Clicky

Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

lipstick79

Honda

Recommended Posts


Sakae, McLaren didn't make a decision based on the past, that was just PR stuff and you know it, they decided that in order to win the WDC they needed to be a works team, Honda promised to do their bit and come up with a strong PU. After 3 years McLaren has produced a rather handy chassis and Honda's PU cannot even finish a race. As much as we try to spin it the sad reality is that this situation is an undiginified failure of Honda

Honda is not the victim here, it's the other way round

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sorry, but I do not see it this way. One could make a case that current situation at McLaren is an outcome of whole series of poor decisions accumulated along-way, from insane FiA set normative references, to experimental restrictiveness, etc. McLaren is in similar situation like RBR is, no difference as far as I am concerned. McLaren witnessed RBR' downfall in 2014, and ask them today, what did they learned of it? Obviously not much, because they did not put brakes on having Honda on. They jumped off the cliff together, and that's where we are.

Forgive me if what might sound like patronizing tone, but it is not intended that way. I mean to say, Japanese always will say, I will do my best.That's normal and there is no other way. Is it a solemn promise? Sure it is. Is outcome guaranteed? No. It merely promises effort investment, that's all.

However, regardless of cultural differences, evaluation of risk parameters of this project remains McLaren's responsibility IMO. They are the party which invited Honda to participate, so now I say - keep up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sakae said:

I am sorry, but I do not see it this way. One could make a case that current situation at McLaren is an outcome of whole series of poor decisions accumulated along-way, from insane FiA set normative references, to experimental restrictiveness, etc. McLaren is in similar situation like RBR is, no difference as far as I am concerned. McLaren witnessed RBR' downfall in 2014, and ask them today, what did they learned of it? Obviously not much, because they did not put brakes on having Honda on. They jumped off the cliff together, and that's where we are.

Forgive me if what might sound like patronizing tone, but it is not intended that way. I mean to say, Japanese always will say, I will do my best.That's normal and there is no other way. Is it a solemn promise? Sure it is. Is outcome guaranteed? No. It merely promises effort investment, that's all.

However, regardless of cultural differences, evaluation of risk parameters of this project remains McLaren's responsibility IMO. They are the party which invited Honda to participate, so now I say - keep up.

Exactly. In any partnership, there's always fault on both sides or credit for that matter.

Can't be Honda 100% fault as McLaren claims. It's too childish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, radical-one said:

Exactly. In any partnership, there's always fault on both sides or credit for that matter.

Can't be Honda 100% fault as McLaren claims. It's too childish.

I frankly find your claim that "it's too childish" bordering on the facrical... you might not have noticed that Honda's engines are blowing up with an alarming frequency, and your argument can be reversed: would you blame (even partly) Honda if Alonso's McLaren suffered a suspension failure at the next race? Be honest, tell me that Honda would be partly to blame for a suspension failure and we'll keep the coversation from there

Having said that of course McLaren did some mistakes, the main mistake that they did was to lose Mercedes, they were their #1 partner and lost them, they then chose as partner a company, Honda, with a very long list of failures in F1 (I perfectly know that they are very succesful in MotoGP or in other forms of motorsport, I'm referring to their very long list of failures in F1), they then put themselves in a position where their very existance depended on Honda and finally they waited too long to take action. So McLaren has made mistakes, but that doesn't change the fact that Alonso and Vandoorne cannot finish a race and have scored no points so far this season because of the abysmal lack of reliability of their Honda PUs and because on top of an alarming lack of reliability those PUs have significant power deficit compared to the opposition (and you can compare their performance level with that of a GP2 car): sadly that is a fact and you ither come up with some convincing arguments that Honda's PUs are not down on power and unreliable or I think that it's about time that you seriously consider whether keeping on in this pointless defence of what cannot (and should not) be defended makes much sense (and whether such attitude does you much favour) 

I understand that one likes a certain car maker or i patriotic but there is a point where a blind defence of what cannot possibly be defended becomes too much, I'm surprised that you don't seem to understand that however great Honda can be what has happened in the last few years is quite simply too much

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sakae said:

I am sorry, but I do not see it this way. One could make a case that current situation at McLaren is an outcome of whole series of poor decisions accumulated along-way, from insane FiA set normative references, to experimental restrictiveness, etc. McLaren is in similar situation like RBR is, no difference as far as I am concerned. McLaren witnessed RBR' downfall in 2014, and ask them today, what did they learned of it? Obviously not much, because they did not put brakes on having Honda on. They jumped off the cliff together, and that's where we are.

