GPWizard F1 Forum
F1 News & Discussions => General F1 Discussion => Topic started by: Monty on June 01, 2017, 09:46:20 AM
-
I cannot remember a time when a manufacturer has spread themselves so thin and it seems to be too much for Honda.
Their F1 involvement costs millions and brings them nothing but embarassment. They have now had a marketing disaster at the Indy 500 (but I think they are having some success in other US series??). They have not made any significant impact in World Touring Cars. Their World Superbike results are terrible and they are mid-pack in British Superbikes. At least they are getting good MotoGP results but still not outstanding.
Then there is their commercial record. Honda cars represent about 2% of the British car sales market but they do not have a single model in any of the top ten sales ratings. In the US I believe the Civic and the Accord are high in the top ten ratings but sales are dropping. In the Motorcycle world Honda do have models in some of the top ten ratings; in fact they often have two or three models in the top ten, but none of them are the prestigious and profitable Sports Bike categories.
Involvement in motor sport is normally justified by a manufacturer claiming that it helps their R&D which can roll out to road vehicles but we all know it is really about marketing.
Honda's marketing all seems to be negative!
Will they use outside help and spend the necessary development budgets to become successful or will they just pull out?
-
They have now had a marketing disaster at the Indy 500
They won the Indy 500. That makes for pretty good advert copy.
-
There is always one smart arse! :P
I know they won the Indy 500 but in the context of F1 the marketing was all about Alonso, and his Honda didn't finish the race!
So I stand corrected and modify my comment to:-
In the context of F1, Honda's marketing all seems to be negative!
-
Remember Toyota?
Big money brand that came into F1 and I think everyone expected good things from them but they were not able to make the grade and disappeared probably to never be seen in F1 again.
So can Honda do it?
I wouldn't put money on it!
If they do not turn it around in 2018 it'll be farewell!
-
Remember Toyota?
Big money brand that came into F1 and I think everyone expected good things from them but they were not able to make the grade and disappeared probably to never be seen in F1 again.
So can Honda do it?
I wouldn't put money on it!
If they do not turn it around in 2018 it'll be farewell!
I've posted before about Honda's goals in F1, and racing in general.
Most car companies are in for the 'win on Sunday, sell on Monday' philosophy. However, most consumers are well informed, and quite frankly I wouldn't trust the judgement of anyone who told me they bought a Chevy Silverado because of what happened at Daytona.
Surely Honda knows that too. They've used their racing programmes as internal 'halo' jobs: do a good job designing valve covers, and we'll let you design valve covers for race cars. Is the guy who makes valve covers for a Honda Civic going to make the best valve covers in F1? Probably not. Is the guy who gets a chance to make F1 valve covers going to make the best valve covers in compact sedans? There's a pretty good chance.
So Honda can afford to lose races as long as they have a pipeline of engineers who are willing to give their all for a chance to work on the F1 programme. Honda may never match Ilmor in building race winning engines, but Ilmor will never match Honda in sheer volume of engines sold.
-
Remember Toyota?
Big money brand that came into F1 and I think everyone expected good things from them but they were not able to make the grade and disappeared probably to never be seen in F1 again.
So can Honda do it?
I wouldn't put money on it!
If they do not turn it around in 2018 it'll be farewell!
Ooh, didn't Honda do something similar (if on smaller scale) at about the same time as Toyota?
-
10 years, first as BAR Honda and then just Honda. 1 win in that entire time. They were best know for having their junior team, Super Aguri, out perform them on a shoestring budget with year old, hand me down equipment.
-
There is always one smart arse! :P
I know they won the Indy 500 but in the context of F1 the marketing was all about Alonso, and his Honda didn't finish the race!
So I stand corrected and modify my comment to:-
In the context of F1, Honda's marketing all seems to be negative!
F1 20 car-usually 2 Honda powerdnf
Indy 33 cars-9 Honda power dnf
-
Honda have not turned up to play second fiddle the question now is how long will they stay? 2018 has to be a good year for them as if it continues as it is we'll 4 DNF's not 2 and they'll be on their way.
