Comments on: Did Honda throw a championship away?

By: Michael M

Michael M — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:36:49 +0000

People don’t seem to be taking into account the lack of continuous development resources at Brawn this year. They started ahead but were caught up by the summer and second fastest car for the second half of the season. With Honda backing they would have been able to continue development throughout the year and maintained any advantage they had. Personally I think they would have been as strong as the McLaren of the late 1990s when Hakkinen was dominant. This car wasn’t built for a Mercedes engine, it was built for the Honda set up. As a result performance was lost in all areas. Yes there may have been more durability issues with the Honda engine over the year but I don’t think they would have made that much of a difference.

Essentially it was a Honda FAIL!

By: Accidental Mick

Accidental Mick — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 10:21:20 +0000

@ Tim

I stand corrected. Thank you – you obviously have a better memory than I.

But I still hold to the point that teams should be given the right to ask for clarification of the rules before race day.

By: Hakki

Hakki — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 03:19:04 +0000

Honda and Toyota are the two most advanced hig-tech car maker in the world. thire technology is far beyond BMW,Renount, even Mercedes not to mention Fiat.

But Honda and Toyota could not succed in F1.
It means modern F1 has nothing to do with car making techinology any more.

Being fast in race trac is valuabule in this environment　age?

Europian people shuld think about the meaning of F1 and motersports. F1’s regulation is less environmental.

By: Hakki

Hakki — Sun, 25 Oct 2009 03:00:17 +0000

From Japanes point of view, Honda’s dicision was correct.
After they pulled out F1, Honda’s image in Japan is improving, because they switch thire promotion cost from F1 to environmental project.
Honda now focus on what is important for Humanbeing’s future. They are not interested in emitting CO2 at track!

The idea that Honda’s withdrawal form F1 was the big mistake was worng, Racing in not so important for ordinaly Japanese people. Honda just choose what people need(environmental techinology)

Honda’s new hybrid car is so popular in Japan now.

By: antonyob

antonyob — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 08:54:11 +0000

I think Honda have been slightly hard done by. Ok the way they operate may not be condusive to winning grand prix’s but they made the decision not to fold the team when there was no buyer and committed to 100 mill of funds despite their name being taken off the car. Thats a big act of philanthropy in anyones book.

Also, lets not forget Hondas engine was as good as there was in F1 in the 80’s so its not that they’ve not got talented engineers it would appear they just cant join everything together as well as German or British run teams.

By: KEV J

KEV J — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 08:34:18 +0000

Simple answer is no, this is a team built from the ashes of Honda, also the honda engine probably would not have been as reliable as the Mercedes engine. This is about a magnificent job done by Brawn, not Honda.

By: Michael K

Michael K — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 07:41:38 +0000

Anyone who has worked with/in a Japanese corporate environment knows that nothing remotely as creative and fast as needed to be successful in F1 can come out of it.
Half of the time the team principals will be occupied with reporting to the mothership and explaining obvious things over and over again. Add to this possible directives from Japan which have to be followed without any consideration to reality.
In order to be successful the Japanese company culture and politics have to be completely removed from the development process and the daily running of the team. When it comes to manufacturing however, this can/should be done in Japan.
Ah yes, I’m in no way a burned child of Japanese corporate culture whatsoever!

By: Aaron

Aaron — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 03:58:04 +0000

forgot to add DD diffusers in design phase according to Whitting and the FIA were illegal…in 09 they became a super clever adaptation of the grey area….

I am not a Mclaren fan but had either they or Renault alone just had this loophole DD on the car it would have been vetoed straight away.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 03:53:06 +0000

wrong completly…RBR went to Charlie Whiting in 08 and asked (stupidly) if this type of design(loophole) was to be allowed.
Had RBR been allowed to design a whole car around the DD design rather than tack it on afterwards Brawn may not have looked as classy.
And this ‘title’ of being super cunning and smart for thinking of the design and no one else did…what utter rubbish.

