McLarens Annus Horribilisus

[Richard C]

Regardless of what good or bad Ron Dennis has done in the past, I just don't see him as being the one to blame for the current McLaren/Honda woes. I hope there is not a need to name a scapegoat.

And I am not saying they couldn't have been successful out of the gate, but I am saying much was stacked against them. The inability to test in advance and then the difficulty of changing course and developing your solution are really impediments if you just didn't get it right on day one.

Richard

[Casper]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Regardless of what good or bad Ron Dennis has done in the past, I just don't see him as being the one to blame for the current McLaren/Honda woes. I hope there is not a need to name a scapegoat.

And I am not saying they couldn't have been successful out of the gate, but I am saying much was stacked against them. The inability to test in advance and then the difficulty of changing course and developing your solution are really impediments if you just didn't get it right on day one.

Richard

They could have tested as much as they liked and they obviously chose to think they did not need too and it has shot them in the foot.

[mikuni]

My feeling is that these new single turbo hybrid PU's are bench tested (dyno'd) to death before they are rolled out, but both Honda and Renault are finding huge differences between dyno results and the real world. I think this difference is unprecedented in F1 (we are seeing it in WEC also) and was simply not something Honda in particular anticipated coming into it. I don't think they were arrogant, I think they just underestimated the complexity of the task they were undertaking.

There has been a little bit documented on this from Renault, when they said they are not getting the same power output from the engine when it is in the chassis as to on the bench, even in the same mode. Even Mercedes were having trouble winding their engine up to its highest mode while in the chassis.

I assume all of this comes down to the ever tighter packaging requirements, while trying to pack more in at the same time. Of course this is just a theory, but there is some fact to it and it would explain a lot.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by Casper

They could have tested as much as they liked and they obviously chose to think they did not need too and it has shot them in the foot.

I will clarify that by saying track testing not dyno testing. Installed track testing is a whole other thing and can spring surprises not seen on a dyno.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by mikuni

My feeling is that these new single turbo hybrid PU's are bench tested (dyno'd) to death before they are rolled out, but both Honda and Renault are finding huge differences between dyno results and the real world. I think this difference is unprecedented in F1 (we are seeing it in WEC also) and was simply not something Honda in particular anticipated coming into it. I don't think they were arrogant, I think they just underestimated the complexity of the task they were undertaking.

There has been a little bit documented on this from Renault, when they said they are not getting the same power output from the engine when it is in the chassis as to on the bench, even in the same mode. Even Mercedes were having trouble winding their engine up to its highest mode while in the chassis.

I assume all of this comes down to the ever tighter packaging requirements, while trying to pack more in at the same time. Of course this is just a theory, but there is some fact to it and it would explain a lot.

I think it is wonderful karma that the people who were responsible for drafting the stoopid rules are now being caught up in them.

RBR, McLaren and to a lesser extent Ferrari have all fallen victims to the rules that they drafted to trip up the lesser teams.
Williams seem to be the only team that have benefitted.
Were Mercedes part of the F1 Working group when they made the regs?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Casper

They could have tested as much as they liked and they obviously chose to think they did not need too and it has shot them in the foot.

It is very late and I need to dig more into this in the morning, but I don't believe your statement is accurate. Off season testing is very limited. If I remember correctly, other than shakedown, straight line and promotional runs, you are limited to the few joint preseason and mid season tests. Also, if I remember correctly there was much speculation if Honda was bound by these rules or not given they were not participating in F1 in 2014. Hypothetically they could have done as they pleased, but with the risk of making enemies (Mercedes, Renault and Ferrari were bound by testing rules in the 2013 and 2014 off seasons which prevented them from having unlimited testing). I believe Honda made a statement that they would operate under the spirit of the rules and not test in a way others could not. So in short, no, they could not test in an unlimited fashion.