Forgive me if what might sound like patronizing tone, but it is not intended that way. I mean to say, Japanese always will say, I will do my best.That's normal and there is no other way. Is it a solemn promise? Sure it is. Is outcome guaranteed? No. It merely promises effort investment, that's all.

However, regardless of cultural differences, evaluation of risk parameters of this project remains McLaren's responsibility IMO. They are the party which invited Honda to participate, so now I say - keep up.

The rules are the same for everyone, and comparing Renault with Honda is a bit disrespectful: Renault had problems and solved most of them, Honda has been going backwards, it's not exactly the same thing.

So why didn't McLaren dump Honda before? Contracts, companies usually enter into biding agreements that prevent one from dumping the other at will, I'm sue that you will have noticed that many media are suggesting that McLaren is putting pressure of Honda so that Honda breaks away from their agreement, it's not a small matter, McLaren in all possibility has no viable option to walk away from that agreement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Publius Cornelius Scipio said:

The rules are the same for everyone, and comparing Renault with Honda is a bit disrespectful: Renault had problems and solved most of them, Honda has been going backwards, it's not exactly the same thing.

So why didn't McLaren dump Honda before? Contracts, companies usually enter into biding agreements that prevent one from dumping the other at will, I'm sue that you will have noticed that many media are suggesting that McLaren is putting pressure of Honda so that Honda breaks away from their agreement, it's not a small matter, McLaren in all possibility has no viable option to walk away from that agreement

It is true that rules are the same for everyone, however it is also true that application of the same rules is upon different development situations, therefore performance outcome is inadvertently different. Renault is in this game with Ferrari much longer than Honda, and MB purportedly worked on that technology since 2010. Honda rivals had gained track experience in 2014, Honda got a taste of it only much later, and without benefit of attending meetings with FiA in early stages thus without having benefit of understanding line of questions asked by rivals, which, IMO placed them in minor disadvantage. 

Without track related testing Honda could not find out that their dyno is not properly calibrated. That's a one problem, and there are more, which in totality creating perhaps distorted negative optics, making it looking worse than it is. Do not forget many small issues is just as bad as several big ones. In 2014 Vettel had once a problem with one sensor on his PU, and it took 3.5 hrs after FP3 to replace it. That's how complex it is. If Honda has potential to match horses with others, and we do not know how much off they are, than I think project can be salvaged. 

It is for those and similar reasons why McLaren should have thought about it more carefully before they kicked Mercedes out. From all reading I've done, it is consistently McLaren, rather than Honda, which seems to peddle the divorce line. They purportedly gave Honda until September to provide result. I am not sure what it means in terms of contractual obligations, but it sounds like McLaren wants to make a business case of it (goods were not delivered). You know more about it than I do. Usually when you issue threat, you should be also prepared to carry it out. Problem is, no one will admit right now who will be replacing Honda. My bet is on Renault, but that's just my guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sakae said:

It is true that rules are the same for everyone, however it is also true that application of the same rules is upon different development situations, therefore performance outcome is inadvertently different. Renault is in this game with Ferrari much longer than Honda, and MB purportedly worked on that technology since 2010. Honda rivals had gained track experience in 2014, Honda got a taste of it only much later, and without benefit of attending meetings with FiA in early stages thus without having benefit of understanding line of questions asked by rivals, which, IMO placed them in minor disadvantage. 

Without track related testing Honda could not find out that their dyno is not properly calibrated. That's a one problem, and there are more, which in totality creating perhaps distorted negative optics, making it looking worse than it is. Do not forget many small issues is just as bad as several big ones. In 2014 Vettel had once a problem with one sensor on his PU, and it took 3.5 hrs after FP3 to replace it. That's how complex it is. If Honda has potential to match horses with others, and we do not know how much off they are, than I think project can be salvaged. 

It is for those and similar reasons why McLaren should have thought about it more carefully before they kicked Mercedes out. From all reading I've done, it is consistently McLaren, rather than Honda, which seems to peddle the divorce line. They purportedly gave Honda until September to provide result. I am not sure what it means in terms of contractual obligations, but it sounds like McLaren wants to make a business case of it (goods were not delivered). You know more about it than I do. Usually when you issue threat, you should be also prepared to carry it out. Problem is, no one will admit right now who will be replacing Honda. My bet is on Renault, but that's just my guess.

