Canadian GP: Four times the charm for Hamilton

[Frederic Schornstein]

The issue (reading Boulier comments) is that Mclaren's engine is not Mclaren's, its Honda's, and the japanese do not seem to let them try to fix something.

I can see the disadvantage respect to the other teams, with one year less of experience, but the fact is that last year no team had the abysmal performance of Mclaren-Honda. Both Caterham and Marussia had by far better reliability, the only team near the amount of retirements was Sauber-Ferrari and 3 or 4 were due to crashes.

Seems to me the honda engine is simply a very slow unreliable brick.

you forgot thursty

 

[the_sigman]

McLaren have a really tight back end of the car, that could have a huge influence in the bad reliablity of the engine. Even though the main problem is the engine, the packaging and the cooling of the car play a critical part in the performance and the reliability of the engine.

 

[Darth]

McLaren have a really tight back end of the car, that could have a huge influence in the bad reliablity of the engine.

Good point. They should probably not have made their car as compact as ther rest
of the grid, they are all almost a year ahead in engine reliability.

 

[Martin Maaskant]

I think the current system is weird in itself or maybe I just dont have enough understanding for engine development. Currently you have to pay for every upgrade with a certain amount of token and you are limited how much you use, but doesnt it mean, that you have to try let's say a turbo upgrade against a possible kers upgrade and make sure you only use the one, that is most efficient in terms of result and cost of token. If you have no tokens, you just throw the upgrade on your engine and it's fine, but with the token you have to make sure, that you only use the most efficient one in terms of token. No idea how that should save money?!

I think Formula E and WEC do a much better job in terms of new technology why can't F1 just focus back on pure racing?! They have supposedly the best 20 drivers in the world and at least half of them wouldnt see the finish without slowing down. Some said, that the racing around 2009 and 2010 (still with Bridgestone) was booring, but I could much more appreciate what the divers were doing back then.

I get the original idea about saving money. No engine development means saving money. However Mercedes/Ferrari/Renault/Honda will develop the engine throughout the season and make it available in 2016. So I see no money saving there. The problem is that F1 has a unsustainable money dividing system and the FIA try's to fix this with engine freezes. I think that F1 should be the pinnacle of motor racing. So no limit on how much fuel you can carry and thus no lifting and coasting anymore. Also allow engine developers to alter the engine throughout the season.

The maximum fuel load of 100 kg's per race is a bad for business. If you don't allow refuelling then by itself teams will make the cars more fuel efficient. Because a thirsty engine means more weight you have to carry around the track. We want to see drivers to take the maximum out of the cars.