a car that differentiated themselves against competitors. I am sure that McLaren fans believe that their team can build a better car than any other Renault powered teams. That's part of the fun of the sport.


And there was no Ford team to favour.

They supplied a bare engine. That does not happen today, you get the set and do not split it.


That might be the answer to this dilemma. 100% no difference between any engine that Mercedes, Ferrari, sell to others.


In the 70's you spent £8000 on a DFV, then 2-3000 on inlet and fuel systems 1500 on exhaust 2000 on ignition then made your own cooling system and went to Hewland to select a gear box. As long as the unit was not revved beyond the rating of the valve gear, they had no restrictions. If you fried it, you fried it and it was your fault.

Now you place an order with Renault and they send a truck and a team of people to put it in your car, which has to be configured in the approved way with air and cooling etc. They are all the same and you can not customise them or the program that runs them.
If there is a different engine, its the one Renault themselves use. Have you noticed Hulks car goes better than the Red Bulls?

It is a completely different thing. I am all for buying a short engine and allowing teams to do what they want with it though. It would be nice.
But facing facts, teams could not do it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1225
Zoue wrote:

I'm afraid you didn't. Move on if you like, but it doesn't reflect well on you that you throw out accusations and are then exposed by being unable to back them up. If you were that convinced of it, it would be a matter of a moment to copy/paste it. So the fact you can't speaks volumes...


Ridiculous. All I can do is retype my explanation. I am not going to do that. You are perfectly capable of re-reading it and address the points raised. You didnt which is what I have come to expect from you.

:lol: @ Exposed.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 2690
Zoue wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Ennis wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
You can bring up history all you want, but I'm going with 212 vs 11. You can choose the engine that gets all of 11 points this year as your ticket to success. I hope that McLaren does not and chooses an engine that can produce 212 championship points.

Fernando Alonso sees no hope with Honda and has as much vested interest in this decision as anyone. You dramatically overstated any so called "improvements" that Honda has made. Fernando continues to criticize the engine for being slow. "I've never raced with less power in my life". Classic.


I'm sorry man, but I think you're basing your outlook very much on the history of McLaren rather than the reality of McLaren.

McLaren have wealthy individuals, but they're also a business and there is nothing there to suggest they can come close to competing with the Big 3 financially without the backing of a manufacturer.

A switch to Renault is 100% an improvement short term, I don't think anyone will deny this. But the suggesting that McLaren could become McLaren-Renault WCC is dreaming. Renault now have their own team, which they'll back when they get up to speed; Red Bull have a Renault engine, and can outspend McLaren (and suspect they will look to get away from Renault as the works team progresses); McLaren have most likely lost a lot of very important talent to some of the big teams following their demise.

They need either a complete overhaul of F1, or manufacturer backing. Honda is the biggest gamble with no short term success, but is probably the only option they have which could have them hunting WDC/WCCs in 5 or 10 years. Going with Renault is accepting 4th place, possibly 5th if Renault are pursuing their own Mercedes-style project.


What you and others are ignoring is the fact that just having a manufacturer backing a team is no guarantee of success. Plenty of teams have had full backing of a manufacturer and not only failed, but some faded away into obscurity. Going from memory here: Arrows Porsche, Larrousse Lamborghni, Jordan Yamaha, McLaren Peugot, Ligier Renault, Jordan Honda, etc.

Plenty of teams have had manufacturer backing and failed miserably. Several with Honda. Honda was a failure when they were a full works team.

There's no reason to suspect Honda has what it takes to produce a championship winning engine. All available data says that they are far behind and incapable of overcoming this deficit.


I've got to agree here with Herb

Does anyone remember Toyota?

Being works is no path to guaranteed success. That is one of the biggest fallacies being spread around this forum. Yes there are advantages to having works status, but you need the manufacturer to be competent. In Honda's case, much like Toyota, they are clearly not.

It's not even a fallacy that's being spread around this forum, let alone one of the biggest. Literally no-one is claiming that


It is, and you are one of the main protagonists. You believe that Mclaren should stay with Honda, the same Honda that has been massively underperforming for 3 years, has gone backwards even, time and time again, and has not shown any indication they can get better any time soon. You believe that Mclaren should stay with Honda even if they could get a Mercedes engine. You have said so in the past. But I understand you're not alone in that view. To me that says that you think the only pathway to success is with Honda, or with works status. And I think that is a fallacy.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20148
kleefton wrote:
Zoue wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Ennis wrote:

I'm sorry man, but I think you're basing your outlook very much on the history of McLaren rather than the reality of McLaren.

McLaren have wealthy individuals, but they're also a business and there is nothing there to suggest they can come close to competing with the Big 3 financially without the backing of a manufacturer.

A switch to Renault is 100% an improvement short term, I don't think anyone will deny this. But the suggesting that McLaren could become McLaren-Renault WCC is dreaming. Renault now have their own team, which they'll back when they get up to speed; Red Bull have a Renault engine, and can outspend McLaren (and suspect they will look to get away from Renault as the works team progresses); McLaren have most likely lost a lot of very important talent to some of the big teams following their demise.

They need either a complete overhaul of F1, or manufacturer backing. Honda is the biggest gamble with no short term success, but is probably the only option they have which could have them hunting WDC/WCCs in 5 or 10 years. Going with Renault is accepting 4th place, possibly 5th if Renault are pursuing their own Mercedes-style project.