Exactly. McLaren chose Honda and dumped Merc before so that in itself is partly to be blamed.

Plus Honda brought in Millions $$$ to McLaren so , suck it up !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kamui is on the pole for Le Mans (however in Toyota). After Indy, Nippon is flying high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RE: McLaren chose Honda and dumped Merc before
> NOT entirely TRUE.
Merc dumped Mclaren,  as U put it.
McLaren like to B the works team, under Ron Dennis at least
However Merc bought Brawn GP as the works team

So Mclaren went back to Honda, brought Honda back to the sport
as a works team. Who now have Sauber as a customer - yet to run as
Sauber Honda

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, lipstick79 said:

RE: McLaren chose Honda and dumped Merc before
> NOT entirely TRUE.
Merc dumped Mclaren,  as U put it.
McLaren like to B the works team, under Ron Dennis at least
However Merc bought Brawn GP as the works team

So Mclaren went back to Honda, brought Honda back to the sport
as a works team. Who now have Sauber as a customer - yet to run as
Sauber Honda

 

True. (Sort off). In recollection, there was commercial conflict between rivals building sport cars. Point is, resolution of that conflict perhaps required little bit more thought, and I do not think its all 20-20 vision today. PU complexity with associated risk is known since 2008, if not earlier. Honda's research actually was focused on similar technology (for non-sporting aims) a decade or earlier, however risk with F1 format and packaging was (obviously) underestimated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

guys we are not talking about what McLaren did wrong, everyone makes mistakes, McLaren made mistakes as Ferrari made mistakes, Red Bull made mistakes, Renault made mistakes, etc, this is not the point, all of the above have managed to rectify what they got wrong. This thread is about Honda and the fact that (sadly, once again) they cannot come up with a remediation plan for their mistakes, that is the problem, they have been very very naive.

Blaming McLaren for the fact that Honda's PUs cannot last a race distance doesn't make any sense, McLaren has responsibility for many things but not for the lack of both performance and reliability of Honda's PUs.

So the point now is:

1) what is going to happen to the relationship between McLaren and Honda?

2) if said relationship is going to break up when that will happen?

3) what are th prospects for the Sauber - Honda partnership?

Here's my take on the above

1) McLaren must find a way out of that contract asap, the need NOW some points to try and limit the damage done to their 2018 budget, they need points also to try and find some sponsor (and hopefully be less difficult that Ron used to be on these matters)

2) I think that it needs to happen before the summer break, they must start working on their 2018 challenge asap, also if they manage to score some points in the first races with a Merc engine they can "save" part of their reputation (and at the same time damage even further Honda's reputation) by proving that the recent failures were not their fault. Should they fail even with a Merc engine at the back of their car then the going would get really tough for the survival of McLaren

3) IMHO it will end in tears, both parties are struggling, one has the worse chassis around the other the worse PU, Honda runs the risk of losing half on the 2017 season, it would be a significant blow (I presume that the testing ban would still be applicable to them). Audi might end up buying what remains of Sauber from the receivers (I don't see how they could survive further difficult times, they are already in a very difficult financial situation)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Publius Cornelius Scipio said:

.

Quote

... they have been very very naive.

That's what you get when you substitute hard nose due diligence process with hard nose ideology. Self inflicted wound.

Quote

What is going to happen to the relationship between McLaren and Honda.

We might know later in the year. Right now no one knows.

Quote

Sauber..?

59196a4c1c776d7343213f14cf5b7b4066252090

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sakae said:

Kamui is on the pole for Le Mans (however in Toyota). After Indy, Nippon is flying high.

Yes, this year is shaping up tp be a good year for Japanese drivers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, lipstick79 said:

RE: McLaren chose Honda and dumped Merc before
> NOT entirely TRUE.
Merc dumped Mclaren,  as U put it.
McLaren like to B the works team, under Ron Dennis at least
However Merc bought Brawn GP as the works team

So Mclaren went back to Honda, brought Honda back to the sport
as a works team. Who now have Sauber as a customer - yet to run as
Sauber Honda

 

Either way, McLaren picked/went back to Honda. Nobody stuck a gun at their head....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sakae said:

That's what you get when you substitute hard nose due diligence process with hard nose ideology. Self inflicted wound.

