TBK-Light.com

McLaren are trying their hardest to be the faceless corporation of motorsport. Yes yes I know, they are a corporation with various interests and stakeholders, I get that, but bloody Nora they sure are turning into a faceless insipid and uninviting team. I no longer have any passion for them like I used to.

Also this.

http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/185 ... er-mclaren

Is he solely talking about a title sponsor here? I kinda get the inference that he is also talking about the performance of the car. That this year might be like last years.

Say what you will about Alonso, but his talent doesn't deserve to have another wasted year at McLaren.

More like....


Someone there clearly did not do it's best by any margins......

I wonder what causes more damage. Not having a titlesponsor or having a lowkey titlesponsor.

I think both devaluate the price. But having none would devaluate it more as now they're getting nothing

Sure, took me 20 seconds with google:

"We have never ever imposed anything on Honda, they do what they want. If they come with an engine like this [big] then we have to accommodate this in our size zero, which would not be a size zero any more." Eric Boullier

http://en.f1i.com/news/43852-honda-not- ... laren.html

Honda have reportedly designed a whole new engine this year, so it'll be fun to see how it goes

_________________
Follow me on Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/135625678@N06/

Yep

_________________

they already have good practice

_________________
Follow me on Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/135625678@N06/

I miss a good engine blowup. Remember the BAR-Honda-years, or McLaren in 2004? That car was literally a driving torch. Merc gave it a go in Malaysia last year, but that was still far off.

From what I heard, Mclaren's chassis and aero were very good and their car was quite competitive where there wasn't long straights. I was told that the car suffered massively on speed traps and accelerations, though.

I read some people guess that Mercedes would get 1.5s slower with a Honda PU on it.

That's what I'm saying. I very much doubt Honda will let Mclaren be competitive

Sadly, I don't think we'll ever see Alonso win another race.

LOL thanks but isn't Eric Boullier known as the McLaren Minister for Information?

Indeed, I've always read that McLaren were the reason for the engine being crap, not Honda.

they can still have crappy performance, but it must be in a good looking car

_________________
Motorsports trend for 2024: climate change ruining races everywhere

And flips, please.

No car looks good unless it's flying through a gravel trap, alongside a concrete wall and metal fence, scattering debris all over the place.

can Jolyon Palmer be able to fill the gap left from Maldonado and Gutierrez to cause that?

_________________
Motorsports trend for 2024: climate change ruining races everywhere

No but Williams have a newbie who's used to doing things like that. I don't think Jolyon's ever flipped a coin, let alone a car.

makes sense. plus he has unlimited money cheat to race until it breaks down or crashes

_________________
Motorsports trend for 2024: climate change ruining races everywhere

Just google it, there's so much on this topic. "McLaren Honda size zero" or "Engine" or whatever.


Honda was too proud to buy engineers from other manufacturers and simply underestimated the challenge (there are direct quotes from Honda about this). I really doubt however, that the chassis is as good as McLaren always claims. Last year they had maybe the fifth or sixth best chassis after Mercedes, Red Bull, Ferrari, Toro Rosso and maybe even Force India.

After the Senna years, Honda has always been crap(they massively struggle everywhere they compete, even in the Motos they hardly makes dominant bikes despite being much bigger than Yamaha, Suzuki.... nevermind Ducati) and putting the blame on Woking is very convinient for them. I'm with Justin Time and am very skeptical that Mclaren can have any blaim on the typically dismal performance of Honda.

I remember having a look at Spa's qualifying, don't know if from 2016 or 2015, and it was staggering to see Red Bull match up the Mercedes on S2(high speed corners) despite running tiny rear wings compared to their rivals. You would think those flat wings would make them decent on S1/S3 but Mercedes had it's advantadge precisely there.

Power is just so much important on light cars such as the F1s. It's quite easy for a decent/good car to look horrible if it's paired with a horrible propeller

That just isn't true.

_________________

Hmmm
Don't know which part you disagree with but, afair, Honda is a much larger company than Yamaha, Ducati(now owned by VAG, but they still won't get huge R&D money due to Ducati's revenue potential), Suzuki. Is it there that you think I'm wrong? I could be, I would have to check their financial reports to be sure.

Or do you disagree because you think that Honda constantly makes dominant bikes? If that's the case, the very fact that Ducati was able to win championships, with Stoner, is shameful enough already. But, also, we just have to see that Yamaha had arguably the best bikes the past couple of years. Marquez won last year but that was certainly without having the outright fastest bike, don't you agree?

Imho, given Honda's size(again, I could be wrong about their financial status), they should have been making dominant bikes quite more often

edit: I suppose you weren't refering to the other cars' series in which Honda compete like Indycar where Honda's aero kit and engine are definitely inferior, or how crappy the Honda is on SuperGT's GT500 and etc