planetf1.com

It is currently Fri Apr 20, 2018 8:25 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 10:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 12:11 pm
Posts: 49
http://www.planetf1.com/news/alonso-que ... esurgence/

4 seconds ,, yeah right !

On the alone, you can see the bitterness still exists..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 10:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 1907
Alonso did a 1:21.3 last year, and a 1:17.8 this year.

3.5 seconds on a track with a short lap.

You've gone a bit over the top don't you think?

_________________
Top Three Team Champions 2017 (With Jezza13)
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 10:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:45 am
Posts: 659
Location: Australia
Herb wrote:
Alonso did a 1:21.3 last year, and a 1:17.8 this year.

3.5 seconds on a track with a short lap.

You've gone a bit over the top don't you think?


Don't let the truth get in the way of a good story.

_________________
#Keep Fighting Michael


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 10:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 5661
He is not wrong; the gist of it is that one test is not representative of the whole year. And that he feels they are faster with the new power unit.

Hard to argue really.

Plus they did 1:17.8 this year in the supersofts. They did about 1:21.3 in last year's test at this point in Barcelona. So yeah, 4 secs is about right


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 10:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:42 am
Posts: 916
Seems more like convenient truths. What a more relevant question is how many sec per lap are they quicker than end of last year vs how much quicker are other teams than what they had end of last year.
Boulier said 1sec a lap based on data they plugged into their simulator that they received from Renault.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 21660
I don't really see the problem here? He mentioned that he has doubts over Honda's ability to make units reliable which, given the problems they had last year, is not surprising. And let's not forget that Honda apparently brought more than their entire annual allocation to the tests, anyway, so it's not as though they thought they'd be fault free, either.

As for the 4 seconds, he wasn't far off, was he? I don't understand the "disregard whatever comes out of his mouth" comment. What exactly did he say that was so controversial?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 4:16 pm
Posts: 63
Second all the comments on this thread.

Definitely some ALO hating there...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 12:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 2:53 pm
Posts: 1469
Location: Canada
Geez I am disappointed, I thought this thread was about Bernie...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 12:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2017 7:05 pm
Posts: 186
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
Whether good or ill, nothing is to be gained by speaking an opinion about a former equipment (this case engine) supplier. You probably will not hear the team offer such comments.

_________________
Short-time member, Life-Long Fan from 1965 -- More than 550 Grand Prix recorded since 1982 (all but 3), and counting...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 12:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 3:22 pm
Posts: 1780
MB-BOB wrote:
Whether good or ill, nothing is to be gained by speaking an opinion about a former equipment (this case engine) supplier. You probably will not hear the team offer such comments.


Nothing is to be gained from about 99% of what we say, and yet we speak anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 12:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24856
4 seconds is not entirely accurate though, the track has been re-surfaced and is supposed to be quicker plus the tyres are softer this year, he used hypersofts which are over 1 second quicker than the tyres he used in last year's winter test.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 12:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 8:02 am
Posts: 662
Location: India
Track surface is different so obviously times have got faster. Alonso and Mclaren were saying that Honda was the problem and they can do what RBR is doing with Renault. Well, they now have to chance to back it up :-P But I think they won't even come close to top3 teams. Their main rival is going to be Renault and may be 1 or 2 midfield team instead.

_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YM9-GK3MeLI


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 1:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24856
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Track surface is different so obviously times have got faster. Alonso and Mclaren were saying that Honda was the problem and they can do what RBR is doing with Renault. Well, they now have to chance to back it up :-P But I think they won't even come close to top3 teams. Their main rival is going to be Renault and may be 1 or 2 midfield team instead.

Indeed and we might be able to play the percentage game, how much of it was down to Honda and how much of it was down to McLaren themselves?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Last edited by pokerman on Wed Mar 14, 2018 1:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 1:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2014 10:32 pm
Posts: 636
jimmyj wrote:
Geez I am disappointed, I thought this thread was about Bernie...


