25 ms·

Honda quits F1, invests in carbon-free tech instead

777 points by fn1 6y ago

vr46 6y ago
Hmm, I wonder whether there’s a fight going on at HRC over the MotoGP budget?
- csours 6y ago
  Interesting question, but really the answer is ultimately that EV and AV are hideously capital intensive, so Honda needs the money for that. Also, if EV is the future (as Honda is indicating that they believe), then F1 is not the appropriate place to signal their engineering competence. Disclaimer: I work for GM but not on EV, AV or Motorsport. This is solely my own opinion.
- mdoms 6y ago
  I'm certain as long as they have Marc they will continue to make their money back.
  - vr46 6y ago
    Well, you say that but every time he wins a WC he gets a permanent €5M salary increase or something, so he's on some mental figure now and the only one that can ride that bike :)
sitkack 6y ago
That is awesome! Honda, you rock.
- tibbydudeza 6y ago
  They are still committed to Indycar, Le Mans and FIA World Endurance but is all done from the US while the F1 program was more costly to run and also used engineering resources based in Japan.
  - AmericanChopper 6y ago
    The F1 program was by far their most expensive program, and would have easily had the worst ROI. The Honda engine (well, _this_ Honda engine at least) was not going to win a world championship. It was miles behind the Mercedes engine, it didn't even look as good as the Renault one. Even the crippled Ferrari engine was beating one of the Honda teams. The main Red Bull team has got some not bad results from it, but that's obviously down to Verstappen's talent. Because everybody they've put in as his team mate has completely failed to deliver. Dropping out of F1, and investing in more consumer-facing (ie, profit generating) technology was an obvious cost cutting exercise. Given their obviously ongoing commitment to ICE motorsport and car production, you don't have to be very cynical at all to imagine the green-tech part of the statement was just thrown in there for some free PR (it's hard to imagine this news would have otherwise been post here, for instance). Also, if anybody's interested in who's going to replace them at Red Bull, the article implies Mercedes is a possibility. It's not, the rules only allow a manufacturer to have 3 engine customer teams (unless they get a special exemption from the FIA). Mercedes already has 3 engine customers. It will almost certainly be back to Renault, because Renault are required by the regulations to give them an engine if they ask for one, and the Ferrari engine is terrible at the moment.
    - mikelward 6y ago
      > Even the crippled Ferrari engine was beating one of the Honda teams. The current points order is: - Verstappen (Red Bull Honda) - Albon (Red Bull Honda) - Leclerc (Ferrari) - Gasly (Alpha Tauri Honda) - Vettel (Ferrari) - Kvyat (Alpha Tauri Honda) - Raikonnen (Alfa Romeo Ferrari) - Giovianazzi (Alfa Romeo Ferrari) - Magnussen (Haas Ferrari) - Grosjean (Haas Ferrari) I think any claim that Honda is worse than Ferrari will need more evidence.
      - AmericanChopper 6y ago
        I didn’t say it was better, I said the Ferrari engine was beating one of the Honda teams. Because Ferrari is 6th, and Alphatauri is 7th in constructors standings. I would say the Honda engine is better than the Ferrari engine. But that still leaves them fighting for last place. Honda’s commitment to F1 has been viewed with a fair amount of skepticism since they came back, primarily because of how much of a PR disaster their last stint in the sport was (with Alonso complaining about the engine constantly). This time around it hasn’t been a disaster, but it hasn’t been much of a success either. With two constructors having clearly better engines, it’s not too surprising to see them leave.
- JshWright 6y ago
  They also just announced that will continue to be an IndyCar supplier for a long while. F1 power units (including the hybrid components) are more efficient than the Indy counterparts. This isn't _actually_ about carbon-free anything... It's about F1 being expensive.
  - gabereiser 6y ago
    It’s also about positioning. Honda’s brand wasn't performing as well as they would like in F1. Probably in addition to it being expensive.
    - JshWright 6y ago
      Which is crazy, given the fact that Max Verstappen's Honda-powered Red Bull is the only car on the gird that can put up any challenge whatsoever against Mercedes and a Honda-powered Alpha Tauri _won_ at Monza (a circuit where engine performance is critical).
      - smcl 6y ago
        Even more crazy is that when they had very their own team they disbanded it ... only for Ross Brawn to lead an MBO, create a "new" team and win both the Constructors Championship and the Drivers Championship THE VERY NEXT SEASON season before it was bought by Mercedes, who went on to do rather well. Honda were on the cusp of dominating F1 and decided "nahhh". I wonder if it's actually not that good for business - otherwise someone's gotta be kicking themselves.
        toyg 6y ago
        > I wonder if it's actually not that good for business It's actually pretty bad for business. Like European football, it's basically a money pit that generates good indirect returns only to the very top teams. That's why it struggles to keep 10 teams on the grid every year (of whom 3 are effectively "B-teams", one is half-owned by another's boss, one is driven by pilots managed by that same boss...). That's why manufacturers as massive as Honda and Toyota never stick around F1 for long: they come in, realize how much money and time they will really need to waste to get any hope of winning trophies, and just pull the plug.
- 8ytecoder 6y ago
  The article is worth a read. Honda has quit a few times before.
  - tibbydudeza 6y ago
    The irony is that the last time they left F1 they sold off their F1 team for next to nothing to management which then won the F1 World driver and constructors championship the next season. That team was then sold to Mercedes to become their works team which now utterly dominates F1 for the last few seasons. If only they persevered.
    - bitL 6y ago
      Ross Brawn said that they gained a second per lap by switching engine to Mercedes. If Honda stayed, Vettel would have been a 5-time WDC.
burtonator 6y ago
F1 is just obsolete. The tech is just so mind-breaking and insanely fast that you can't actually get faster without killing people. They've already had to modify tracks as it causes physical damage to spine cords and vertebrae. What we need is something else which isn't tone death about economic inequality and climate change. The thing is that it has to be a SPORT so people watch it and it gets as much funding as F1
Thaxll 6y ago
Haha Red Bull, back to Renault.
- toyg 6y ago
  I actually think we'll see a bit of shuffling and RedBull will end up with either an official Mercedes engine (i.e. Mercs will drop Will-- sorry, one customer, to replace them with RBR) or a funky rebranded not-officially-X-but-basically-the-same engine. Horner and Marko seem to have burnt "one bridge too far" with Renault, Renault themselves suggested that they would take RedBull as customer only as a last resort and if forced by the rules.
