What happened to McLaren in the mid-1990s?

[Mark]

Throughout McLaren's history they've always been at or close to the front of the grid. Except in the mid 1990s. What went wrong?

[Robinho]

coupled with a period of domination by Williams, Renault and Newey

[jens]

Unlike other periods McLaren didn't have a consistent engine partner. Like in 84-87 TAG Porsche, 88-92 Honda or from 95 onwards Mercedes.

Honda left the sport and besides Renault (who already had partnerships with Williams and Ligier) and Ferrari there weren't any top engines left, Benetton was also Ford's so-called factory team. The chassis of McLaren was good in '93, but they were largely let down by what was considered to be a customer Ford engine. So after an underwhelming test with Lamborghini engines in late '93 McLaren was left to try to build a new future with a relative newcomer to F1 - first Peugeot and then Mercedes.

We can also remember similar lows in the history of Williams. Honda opted for McLaren after 1987 and the World Champions were left with customer Judd engines, finishing merely 7th in WCC in 1988. After that Williams started building up a new successful relationship with Renault. Another low period was 98-00, when Williams was running with outdated and re-badged Renault engines before starting to improve with factory BMW engines again.

[Malbec]

I read that one of the reasons Honda got frustrated with McLaren was that they were very picky about what technologies they would invest in.

Honda had developed its own active suspension systems as it seemed that this was the future for roadcars as well as racing, but McLaren refused to use this technology on their cars. McLaren's own active suspension system was only in its infancy and we all know what happened after with Williams introducing its own system.

I think that while McLaren were clearly extremely competent, they were caught out by several new key technologies coming out at the same time and didn't have the resources to exploit them all, on top of which they lost their Honda contract and got stuck with Peugeots for a while.

[wedge]

No one at McLaren could rival Adrian Newey.

Peugeot engines were absolutely crap and had a habit of self detonating.

Questionable #2 drivers partly due to politics.


I read that one of the reasons Honda got frustrated with McLaren was that they were very picky about what technologies they would invest in.

Honda had developed its own active suspension systems as it seemed that this was the future for roadcars as well as racing, but McLaren refused to use this technology on their cars. McLaren's own active suspension system was only in its infancy and we all know what happened after with Williams introducing its own system.

Do you have a source?

Honda tested project cars in the early 90s. RC100 didn't have active suspension but did have McLaren's transmission.

RC101 was used for major testing purposes in 1993 but very little is known. Note: AS was initially banned mid-93 but moved to 94 onwards.

8W - What? - Honda RC101 (http://www.forix.com/8w/honda101.html)

[Malbec]

Do you have a source?

Honda tested project cars in the early 90s. RC100 didn't have active suspension but did have McLaren's transmission.

RC101 was used for major testing purposes in 1993 but very little is known. Note: AS was initially banned mid-93 but moved to 94 onwards.

8W - What? - Honda RC101 (http://www.forix.com/8w/honda101.html)

No source.

The two Honda project cars were started partly out of frustration with dealing with McLaren, Honda wanted more involvement with the chassis side of things and tried to see how hard it was to develop their own cars. You can also get some inkling of the level of frustration felt in the decision not to tell McLaren about Honda's F1 pull out until the last possible moment, making it difficult for them to arrange a good engine deal in time. Senna on the other hand was personally called up by Mr Honda himself which is why he made such an effort to jump ship to Williams for '93.

By all accounts both cars were out-of-hours projects and neither were particularly quick which resulted in Honda realising that building a good chassis was harder than expected and didn't bother carrying on.

[wedge]

Hmmm... I wonder if anyone else can verify on record with this animosity between McLaren and Honda.

Honda were restructuring and cited a number of reasons for pulling out.

According to Wiki McLaren tested an active suspension car in Portugal 1992. It was crap it never went any further that year.

[Malbec]

Hmmm... I wonder if anyone else can verify on record with this animosity between McLaren and Honda.

Honda were restructuring and cited a number of reasons for pulling out.

I think animosity is a bit too strong a word to describe things, more frustration.

I have no idea how big a factor that was in Honda's decision to pull out of F1, I suspect the decision to expand their model range and production facilities in the US was by far the strongest factor.

[steveaki13]

Ah the Mclaren peugeot.