Richard

[Casper]

Their thinking may have been that it was going to make life really difficult for any would be entrant to come up to speed so effectively making it a closed shop. It also makes it more than possible that using a customer car/engine is the only feasible way to get into the category. Imagine what would have happened if Honda had entered with their own complete car to sort out on top of the PU. What should have been done is a car built and the motor tested on the track, all doable before any entry is made and therefore outside the regulatory regime of F1. The current entrants would have gone nuts but there is little they could have done to prevent it. I would pay good money to see someone do it just to watch the reaction of those who created this debacle.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

It is very late and I need to dig more into this in the morning, but I don't believe your statement is accurate. Off season testing is very limited. If I remember correctly, other than shakedown, straight line and promotional runs, you are limited to the few joint preseason and mid season tests. Also, if I remember correctly there was much speculation if Honda was bound by these rules or not given they were not participating in F1 in 2014. Hypothetically they could have done as they pleased, but with the risk of making enemies (Mercedes, Renault and Ferrari were bound by testing rules in the 2013 and 2014 off seasons which prevented them from having unlimited testing). I believe Honda made a statement that they would operate under the spirit of the rules and not test in a way others could not. So in short, no, they could not test in an unlimited fashion.

Richard

They could have if they wanted to, the fact is they had a choice and they chose not to. Hypothetically I can build an F1 car at any time fully compliant with the regs of the category and the category could do nothing about it. I can then go on and use that car as I want outside of F1 so it would be possible to do just as I suggested. Once they have entered then they must toe the line of course.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Casper

They could have if they wanted to, the fact is they had a choice and they chose not to. Hypothetically I can build an F1 car at any time fully compliant with the regs of the category and the category could do nothing about it. I can then go on and use that car as I want outside of F1 so it would be possible to do just as I suggested. Once they have entered then they must toe the line of course.

Yes to the letter of the law they could have. But it would have been a very public finger in the eye of the existing teams and PU manufactures. It was discussed at that time and ruled out. Here is an article and some quotes from back in that time period...

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/re...e-honda-tests/

Team boss Boullier is quoted by Auto Motor und Sport: "There is a gentleman's agreement among the engine manufacturers that prohibits track tests outside the official dates.

"But we could test if we wanted, because Honda is not (yet) officially part of the world championship," said the Frenchman.

Mercedes' Toto Wolff does not like the sound of that.

"You can't put an engine in an experimental car or whatever and just drive around. It's clearly against the rules."

He said Boullier's argument about Honda not yet being an official part of F1 is not valid.

"McLaren is enrolled as a team," said Wolff. "And if they have an engine supplier (for 2015), then you can't just say 'I don't know who my supplier is'.

It would have been seen as McLaren and Honda throwing down the gauntlet and walking away from some behind the scenes gentlemens agreements as to what to do and what not to do. Fans would have lost their minds (remember many was afraid that Honda was going to show up and roll over at least Ferrari and Renault if not maybe even Mercedes) and it would have been a lot of negative PR for both Honda and McLaren. It was clearly a grey area. We as fans love to point out the nefarious and corrupt nature of F1. So now we are going to call out Honda in a negative way for maybe actually doing the honorable thing?

IMHO, the reason Honda was able to navigate the issue around 2015 token allocation (remember that?) was because they were a good sport in the run up to the 2015 season. That allowed them to get the other teams to agree to give them some 2015 PU development tokens (if I remember it was an average of the remaining 2015 tokens the other teams hadn't used up to that point). If they had tested against the will of the other teams there would have been zero chance they would have received ANY 2015 PU tokens. I suspect that would have put them in an even worse situation than what they are in now even if some hypothetical pre-season mule testing had happened.

