Some explanations from Honda

Status
Not open for further replies.
So will they stop having engines fail , before then end of the race now ?
 
Last edited:
They'll have their reliability sorted out in time for the new engine formula.
wink.gif


Actually, Renault should be counting their blessings, that Honda is monopolising the "bad engine" headlines.
 
So they said things did not show on an engine dyno, why don't they use a chassis dyno. I know lowly nascar teams will run a car on a chassis dyno up to speed to loo kfor drivetrain vibrations.
 
Originally Posted By: bdcardinal
So they said things did not show on an engine dyno, why don't they use a chassis dyno. I know lowly nascar teams will run a car on a chassis dyno up to speed to loo kfor drivetrain vibrations.


I'm pretty sure that's against the rules. You know, the 3" thick book they wrote to try and put a lid on costs. The one that costs more to enforce/work around than they were spending on testing and development in any case. Anyway, it is what it is.
 
The real reason is, Honda is new at this game, and is NOT the huge company that Toyota is, with limitless amounts of money to throw at it.
 
Originally Posted By: HangFire
The real reason is, Honda is new at this game, and is NOT the huge company that Toyota is, with limitless amounts of money to throw at it.


Dead right, look how many world championships Toyota has racked up vs Honda.. Oh wait.. I'm pretty sure Toyota never won a race.
 
Originally Posted By: HangFire
The real reason is, Honda is new at this game, and is NOT the huge company that Toyota is, with limitless amounts of money to throw at it.


Honda is not "new at this game". They have done well in F1 in past years with numerous wins since 1968 BCP (before cell phones) where Toyota has failed to make any headway and quit. It appears that Honda suffered more from the tsunami than was at first realized and that resources had to be redirected to keep the manufacturing core of their business alive.

Honda powered McLarens won 44 races with 53 poles from 1988-1992. Their reliability and power were untouchable and this partnership along with their drivers, Arton Senna and Alain Prost owned F1. The only question at those races was not whether a Honda powered car would win but which driver would win.

Link
 
At the risk of painting with too broad a brush (not to mention the threat from marauding Honda fanbois) I have begun to wonder if the whole Honda corporate structure has lost the engineering/mechanical bent it long had. I have not been truly impressed with their efforts for at least a dozen years. The VTEC hayday has come and gone and the newer models are fairly ho-hum in my opinion. It's as though they just stoppd investing in "doing it better" and have been coasting. Just my .02.
 
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
Originally Posted By: HangFire
The real reason is, Honda is new at this game, and is NOT the huge company that Toyota is, with limitless amounts of money to throw at it.


Honda is not "new at this game". They have done well in F1 in past years with numerous wins since 1968 BCP (before cell phones) where Toyota has failed to make any headway and quit. It appears that Honda suffered more from the tsunami than was at first realized and that resources had to be redirected to keep the manufacturing core of their business alive.

Honda powered McLarens won 44 races with 53 poles from 1988-1992. Their reliability and power were untouchable and this partnership along with their drivers, Arton Senna and Alain Prost owned F1. The only question at those races was not whether a Honda powered car would win but which driver would win.

Link




I think Honda was arrogant due to past success (though their most recent spell in F1 from 2000 to 2008 netted them all of ONE win so it's not like they had always been successful). If past success counted then Cosworth should be tearing it up right now...
 
Originally Posted By: Brad_C
I'm pretty sure that's against the rules. You know, the 3" thick book they wrote to try and put a lid on costs. The one that costs more to enforce/work around than they were spending on testing and development in any case. Anyway, it is what it is.

It's not that thick.
wink.gif
I think the technical regulations are only 100 pages or so.

With respect to Honda's success over the years, Autosport magazine did a feature on how they really didn't do that well if you look at the numbers. Aside from the Ayrton Senna years, which make all the headlines, there were some mighty disastrous years. Nonetheless, Honda does have the resources to straighten things out, should they devote the resources and get creative enough. Mercedes, Ferrari, and Renault wouldn't hesitate to poach the best talent from other teams (or other divisions within the parent company, which is what Mercedes did). Honda looks way too inwardly. They need to look at some outside talent. That's not a failing; that's forward thinking.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Brad_C
I'm pretty sure that's against the rules. You know, the 3" thick book they wrote to try and put a lid on costs. The one that costs more to enforce/work around than they were spending on testing and development in any case. Anyway, it is what it is.