Brundle engine blow up spain 1994.wmv - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bepVemmrL4g&feature=related)

Hakkinen retirement spain 1994.wmv - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eog5PlAf5D0&NR=1)

Martin Brundle massive engine blow at Silverstone - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lQU3Ofs_Dk)

These bring back the memorys of mclarens poor season in 94.

[wedge]

The Peugeot era was a dark period for McLaren.

Mercedes-Benz was the start of something. Hakkinen was showing his potential in outdriving the car and yet it was DC who got a race win or two.

Their engines were rated in those days.

I did work experience with Ilmor in Autumn 1996. I was being shown around the factory went into the dyno room and still got a bollo-king for it! Obviously they were testing an upgrade that day!

[ArrowsFA1]

Throughout McLaren's history they've always been at or close to the front of the grid. Except in the mid 1990s. What went wrong?
The late 70's was a pretty dire period as well. After Hunt's title in '76 the team slowly declined until Ron's Project 4 organisation took over with the support of Marlboro.

[zako85]

Honda's pullout from F1 after 1992 was one of the worst decisions in all of history of motorsport. I am sure they really regretted this later on, but with McLaren now in a tight relationship with Mercedes, Honda ended up buying BAR and spending hundreds of millions of dollars on running its own team with no meaningful results. Brawn's (former Honda team) double championship win in 2009, right after Honda's second F1 pullout was another bitter pill for them to swallow. Honda's execs probably cringe right now at any mentions of Formula 1.

[Mark]

Quite so. Both times the teams they abandoned went on to have success with Mercedes. Brawn especially was reportedly 100% funded by Honda but they got zero credit for the achievements.

[Malbec]

Honda's pullout from F1 after 1992 was one of the worst decisions in all of history of motorsport. I am sure they really regretted this later on, but with McLaren now in a tight relationship with Mercedes, Honda ended up buying BAR and spending hundreds of millions of dollars on running its own team with no meaningful results. Brawn's (former Honda team) double championship win in 2009, right after Honda's second F1 pullout was another bitter pill for them to swallow. Honda's execs probably cringe right now at any mentions of Formula 1.

Honda's decisions to pull out of F1 in the late '60's and early 90's were part of a broader strategic vision though, Honda was quite a small company then so the costs of competing in F1 were disproportionately large for them.

The money and engineering resources freed up in the '60's went into developing a new globally marketed hatchback called the 'Civic' that turned Honda into a global player, not a niche motorbike/sportscar maker that was then of a similar size to Suzuki.

In the '90's the money went into rapidly expanding Honda's American presence which meant that the company went overtook Nissan and became the second biggest Japanese car maker and often the most profitable.

I don't know about the most recent pullout though, Honda posted $10 billion profits for the last year so a few $100 million saved here and there won't have been as important as it was in the '60s and '90s. They certainly lost out on huge publicity that they would have gained if the 2009 championship was won by a Honda, not a Brawn.

[Don Capps]

They certainly lost out on huge publicity that they would have gained if the 2009 championship was won by a Honda, not a Brawn.

As shocking as it might seem to those totally enamored with formula one, there is, perhaps, also the point that they simply no longer had any real interest and it did not really matter to them. They finished a commitment and that was that. The American market has always been the focal point of Honda's efforts and the F1 world championship is pretty much irrelevant as a sales gimmick in the US. Besides, the Wall Street Depression did affect Honda and its operations, especially in the US.

[Malbec]

As shocking as it might seem to those totally enamored with formula one, there is, perhaps, also the point that they simply no longer had any real interest and it did not really matter to them.

It has to be said that the Japanese domestic market and their makers have both lost interest in sportscars and racing full stop, and the complete lack of sportscars in the entire Honda and Toyota lineup is a result of that.

The major Japanese makers have instead focused their attention on green tech, believing that is where future profits are to be made and F1 has limited relevance to this objective.


The American market has always been the focal point of Honda's efforts and the F1 world championship is pretty much irrelevant as a sales gimmick in the US. Besides, the Wall Street Depression did affect Honda and its operations, especially in the US.

The American market is catered for by Honda's Indy efforts. The same is true of Toyota and NASCAR.