  - justin66 6y ago
    It's a question of Ferrari selling them an engine because they want the money, or Renault selling them an engine because the FIA dictates it. I'm not sure I can see the logic in Mercedes selling RBR an engine, since they're such a fearsome competitor, and I really doubt they want to break with Williams. Williams is a perfect customer for them: they aren't a real competitor, but they can serve as a place to park drivers from the Mercedes junior program.
  - dan1234 6y ago
    Why would Mercedes offer Red Bull (their main competitor) engines?
    - toyg 6y ago
      Because money is money, control over your competitors’ roadmap is nice, and customers often don’t even get the latest version of an engine.
causality0 6y ago
F-1 has always baffled me as a sport. Not that it's inherently bad or boring, just that there are so many motor sports that make it look that way. Same with NASCAR. I don't understand how an audience for those exists when, for example, rally races exist.
- Guthur 6y ago
  Simple, F1 and nascar are both races. Rally is a time trial. Generally I think people find racing more exciting.
  - smcl 6y ago
    Right - I can see an argument being made between Moto GP over F1 (less emphasis on starting position, far more passing) but not Rally over F1 as it's a different beast. I used to love F1 (partly since it was often well timed for hungover Sundays off work for me when I was at university) so I really get both the fun and the frustrations with Formula 1.
    - TylerE 6y ago
      The other thing that makes MotoGP much more interesting are that the races, being a good bit shorter, are made without pitstops. So the driver wins on the track, and not the pit crew in the pits.
      - Ichthypresbyter 6y ago
        There's also limited communication- the drivers can receive text messages from their pit crew and race direction, but there is no voice communication and no way for the driver to reply - and most teams still use traditional pit boards.
  - russellbeattie 6y ago
    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 qualifying time trials, then it really doesn't matter. Might as well say the qualifiers is the race.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
x87678r 6y ago
F1 isn't what it used to be last century. Races were nail biting epic contests, cars visibly improved every season, drivers were international celebrities dicing with real life ending risk, and passionate fans filled the stadiums. Modern races are just a procession of the same few people each weekend in global rich social events.
- wombatmobile 6y ago
  With the automobile market transitioning to EV, it is inevitable that F1 will be rebooted as an EV contest. Expect Honda to re-enter then, particularly if MotoGP goes EV first.
  - JshWright 6y ago
    So, Formula E?
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - snuxoll 6y ago
      Formula E also has a monopoly on FIA sanctioned all-electric single seater racing for 25 seasons, so F1 cannot go full EV until 2039 at minimum unless contracts get renegotiated. Will be interesting to see what happens to F1 as a result, Indycar as well. Petrolheads can whine about electric racing all they want, but engine suppliers are losing interest in making gas engines when the consumer market is in a shift away from them. Even Ferrari will have to adapt to the times at some point.
      - csours 6y ago
        So, right now F1 has hybrid engines. Is there a power mix they can't cross before they infringe on Formula E? Or is it just literally, has to have an engine on board? Racing teams have never been shy about running right up to the edge of defined rules, and also running wild in undefined areas.
xadhominemx 6y ago
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.
- nomad543 6y ago
  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.
  - xadhominemx 6y ago
    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.
exabrial 6y ago
I highly highly highly doubt this is the explanation is true. F1 is way over regulated with ridiculous rules, crushing innovation and free thinking. Honda knows just as well as everyone else that the technology developed there has trickled down into consumer ICE engines and made them superior in terms of carbon expenditure. Hell of a marketing spin.
- saberdancer 6y ago
  It's very doubtful. They are staying involved with IndyCar which is not hybrid at the moment. The real reason for them pulling out is probably the economic downturn and expected losses Honda will generate. Getting out of a expensive project like F1 makes sense although I am struggling to understand why they can't continue on, engines will be almost "frozen" in the next few years. One explanation I have is that Honda was funding Red Bull, just like they were paying McLaren to use their engines. Giving away money to Red Bull just so that you can spend more money to produce the engines doesn't make sense commercially. To be clear, I am speculating about this as I do not know the details of Honda-Red Bull contract.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
nemo44x 6y ago
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. Just not the same as taking an ICE and tweaking it through mechanical engineering to find new performance gains. End of an era but that’s progress. Maybe fully mechanical cars will find a way to exist as a sport. But I imagine people will lose interest over a few generations. But then, horses still race.
- zachrose 6y ago
  I imagine that Formula E will support more innovation as they grow, with more suppliers and a contested regulations.
- galaxyLogic 6y ago
  Where I live often times I hear from the street below a group young men riding motorcycles down the street as a group. A bit of mad Max in it. They make a lot of sound and some drivers make their bikes ride in a upright position with only the read wheel on the road. I can see they're having lots of fun, partly because of the loud roaring sound their engines make. They make their presence known. It makes me wonder what will the kids do in a few years when all bikes are electric.
  - names_are_hard 6y ago
    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, even silent. I hate that it bothers the neighbors when I start it early in the morning on a weekend, I hate that it annoys others when I ride on the street. I used to think the noise was part of what made it fun or cool, now I think it's just an unfortunate side effect of one the things that make it fun and cool[0]. Unfortunately electric motorcycles have too many downsides right now to be a viable alternative.
sumanthvepa 6y ago