That makes 2 of us :thumbdown:

_________________
PF1 pick 10 2016: 7th (1 win, 4 podiums), 2017: 17th (3 podiums)
Awards: Sergio perez trophy & Podium specialist
PF1 pick 3 2015: constructors 2nd, singles 5th
Autosport Gp 2016/17 - 5th
F1 Oracle 2017: 2nd (6 wins), 2016:5th (2wins)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 1:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 5661
pokerman wrote:
4 seconds is not entirely accurate though, the track has been re-surfaced and is supposed to be quicker plus the tyres are softer this year, he used hypersofts which are over 1 second quicker than the tyres he used in last year's winter test.


It is factual though, either down to Renault or the track/tyre combo, they are about 4 secs quicker and Alonso doesn't say it is only down to Renault. Only that they are happy with this power unit and that's what matters. It sounds a bit harsh for Honda the way Alonso portrayed it, but they only have to prove him wrong on track.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 1:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24856
Siao7 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
4 seconds is not entirely accurate though, the track has been re-surfaced and is supposed to be quicker plus the tyres are softer this year, he used hypersofts which are over 1 second quicker than the tyres he used in last year's winter test.


It is factual though, either down to Renault or the track/tyre combo, they are about 4 secs quicker and Alonso doesn't say it is only down to Renault. Only that they are happy with this power unit and that's what matters. It sounds a bit harsh for Honda the way Alonso portrayed it, but they only have to prove him wrong on track.

It's factual without context, STR by going from Renault engines to Honda engines are 1.5 seconds quicker this year and only half a second slower than McLaren.

Honda are not the only ones with something to prove this year.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 1:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 5629
Location: Mumbai, India
pokerman wrote:
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Track surface is different so obviously times have got faster. Alonso and Mclaren were saying that Honda was the problem and they can do what RBR is doing with Renault. Well, they now have to chance to back it up :-P But I think they won't even come close to top3 teams. Their main rival is going to be Renault and may be 1 or 2 midfield team instead.

Indeed and we might be able to play the percentage game, how much of it was down to Honda and how much of it was down to McLaren themselves?


Either it's a ridiculous coincidence that when Honda & McLaren went their separate ways, the 4th year Honda found all that was missing & became so reliable OR Honda were thwarted in their progress because of McLaren!

I read an article where Honda has more freedom working with Toro Rosso speaks volumes by itself.

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4084
UnlikeUday wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Track surface is different so obviously times have got faster. Alonso and Mclaren were saying that Honda was the problem and they can do what RBR is doing with Renault. Well, they now have to chance to back it up :-P But I think they won't even come close to top3 teams. Their main rival is going to be Renault and may be 1 or 2 midfield team instead.

Indeed and we might be able to play the percentage game, how much of it was down to Honda and how much of it was down to McLaren themselves?


Either it's a ridiculous coincidence that when Honda & McLaren went their separate ways, the 4th year Honda found all that was missing & became so reliable OR Honda were thwarted in their progress because of McLaren!

I read an article where Honda has more freedom working with Toro Rosso speaks volumes by itself.


Doesn't really tally with McLaren-Honda being able to do over 300 laps in 2 testing days in November though. There was no issue reliability wise the last time it was in the back of a McLaren so it's not really sudden or unexpected that Honda can run reliably in testing no matter how overboard the experts went over STR's recent test.

They were also pretty reliable in the races come season end too. It was just the weakest overall and down on power by that point but it was a million miles away from the unit that could barely run last winter testing and to which I assume Alonso is referencing with 4s improvement after that tweet F1 put out about McLaren making the biggest gains the other day there and quoting the 3.5 seconds improvement.

And l echo the comments about the thread. Over reaction much?

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 8:02 am
Posts: 662
Location: India
pokerman wrote:
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Track surface is different so obviously times have got faster. Alonso and Mclaren were saying that Honda was the problem and they can do what RBR is doing with Renault. Well, they now have to chance to back it up :-P But I think they won't even come close to top3 teams. Their main rival is going to be Renault and may be 1 or 2 midfield team instead.