Additionally, I really just don't think they would have been ready to do much anyhow, or even change course much if they had found major issues. And this might be a point on which we agree upon (i.e. not enough effort put forth from the start). They announced their return in May of 2013. McLaren had already notably not renewed with Mercedes much earlier, so there was much speculation and rumors that they had a new engine partner. So clearly you know Honda had internally made the decision much earlier and would have been working on the engine prior to the May announcement. Or at least you would think so. But only two months after the announcement Honda is saying they don't expect the ICE to fire up for the first time until sometime in the Fall of 2013 (!) and the ERS not running on the dyno until early 2014(!!) To me that is a shocking fact. But it didn't seem to publicly raise eyebrows at that time. Now it doesn't mean they didn't have other "less than a full engine" testing mules on dynos before that point (such as testing different turbo types). The article implies the full engine using whatever architecture they had settled upon...

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/108796

Assuming those timelines are not smoke and mirrors (I see no reason to doubt them), Honda could still have been deep in sorting out minor (or major) issues on the dyno late 2013 and early 2014 and maybe could have cobbled together some type of track test mule in early 2014 at the earliest assuming things were going well on the static dyno. But that test mule couldn't have come from McLaren as they were still under contract with Mercedes at that time point for the 2014 season (risk Mercedes pulling their engines somehow via a contract clause?) Honda could have bought a chassis from some other series and made it work, or built their own (more money), but it would have run afoul of the above mentioned gentleman agreement. The earliest we would (and did) see the Honda in a car was the post 2014 season Abu Dhabi Test in November of 2014 (in a McLaren test mule). At that point forward they really were subject to testing limits as McLaren was already entered into the 2015 championship which would mean they couldn't show up again until the official sanctioned 2015 tests in February 2015.

Could Honda have done more? Hindsight is 20/20, so the answer is absolutely yes. And maybe even without hindsight they answer is yes as well. Were they maybe over confident with their design and testing regime (we can make this work on dynos)? Without hindsight, yes again, but they were playing the cards that were dealt them (see comments below regarding testing regulations) and then in an optimistic way, convincing themselves that it be OK anyhow. What they should have done is to have made their decision earlier and started earlier. But I am sure they started as soon as they got approval and funding.

So yes, Overall they got it wrong. But my initial points was that I don't blame Ron Dennis for this and I think that how the 2014+ engine and testing regulations are written makes it VERY hard for a new supplier such as Honda to enter the fray and make it work out of the box. And to extend that, if they get it wrong, the uphill climb is long with no guarantee (regardless of money spent) that you can fix all of your problems (ala Renault and Honda). That is why they are talking about a complete overhaul of the PU token system.

Richard

[Mike Harte]

Excellent post, Richard, and one I agree with totally.

Part of the problem with F1 (and many other top level sports as well) is that it is run as a closed shop, and to join in the fun, you have to be invited by those supposedly in charge. This often leads to long lead in times as you have to be "registered" and from that point on you become subject to all the rules and regulations. And that usually means, as you point out, that you can't undertake testing of any of the cars' components in a real life on track way.

The stupidity of this regime is that it is supposed to stop excessive costs; however, it just means, when related to aero parts for example, that the teams end up spending millions experimenting in the wind tunnels, and I would imagine that small fortunes go down the drain on PSU testing on dynos. The reality, as experience repeatedly shows, these cost savings don't actually work, any more than do the parts that are thrown away almost on a weekly basis because they are found to be useless on or in a car on the track.

[chillibowl]

Alonso has some things to say about the rules.

http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/...ernando-alonso

"Probably more testing or little bit more freedom in terms of developing the car because right now, as you put the car in the first winter test, more or less you keep that position until the end of the year.

"You make progress, everyone makes progress, and that's it - the rules are very tight, so you cannot develop much in terms of engine, which is frozen, and aerodynamics is very restrictive. More or less what you have in the first test is what you have all season so that's making the races very predictable and very boring."

as boring as this season is to me, i feel like much of my boredom would be alleviated by seeing Ferrari and Mclaren pounding out laps until they got their cars sorted.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Yes to the letter of the law they could have. But it would have been a very public finger in the eye of the existing teams and PU manufactures. It was discussed at that time and ruled out. Here is an article and some quotes from back in that time period...