F1's problem is that it is a technological marvel that is simultaneously obsolete. Like the XB-71 Valkyrie project of the US AirForce, the technology powering modern F1 hybrid power trains is just outstandingly brilliant. However, just like the XB-71 was made obsolete by the advent of ICBMs, the hybrid power train's future for road cars has been overtaken by the advent of Tesla and battery electric vehicles. The metaphorical comparison with XB-70 ends when performance is concerned. F1 hybrids are still far superior to pure battery electric vehicles. So F1 is essentially stuck in the upper-left corner of the price-performance envelope. They are too good to move to pure electric, but their tech is obsolete for road cars. In a few years battery electric vehicles will get to the performance levels of current F1 hybrids, but by that time the mantle of the pinnacle of auto-racing will have been taken by FormulaE. Not a good place for F1 to be. In effect Tesla killed F1.
- mhh__ 6y ago
  Tesla killing F1 is a conclusion too far. The success of electric vehicles makes the calculus less good, but it's just another term in the equation for a company doing business in F1. Honda are still in other ICE motorsports. I think it's worth pointing out that Honda staying this long was a surprise in itself because, to be blunt, they were absolutely awful in their first years and no better than their rivals now. Also, the issue for a battery powered racing series isn't really efficiency at the moment but actually just being able to actually do the race distance at an acceptable speed. If they could make Formula E cars go fast enough they'd have already switched, or at least put pen to paper.
  - gonzo41 6y ago
    Shouldn't F1 cars be about finding the peak of a X engineering problem. For electiric's it's not as much about speed but battery. Maybe having hyper-miler distance races that aren't speed oriented is the sort of pivot F1 should be doing? I know it's not sexy like a fast car moving nimbly among the pack but if car companies can get their tech focused on getting the most distance from a battery then there's the cross over development that can flow to the mainstream. But I know, watching a slow race is a big ask.
W-Stool 6y ago
Think about this scenario for a minute: You are top designer at an F1 team. You've got an idea that will (maybe) make the car go faster. Say it is a different profile rear wing. So you get the lads to build one up (you have your own carbon fibre maufacturing facility on site) and you mount it on the current car and then arrange for the team to rent (say) Brands Hatch for the day, run the new wing, compare sector times, get feedback from the driver, etc - something any technical person would expect to do. Problem: this is completely against the rules. Can't just take the car out to the track and run it between races when you want. That's why these insane chassis dynos exist, everything is a simulation now, even wind tunnel time and the number of CPUs in your CFD cluster are being regulated. This is all in the name of reducing expenses of course, but it has the opposite effect. I saw my first F1 race in 1979, it was really something. The sport I see now has almost nothing to do with those times - in some good ways (safety!) but mostly bad (see above). I'm out.
- ip26 6y ago
  This is all in the name of reducing expenses of course, but it has the opposite effect. I always thought it was more like, Ferrari will always spend gobs of money and a small player can only spend a tenth as much- the amount of money spent will not change- but how can we narrow the gap between the high budget & low budget teams, such that a really awesome low budget team has a chance of catching a high budget team napping.
  - ll931110 6y ago
    That is precisely the reason budget cap will come into effect from 2021.
  - nradov 6y ago
    Ferrari is currently #6 out of 10 teams so whatever they're spending it's not working. https://www.formula1.com/en/results.html/2020/team.html https://www.formula1.com/en/results.html/2020/team.html
    - manojlds 6y ago
thatindiandude 6y ago
This is a strong message.
TeeMassive 6y ago
Call me cynical but I doubt all those companies claiming they'll go "green" or "100% electric" in X years really do that for the environment or are really serious about it. There is no economical reason to do so dude to the fact that electric cars cost too much, mainly due to the batteries for which the price can only increase if there is a market of a billion users. And except for the high end market which Tesla occupies the most, nobody has the money for that. Not to say I'm against the idea, coming from a place where hydroelectricity is king I just can't wait to get my first electric car, but I am skeptical.
- rocqua 6y ago
  I think that there is a decent chance this might happen. If at the highest decision making levels we finally start taking global warming seriously, this kind of move makes a lot of sense. Similarly, we are moving towards a situation where the majority opinion could actually turn against ICEs. It seems highly forward thinking to me. There are big barriers sure, but there are also some really big forces that will be pushing this. There are also some relevant tipping points that might happen, where it makes sense to make electric the default just because so many other things are already electric.
mdoms 6y ago
I have a theory that F1 is motorsport for people with no interest in motorsport. You can't possibly watch it for the racing, in a series where 90 minute races routinely end with over 25 seconds between each podium car. Where the fanbase fanatically opposes things like simplified powertrains, simplified aero and control parts, which would all result in far better, closer racing but would (in their minds) erode the prestige of the prototype series. Personally I think prestige comes from winning hard-fought races, not driving a Mercedes to yet another cruising victory. It boggles my mind that people bother, when there are such incredibly close series like MotoGP, GT World Challenge [Europe|Asia|America], V8 Supercars, etc... The only explanation is that the fans simply don't care about the racing itself.
- cwaffles 6y ago
  IMO F1 is a testing ground for engineers firstly, and a medium for displaying driver skill second.
- inamberclad 6y ago
  It really is reality TV. I just watch the post-race highlight videos on Youtube.
- saberdancer 6y ago
  There are plenty of series that do what you ask for yet there are few series that do what F1 does. Fanbase isn't inherently against simplified powertrains (there are many calling for NA engines for example V10s) but they are against spec engines or majority of parts. F1 was always an engineering competition. You can't compare it with GT racing where they BoP all the cars to drive around relatively the same. I disagree with your opinion. F1 racing can be very exciting and interesting, but it is similar to soccer/football, you get periods of boredom mixed with moments of sheer brilliance. Sometimes you get a great race with many moments of sheer brilliance and sometimes it ends with no goals on either side. Just like in soccer, you could "spice things up" by mixing up the players on the teams and making the teams equal, but that is not really the idea behind the sport. F1 is trying to stay relevant, these hybrid engines are here because of that, but the problem is that costs escalated due to the complexity involved. F1 should focus on reducing complexity while allowing innovation, especially in hybrid/EV fields.
lowdose 6y ago