It's not that thick.
wink.gif
I think the technical regulations are only 100 pages or so.


Yeah, I know but without a bit of hyperbole it doesn't quite sound as magnificent
smile.gif


In any case, Honda need to get it together because at the moment they're making Renault look relatively good and we need a bit more pressure on the French to get it together. At least Ferrari are providing a bit of competition this year. Best season we've seen in years (in my personal opinion anyway - not humble, but worth what you paid for it).
 
Originally Posted By: bdcardinal
So they said things did not show on an engine dyno, why don't they use a chassis dyno. I know lowly nascar teams will run a car on a chassis dyno up to speed to loo kfor drivetrain vibrations.


Ok, so I looked into this a bit further. There's nothing in the Technical Regs on Dyno usage, but Article 5.2 in Appendix 8 (Aerodynamic Testing Restrictions - ATR) of the FIA F1 Sporting regulations explicitly permit "Steady state and dynamic engine dynamometer work with an F1 car or subcomponent may be performed (and therefore not within the definition of RWTT) provided that"..

And it goes on to basically say yes you can use a chassis dyno *but* there must be no front or rear wings and nothing that can be construed as Aero testing. So that honestly knocks out a whole host of vibration sources that Honda might want to be testing against. Without the road surface and interaction between the aero and suspension you're effectively testing on a static bed anyway, so back to a custom chassis specific engine dyno. You really need the complete car to get a representative test, and you aren't allowed to use it.

That's the only reference to Dyno work I can find (although there are several Appendices I can't find). All testing limitations really pertain to aero and on-road.

Since I had the 2018 regs open, I had to look. They're down to 3 of each major component next year and they have effectively nailed down the potential for oil burning to supplement fuel.
 
Originally Posted By: Brad_C
Yeah, I know but without a bit of hyperbole it doesn't quite sound as magnificent
smile.gif


That's true, and when you sit and try to read them, they might as well be 3" thick. For teams to make sense of them, they almost certainly have both engineers and lawyers go over the things.

I don't think there's much choice but for Honda to get it together. McLaren can't be satisfied being an engine customer, so even if Renault, Ferrari, or Mercedes were willing to help, I'm not sure how well things would work out.

They're reducing the engine allotment by one next year, as you noted, so everyone, especially Honda, needs to get reliability in order. Mario Ilien today was lamenting how that's way too few.

Maybe we'll see the clock turn back on a few things. Road testing, in order to save money, has been scaled back way too much, and it's not like simulations are cheap, either. Some were commenting over the last couple days how it's seriously depleted the pool of drivers who are eligible for a Super License. They may have all the points, but they don't have the mileage. I find it hard to believe, but the article mentioned that even Paul di Resta isn't even eligible because of how long it's been since he competed in a race, and how few miles he's turned as a reserve driver.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak

Maybe we'll see the clock turn back on a few things. Road testing, in order to save money, has been scaled back way too much, and it's not like simulations are cheap, either. Some were commenting over the last couple days how it's seriously depleted the pool of drivers who are eligible for a Super License. They may have all the points, but they don't have the mileage. I find it hard to believe, but the article mentioned that even Paul di Resta isn't even eligible because of how long it's been since he competed in a race, and how few miles he's turned as a reserve driver.


Do you have a link to that article? Paul is still the official Williams reserve driver, so I'd be very surprised if that were the case.

On a completely different note, interesting scuttlebutt about Cosworth talking about coming back for the 2021- power units. Be nice to get some more suppliers in the game.
 
That's why I find it hard to believe, because of his role. It's at Autosport here, but it's a premium article, so unless you have a paid membership there, you won't be able to read it. Motorsport might have it as well, but probably behind their pay wall, too. In any event, it claims you must have raced in at least one GP in the last three years to not have to basically start over with the paperwork. They also talk about the very low testing mileage, where in years past, test drivers had more mileage than some modern drivers. I guess Massa was the last one from the high test mileage days.

More power unit suppliers wouldn't be a bad idea. I read about Mario Ilien having some concern about costs, but open to the idea of sponsorship and partnerships. Cosworth would be nice to see back, too.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top