Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I remember reading the somewhat winding story about that connection a while back, but seem to remember it involves the Honda family and some drama/espionage. bit boring really.

Mugen was founded by Soichirio Hondas son. They damn near won a WDC in the Jordan with Frentzen of all people.

lolwut?

McLaren have had heeeaps of different engine suppliers.

Tidbit: Chrysler/Lamborghini almost ended up as an engine supplier, and the team built a modified MP4/8 to test their 3.5 V12 in

Yes kiddies. They started with all sort sof oddball stuff. Got good with the DFV's, spent huge amount of TAG money to get Porsche to build the V6 motors from 83 - 87, then went Honda, Ford, Peugeot, Merc.

^I was just reading about that (good old wiki). More tidbits: they went with Peugeot instead, but after a year of poor performance changed to the mercedes engines.

Interesting reading

Yes- Went from a 3.5L Ford-Cosworth V8 in '93 to a Peugeot V10 for '94; Which my McLaren history book tells me made 100hp more (740) from the same capacity than the V8 did.

Bollocks I say. Everyone was down on the Ford motor. But the packaging advantages and the massive torque made up for the hp deficit. Not that it was ever what the French made it out to be. In any case the engine McLaren ran was to an older spec than the one in the Benetton. True story.

Edited by djr81

If you count a total of 42 points as 'not finishing a race'

not a good season tho

The point wasnt really whether or not the motor somehow once or even twice hung together for the length of a GP. Really McLaren went from belting everyone with a Honda motor to being thereabouts competitive with a second string Ford to being hopeless with the Pug. It got worse in the first year with the Merc - even the fat boy special they made for Mansell was hopeless.

Edited by djr81

1!

Exactly. If they were really up on power and reliable do you think the team would have binned them? The Peugeot motor was unloved at McLaren, tolertated/suffered at Jordan until they got the Mugen (at the time it was effectively a factory Honda engine but out the back of the factory through the family ties at Mugen)and Prost never went anywhere.

Hey, I was just stating the bare fact that the Pug 3.5 V10 made (as far as McLaren's own information indicates) 100hp more than the same displacement Ford V8.

It's not like I'm some Peugeot motah fan-boy.

(a quick look at the wiki link reveals a grand total of zero GP's won via Pug power)

Hey, I was just stating the bare fact that the Pug 3.5 V10 made (as far as McLaren's own information indicates) 100hp more than the same displacement Ford V8.

It's not like I'm some Peugeot motah fan-boy.

Nah and Im not either. Just trying to point out you shouldnt confuse PR bullsht with reliable engineering. There is much more to an engine install in an F1 car than horsepowers on a dyno. Honda had to learn that. Ron Tauranac showed TWR (of all people) that with the Yamaha in the Arrows. Not that it needed proving but the Renault motor has also proved it over the last few years.

If you want to see a good motor have a look at some of the massive aluminium Chevs McLaren used in the M8's and later. Or the Repco motors in the Brabhams. And yes I am an MRD/Ralt fanboy.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • But I think you missed mine.. there is also nothing about the 98 spec that supports your claim..  according to the fuel standards, it can be identical to 95, just very slightly higher octane number. But the ulp vs pulp fuel regulations go show 95 (or 98), is not just 91 with some additives. any claim of ‘refined by the better refineries’ or ‘higher quality fuel’ is just hearsay.  I have never seen anything to back up such claims other than ‘my mate used to work for a fuel station’, or ‘drove a fuel delivery truck’, or ‘my mechanic says’.. the actual energy densities do slightly vary between the 3 grades of fuel, but the difference is very minor. That said, I am very happy to be proven wrong if anyone has some hard evidence..
    • Hey guys I’m chasing a Rb20det complete or bare block need a good running engine as mine has low comp 
    • You're making my point for me. 95 is not "premium". It is a "slightly higher octane" version of the basic 91 product. The premium product that they want people to buy (for all the venal corporate reasons of making more profit, and all the possibly specious reasons of it being a "better" fuel with nicer additive packages) is the 98 octane stuff. 95 is the classic middle child. No-one wants it. No-one cares about it. It is just there, occupying a space in the product hierarchy.
    • 98 and 95 have to meet the same national fuel standards beside the actual RON.  91 has lower standards (which are quite poor really), so 95 is certainly not 91 with some octane booster. It would be an easier argument to claim 98 is just 95 with some octane boosters. Also RON doesn't specify 'quality' in any sense, only the octane number.  Anything different retailers decide or not decide to add to their 95 or 98 is arbitrary and not defined by the RON figure.
    • Anyone know alternatives to powerplus tungsten? Can't find an alternative online. 
×
×
  • Create New...