I hope F1 removes the driver completely and changes the rules that it is allowed to fire of rocket launchers, drop land mines and all the other ridiculous military toys Oil money can buy and put it to use. I would like to watch a full on war battle between teams every weekend.
perfunctory 6y ago
> By my count, this is the fifth time that the Japanese automaker has quit F1 Makes you wonder how serious one should take this announcement. > our current goal of "electrifying two-thirds of our global automobile unit sales in 2030" Sounds ambitious, but we know by now that nobody - no company, no government - has ever met any of their climate pledges.
- nindalf 6y ago
  They’re not electrifying their fleet by 2030 because they want to make the world a better place through technology. They’re doing it because in 2035 they lose access to the world’s 4th largest economy - California. No manufacturer can take that kind of hit. All manufacturers see the writing on the wall - they need to invest in EVs or perish. In 10 years if it looks like a majority of manufacturers are successfully making the transition, every jurisdiction will enact a rule similar to California’s. The remaining laggards will be dearly departed.
  - onion2k 6y ago
    No manufacturer can take that kind of hit. California has a huge economy but that doesn't translate directly to the number of cars sold. Sales of cars is proportionate to population size more than economy size in wealthy Western countries. Honda will obviously have many EVs on the market for Californians (and other Americans, and Europeans, and Asians, and every other market that's banning petrol and diesel cars) to buy, but they're also going to continue to make and sell fossil fuel powered cars for long time in countries that don't have the electrical infrastructure to support electrification of civilian vehicles.
  - toyg 6y ago
    I believe Germany is also supposed to switch in 2035, and the UK committed to 2040 but are looking into the possibility of moving it forward to '35. Nordic countries will probably do it before the end of this decade too. It's finally happening, we probably have the emission scandal to thank for it. Not that this has any real link with the current announcement, it's a fig leaf over a classic Japanese move: in bad times, cut all non-essential items related to foreign markets, and regroup at home. F1 is largely an expensive promotional activity targeted at Europe.
sebastian_j 6y ago
Really good news :)
axegon_ 6y ago
I think there's more to it than the carbon-free tech for Honda(or any other manufacturer for that matter). F1 is getting eaten from the inside with politics and corruption. It takes a lot of effort to stay out in front. For the past half a decade no one has managed to give Mercedes a run for their money and expecting something to change with the new regulations is a huge leap of faith. Meanwhile costs and complexity is through the roof. Remember when a year or two ago Porsche was considering to supply engines for F1? Sure, they don't have a good record as far as F1 goes, but let's not fool ourselves - the engineers at Porsche are absolute gods when it comes to making small capacity, high power engines and hybrid systems. And realistically the main reason why they decided not to move forward was the huge leap of faith considering the exact complexity and costs I mentioned earlier. So there's a good chance the whole thing isn't paying off for Honda.
- speedgoose 6y ago
  I think the main reason was the diesel gate. Volkswagen canceled the project.
  - axegon_ 6y ago
    Nah, diesel gate was 2009. The idea for supplying engines to F1 was after Porsche retired from LMP1 in 2017 or 2018. Afaik the idea was to substitute LMP1 for the outrageous costs involved(despite their 3 consecutive world titles) and put the effort into building F1 engines.
    - speedgoose 6y ago
      You are right, I was thinking about the volkswagen project to join F1 around 2010.
duncan_bayne 6y ago
Some of the best motor racing I've personally seen was open class motorcycle racing. It was the 90s, so you had road legal GSXR1100s with the lights taped up, mixing it with 125cc Grand Prix bikes. I don't get why you couldn't do similar with F1. Make it open slather: if it passes scrutineering, carries a driver, and is safe to be near on a track (no rockets) then go nuts. Surely part of the expense in F1, and part of the fact that it is increasingly technologically irrelevant, is the incredibly tight restrictions on engineering and testing?
nickik 6y ago
Honda as an electric company has sucked. Fuel cells continue to be total nonsense and have no viability for the market, yet Honda is one of those companies still investing. Honda barley produces an EV and in the US seems to want to use GM platform, not even have its own. Meaning that GM will capture the majority of the value. At some point the competitiveness of ICE will be incredibly clear and Honda is one of those companies who is not even close to being ready. They are good candidate for consolidation in the future.
rdxm 6y ago
Honda has committed big time to the Indy series where they are one of two providers of crate motors. It all comes down to this: the F1 racing "product" sucks. Indy racing is night and day more entertaining. That's also why Liberty Media (who owns F1) just invested big time in an Indy team. I do not think it's more complicated than that.
davewritescode 6y ago
I just want to point out that this headline is wrong and out of date already. After pulling out of F1, Honda has announced that they're going to be an engine supplier for Indycar. Technically, it's a different division of Honda (Honda USA) but this greenwashing of why they left F1 leaves a bad taste in my mouth. They're leaving because they're not successful and they're dumping a bunch of money in the sport. Edit: I made a mistake they've recommitted to supplying engines under the new hybrid rules that indycar is adopting in 2023.
- kube-system 6y ago
  > After pulling out of F1, Honda has announced that they're going to be an engine supplier for Indycar. Honda has been a supplier for engines in Indycar for decades
  - davewritescode 6y ago
    You're correct, but as far as I knew they hadn't committed to building a new engine for the hybrid rules coming in 2023. As of yesterday, they had committed long term. Thanks for pointing it out, I'm not an indycar fan and I just saw the announcement that they were building a new hybrid. The point still stands, Honda isn't leaving F1 to focus on green tech, it's leaving because they're burning money and not seeing any return.
    - kube-system 6y ago
      >Honda isn't leaving F1 to focus on green tech, it's leaving because they're burning money and not seeing any return. Really, both are technically true. But you'd be a pretty bad PR representative if you phrased your announcement to emphasize the latter.
  - animal_spirits 6y ago
    Yes, Honda is not trying to hide that they are switching resources from F1 to Indycar behind some greenwashing. They've been in Indy for a while now and I genuinely believe that they want to pull resources for carbon free tech