Indeed and we might be able to play the percentage game, how much of it was down to Honda and how much of it was down to McLaren themselves?


Mclaren are arrogant and talked big last year :uhoh: It is always nice to be modest or little humble. Unfortunately for them Renault is improving so they might end up as 5th best team. If they have a bad weekend they may not even score points :twisted:

_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YM9-GK3MeLI


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3077
This is going to be a fun season with Mclaren, Honda, Toro Rosso. Gosh I can hardly wait. And Redbull is paying special attention too. LOL


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11031
pokerman wrote:
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Track surface is different so obviously times have got faster. Alonso and Mclaren were saying that Honda was the problem and they can do what RBR is doing with Renault. Well, they now have to chance to back it up :-P But I think they won't even come close to top3 teams. Their main rival is going to be Renault and may be 1 or 2 midfield team instead.

Indeed and we might be able to play the percentage game, how much of it was down to Honda and how much of it was down to McLaren themselves?


Stop rewriting history. It was almost all down to Honda. Even if one would claim "size 0" put unreasonable demands on Honda, that could be countered easily with a few points:
1. If someone asks you to deliver something you can't, you say so.
2. If you agree to deliver something, then test it properly. That includes full-scale testing instead of 1-cylinder test setup benching, it also includes putting the whole damn thing together front to end instead of having to put two parts together at the first test then see it doesn't even fit. Stuff like that.
3. Has anyone looked at the backends of the RBR? Merc? Not exactly fatties are they? So were McLaren's demands really that unreasonable?
4. Size 0 was discarded for the 2017 season anyway.

As Lotus49 states, they ran hundres of laps during the AD test as well, in a McLaren. So I've come to agree that the current perceived reliability in the STR is not that special when you consider the AD test.

We'll see in Australia how McLaren and STR perform.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24856
UnlikeUday wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Track surface is different so obviously times have got faster. Alonso and Mclaren were saying that Honda was the problem and they can do what RBR is doing with Renault. Well, they now have to chance to back it up :-P But I think they won't even come close to top3 teams. Their main rival is going to be Renault and may be 1 or 2 midfield team instead.

Indeed and we might be able to play the percentage game, how much of it was down to Honda and how much of it was down to McLaren themselves?


Either it's a ridiculous coincidence that when Honda & McLaren went their separate ways, the 4th year Honda found all that was missing & became so reliable OR Honda were thwarted in their progress because of McLaren!

I read an article where Honda has more freedom working with Toro Rosso speaks volumes by itself.

Indeed McLaren very much dictated the design architecture of the Honda engine so as not to compromise their car, from the offset Honda had to design 3 engines before McLaren were happy, it didn't seem a case of Honda being able to optomise the engine they wanted to build.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 3:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24856
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Track surface is different so obviously times have got faster. Alonso and Mclaren were saying that Honda was the problem and they can do what RBR is doing with Renault. Well, they now have to chance to back it up :-P But I think they won't even come close to top3 teams. Their main rival is going to be Renault and may be 1 or 2 midfield team instead.

Indeed and we might be able to play the percentage game, how much of it was down to Honda and how much of it was down to McLaren themselves?


Stop rewriting history. It was almost all down to Honda. Even if one would claim "size 0" put unreasonable demands on Honda, that could be countered easily with a few points:
1. If someone asks you to deliver something you can't, you say so.
2. If you agree to deliver something, then test it properly. That includes full-scale testing instead of 1-cylinder test setup benching, it also includes putting the whole damn thing together front to end instead of having to put two parts together at the first test then see it doesn't even fit. Stuff like that.
3. Has anyone looked at the backends of the RBR? Merc? Not exactly fatties are they? So were McLaren's demands really that unreasonable?
4. Size 0 was discarded for the 2017 season anyway.