What you and others are ignoring is the fact that just having a manufacturer backing a team is no guarantee of success. Plenty of teams have had full backing of a manufacturer and not only failed, but some faded away into obscurity. Going from memory here: Arrows Porsche, Larrousse Lamborghni, Jordan Yamaha, McLaren Peugot, Ligier Renault, Jordan Honda, etc.

Plenty of teams have had manufacturer backing and failed miserably. Several with Honda. Honda was a failure when they were a full works team.

There's no reason to suspect Honda has what it takes to produce a championship winning engine. All available data says that they are far behind and incapable of overcoming this deficit.


I've got to agree here with Herb

Does anyone remember Toyota?

Being works is no path to guaranteed success. That is one of the biggest fallacies being spread around this forum. Yes there are advantages to having works status, but you need the manufacturer to be competent. In Honda's case, much like Toyota, they are clearly not.

It's not even a fallacy that's being spread around this forum, let alone one of the biggest. Literally no-one is claiming that


It is, and you are one of the main protagonists. You believe that Mclaren should stay with Honda, the same Honda that has been massively underperforming for 3 years, has gone backwards even, time and time again, and has not shown any indication they can get better any time soon. You believe that Mclaren should stay with Honda even if they could get a Mercedes engine. You have said so in the past. But I understand you're not alone in that view. To me that says that you think the only pathway to success is with Honda, or with works status. And I think that is a fallacy.

None of the above claims a guarantee of success. People may be saying being a Works team increases your chances (or, more specifically, not being a Works team decreases them), but that's in no way the same as saying it guarantees success. It's quite a key difference.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20148
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Zoue wrote:

I'm afraid you didn't. Move on if you like, but it doesn't reflect well on you that you throw out accusations and are then exposed by being unable to back them up. If you were that convinced of it, it would be a matter of a moment to copy/paste it. So the fact you can't speaks volumes...


Ridiculous. All I can do is retype my explanation. I am not going to do that. You are perfectly capable of re-reading it and address the points raised. You didnt which is what I have come to expect from you.

:lol: @ Exposed.

Hey, if lying makes you feel good, that's up to you. You've stated where you have disagreed with my logic, but nowhere where I have been confused by my own. If you're still trying to claim otherwise then you're being less than honest, I'm afraid.

Not to mention which, I clearly don't believe you have, which means I can't find it. If you truly believe otherwise, it would have taken you less time to copy and paste what you'd already written than to write the lines above. The fact that you can't exposes you as a fraud.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1225
Zoue wrote:
Herb Tarlik wrote:
Zoue wrote:

I'm afraid you didn't. Move on if you like, but it doesn't reflect well on you that you throw out accusations and are then exposed by being unable to back them up. If you were that convinced of it, it would be a matter of a moment to copy/paste it. So the fact you can't speaks volumes...


Ridiculous. All I can do is retype my explanation. I am not going to do that. You are perfectly capable of re-reading it and address the points raised. You didnt which is what I have come to expect from you.

:lol: @ Exposed.

Hey, if lying makes you feel good, that's up to you. You've stated where you have disagreed with my logic, but nowhere where I have been confused by my own. If you're still trying to claim otherwise then you're being less than honest, I'm afraid.

Not to mention which, I clearly don't believe you have, which means I can't find it. If you truly believe otherwise, it would have taken you less time to copy and paste what you'd already written than to write the lines above. The fact that you can't exposes you as a fraud.


Personal attacks are not allowed in this forum. That you resorted to them shows how utterly bankrupt your position is.

I am not going to dive down to your level and respond in kind.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 1383
maybe we could get back to, how much higher up the grid next year McLaren Renault will be ,and can all have a whip round later for Fernando's wages next year

if not we will lose him to indy where the adverts make you forget what you were watching, and that would be awlful


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 7490
slide wrote:
maybe we could get back to, how much higher up the grid next year McLaren Renault will be ,and can all have a whip round later for Fernando's wages next year

if not we will lose him to indy where the adverts make you forget what you were watching, and that would be awlful



I think, for the first few races at least, they will be right there within a second of Toro Roso Honda.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2017 6:04 pm
Posts: 1225
moby wrote:
slide wrote:
maybe we could get back to, how much higher up the grid next year McLaren Renault will be ,and can all have a whip round later for Fernando's wages next year

if not we will lose him to indy where the adverts make you forget what you were watching, and that would be awlful



I think, for the first few races at least, they will be right there within a second of Toro Roso Honda.


:lol: :lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 3193
Some whispers via an AMuS video in German that it's done and McLaren have ditched Honda. Alonso has stopped following Honda accounts and removed pictures of the McHonda and all things Honda apparently(Not on twitter myself so can't confirm).

Just waiting for STR-Honda deal to be finalised before any announcement as that domino has to fall next for Renault to be free to supply McLaren.

EDIT: Not a German speaker myself but if anyone's interested this was the link that apparently mentions it. http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/vide ... 58737.html

_________________
"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  
 
 Post subject: Re: McLaren Renault deal
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 20148
Lotus49 wrote:
Some whispers via an AMuS video in German that it's done and McLaren have ditched Honda. Alonso has stopped following Honda accounts and removed pictures of the McHonda and all things Honda apparently(Not on twitter myself so can't confirm).

Just waiting for STR-Honda deal to be finalised before any announcement as that domino has to fall next for Renault to be free to supply McLaren.

It's inevitable now, isn't it?

I read an article on ESPN today which said that McLaren was considering making their own engines if the 2021 regulations prove to be much less complex. They haven't a prayer now but simpler units woulds see them making the foray..


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: stranger 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