How far behind is McLaren ?

Hard to tell if the McLaren chassis is crap or not. With that engine they have to run with less wing, have power delivery issues and can't do much setup work as it often breaks down in practice sessions.

Probably it's not a terrible chassis as they perform better at slow tracks, but many of their engine problems come from a tight packaging. It's easier to do a good aero if you don't have to worry about cooling so they can't put all the blame in Honda.

 

True Ian, they are a year behind but, last year Ferrari and Merc weren't blowing pieces all over the place in each and every race!!! Even Renault was a lot better...truth is nothing works on that car, Ron says the car is good...sure, that's why the other day jenson said after the race he soiled his pants driving the damn thing, that's how bad the Mccheaters chassis is.....

 

Jensen recently had a session where the car was all over the place and he called it the scariest X laps he's ever driven.

Not all is well in Chassis land...

 

Agreed.

Being down on power, around 50-75 ponies if the rumors are to be believed, *should* "mask" chassis deficiencies, not highlight them! OK, the all important power delivery & harvesting curves may be a little behind, but seems to me their entire package is crap. Not just the PU and not just the chassis.

Again, I'm not about to lose any sleep about it though!

Cheers,
Ian

 

Martin whitmarsh must be a happy boy...

 

Indeed. I wonder where he'll pop up?

With apologies to the purists, this is a repost, but I'm still chuckling;

Cheers,
Ian

 

The latest from Uncle Ron;

No love lost there then......

Doubt EJ will be interviewing Ron any time soon!

Cheers,
Ian
Dennis calls Eddie Jordan a village idiot - Pitpass.com

 

Wasn't that a race? And in that race they had all sorts of braking/regen issues?

 

I think you're correct. It was still a POS in race trim with the wick turned down. (If the tales are true.)

Having said that, seems their "issues" run deeper than that..... I believe they've already used all of their permitted parts, not just subsets like the Renault guys.

Cheers,
Ian

 

I wonder how long Alonso will put up with this fiasco at McMinardi? He only has so many years left and driving around at the back isn't his idea of fun. If the seat at Williams opens up, I wouldn't be surprised if he goes there which at least gives him a chance at a rare victory, but his chance at a third title would be over! However it's better than driving around at the back when the car does finish......

 

I hope a miracle for both drivers.

+1

Testing an engine on a dyno is different than testing it on track with the actual car it's supposed to be mounted on. Also, I agree about the points.

Speaking of points, is the loophole closed for next year? Will they have to homologate their engine by the season opener and no more points available for updates?

 

That's my current understanding; Homologate by, at the latest, the start of the season.

However, given how badly everyone except Merc is hurting, unless the others do some serious catching up later this season, I can see them "relaxing" it again and allowing some token spend during the season. Apparently, that's still on the SWG agenda......

Cheers,
Ian

 

He said that after the Spanish GP, but the car must be much improved now.

 

N F1 car is such an integrated system these days that the conventional distinction between chassis and power unit doesn't really hold.
You can't have a good handling chassis if the PU doesn't do what you expected it to do when you designed the chassis.

 

They all arrived at winter testing with only dyno runs. MB in 2014 Honda in 2015.

Is firing up the engine also different on track vs dyno? People seem to forget that Honda wasn't able to fire up their engine for winter testing.
Honda is a complete mess. I'm sure the chassis is lacking as well even though Ron says it's 2nd only to Mercedes.

 

I agree, and not to split hairs, but I don't think that is a conventional distinction. Even the stability of a basic formula car (like a formula ford/ renault / bmw / etc) requires predictable power delivery or you are going to have an exciting time trying to keep it pointed in the right direction. The engine is actually a stressed part of the chassis and engine output helps to stabilize the rear end.

 

Didn't Mercedes arrive to winter testing with a lot of dyne testing though, more than the others? Didn't Mercedes' engine development start like 18-24 months at least, before the start of the 2014 season?

It is sad that having some inside information on the Mercedes design, Honda couldn't come up with something competitive.