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/re...e-honda-tests/



It would have been seen as McLaren and Honda throwing down the gauntlet and walking away from some behind the scenes gentlemens agreements as to what to do and what not to do. Fans would have lost their minds (remember many was afraid that Honda was going to show up and roll over at least Ferrari and Renault if not maybe even Mercedes) and it would have been a lot of negative PR for both Honda and McLaren. It was clearly a grey area. We as fans love to point out the nefarious and corrupt nature of F1. So now we are going to call out Honda in a negative way for maybe actually doing the honorable thing?

IMHO, the reason Honda was able to navigate the issue around 2015 token allocation (remember that?) was because they were a good sport in the run up to the 2015 season. That allowed them to get the other teams to agree to give them some 2015 PU development tokens (if I remember it was an average of the remaining 2015 tokens the other teams hadn't used up to that point). If they had tested against the will of the other teams there would have been zero chance they would have received ANY 2015 PU tokens. I suspect that would have put them in an even worse situation than what they are in now even if some hypothetical pre-season mule testing had happened.

Additionally, I really just don't think they would have been ready to do much anyhow, or even change course much if they had found major issues. And this might be a point on which we agree upon (i.e. not enough effort put forth from the start). They announced their return in May of 2013. McLaren had already notably not renewed with Mercedes much earlier, so there was much speculation and rumors that they had a new engine partner. So clearly you know Honda had internally made the decision much earlier and would have been working on the engine prior to the May announcement. Or at least you would think so. But only two months after the announcement Honda is saying they don't expect the ICE to fire up for the first time until sometime in the Fall of 2013 (!) and the ERS not running on the dyno until early 2014(!!) To me that is a shocking fact. But it didn't seem to publicly raise eyebrows at that time. Now it doesn't mean they didn't have other "less than a full engine" testing mules on dynos before that point (such as testing different turbo types). The article implies the full engine using whatever architecture they had settled upon...

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/108796

Assuming those timelines are not smoke and mirrors (I see no reason to doubt them), Honda could still have been deep in sorting out minor (or major) issues on the dyno late 2013 and early 2014 and maybe could have cobbled together some type of track test mule in early 2014 at the earliest assuming things were going well on the static dyno. But that test mule couldn't have come from McLaren as they were still under contract with Mercedes at that time point for the 2014 season (risk Mercedes pulling their engines somehow via a contract clause?) Honda could have bought a chassis from some other series and made it work, or built their own (more money), but it would have run afoul of the above mentioned gentleman agreement. The earliest we would (and did) see the Honda in a car was the post 2014 season Abu Dhabi Test in November of 2014 (in a McLaren test mule). At that point forward they really were subject to testing limits as McLaren was already entered into the 2015 championship which would mean they couldn't show up again until the official sanctioned 2015 tests in February 2015.

Could Honda have done more? Hindsight is 20/20, so the answer is absolutely yes. And maybe even without hindsight they answer is yes as well. Were they maybe over confident with their design and testing regime (we can make this work on dynos)? Without hindsight, yes again, but they were playing the cards that were dealt them (see comments below regarding testing regulations) and then in an optimistic way, convincing themselves that it be OK anyhow. What they should have done is to have made their decision earlier and started earlier. But I am sure they started as soon as they got approval and funding.

So yes, Overall they got it wrong. But my initial points was that I don't blame Ron Dennis for this and I think that how the 2014+ engine and testing regulations are written makes it VERY hard for a new supplier such as Honda to enter the fray and make it work out of the box. And to extend that, if they get it wrong, the uphill climb is long with no guarantee (regardless of money spent) that you can fix all of your problems (ala Renault and Honda). That is why they are talking about a complete overhaul of the PU token system.