777 points by fn1 6y ago

vr46 6y ago

Hmm, I wonder whether there’s a fight going on at HRC over the MotoGP budget?

csours 6y ago
Interesting question, but really the answer is ultimately that EV and AV are hideously capital intensive, so Honda needs the money for that. Also, if EV is the future (as Honda is indicating that they believe), then F1 is not the appropriate place to signal their engineering competence. Disclaimer: I work for GM but not on EV, AV or Motorsport. This is solely my own opinion.
mdoms 6y ago
I'm certain as long as they have Marc they will continue to make their money back.
- vr46 6y ago
  Well, you say that but every time he wins a WC he gets a permanent €5M salary increase or something, so he's on some mental figure now and the only one that can ride that bike :)

sitkack 6y ago

That is awesome! Honda, you rock.

tibbydudeza 6y ago
They are still committed to Indycar, Le Mans and FIA World Endurance but is all done from the US while the F1 program was more costly to run and also used engineering resources based in Japan.
- AmericanChopper 6y ago
  The F1 program was by far their most expensive program, and would have easily had the worst ROI. The Honda engine (well, _this_ Honda engine at least) was not going to win a world championship. It was miles behind the Mercedes engine, it didn't even look as good as the Renault one. Even the crippled Ferrari engine was beating one of the Honda teams. The main Red Bull team has got some not bad results from it, but that's obviously down to Verstappen's talent. Because everybody they've put in as his team mate has completely failed to deliver. Dropping out of F1, and investing in more consumer-facing (ie, profit generating) technology was an obvious cost cutting exercise. Given their obviously ongoing commitment to ICE motorsport and car production, you don't have to be very cynical at all to imagine the green-tech part of the statement was just thrown in there for some free PR (it's hard to imagine this news would have otherwise been post here, for instance). Also, if anybody's interested in who's going to replace them at Red Bull, the article implies Mercedes is a possibility. It's not, the rules only allow a manufacturer to have 3 engine customer teams (unless they get a special exemption from the FIA). Mercedes already has 3 engine customers. It will almost certainly be back to Renault, because Renault are required by the regulations to give them an engine if they ask for one, and the Ferrari engine is terrible at the moment.
  - mikelward 6y ago
    > Even the crippled Ferrari engine was beating one of the Honda teams. The current points order is: - Verstappen (Red Bull Honda) - Albon (Red Bull Honda) - Leclerc (Ferrari) - Gasly (Alpha Tauri Honda) - Vettel (Ferrari) - Kvyat (Alpha Tauri Honda) - Raikonnen (Alfa Romeo Ferrari) - Giovianazzi (Alfa Romeo Ferrari) - Magnussen (Haas Ferrari) - Grosjean (Haas Ferrari) I think any claim that Honda is worse than Ferrari will need more evidence.
    - AmericanChopper 6y ago
      I didn’t say it was better, I said the Ferrari engine was beating one of the Honda teams. Because Ferrari is 6th, and Alphatauri is 7th in constructors standings. I would say the Honda engine is better than the Ferrari engine. But that still leaves them fighting for last place. Honda’s commitment to F1 has been viewed with a fair amount of skepticism since they came back, primarily because of how much of a PR disaster their last stint in the sport was (with Alonso complaining about the engine constantly). This time around it hasn’t been a disaster, but it hasn’t been much of a success either. With two constructors having clearly better engines, it’s not too surprising to see them leave.
JshWright 6y ago
They also just announced that will continue to be an IndyCar supplier for a long while. F1 power units (including the hybrid components) are more efficient than the Indy counterparts. This isn't _actually_ about carbon-free anything... It's about F1 being expensive.
- gabereiser 6y ago
  It’s also about positioning. Honda’s brand wasn't performing as well as they would like in F1. Probably in addition to it being expensive.
  - JshWright 6y ago
    Which is crazy, given the fact that Max Verstappen's Honda-powered Red Bull is the only car on the gird that can put up any challenge whatsoever against Mercedes and a Honda-powered Alpha Tauri _won_ at Monza (a circuit where engine performance is critical).
    - smcl 6y ago
      Even more crazy is that when they had very their own team they disbanded it ... only for Ross Brawn to lead an MBO, create a "new" team and win both the Constructors Championship and the Drivers Championship THE VERY NEXT SEASON season before it was bought by Mercedes, who went on to do rather well. Honda were on the cusp of dominating F1 and decided "nahhh". I wonder if it's actually not that good for business - otherwise someone's gotta be kicking themselves.
      - toyg 6y ago
        > I wonder if it's actually not that good for business It's actually pretty bad for business. Like European football, it's basically a money pit that generates good indirect returns only to the very top teams. That's why it struggles to keep 10 teams on the grid every year (of whom 3 are effectively "B-teams", one is half-owned by another's boss, one is driven by pilots managed by that same boss...). That's why manufacturers as massive as Honda and Toyota never stick around F1 for long: they come in, realize how much money and time they will really need to waste to get any hope of winning trophies, and just pull the plug.
8ytecoder 6y ago
The article is worth a read. Honda has quit a few times before.
- tibbydudeza 6y ago
  The irony is that the last time they left F1 they sold off their F1 team for next to nothing to management which then won the F1 World driver and constructors championship the next season. That team was then sold to Mercedes to become their works team which now utterly dominates F1 for the last few seasons. If only they persevered.
  - bitL 6y ago
    Ross Brawn said that they gained a second per lap by switching engine to Mercedes. If Honda stayed, Vettel would have been a 5-time WDC.

burtonator 6y ago

F1 is just obsolete. The tech is just so mind-breaking and insanely fast that you can't actually get faster without killing people. They've already had to modify tracks as it causes physical damage to spine cords and vertebrae. What we need is something else which isn't tone death about economic inequality and climate change. The thing is that it has to be a SPORT so people watch it and it gets as much funding as F1