As Lotus49 states, they ran hundres of laps during the AD test as well, in a McLaren. So I've come to agree that the current perceived reliability in the STR is not that special when you consider the AD test.

We'll see in Australia how McLaren and STR perform.

So you are basically putting it close to 100% on Honda for McLaren not winning races and gaining podiums these past 3 years?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 3:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4084
pokerman wrote:
UnlikeUday wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Track surface is different so obviously times have got faster. Alonso and Mclaren were saying that Honda was the problem and they can do what RBR is doing with Renault. Well, they now have to chance to back it up :-P But I think they won't even come close to top3 teams. Their main rival is going to be Renault and may be 1 or 2 midfield team instead.

Indeed and we might be able to play the percentage game, how much of it was down to Honda and how much of it was down to McLaren themselves?


Either it's a ridiculous coincidence that when Honda & McLaren went their separate ways, the 4th year Honda found all that was missing & became so reliable OR Honda were thwarted in their progress because of McLaren!

I read an article where Honda has more freedom working with Toro Rosso speaks volumes by itself.

Indeed McLaren very much dictated the design architecture of the Honda engine so as not to compromise their car, from the offset Honda had to design 3 engines before McLaren were happy, it didn't seem a case of Honda being able to optomise the engine they wanted to build.


It's called being a works partner. If Honda want to make 100% of the decisions then enter as Honda or at least with a small team not used to works status.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 3:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:07 am
Posts: 11031
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Track surface is different so obviously times have got faster. Alonso and Mclaren were saying that Honda was the problem and they can do what RBR is doing with Renault. Well, they now have to chance to back it up :-P But I think they won't even come close to top3 teams. Their main rival is going to be Renault and may be 1 or 2 midfield team instead.

Indeed and we might be able to play the percentage game, how much of it was down to Honda and how much of it was down to McLaren themselves?


Stop rewriting history. It was almost all down to Honda. Even if one would claim "size 0" put unreasonable demands on Honda, that could be countered easily with a few points:
1. If someone asks you to deliver something you can't, you say so.
2. If you agree to deliver something, then test it properly. That includes full-scale testing instead of 1-cylinder test setup benching, it also includes putting the whole damn thing together front to end instead of having to put two parts together at the first test then see it doesn't even fit. Stuff like that.
3. Has anyone looked at the backends of the RBR? Merc? Not exactly fatties are they? So were McLaren's demands really that unreasonable?
4. Size 0 was discarded for the 2017 season anyway.

As Lotus49 states, they ran hundres of laps during the AD test as well, in a McLaren. So I've come to agree that the current perceived reliability in the STR is not that special when you consider the AD test.

We'll see in Australia how McLaren and STR perform.

So you are basically putting it close to 100% on Honda for McLaren not winning races and gaining podiums these past 3 years?


Well, yes. As I said, the only thing you could say that contributed to their failings were the size 0 demands, but then those four points above are how I think about that.
Ultimately, Honda have final responsibility over their product, the PU, and it was woefully bad for 3 years in a row. That is on them.

_________________
Go Vandoorne - Verstappen - Vettel!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 3:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 5661
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Track surface is different so obviously times have got faster. Alonso and Mclaren were saying that Honda was the problem and they can do what RBR is doing with Renault. Well, they now have to chance to back it up :-P But I think they won't even come close to top3 teams. Their main rival is going to be Renault and may be 1 or 2 midfield team instead.

Indeed and we might be able to play the percentage game, how much of it was down to Honda and how much of it was down to McLaren themselves?


Stop rewriting history. It was almost all down to Honda. Even if one would claim "size 0" put unreasonable demands on Honda, that could be countered easily with a few points:
1. If someone asks you to deliver something you can't, you say so.
2. If you agree to deliver something, then test it properly. That includes full-scale testing instead of 1-cylinder test setup benching, it also includes putting the whole damn thing together front to end instead of having to put two parts together at the first test then see it doesn't even fit. Stuff like that.
3. Has anyone looked at the backends of the RBR? Merc? Not exactly fatties are they? So were McLaren's demands really that unreasonable?
4. Size 0 was discarded for the 2017 season anyway.

