Honda quits F1, invests in carbon-free tech instead • Hacker News Board

Re: Honda quits F1, invests in carbon-free tech instead

#361

Post by oarsinsync » Mon, Oct 05, 2020, 3:03 PM UTC

hvidgaard wrote: post #336

oarsinsync wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Mercedes win, not because they also produce the engine, but because they pour nearly half a billion euros into the car It takes more than just throwing money at the problem to win. Otherwise, Red Bull (paying for two teams in full) and Ferrari would be doing a lot better right now.

Mercedes, excluding the engine development, outspend both of those teams. All three outspend the rest of the field by quite some margin.

According to this source[0], for 2019, Mercedes spent $484MM, Ferrari $463MM, Red Bull $445MM, Red Bull 2 (aka Toro Rosso) $138M.

Ferrari's last driver's championship win was 2007, and last constructors championship win was 2008. If simply outspending their competitors by 5% would make all the difference, I think they would have tried it by now (and infact, if you look at previous years, they have, and failed)

[0] https://www.essentiallysports.com/what-are-the-budgets-for-a...

Re: Honda quits F1, invests in carbon-free tech instead

#362

Post by sgt » Mon, Oct 05, 2020, 3:18 PM UTC

koffiezet wrote: post #334

sgt wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Second this. Not sure why people watch F1. MotoGP is infinitely better and in fact, it seems to just get better each passing year! The secret is that it's "90% rider" and "10% machine".

Ehm machine is still quite important... I haven't followed MotoGP for a while, but I remember when Rossi switched to Ducati... That said, I always enjoyed watching MotoGP... Maybe should start following it again :P

But it was also psychological. Maybe he didn't touch the peg enough.

Re: Honda quits F1, invests in carbon-free tech instead

#363

Post by mywittyname » Mon, Oct 05, 2020, 3:36 PM UTC

Jnr wrote: post #217

names_are_hard wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At first I thought this post was going to be someone complaining about hooligans on motorcycles doing wheelies in their otherwise quiet neighborhood, wishing they'd just go away. Thanks for not going there, I appreciate it. I'm someone who enjoys riding a motorcycle fast (on a racetrack, wearing leathers, because I don't want to die and because I like tickets). I can tell you that I very much wish my bike was quieter…

I think that the noise is one of the better safety features of motorcycles. Without the noise you would be invisible and I think even more accidents would happen.

The noise from motorcycles is projected behind the bike, so it's not terribly effective at alerting unaware people to their presences. And, as most people who've tried to determine the direction an ambulance is approaching from will tell you: it's really hard to locate objects based on sound emissions alone from within a car cabin because of the acoustics of a cabin end up reflecting the audio all around the driver.

If you want to stand out on a motorcycle, use your lights and wear bright, reflective clothing. Even then, you have to accept that you'll never have the presence of an automobile, so drive accordingly.

Re: Honda quits F1, invests in carbon-free tech instead

#364

Post by Jonnax » Mon, Oct 05, 2020, 3:41 PM UTC

logicOnly wrote: post #342

knute wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also because the F1 audience is strongly concentrated in Europe, where Honda's market share is miniscule. Contrasted with Indycar, which is US-based, where Honda has a much larger presence.

Interesting to hear about a major international company reducing their investments in Europe. "European pessimism" is this weird common knowledge about the decline of Europe. It's been written about in I, Robot. There is population decline but their GDP numbers look on-par with the United States. It's the major/minor events rather than numbers that seem to push this mindset of inevitable decline. Is it bad government…

Europe is in decline as evidenced by a science fiction book from 70 years ago?

Re: Honda quits F1, invests in carbon-free tech instead

#365

Post by Someone » Mon, Oct 05, 2020, 3:46 PM UTC

hvidgaard wrote: post #337

Someone wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Into a barrier is the good outcome for loss of downforce. The car may make a backward somersault and fly over a barrier or land on top of another car.

Loss of downforce does not necessarily mean it goes tumbling. Skits basically means it's easier to create the suction that provide the downforce. Loss of that means it lacks the grip it would otherwise have, not that air gets under the car in a way that send it flying. The front wing and rear wing would still produce some downforce that keeps with the wheels on the ground.

Not necessarily, but it does make it more likely; that’s why I wrote “may”. If the design has skirts to generate more downforce, designers will decrease downforce generated elsewhere.

Having said that, I think skirts were forbidden more because they make driving a car through corners too easy and races too dull than out of safety concerns.