Sakae Honda has been naive with their approach not McLaren in choosing them, thinking that with no experience of the new generation of PUs they came in and refused to follow the lead of other manufacturers because "we will show them how to do it" was silly and naive

A general remark: have you guys realised that by blaming McLaren for partnering with Honda it's as if you were saying that Honda is no good and that was plain to see to everyone from day one and any self respecting F1 team should have steered well clear of them? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do agree that Honda underestimated task in hand, the only "crime" they committed, and they have admitted as much, however I continue to maintain, that McLaren is responsible for their own thinking. This case (i) is ongoing, thus it would be premature to termed as total failure, and (ii) IMO it should not reflect badly on this organization. Odds were stacked up against them right from the beginning, and prospect of never reaching convergence on time line they set forth for themselves was very real. In 2015 and 2016 rivals with track experience of 2014 behind them, began progressing on exponential slope, whereas Honda is still lagging behind, while comparative, distorted optics makes them look perhaps worse than it is. Ferrari and MB aren't standstill and situation is dynamic.

Take Renault case - RBR is freaking out, claiming performance deficit, yet Cyril Abiteboul declared that next upgrade is due only in 2018. There you go. Honda is not the only entity with issues. Cyril must have reached conclusion that his current configuration has reached max of its potential, and I would expect big re-design next year (an attempt Honda made too with current PU design).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's exactly what Ive' been pointing. Only one champion in each year. I couldn't imagine McLaren being champion even if they remained with Merc.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎17‎/‎06‎/‎2017 at 1:23 AM, radical-one said:

That's exactly what Ive' been pointing. Only one champion in each year. I couldn't imagine McLaren being champion even if they remained with Merc.....

Especially if Mercedes had their own works team.
That's why Ron returned to Honda.
It is now up to the Honda guys to deliver the PU
The guys at Woking HAVE a good chassis - just NOT powerful & reliable enough PU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IF McLaren DID dump Honda.
Mercedes would NEVER allow them to BEAT the works
Mercedes team.
Look at the Williams Mercedes and Force India Mercedes
NOT challenging the Mercedes works team, McLaren want to WIN     

At this time, Honda do not look up to it.
But when Sauber is ALSO running Honda power
More data to work with   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/16/2017 at 7:41 AM, Sakae said:

Kamui is on the pole for Le Mans (however in Toyota). After Indy, Nippon is flying high.

So, it looks like Mazda = last Samurai in Le Mans racing? BTW, Hiroshima as a business destination presents itself today a vibrant city in all respects; its home of Mazda, after all. It was - well different this time around. Reliability is precious commodity. Toyota has to bow head to Mazda. That must be painful, I gather.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: would expect big re-design next year (an attempt Honda made too with current PU design).

>Indeed, Honda went revolutionary with THIS year (2017) not evolutionary.
To get a good base, which still NOT managed to complete a race distance yet.
Fernando were only 2 laps short.
Once the foundation is laid, complete a full race distance - reliability
Then they have something to work with to gain performance,
and be knocking on the door of Ferrari & Mercedes
To finish first,  first you must finish.
Honda have shown proven development so far this season

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honda has chosen (at least initially) to create their own design concept, however in time as they evaluated their design in comparative analysis and its potential, it was realized that any continuation was a road with dead end, never good enough to compete with their rivals. (Honda admitted that much). That was a reason for them starting from scratch, and that's where we are today. Counting laps and grid positions in a race is important, however more important is design potential, once they fix reliability issues. I've heard people claiming otherwise, but I've always thought that you can make a fast car reliable, however it is dubious whether you can make a slow car fast, regardless how reliable it is. The design has to be substantively full of opportunities and potential to improve and "grow". We really do not know where Honda stands in convergence sphere once they reliably run full race distance with "pedal to the floor". Its not all Honda, mind you. The other day they parked the car because of a leak. Optics are bad, but in reality it is something that can be fixed. Some other time they parked the car, because a critical sensor failed, and as long as it packaging was approved by the sensor supplier, then shame actually should be on the supplier's head, yet it is Honda who is hammered, and so it goes. (Honda is not manufacturing sensors as far as I know). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...