As Lotus49 states, they ran hundres of laps during the AD test as well, in a McLaren. So I've come to agree that the current perceived reliability in the STR is not that special when you consider the AD test.

We'll see in Australia how McLaren and STR perform.

So you are basically putting it close to 100% on Honda for McLaren not winning races and gaining podiums these past 3 years?


Well, yes. As I said, the only thing you could say that contributed to their failings were the size 0 demands, but then those four points above are how I think about that.
Ultimately, Honda have final responsibility over their product, the PU, and it was woefully bad for 3 years in a row. That is on them.


Didn't Macca also want to send engineers to help in Japan, but Honda said no as their face-saving mode kicked in? They hold the biggest share of the failed partnership in my opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 4:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:57 am
Posts: 926
Location: Brazil
I don't like Alonso at all but I haven't got a clue about how the existence of this thread is necessary.

_________________
Image

"Ask any racer, any real racer... It don't matter if you win by an inch or a mile. Winning is winning." (Dominic Toretto, "The Fast and The Furious")


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 4:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24856
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Track surface is different so obviously times have got faster. Alonso and Mclaren were saying that Honda was the problem and they can do what RBR is doing with Renault. Well, they now have to chance to back it up :-P But I think they won't even come close to top3 teams. Their main rival is going to be Renault and may be 1 or 2 midfield team instead.

Indeed and we might be able to play the percentage game, how much of it was down to Honda and how much of it was down to McLaren themselves?


Stop rewriting history. It was almost all down to Honda. Even if one would claim "size 0" put unreasonable demands on Honda, that could be countered easily with a few points:
1. If someone asks you to deliver something you can't, you say so.
2. If you agree to deliver something, then test it properly. That includes full-scale testing instead of 1-cylinder test setup benching, it also includes putting the whole damn thing together front to end instead of having to put two parts together at the first test then see it doesn't even fit. Stuff like that.
3. Has anyone looked at the backends of the RBR? Merc? Not exactly fatties are they? So were McLaren's demands really that unreasonable?
4. Size 0 was discarded for the 2017 season anyway.

As Lotus49 states, they ran hundres of laps during the AD test as well, in a McLaren. So I've come to agree that the current perceived reliability in the STR is not that special when you consider the AD test.

We'll see in Australia how McLaren and STR perform.

So you are basically putting it close to 100% on Honda for McLaren not winning races and gaining podiums these past 3 years?


Well, yes. As I said, the only thing you could say that contributed to their failings were the size 0 demands, but then those four points above are how I think about that.
Ultimately, Honda have final responsibility over their product, the PU, and it was woefully bad for 3 years in a row. That is on them.

Well that being the case going forward then McLaren should be able to do what Ferrari and Red Bull have done these few years and win races and get podiums, however none of the pundits are saying that McLaren will be able to compete with the top 3 teams anytime soon and they were not able to do that 2 years previous to Honda joining either, so I'm basically calling out McLaren here for any claims that Honda were 100% at fault for McLaren not being able to compete at the pointy end.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 4:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 1907
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Indeed and we might be able to play the percentage game, how much of it was down to Honda and how much of it was down to McLaren themselves?


Stop rewriting history. It was almost all down to Honda. Even if one would claim "size 0" put unreasonable demands on Honda, that could be countered easily with a few points:
1. If someone asks you to deliver something you can't, you say so.
2. If you agree to deliver something, then test it properly. That includes full-scale testing instead of 1-cylinder test setup benching, it also includes putting the whole damn thing together front to end instead of having to put two parts together at the first test then see it doesn't even fit. Stuff like that.
3. Has anyone looked at the backends of the RBR? Merc? Not exactly fatties are they? So were McLaren's demands really that unreasonable?
4. Size 0 was discarded for the 2017 season anyway.