RBR should have just built it and then did a ‘brawn’ what illegal?!?!? no (my mate is C Whitting he will take care of it)…oh hang on that was what brawn did and williams did,

By: ashes1991

ashes1991 — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:36:23 +0000

*sorry top speed during a race

By: ashes1991

ashes1991 — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:35:52 +0000

Wasnt the Honda engine the fastest engine in a straight line during 2006? And the last 2 seasons although terrible cars they did have very fast race pace

By: Mussolini's Pet Cat

Mussolini's Pet Cat — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 19:02:55 +0000

probably not

By: IDR

IDR — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:20:09 +0000

Hona + Brawn = Success.

By: antonyob

antonyob — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 10:03:21 +0000

I dont think you can underestimate the role of the team principal. Nick Fry was woeful for the years he was in charge- what is he anyway by trade? i think a car plant manager. Its no coincidence that in the year they (BAR) had Dave Richards (what is he doing out of the sport?) they had podiums, if not wins, a plenty.

Williams have still not really recovered from Patrick Head taking a seat upstairs, Ferrari have gone backwards after Todt as have Mclaren after Dennis..Of course there is always 20 reasons given why the lack of form is because of this or that but fundamentally the winning mentality seeps down from the team principal. Get the appointment wrong and you can have all the double diffusers you want, you wont win.

By: Maksutov

Maksutov — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 09:55:38 +0000

Had Honda stayed, and the team stuck to a regular testing programme, its rivals would have known as early as January that the RA109 (not the BGP 001) was quick.

I agree with this statement. Interesting point. Also the Max Mosley benefit makes sense regarding the diffusers.

And another important point was that the Mercedes engine deal was approved by the FIA for the very reason of the strugle:

http://www.autoevolution.com/news/fia-yet-to-approve-brawn-gp-engine-deal-with-mercedes-4807.html

In addition it could be also argued that the mere fact all of the staff of the Honda team were faced with the sack, this gave that extra energy and boost for them to work hard on the development. Everybody was fighting for the survival of their jobs and this really meant that everybody had to give 100%. In other words, change of circumstances and pressure changes the way in which people approach and do their jobs.

So overall: Did Honda throw championship away?

Answ: No.

I think Honda would not have been as competitive as Brown, since many of the circumstances following this transition would not have taken place. So there is very high chance that Honda would have been slow.

By: manatcna

manatcna — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 06:35:38 +0000

That is Honda, pre-brawn of course

By: Achilles

Achilles — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 06:35:20 +0000

I was interested in the point the engineer made that 150mmm was removed from the chassis,OF A NEW CAR!! If they had stayed with Honda engines, would the extra length of the car worked as well aerodynamically? Also the centrepoint of the gearbox being higher, would that raise the centre of gravity? A lot of CFD, and wind-tunnel time would have had to be scrapped, was it just good fortune that made the car so good, and having a season of experience behind them, will the car be even better next season??

By: IDR

IDR — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 05:45:37 +0000

Had Honda stayed, and the team stuck to a regular testing programme, its rivals would have known as early as January that the RA109 (not the BGP 001) was quick.

Interesting view, I never thought about it and you probably are quite right.

On the other hand, I have another theory:

I think Max Mosley benefited Brawn GP because he wanted to use it as a good example of how an small team can be winner in order to support his capped budget proposal at that time, not forgetting he was trying to destroy FOTA unity also.

So, if Honda had not left F1, I’m not sure FIA would have accepted double diffusers.

By: Dane

Dane — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 05:32:23 +0000

Honda = Fail

By: wasiF1

wasiF1 — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:57:32 +0000

Firstly I don’t think Honda engine would have perform better than Mercedes,but the the aerodynamics would have been same so the car would have been good.
Secondly yes if Honda have tested their car from January many teams like Mclaren & Ferrari would have developed double diffuser from the start of the season.
But I am dissapointed about the fact that we loose a Manufacturer from F1,with the exit of BMW next year we are left with Ferrari,Renault,Toyota,& Mclaren.Even both Renault & Toyota still to confirmed.