Thaxll 6y ago

Haha Red Bull, back to Renault.

toyg 6y ago
I actually think we'll see a bit of shuffling and RedBull will end up with either an official Mercedes engine (i.e. Mercs will drop Will-- sorry, one customer, to replace them with RBR) or a funky rebranded not-officially-X-but-basically-the-same engine. Horner and Marko seem to have burnt "one bridge too far" with Renault, Renault themselves suggested that they would take RedBull as customer only as a last resort and if forced by the rules.
- justin66 6y ago
  It's a question of Ferrari selling them an engine because they want the money, or Renault selling them an engine because the FIA dictates it. I'm not sure I can see the logic in Mercedes selling RBR an engine, since they're such a fearsome competitor, and I really doubt they want to break with Williams. Williams is a perfect customer for them: they aren't a real competitor, but they can serve as a place to park drivers from the Mercedes junior program.
- dan1234 6y ago
  Why would Mercedes offer Red Bull (their main competitor) engines?
  - toyg 6y ago
    Because money is money, control over your competitors’ roadmap is nice, and customers often don’t even get the latest version of an engine.

causality0 6y ago

F-1 has always baffled me as a sport. Not that it's inherently bad or boring, just that there are so many motor sports that make it look that way. Same with NASCAR. I don't understand how an audience for those exists when, for example, rally races exist.

Guthur 6y ago
Simple, F1 and nascar are both races. Rally is a time trial. Generally I think people find racing more exciting.
- smcl 6y ago
  Right - I can see an argument being made between Moto GP over F1 (less emphasis on starting position, far more passing) but not Rally over F1 as it's a different beast. I used to love F1 (partly since it was often well timed for hungover Sundays off work for me when I was at university) so I really get both the fun and the frustrations with Formula 1.
  - TylerE 6y ago
    The other thing that makes MotoGP much more interesting are that the races, being a good bit shorter, are made without pitstops. So the driver wins on the track, and not the pit crew in the pits.
    - Ichthypresbyter 6y ago
      There's also limited communication- the drivers can receive text messages from their pit crew and race direction, but there is no voice communication and no way for the driver to reply - and most teams still use traditional pit boards.
- russellbeattie 6y ago
  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 qualifying time trials, then it really doesn't matter. Might as well say the qualifiers is the race.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

x87678r 6y ago

F1 isn't what it used to be last century. Races were nail biting epic contests, cars visibly improved every season, drivers were international celebrities dicing with real life ending risk, and passionate fans filled the stadiums. Modern races are just a procession of the same few people each weekend in global rich social events.

wombatmobile 6y ago
With the automobile market transitioning to EV, it is inevitable that F1 will be rebooted as an EV contest. Expect Honda to re-enter then, particularly if MotoGP goes EV first.
- JshWright 6y ago
  So, Formula E?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - snuxoll 6y ago
    Formula E also has a monopoly on FIA sanctioned all-electric single seater racing for 25 seasons, so F1 cannot go full EV until 2039 at minimum unless contracts get renegotiated. Will be interesting to see what happens to F1 as a result, Indycar as well. Petrolheads can whine about electric racing all they want, but engine suppliers are losing interest in making gas engines when the consumer market is in a shift away from them. Even Ferrari will have to adapt to the times at some point.
    - csours 6y ago
      So, right now F1 has hybrid engines. Is there a power mix they can't cross before they infringe on Formula E? Or is it just literally, has to have an engine on board? Racing teams have never been shy about running right up to the edge of defined rules, and also running wild in undefined areas.

xadhominemx 6y ago

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.

nomad543 6y ago
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.
- xadhominemx 6y ago
  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.

exabrial 6y ago

I highly highly highly doubt this is the explanation is true. F1 is way over regulated with ridiculous rules, crushing innovation and free thinking. Honda knows just as well as everyone else that the technology developed there has trickled down into consumer ICE engines and made them superior in terms of carbon expenditure. Hell of a marketing spin.

saberdancer 6y ago
It's very doubtful. They are staying involved with IndyCar which is not hybrid at the moment. The real reason for them pulling out is probably the economic downturn and expected losses Honda will generate. Getting out of a expensive project like F1 makes sense although I am struggling to understand why they can't continue on, engines will be almost "frozen" in the next few years. One explanation I have is that Honda was funding Red Bull, just like they were paying McLaren to use their engines. Giving away money to Red Bull just so that you can spend more money to produce the engines doesn't make sense commercially. To be clear, I am speculating about this as I do not know the details of Honda-Red Bull contract.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

nemo44x 6y ago

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. Just not the same as taking an ICE and tweaking it through mechanical engineering to find new performance gains. End of an era but that’s progress. Maybe fully mechanical cars will find a way to exist as a sport. But I imagine people will lose interest over a few generations. But then, horses still race.

zachrose 6y ago
I imagine that Formula E will support more innovation as they grow, with more suppliers and a contested regulations.
galaxyLogic 6y ago
Where I live often times I hear from the street below a group young men riding motorcycles down the street as a group. A bit of mad Max in it. They make a lot of sound and some drivers make their bikes ride in a upright position with only the read wheel on the road. I can see they're having lots of fun, partly because of the loud roaring sound their engines make. They make their presence known. It makes me wonder what will the kids do in a few years when all bikes are electric.
- names_are_hard 6y ago
  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, even silent. I hate that it bothers the neighbors when I start it early in the morning on a weekend, I hate that it annoys others when I ride on the street. I used to think the noise was part of what made it fun or cool, now I think it's just an unfortunate side effect of one the things that make it fun and cool[0]. Unfortunately electric motorcycles have too many downsides right now to be a viable alternative.