As Lotus49 states, they ran hundres of laps during the AD test as well, in a McLaren. So I've come to agree that the current perceived reliability in the STR is not that special when you consider the AD test.

We'll see in Australia how McLaren and STR perform.

So you are basically putting it close to 100% on Honda for McLaren not winning races and gaining podiums these past 3 years?


Well, yes. As I said, the only thing you could say that contributed to their failings were the size 0 demands, but then those four points above are how I think about that.
Ultimately, Honda have final responsibility over their product, the PU, and it was woefully bad for 3 years in a row. That is on them.

Well that being the case going forward then McLaren should be able to do what Ferrari and Red Bull have done these few years and win races and get podiums, however none of the pundits are saying that McLaren will be able to compete with the top 3 teams anytime soon and they were not able to do that 2 years previous to Honda joining either, so I'm basically calling out McLaren here for any claims that Honda were 100% at fault for McLaren not being able to compete at the pointy end.


Last year's performance has nothing to do with what happens this year. It wouldn't be the first time McLaren had issues the year after developing a great car.

_________________
Top Three Team Champions 2017 (With Jezza13)
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 5:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12936
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Track surface is different so obviously times have got faster. Alonso and Mclaren were saying that Honda was the problem and they can do what RBR is doing with Renault. Well, they now have to chance to back it up :-P But I think they won't even come close to top3 teams. Their main rival is going to be Renault and may be 1 or 2 midfield team instead.

Indeed and we might be able to play the percentage game, how much of it was down to Honda and how much of it was down to McLaren themselves?


Stop rewriting history. It was almost all down to Honda. Even if one would claim "size 0" put unreasonable demands on Honda, that could be countered easily with a few points:
1. If someone asks you to deliver something you can't, you say so.
2. If you agree to deliver something, then test it properly. That includes full-scale testing instead of 1-cylinder test setup benching, it also includes putting the whole damn thing together front to end instead of having to put two parts together at the first test then see it doesn't even fit. Stuff like that.
3. Has anyone looked at the backends of the RBR? Merc? Not exactly fatties are they? So were McLaren's demands really that unreasonable?
4. Size 0 was discarded for the 2017 season anyway.

As Lotus49 states, they ran hundres of laps during the AD test as well, in a McLaren. So I've come to agree that the current perceived reliability in the STR is not that special when you consider the AD test.

We'll see in Australia how McLaren and STR perform.

So you are basically putting it close to 100% on Honda for McLaren not winning races and gaining podiums these past 3 years?


With a Honda engine for the last three years it would have been impossible to score a podium in normal circumstances. So yes. That's all on Honda. Do you honestly believe Mclaren wouldn't have podiumed in the last three years with a Renault engine?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 7:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:42 am
Posts: 916
Siao7 wrote:

Didn't Macca also want to send engineers to help in Japan, but Honda said no as their face-saving mode kicked in? They hold the biggest share of the failed partnership in my opinion.


That's complete lies that Honda refused outside help. They worked with Simon F1 engine consultants in 2016 and got rid of them last year after their disastrous start to 2017.
https://www.google.co.za/url?sa=t&sourc ... o6&ampcf=1
And they have been working with ilmor since last year
https://www.google.co.za/url?sa=t&sourc ... DlD_QS9tHJ


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 8:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24856
Herb wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
Stop rewriting history. It was almost all down to Honda. Even if one would claim "size 0" put unreasonable demands on Honda, that could be countered easily with a few points:
1. If someone asks you to deliver something you can't, you say so.
2. If you agree to deliver something, then test it properly. That includes full-scale testing instead of 1-cylinder test setup benching, it also includes putting the whole damn thing together front to end instead of having to put two parts together at the first test then see it doesn't even fit. Stuff like that.
3. Has anyone looked at the backends of the RBR? Merc? Not exactly fatties are they? So were McLaren's demands really that unreasonable?
4. Size 0 was discarded for the 2017 season anyway.