While maintaining and expanding market share in the US is important to Honda, their current objective is to expand market share in the BRIC states. Just as expansion in the US in the '90s was accompanied by the building of new factories across the US, we can see new Honda factories spring up across China and India (where Honda recently split from its Indian partner Hero to build up its brand there) with third-world specific car models being developed.

F1 was used for two purposes by Honda. One was advertising in old markets like Europe and new markets in the BRIC states where F1 was a good tool. The other was for training and identifying upcoming engineering talent from within its ranks.

I guess the concern that liquidity couldn't be maintained throughout the credit crisis was the foremost concern when Honda and the other makers pulled out, few could have predicted a return to profitability for the best run makers so quickly back in those dark days.

[D-Type]

Interesting point about Honda focussing on green technology. Born out by the colour scheme adopted for the Honda cars shortly before they withdrew.

[wedge]

Manufacturers come as go as they please. Renault went out while they were at their peak. Honda left at the right time compared to 2008/09


The American market is catered for by Honda's Indy efforts. The same is true of Toyota and NASCAR.

That's a funny one. They're really there to sell mid-size sedans.

They don't have huge capacity pushrod V8 in their line up but relied on Chevy in that department.

In the Nationwide series they have gone to using pony car body shells yet Toyota has no coupe in their line up and stuck with the Camry.


Interesting point about Honda focussing on green technology. Born out by the colour scheme adopted for the Honda cars shortly before they withdrew.

At the same time they ran a small island fully on hydrogen power which costs similar to the amount of money being pumped into F1 at that time.

With new emission regs it will be interesting how the Type R brand evolves as turbos rule the roost.

[Malbec]

That's a funny one. They're really there to sell mid-size sedans.

They don't have huge capacity pushrod V8 in their line up but relied on Chevy in that department.

In the Nationwide series they have gone to using pony car body shells yet Toyota has no coupe in their line up and stuck with the Camry.

I don't think Toyota's aims with NASCAR are as direct as promoting individual models, more at establishing their brand as being as much American as Japanese in much the same way as Ford has come to be viewed by many Brits as being defacto British.


At the same time they ran a small island fully on hydrogen power which costs similar to the amount of money being pumped into F1 at that time.

Indeed, I'd love to know how much the entire fuel cell project costs. It can't be cheap and I bet it makes the F1 budget look like small change.


With new emission regs it will be interesting how the Type R brand evolves as turbos rule the roost.

Thats the odd thing about both Honda and Toyota. They've invested so much in hybrids and fuel cell technology but they haven't really bothered to get the most out of current petrol technology with small turbocharged engines or Diesels.

[D-Type]

Thats the odd thing about both Honda and Toyota. They've invested so much in hybrids and fuel cell technology but they haven't really bothered to get the most out of current petrol technology with small turbocharged engines or Diesels.
Perhaps they realise that current technology is only a stopgap and hybrids and fuel cells is the long term future.
When we use up all the oil (which is reality as stocks are finite) we'll have to produce electricity from nuclear, hydro or new technologies like wind, wave and solar. Then we'll have to find a way of using electricity in a power station to power a car: batteries, produce hydrogen by electrolysis, synthesise CO2 and water to make some sort of petrol. or use alcohol - but you need spsce to grow the sugar cane or sugar beet and energy to concentrate it by distillation or whatever.

But this is wandering a long way away from McLaren's dip in performance. But they have bounced back into contention, which Lotus, Brabham etc didn't and Williams don't seem to be able to do

[Malbec]

Perhaps they realise that current technology is only a stopgap and hybrids and fuel cells is the long term future.

But converting the engine range to smaller capacity turbocharged engines in the same way as VW, BMW and Mercedes are doing now costs relatively little compared to developing an entirely new technology like fuel cell. Also, the vast majority of cars sold today are bread and butter petrol and Diesel engined vehicles so it doesn't make sense to keep them relatively uncompetitive in a market where taxation based on engine capacity and CO2 emissions is rapidly becoming the norm.