Re: Honda quits F1, invests in carbon-free tech instead

#366

Post by xadhominemx » Mon, Oct 05, 2020, 3:46 PM UTC

nomad543 wrote: post #93

xadhominemx wrote: post #40

Honda is like a decade behind Tesla and 5 years behind GM and VW on BEV so they definitely need to invest (as does Toyota) I doubt there is actually a link to dropping F1, however.

Are you kidding? You need to see more of the outside world. Tesla has zero tech advantage on BEV. Go to China, every mom and pop factory can build a new BEV vehicle on a weekend. BEVs vehicles are so easy to build that cars will be a comoditized item. Infinite amount of battery suppliers. The only reason traditional car makers are not focusing too much on EVs right now is because there is not enough profits currently…

Chinese BEVs are horrible compared to those from western OEMs. It is true that it’s easy to churn out a BEV that just integrates components from a bunch of tier-1s but efficiency and cost are way worse than what western OEMs can produce now or in the near future.

Re: Honda quits F1, invests in carbon-free tech instead

#367

Post by joncrane » Mon, Oct 05, 2020, 3:48 PM UTC

russellbeattie wrote: post #68

Guthur wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Simple, F1 and nascar are both races. Rally is a time trial. Generally I think people find racing more exciting.

The problem is that at the top of the leaderboard there's rarely any passing in modern F1 that's based on skill. What I mean is, passing usually requires some sort of screwup or random external force (race start mosh pit, engine failure, flat tires, etc.) and rarely does it happen because one driver out maneuvered another. Races can be exciting, but if the end of the race has basically the same order as the qualifyin…

I have to disagree with you here.

The cars can store and deploy energy. Often times the optimal strategy is to alternate storing and deploying energy on consecutive laps. So there is a ton of skill involved in staying as close to the driver in front while on a "harvest" lap so that they can pass the driver on the next "deploy" lap.

This is just one of the many, many ways that skill comes into play.

For more detail, I suggest watching the "track guide" videos by former Champion Nico Rosberg. He basically does sim laps while commentating the details that separate a pole position run from a 4th place run.

Re: Honda quits F1, invests in carbon-free tech instead

#368

Post by emptyfile » Mon, Oct 05, 2020, 4:18 PM UTC

logicOnly wrote: post #342

knute wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also because the F1 audience is strongly concentrated in Europe, where Honda's market share is miniscule. Contrasted with Indycar, which is US-based, where Honda has a much larger presence.

Interesting to hear about a major international company reducing their investments in Europe. "European pessimism" is this weird common knowledge about the decline of Europe. It's been written about in I, Robot. There is population decline but their GDP numbers look on-par with the United States. It's the major/minor events rather than numbers that seem to push this mindset of inevitable decline. Is it bad government…

Lol

Re: Honda quits F1, invests in carbon-free tech instead

#369

Post by anticensor » Mon, Oct 05, 2020, 4:28 PM UTC

nemo44x wrote: post #75

Auto racing will just never be the same. I don’t even think EV racing will evolve the sport. The golden days of auto racing involved real innovation like creating super chargers, turbos, certain efficiencies, and improvements in potting, etc. There was a time when we just didn’t know what could be done to build an engine that could run near the edge without blowing. I don’t think EV will ever have its equivalent. Jus…

> Just not the same as taking an ICE and tweaking it through mechanical engineering to find new performance gains.

Why will replacing mechanical engineering by electrical engineering not give the same result in EVs? Because we are already almost 100% electrically efficient? Thermal issues? Energy density issues?

Re: Honda quits F1, invests in carbon-free tech instead

#370

Post by Theodores » Mon, Oct 05, 2020, 4:31 PM UTC

hvidgaard wrote: post #198

btian wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No niche manufacturer will be able to make a competitive V10 PU. If F1 is serious about reducing costs, they have to at least standardize PU, like they did to ECU.

Engines is the least of concerns. Mercedes win, not because they also produce the engine, but because they pour nearly half a billion euros into the car, with engines being a vanishingly small amount of that. They have a car with superior aerodynamics and mechanical grip. Making the engine standardized will not change that.

Mercedes get prize money and sponsor money. On top of that they get revenue from supplying engines to other teams.

The team might spent untold hundreds of millions (of money they have earned) but the parent Mercedes company spend thirty million a year.

For Mercedes this is excellent value for money, equivalent to a billion or so in paid advertising time on television.

Contrast this situation with teams at the back of the grid: no revenue from supplying engines, expenses for getting engines, poor sponsorship money, no income from a parent manufacturer. Oh, and little in the way of prize money. They do get some sponsorship money from their drivers though, either because they are in a Mercedes/Ferrari/Red Bull 'academy' or because the pay driver comes with sponsorship from his wealthy father or country.