-
If a company like Honda can't be competitive or even finish races if F1, could it be that the engine regulations are the problem? At the moment if you aren't running the latest Merc or Ferrari, then you are fighting for crumbs.
Bring back open development and no more engine penalties. Stop handcuffing the engineers.
-
If a company like Honda can't be competitive or even finish races if F1, could it be that the engine regulations are the problem? At the moment if you aren't running the latest Merc or Ferrari, then you are fighting for crumbs.
Bring back open development and no more engine penalties. Stop handcuffing the engineers.
Well said that man, totally agree
-
Bring back open development
That's essentially what they have done for this year. :confused:
Sure you've still got grid penalties but Honda and Renault should have turned up with better engines at the start of the year. It's not like they weren't given notice that the regs were being lifted.
Ferrari have somehow got there heads around the issue, both with engine and chassis. If they can do it so can the others with the big budgets. F1 has always seen one team dominate for a season, 2 or even 3, then they get pegged back by another - and so on and so forth. This year is another tipping point, maybe in one or 2 years it will be Renault or Honda's time in the sunshine.
To me that's what keeps F1 refreshed, different teams bringing forward a faster car/engine than the rest. Sure the big budget works, or pseudo works, teams dominate but it moves around.
Weren't we having similar conversations about giving others a leg up when the big bull was striding the stage over many seasons a few years back?
-
Yesterday Honda took won the first Detroit race. They took 7 of the top 10 spots.
-
The success of Honda in IndyCar points out the rules differences: while both are V6 turbos, the IndyCar engine does not have all the energy recovery systems F1 does. Most manufacturers believe hybrids are the future for road cars which is why the current rules package was put forward. F1 also has much tighter aero packages which lead to cooling problems that IndyCar does not have.
-
Rahal just made it two for two at Detroit for Honda.
-
I think some of the issues here are becoming pro-Honda versus Anti-Honda and that wasn't my point.
I am questioning if they have spread themselves too thin.
To my knowledge they are represented (as the actual manufacturer and not using a build partner) in:-
F1
Indy
Moto GP
World Superbike
World Touring Car
I assume they are also heavily supporting
British Superbike
British Touring Car
Yes they have some success in Indy and they are mid-pack but pushing to the front in World Touring Car. But surely the series they want (need) to have success in are F1, MotoGP and World Superbikes; i.e. the series that get Global attention.
They are failing badly in all of these series.
-
May be it is just the way Honda operates, makes them look bad. We know Honda did not make any impact before pulling out in 2008, but had they stayed, they would be celebrating a great team effort which was done in the guise of Brawn. I doubt without the engine of Mercedes, they would not have been the world champion, but at least they would have been competitive for sure.
I think for Honda and Toyota the lack of experience in their management teams are the culprits for making hasty decisions and making the brand look terrible. This sports are entirely based on either Europe or America, so one should employ and empower a person who knows the know-how of these region to become successful, not make boardroom decisions in Tokyo.
-
Honda also got it's first IMSA GTD (GT3) win at Detroit over the week-end. Katherine Legge & Andy Lally drove Mike Shank's car. Shank's Acrua team gets direct factory backing from Honda.
-
I am questioning if they have spread themselves too thin.
To my knowledge they are represented (as the actual manufacturer and not using a build partner) in:-
F1
Indy
Moto GP
World Superbike
World Touring Car
I assume they are also heavily supporting
British Superbike
British Touring Car
I guess it depends on what you regard as a build partner, in F1, World & British Touring cars and Indy the actual car chassis are fettled by others. I think in Moto GP they have total build control of both bike and engines, in other bike series I'm not so sure.
Mugen also take on quite a lot of Honda engine development, and occasionally car build, in other series.
Mercedes are also in a lot of other series, albeit with chassis build partners. I think Merc even owns a motorbike brand now as well - as does VW/Audi group I believe.