As Lotus49 states, they ran hundres of laps during the AD test as well, in a McLaren. So I've come to agree that the current perceived reliability in the STR is not that special when you consider the AD test.

We'll see in Australia how McLaren and STR perform.

So you are basically putting it close to 100% on Honda for McLaren not winning races and gaining podiums these past 3 years?


Well, yes. As I said, the only thing you could say that contributed to their failings were the size 0 demands, but then those four points above are how I think about that.
Ultimately, Honda have final responsibility over their product, the PU, and it was woefully bad for 3 years in a row. That is on them.

Well that being the case going forward then McLaren should be able to do what Ferrari and Red Bull have done these few years and win races and get podiums, however none of the pundits are saying that McLaren will be able to compete with the top 3 teams anytime soon and they were not able to do that 2 years previous to Honda joining either, so I'm basically calling out McLaren here for any claims that Honda were 100% at fault for McLaren not being able to compete at the pointy end.


Last year's performance has nothing to do with what happens this year. It wouldn't be the first time McLaren had issues the year after developing a great car.

Was the McLaren a great car?

It supposedly was great around the corners but terrible on the straights which was put firmly at the feet of Honda, strange how the STR Honda seems so much faster on the straights.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Last edited by pokerman on Wed Mar 14, 2018 8:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 8:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24856
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Track surface is different so obviously times have got faster. Alonso and Mclaren were saying that Honda was the problem and they can do what RBR is doing with Renault. Well, they now have to chance to back it up :-P But I think they won't even come close to top3 teams. Their main rival is going to be Renault and may be 1 or 2 midfield team instead.

Indeed and we might be able to play the percentage game, how much of it was down to Honda and how much of it was down to McLaren themselves?


Stop rewriting history. It was almost all down to Honda. Even if one would claim "size 0" put unreasonable demands on Honda, that could be countered easily with a few points:
1. If someone asks you to deliver something you can't, you say so.
2. If you agree to deliver something, then test it properly. That includes full-scale testing instead of 1-cylinder test setup benching, it also includes putting the whole damn thing together front to end instead of having to put two parts together at the first test then see it doesn't even fit. Stuff like that.
3. Has anyone looked at the backends of the RBR? Merc? Not exactly fatties are they? So were McLaren's demands really that unreasonable?
4. Size 0 was discarded for the 2017 season anyway.

As Lotus49 states, they ran hundres of laps during the AD test as well, in a McLaren. So I've come to agree that the current perceived reliability in the STR is not that special when you consider the AD test.

We'll see in Australia how McLaren and STR perform.

So you are basically putting it close to 100% on Honda for McLaren not winning races and gaining podiums these past 3 years?


With a Honda engine for the last three years it would have been impossible to score a podium in normal circumstances. So yes. That's all on Honda. Do you honestly believe Mclaren wouldn't have podiumed in the last three years with a Renault engine?

I don't believe that getting an occasional podium means you are a top team, these are the claims of McLaren, so like Ferrari and Red Bull would they have got wins and many podiums?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 8:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12936
pokerman wrote:
I don't believe that getting an occasional podium means you are a top team, these are the claims of McLaren, so like Ferrari and Red Bull would they have got wins and many podiums?


That's not what I am claiming and you know it. The best car on the grid wouldn't score podiums in normal circumstances with Honda. That puts the fault for not scoring podiums 100% on Honda.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 8:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 24856
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I don't believe that getting an occasional podium means you are a top team, these are the claims of McLaren, so like Ferrari and Red Bull would they have got wins and many podiums?


That's not what I am claiming and you know it. The best car on the grid wouldn't score podiums in normal circumstances with Honda. That puts the fault for not scoring podiums 100% on Honda.

So McLaren get a free pass with claims of having a top car these past few years, the Renault engine was supposed to be some kind of golden bullet but we seem to be talking about them competing against Renault rather than Red Bull.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 12th

Wins: Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: 2nd Canada 2015, 3rd Monza 2016, Hungary 2016 and Barcelona 2015


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 9:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 1907
pokerman wrote:
Herb wrote:
pokerman wrote:
mds wrote:
pokerman wrote:
So you are basically putting it close to 100% on Honda for McLaren not winning races and gaining podiums these past 3 years?