sumanthvepa 6y ago

F1's problem is that it is a technological marvel that is simultaneously obsolete. Like the XB-71 Valkyrie project of the US AirForce, the technology powering modern F1 hybrid power trains is just outstandingly brilliant. However, just like the XB-71 was made obsolete by the advent of ICBMs, the hybrid power train's future for road cars has been overtaken by the advent of Tesla and battery electric vehicles. The metaphorical comparison with XB-70 ends when performance is concerned. F1 hybrids are still far superior to pure battery electric vehicles. So F1 is essentially stuck in the upper-left corner of the price-performance envelope. They are too good to move to pure electric, but their tech is obsolete for road cars. In a few years battery electric vehicles will get to the performance levels of current F1 hybrids, but by that time the mantle of the pinnacle of auto-racing will have been taken by FormulaE. Not a good place for F1 to be. In effect Tesla killed F1.

mhh__ 6y ago
Tesla killing F1 is a conclusion too far. The success of electric vehicles makes the calculus less good, but it's just another term in the equation for a company doing business in F1. Honda are still in other ICE motorsports. I think it's worth pointing out that Honda staying this long was a surprise in itself because, to be blunt, they were absolutely awful in their first years and no better than their rivals now. Also, the issue for a battery powered racing series isn't really efficiency at the moment but actually just being able to actually do the race distance at an acceptable speed. If they could make Formula E cars go fast enough they'd have already switched, or at least put pen to paper.
- gonzo41 6y ago
  Shouldn't F1 cars be about finding the peak of a X engineering problem. For electiric's it's not as much about speed but battery. Maybe having hyper-miler distance races that aren't speed oriented is the sort of pivot F1 should be doing? I know it's not sexy like a fast car moving nimbly among the pack but if car companies can get their tech focused on getting the most distance from a battery then there's the cross over development that can flow to the mainstream. But I know, watching a slow race is a big ask.

W-Stool 6y ago

Think about this scenario for a minute: You are top designer at an F1 team. You've got an idea that will (maybe) make the car go faster. Say it is a different profile rear wing. So you get the lads to build one up (you have your own carbon fibre maufacturing facility on site) and you mount it on the current car and then arrange for the team to rent (say) Brands Hatch for the day, run the new wing, compare sector times, get feedback from the driver, etc - something any technical person would expect to do. Problem: this is completely against the rules. Can't just take the car out to the track and run it between races when you want. That's why these insane chassis dynos exist, everything is a simulation now, even wind tunnel time and the number of CPUs in your CFD cluster are being regulated. This is all in the name of reducing expenses of course, but it has the opposite effect. I saw my first F1 race in 1979, it was really something. The sport I see now has almost nothing to do with those times - in some good ways (safety!) but mostly bad (see above). I'm out.

ip26 6y ago
This is all in the name of reducing expenses of course, but it has the opposite effect. I always thought it was more like, Ferrari will always spend gobs of money and a small player can only spend a tenth as much- the amount of money spent will not change- but how can we narrow the gap between the high budget & low budget teams, such that a really awesome low budget team has a chance of catching a high budget team napping.
- ll931110 6y ago
  That is precisely the reason budget cap will come into effect from 2021.
- nradov 6y ago
  Ferrari is currently #6 out of 10 teams so whatever they're spending it's not working. https://www.formula1.com/en/results.html/2020/team.html https://www.formula1.com/en/results.html/2020/team.html
  - manojlds 6y ago

thatindiandude 6y ago

This is a strong message.

TeeMassive 6y ago

Call me cynical but I doubt all those companies claiming they'll go "green" or "100% electric" in X years really do that for the environment or are really serious about it. There is no economical reason to do so dude to the fact that electric cars cost too much, mainly due to the batteries for which the price can only increase if there is a market of a billion users. And except for the high end market which Tesla occupies the most, nobody has the money for that. Not to say I'm against the idea, coming from a place where hydroelectricity is king I just can't wait to get my first electric car, but I am skeptical.

rocqua 6y ago
I think that there is a decent chance this might happen. If at the highest decision making levels we finally start taking global warming seriously, this kind of move makes a lot of sense. Similarly, we are moving towards a situation where the majority opinion could actually turn against ICEs. It seems highly forward thinking to me. There are big barriers sure, but there are also some really big forces that will be pushing this. There are also some relevant tipping points that might happen, where it makes sense to make electric the default just because so many other things are already electric.

mdoms 6y ago

I have a theory that F1 is motorsport for people with no interest in motorsport. You can't possibly watch it for the racing, in a series where 90 minute races routinely end with over 25 seconds between each podium car. Where the fanbase fanatically opposes things like simplified powertrains, simplified aero and control parts, which would all result in far better, closer racing but would (in their minds) erode the prestige of the prototype series. Personally I think prestige comes from winning hard-fought races, not driving a Mercedes to yet another cruising victory. It boggles my mind that people bother, when there are such incredibly close series like MotoGP, GT World Challenge [Europe|Asia|America], V8 Supercars, etc... The only explanation is that the fans simply don't care about the racing itself.

cwaffles 6y ago
IMO F1 is a testing ground for engineers firstly, and a medium for displaying driver skill second.
inamberclad 6y ago
It really is reality TV. I just watch the post-race highlight videos on Youtube.
saberdancer 6y ago
There are plenty of series that do what you ask for yet there are few series that do what F1 does. Fanbase isn't inherently against simplified powertrains (there are many calling for NA engines for example V10s) but they are against spec engines or majority of parts. F1 was always an engineering competition. You can't compare it with GT racing where they BoP all the cars to drive around relatively the same. I disagree with your opinion. F1 racing can be very exciting and interesting, but it is similar to soccer/football, you get periods of boredom mixed with moments of sheer brilliance. Sometimes you get a great race with many moments of sheer brilliance and sometimes it ends with no goals on either side. Just like in soccer, you could "spice things up" by mixing up the players on the teams and making the teams equal, but that is not really the idea behind the sport. F1 is trying to stay relevant, these hybrid engines are here because of that, but the problem is that costs escalated due to the complexity involved. F1 should focus on reducing complexity while allowing innovation, especially in hybrid/EV fields.