 

People like to talk and blame the unfair rules, tokens, etc. I think the biggest advantage that Mercedes had was that they gave up on the V8 a lot earlier and put most of their resources into the V6 cars.
Renault and Ferrari on other hand were still fighting/developing the V8 cars for the 2012/2013 crown. If you put all of your resources toward the V6 you obviously have a much better chance of getting it right vs the teams that had to split their development.
I don't see how it's MB's fault though. They took the long term risk and now it's paying off.

Honda on the other hand doesn't have any excuses. A big manufacturer with racing experience like Honda doesn't decide to return to F1 6 months in advance. Nobody knows how long Honda has been working on the project or if any Mercedes info leaked. Maybe they just underestimated the work and thought it would be a lot easier with all of their turbo/racing knowledge.

 

I hear you, and understand what you're getting at. But, I'm honestly not convinced...... OK, Uncle Ron was no doubt on the back foot with Merc last season, but even then "he" has to be able to see at least the operational data.

Beyond that, they know way ahead of time the weight, CofG etc of the "lump" they're going to bolt in. Damn, Charlie even spec's the mounting details!

They then design the 'box & rear suspension around that. Obviously, nothing to do with pull/push rod at the front and other logistical problems they may have.

I'd bet cooling requirements are also pretty well spec'd in plenty of time - They'll all push this to the limits for obvious aero reasons and sometimes go too far - Particularly if your initials are AN - Remember the completely agricultural "holes" they were cutting in the Can in testing a couple of years back? "Oops!"......

Sure, the electronics & batteries (in particular) are going to get toasty, but nothing like the heat around the exhausts, and seems they manage that fairly well.

Despite the appearance (of the steering wheel in particular!) of being "rocket science", it really isn't IMO - You've got to steer using the front wheels and get power down using the rears. There's an engine in the middle and a nut that has to fit behind the wheel. Done....... OK, they're hauling round myriad sensors, feedback systems & radios etc, but none of that stuff actually affects the car (beyond weight & distribution thereof).

I spent a little time studying the online docs for the Mclaren standard ECU - It's a pretty smart piece of kit, and for sure they all (not just the PU guys) have access to it's "heart" - It has to be that way so Charlie can see all the data too.

Build something that works. Put the heavy "accessories" as low as possible. Bolt the sucker to the back of the tub, throw a 'box on behind that and go racing!...... Easy!
.
.
He said from the safety of his armchair!

Cheers,
Ian

 

In practice 3 for Silverstone, they told Jensen over the radio (paraphrasing from memory):

"We can go another lap or two. Do you want another lap?"​

Jensen came back on the radio with something along the lines of:

"No! The stability is terrible, it's bouncing around all over the place. The bouncing really is terrible. I'm coming in."​

All the best,
Andrew.

 

I may be wrong, it's been a *long* time since I messed with this stuff, but I'm pretty sure an FF lump isn't a stressed member. Not sure at all on the others.

My question here is, even if it is stressed, how does that "help stabilize the rear end"? If stressed, it better be very damn rigid or the pistons are going to object in a big hurry!

Nothing to do with being a stressed member or not IMO - But I was wrong once!

Cheers,
Ian

 

Given the harvesting and braking that the PU does through the rear wheels, if that's fugged stability might suffer.
This is the sort of knock on effect that I was referring to before.

 

Sure! I think they've *all* struggled in that area since brake by wire came along. Fer sure, they all seem to spend much time whining about it!

But, that stability under braking is but a small part of the laptime, and they've all got knobs, buttons, dials and who knows what else to futz with to try and get 'er balanced...... Diff settings is another; one for corner entry, another for "mid corner" & yet another for exit!

He who dials all that in best, on top of a solid car/suspension design will win.

Despite my "cynicism", it's not easy. Go hire some more S/W jocks and improve your mapping/harvesting strategy......

Cheers,
Ian

 

Theres a lot more going on in an F1 car than we can fathom. Which is why I'm loath to express certainties.