Richard

And HAAS is doing this year what Honda should have done and that is give the establishment and any gentleman's agreement the finger and are getting on with unlimited aero testing and developing the car outside the regulations. The PU can't be part of that but I bet if they could have they would have.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Casper

And HAAS is doing this year what Honda should have done and that is give the establishment and any gentleman's agreement the finger and are getting on with unlimited aero testing and developing the car outside the regulations. The PU can't be part of that but I bet if they could have they would have.

I don't put Haas and Honda in the same league and I suspect the other teams don't as well, or at least those that have voices loud enough to be heard. Haas, while having a spot reserved, is not yet an entrant into the championship, so they apparently are not yet subject to resource restrictions for the car design. There has already however been some grumblings about this. Not so much as to what it might do to help Haas, but rather technical partner Ferrari...

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/f1...nd-a-loophole/

It is someone like Manor who should be complaining. Dare I say Haas might even give McLaren a run next year! (how the mighty have fallen)

Also, I wonder if someone big like a Toyota decided to get back in if they would be treated as nicely (or ignored/turn a blind eye) as Haas has been with respect to any loopholes on resource restrictions.

Regardless, I have been saying the testing and development rules are screwed up for awhile. I think this "loophole" is a good thing for any new team.

Richard

[Casper]

We are all well aware of the grumblings re HAAS and its testing using Ferrari's facilities and the FIA going and having a look. I bet if RB or one of the other teams were in a similar situation and it was Ferrari doing the grumbling things might be a bit different. I still am of the opinion that the testing restrictions was an attempt by the established big four to close ranks and stop anyone entering and taking a bit of their pie away from them and if that was not the intention they have shot themselves in the foot well and truly. Sometimes people can be too clever and it bites them long term.

[Pole2Win]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

Alonso has some things to say about the rules.

http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/...ernando-alonso

"Probably more testing or little bit more freedom in terms of developing the car because right now, as you put the car in the first winter test, more or less you keep that position until the end of the year.

"You make progress, everyone makes progress, and that's it - the rules are very tight, so you cannot develop much in terms of engine, which is frozen, and aerodynamics is very restrictive. More or less what you have in the first test is what you have all season so that's making the races very predictable and very boring."

as boring as this season is to me, i feel like much of my boredom would be alleviated by seeing Ferrari and Mclaren pounding out laps until they got their cars sorted.

Alonso has a point, but then all the development in the world didn't help the other teams against Ferrari in 2002 and 2004...

[chillibowl]

i thought 2003 was a cracking season but i see your point. there will always be a risk of one team dominating, every sport runs that risk.

what they dont do is formalize that advantage after the first match of the year by not letting anyone practice.

obviously cost is the issue so full on unlimited testing is financially unsound but surely a better balance should be found.

[Sodemo]

2003 was one of the best seasons of the modern era without doubt. Williams, McLaren and Ferrari all with winning cars.

Shame Montoya couldn't win the championship that year.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Pole2Win

Alonso has a point, but then all the development in the world didn't help the other teams against Ferrari in 2002 and 2004...

Originally Posted by chillibowl

i thought 2003 was a cracking season but i see your point. there will always be a risk of one team dominating, every sport runs that risk.

what they dont do is formalize that advantage after the first match of the year by not letting anyone practice.

obviously cost is the issue so full on unlimited testing is financially unsound but surely a better balance should be found.

Quoted Pole2Win just to ensure context...

So I am perfectly OK with a team dominating, and even having a solution that is just so good it can be hard for the competitors to recover. But I would qualify that by saying "recover within a reasonable amount of time by working hard". Reasonable time being a season or two. The problem with the current system is that as time progresses, more and more of the engine is frozen and there are fewer and fewer tokens. So domination (or really rather being locked into a loosing solution) could potentially last a half decade or more.

And to your point Chillibowl, no practice/testing = no feedback loop. The allowable testing is just before the season with a small amount in the middle and end. The majority is just before the start and the best you can do with that is iron out small issues and nothing else. There is no room for large course corrections or significant experimentation.

We are on the exact same page regarding unlimited testing being unviable, but a better balance could be reached.

Richard