Well, yes. As I said, the only thing you could say that contributed to their failings were the size 0 demands, but then those four points above are how I think about that.
Ultimately, Honda have final responsibility over their product, the PU, and it was woefully bad for 3 years in a row. That is on them.

Well that being the case going forward then McLaren should be able to do what Ferrari and Red Bull have done these few years and win races and get podiums, however none of the pundits are saying that McLaren will be able to compete with the top 3 teams anytime soon and they were not able to do that 2 years previous to Honda joining either, so I'm basically calling out McLaren here for any claims that Honda were 100% at fault for McLaren not being able to compete at the pointy end.


Last year's performance has nothing to do with what happens this year. It wouldn't be the first time McLaren had issues the year after developing a great car.

Was the McLaren a great car?

It supposedly was great around the corners but terrible on the straights which was put firmly at the feet of Honda, strange how the STR Honda seems so much faster on the straights.


From every pundit I read last year - yes, it was a great car. Just didn't have the grunt to get down the straights.

This year's STR has nothing to do with McLaren.

_________________
Top Three Team Champions 2017 (With Jezza13)
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 9:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 12936
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I don't believe that getting an occasional podium means you are a top team, these are the claims of McLaren, so like Ferrari and Red Bull would they have got wins and many podiums?


That's not what I am claiming and you know it. The best car on the grid wouldn't score podiums in normal circumstances with Honda. That puts the fault for not scoring podiums 100% on Honda.

So McLaren get a free pass with claims of having a top car these past few years, the Renault engine was supposed to be some kind of golden bullet but we seem to be talking about them competing against Renault rather than Red Bull.


Who is giving them a free pass? That's the second time in two posts you have made a strawman.

Mclaren might have had a great car. I don't know. What I do know is that them having an average car this year doesn't mean they didn't have a great car in 2016 or 2017. If FI have a bad year this year that doesn't alter their good year from last year.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 9:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:57 am
Posts: 926
Location: Brazil
pokerman wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I don't believe that getting an occasional podium means you are a top team, these are the claims of McLaren, so like Ferrari and Red Bull would they have got wins and many podiums?


That's not what I am claiming and you know it. The best car on the grid wouldn't score podiums in normal circumstances with Honda. That puts the fault for not scoring podiums 100% on Honda.

So McLaren get a free pass with claims of having a top car these past few years, the Renault engine was supposed to be some kind of golden bullet but we seem to be talking about them competing against Renault rather than Red Bull.


It was a good chassis. It carried Alonso to a good result in Spain. Not all car obviously, Alonso did drive the heck out of it, but machinery was very important, especially on that track.

_________________
Image

"Ask any racer, any real racer... It don't matter if you win by an inch or a mile. Winning is winning." (Dominic Toretto, "The Fast and The Furious")


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 14, 2018 10:40 pm 
Online

Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 9:21 am
Posts: 3254
Mayhem wrote:
jimmyj wrote:
Geez I am disappointed, I thought this thread was about Bernie...


That makes 2 of us :thumbdown:

3 :(

Let me get this straight.

Alonso said McLaren were 4 seconds faster this year than last year. OK, sure, the logic is a bit of a fiddle, but it's true. So telling the truth is now a reason to "disregard what ever comes out of his mouth".

There then follows much confusion as to the point of the thread, as well as people insisting they know better than the experts (fair enough, nothing new there) and insisting misinformation is true.

I'm just going to lock this before my headache gets any worse...

_________________
AlienTurnedHuman wrote:
Eurytus probably thought he was God. At least until he was banned. Which means if he was God, it makes me very scared of PF1-Mod.

Don't forget the games you're competing in. Someone has to get one over on us!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: owenmahamilton, P-F1 Mod 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