It does seem a bit weird that Honda have it so wrong again. They know how powerful their 2016 PU was and surely they would have data predicting how much extra the Merc has. So you would think they would have tried to build a PU that was 5-10% better than Merc to compensate for Mercs 2017 development. OK so they probably wouldn't achieve it but if they sort out reliability they should have decent power. Can't believe Honda can still get things so wrong. I just hope the thing holding them back reliability wise is restricting power in a big way. Fix that and away they go, well hopefully.
Read somewhere that vibrations are Hondas big issue. I hope the story isn't true as that is exactly the kind of fundamental problem you'd discover with dyno testing.
I read same thing. They must have vibration data from previous years. So why didn't they test for vibration on a dyno rig? Seems another rookie mistake if true!
I guess that depends on whether the vibration issue is the engine creating vibrations, or vibrations through the chassis effecting the engine. In the former case you'd hope you could see it on a dyno, but the latter might not be identified until you run the car. I don't think Honda would have quite let Mclaren throw them under the bus like they have if some fault could be ascribed to the car.
Probably so he can get a bit of grip for when he turns the McHonda into a Flintstones car and reverts to foot power Might be his only chance of getting to the finish!!
Interesting. I thought chassis sharing between teams was not allowed? Looks like Ferrari and Haas has exactly the same dimensions, the rake was the same last year as well! Merc seem to have gone much longer than the rest that might make Monacco interesting.
Great write up from James Allen. I tried to copy and paste the text but it seems to be corrupting? https://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2017...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
For 2016, Haas were as close to a Ferrari customer team as was allowed, using as many parts as they possibly could from them. It would make sense to have the same wheelbase too I suppose so that the packaging solutions could be identical. Perhaps it also helps with wind tunnel correlation too? I don't know how those rules have been tightened/changed for 2017, but I suppose it isn't a great surprise that they went in the same direction.
Alonso not doing the test? That's a rookie and a total unknown trying to work on the McLaren - very strange.
Ben Edwards was commenting on this during the race that Sirotkin was due to do FP1 in Russia, which is no surprise as he has done FP1 in Russia before. More telling was there belief that if Palmer does not up his game then Sirotkin has the funding to take his place. Not really if he would fare much better as his junior record is not as good as Palmer's. If the Alonso rumours are true for 2018, and unless he can bring a lot more money to the team, I can't see Palmer being replaced just yet as Renault aren't going to gain much.
McLaren are looking at other engine options and there is a working version of the W12 around..............
At this point I actually don't think Honda have an actual clue what they are doing or where they are going with it. They are using McLaren like some sort of experiment and it's no longer acceptable 3 years in to not get a basic level of PU up and running. If they were breaking down on the way to a surge in horsepower and performance I could forgive them, but there's is just no sign of any of that. It is awful on every level.
I wonder if Mclaren built their car this year with an eye on making quicker engine changes? They're doing them so frequently, shaving an hour off an engine change would make a big difference.