lowdose 6y ago

I hope F1 removes the driver completely and changes the rules that it is allowed to fire of rocket launchers, drop land mines and all the other ridiculous military toys Oil money can buy and put it to use. I would like to watch a full on war battle between teams every weekend.

perfunctory 6y ago

> By my count, this is the fifth time that the Japanese automaker has quit F1 Makes you wonder how serious one should take this announcement. > our current goal of "electrifying two-thirds of our global automobile unit sales in 2030" Sounds ambitious, but we know by now that nobody - no company, no government - has ever met any of their climate pledges.

nindalf 6y ago
They’re not electrifying their fleet by 2030 because they want to make the world a better place through technology. They’re doing it because in 2035 they lose access to the world’s 4th largest economy - California. No manufacturer can take that kind of hit. All manufacturers see the writing on the wall - they need to invest in EVs or perish. In 10 years if it looks like a majority of manufacturers are successfully making the transition, every jurisdiction will enact a rule similar to California’s. The remaining laggards will be dearly departed.
- onion2k 6y ago
  No manufacturer can take that kind of hit. California has a huge economy but that doesn't translate directly to the number of cars sold. Sales of cars is proportionate to population size more than economy size in wealthy Western countries. Honda will obviously have many EVs on the market for Californians (and other Americans, and Europeans, and Asians, and every other market that's banning petrol and diesel cars) to buy, but they're also going to continue to make and sell fossil fuel powered cars for long time in countries that don't have the electrical infrastructure to support electrification of civilian vehicles.
- toyg 6y ago
  I believe Germany is also supposed to switch in 2035, and the UK committed to 2040 but are looking into the possibility of moving it forward to '35. Nordic countries will probably do it before the end of this decade too. It's finally happening, we probably have the emission scandal to thank for it. Not that this has any real link with the current announcement, it's a fig leaf over a classic Japanese move: in bad times, cut all non-essential items related to foreign markets, and regroup at home. F1 is largely an expensive promotional activity targeted at Europe.

sebastian_j 6y ago

Really good news :)

axegon_ 6y ago

I think there's more to it than the carbon-free tech for Honda(or any other manufacturer for that matter). F1 is getting eaten from the inside with politics and corruption. It takes a lot of effort to stay out in front. For the past half a decade no one has managed to give Mercedes a run for their money and expecting something to change with the new regulations is a huge leap of faith. Meanwhile costs and complexity is through the roof. Remember when a year or two ago Porsche was considering to supply engines for F1? Sure, they don't have a good record as far as F1 goes, but let's not fool ourselves - the engineers at Porsche are absolute gods when it comes to making small capacity, high power engines and hybrid systems. And realistically the main reason why they decided not to move forward was the huge leap of faith considering the exact complexity and costs I mentioned earlier. So there's a good chance the whole thing isn't paying off for Honda.

speedgoose 6y ago
I think the main reason was the diesel gate. Volkswagen canceled the project.
- axegon_ 6y ago
  Nah, diesel gate was 2009. The idea for supplying engines to F1 was after Porsche retired from LMP1 in 2017 or 2018. Afaik the idea was to substitute LMP1 for the outrageous costs involved(despite their 3 consecutive world titles) and put the effort into building F1 engines.
  - speedgoose 6y ago
    You are right, I was thinking about the volkswagen project to join F1 around 2010.

duncan_bayne 6y ago

Some of the best motor racing I've personally seen was open class motorcycle racing. It was the 90s, so you had road legal GSXR1100s with the lights taped up, mixing it with 125cc Grand Prix bikes. I don't get why you couldn't do similar with F1. Make it open slather: if it passes scrutineering, carries a driver, and is safe to be near on a track (no rockets) then go nuts. Surely part of the expense in F1, and part of the fact that it is increasingly technologically irrelevant, is the incredibly tight restrictions on engineering and testing?

nickik 6y ago

Honda as an electric company has sucked. Fuel cells continue to be total nonsense and have no viability for the market, yet Honda is one of those companies still investing. Honda barley produces an EV and in the US seems to want to use GM platform, not even have its own. Meaning that GM will capture the majority of the value. At some point the competitiveness of ICE will be incredibly clear and Honda is one of those companies who is not even close to being ready. They are good candidate for consolidation in the future.

rdxm 6y ago

Honda has committed big time to the Indy series where they are one of two providers of crate motors. It all comes down to this: the F1 racing "product" sucks. Indy racing is night and day more entertaining. That's also why Liberty Media (who owns F1) just invested big time in an Indy team. I do not think it's more complicated than that.

davewritescode 6y ago

I just want to point out that this headline is wrong and out of date already. After pulling out of F1, Honda has announced that they're going to be an engine supplier for Indycar. Technically, it's a different division of Honda (Honda USA) but this greenwashing of why they left F1 leaves a bad taste in my mouth. They're leaving because they're not successful and they're dumping a bunch of money in the sport. Edit: I made a mistake they've recommitted to supplying engines under the new hybrid rules that indycar is adopting in 2023.

kube-system 6y ago
> After pulling out of F1, Honda has announced that they're going to be an engine supplier for Indycar. Honda has been a supplier for engines in Indycar for decades
- davewritescode 6y ago
  You're correct, but as far as I knew they hadn't committed to building a new engine for the hybrid rules coming in 2023. As of yesterday, they had committed long term. Thanks for pointing it out, I'm not an indycar fan and I just saw the announcement that they were building a new hybrid. The point still stands, Honda isn't leaving F1 to focus on green tech, it's leaving because they're burning money and not seeing any return.
  - kube-system 6y ago
    >Honda isn't leaving F1 to focus on green tech, it's leaving because they're burning money and not seeing any return. Really, both are technically true. But you'd be a pretty bad PR representative if you phrased your announcement to emphasize the latter.
- animal_spirits 6y ago
  Yes, Honda is not trying to hide that they are switching resources from F1 to Indycar behind some greenwashing. They've been in Indy for a while now and I genuinely believe that they want to pull resources for carbon free tech