But this is wandering a long way away from McLaren's dip in performance. But they have bounced back into contention, which Lotus, Brabham etc didn't and Williams don't seem to be able to do

Credit has to go to Ron Dennis himself who seems to understand very well what corporations want from a sponsorship tie-up with an F1 team. IMO only McLaren, Ferrari and to some extent Sauber have shown really professional attitudes towards their corporate sponsors which is why all three teams have had longstanding partnerships (BMW's purchase and sale of Sauber notwithstanding). The fact that companies like Santander carried on sponsoring them even after choosing to follow Alonso to Ferrari speaks volumes, and its well known that the McLaren drivers have a more rigorous sponsor promotion schedule than any other team.

Ron has proven to be ruthless when he needs to be. He supposedly asked Honda execs in 1986 whether they knew of anyone who had won championships while paralysed (referring to SFW's recent accident where he had spinal injuries) and replying "me neither" when they answered in the negative. He's also been very very lucky in that he's had good partners too. Philip Morris came to McLaren as part of the deal that got Ron Dennis in charge and stayed with him for more than a decade, and his partnerships with West, Honda and Mercedes since have all been very positive and benign in stark contrast to, say, BMW who IMO were poisonous to both Williams and Sauber despite their money and engine expertise.

Ultimately I think it says a lot that McLaren not only came back from the brink in the mid-'90s but has gone on to expand into many other industry sectors including sportscar manufacturing. Not many teams have managed anything similar in recent years. The fact that that was possible has to be down to a significant extent to Ron's management.

[Lemmy-Boy]

Here is a summary:

1. 1994 - Senna left for Williams. And McLaren mistakenly used explosive dynamite in the form of a Peugeot engine.

McLaren finishes the year with 0 wins.

2. 1995 - Nigel Mansell is now a driver for Mclaren, alongside Hakkinen. Mercdedes-Ilmor gives factory support as the engine supplier. But McLaren produces a whale of a chassis. Furthermore, Mansell misses 2 races due to his fat ass unable to fit in the Chassis. He only lasts 2 races with the team, only to be replaced by Mark Blundell.

Hakkinen almost dies at the Australian GP. He was saved by an emergency tracheotomy.

McLaren finishes the year with 0 wins.

3. 1996 - Coulthard becomes the 2nd driver alongside Hakkinen, while giving the team driver stability for many years. The Mercedes engine continues to Explode, while the Chasis is still behind the competition.

McLaren finishes the year with 0 wins.

4. 1997 - McLaren finally wins a race. The Mercedes continues to explode but was known to be the most powerful engine, and the car was known to have the fastest straight line speed on a consistent basis.

AND LATER IN THE YEAR, ADRIAN NEWEY FINALLY JOINS THE TEAM.

5. 1998 - Adrian Newey's first car produces a World Drivers and Constructors Championship for Mclaren.

[zako85]

Manufacturers come as go as they please. Renault went out while they were at their peak. Honda left at the right time compared to 2008/09




I suspect Renault never quite needed to run a manufacturer team to begin with. What Renault always cared about was having their engine used in one of top cars. With Williams and McLaren already in tight relationship with car manufacturers in the early 2000s, Renault had no choice but buy its own team. Toyota, Honda, etc. were in the same situation. The only difference is that Renault GPs effort was quite successful. However, as soon as Renault saw than RedBull-Renault is being estabished as one of top teams, they pulled out. It's much easier to build a great engine and have RedBull and other sponsors pick up the team operations tab instead of trying to do both on their own.

[wedge]

Thats the odd thing about both Honda and Toyota. They've invested so much in hybrids and fuel cell technology but they haven't really bothered to get the most out of current petrol technology with small turbocharged engines or Diesels.

Too busy perfecting variable valve timing, got bored with 'sportscars' and went for another challenge.

[wedge]

I don't think Toyota's aims with NASCAR are as direct as promoting individual models, more at establishing their brand as being as much American as Japanese in much the same way as Ford has come to be viewed by many Brits as being defacto British.

Very true indeed. Just remembered Toyota tested NASCAR's waters with the Tundra in the Truck Series.

[codalunga]

Four engine suppliers in four years.

Holding out for Renault power until December 1992, then being forced to take customer Cosworths, then deciding to use TAG electronics. Being the fully active era, the already compromised and hurried car struggled to run in early testing. Senna described the MP4/8 as "diabolical" and said it had a fundamental flaw, although it did come together at the end of the season.

Someone said the Lambo test was disappointing (and they had been previously), but the press at the time said it was quit impressive.