Now just because a bike brand is under a different name is it really separate? Perhaps we should view Honda 2 wheels as separate from their 4 wheel activities? :DntKnw:
-
I guess it depends on what you regard as a build partner, in F1, World & British Touring cars and Indy the actual car chassis are fettled by others. I think in Moto GP they have total build control of both bike and engines, in other bike series I'm not so sure.
Mugen also take on quite a lot of Honda engine development, and occasionally car build, in other series.
Mercedes are also in a lot of other series, albeit with chassis build partners. I think Merc even owns a motorbike brand now as well - as does VW/Audi group I believe.
Now just because a bike brand is under a different name is it really separate? Perhaps we should view Honda 2 wheels as separate from their 4 wheel activities?
That's sort of my point.
Mercedes (Germany) do not build their F1 cars; they have an F1 division.
Renault (France) do not build their F1 cars; they have an F1 division
Volkswagon Audi Group (Germany) do not build their motorbikes; Ducati do that and even they have a separate Motor Racing Division
Obviously Honda do not build the F1 cars but they do build the engines, the Indy car engines, the MotoGP bikes, the World Superbikes and the engines for World Touring cars all in-house. As far as I can see no other manufacturer keeps so much in-house and I wonder if this policy is limiting?
-
I guess it depends on what you regard as a build partner, in F1, World & British Touring cars and Indy the actual car chassis are fettled by others. I think in Moto GP they have total build control of both bike and engines, in other bike series I'm not so sure.
Mugen also take on quite a lot of Honda engine development, and occasionally car build, in other series.
Mercedes are also in a lot of other series, albeit with chassis build partners. I think Merc even owns a motorbike brand now as well - as does VW/Audi group I believe.
Now just because a bike brand is under a different name is it really separate? Perhaps we should view Honda 2 wheels as separate from their 4 wheel activities?
That's sort of my point.
Mercedes (Germany) do not build their F1 cars; they have an F1 division.
Renault (France) do not build their F1 cars; they have an F1 division
Volkswagon Audi Group (Germany) do not build their motorbikes; Ducati do that and even they have a separate Motor Racing Division
Obviously Honda do not build the F1 cars but they do build the engines, the Indy car engines, the MotoGP bikes, the World Superbikes and the engines for World Touring cars all in-house. As far as I can see no other manufacturer keeps so much in-house and I wonder if this policy is limiting?
The policy is limiting to a certain degree, but it's nice to see that racing is part of the company, not some side project with their own agenda. I know that 'Enstone' employees don't really think of themselves as 'Renault'. They're racing for themselves. It's a cynical world, and seeing large companies pay for someone else's work and then slap their own name on it just becomes more and more painful.
You know when Honda shows up on the grid, that's Honda. The same with Williams, Sauber and Ferrari.
-
I know that 'Enstone' employees don't really think of themselves as 'Renault'. They're racing for themselves.
Out of interest Jeri how do you know that?
-
I know that 'Enstone' employees don't really think of themselves as 'Renault'. They're racing for themselves.
Out of interest Jeri how do you know that?
from Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_in_Formula_One (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_in_Formula_One)
- 1981 Tolemen joins F1
- 1985 Benetton buys Tolemen and renames the team
- 2000 Renault buys Benetton, but retains the name (as they don't want a losing team to tarnish the brand)
- 2002 Renault changes the name to Renault
- 2010 Genii buys Renault but retains the name Renault
- 2011 Team is renamed to Lotus Renault (not to be confused with Team Lotus). Also, runs as an English team instead of French
- 2012 Renamed to Lotus F1
- 2015 Team is purchased by Renault
- 2016 Team is renamed Renault
- Note: 'Enstone' is in no way associated with the Renault Elf team that ran from 1978 to 1985. They actually competed against each other from 81 to 85. (And for that matter raced against a different Team Lotus in the 80s and 90s)
An interview with Boullier (I think) in 2012 asked what he thought about the changing team name, he said he thought of the team as 'Enstone'. It was the same group of people who made the team, not their corporate overlords (my words, but his idea).
I don't think that any team on the grid has had more names, not even Mercedes (Brawn, Honda, BAR, Tyrrell)