F1 » Horner lays blame on McLaren ECU for Webber woes

With McLaren's technical standing taking a beating on track, now its their provision of the latest generation of ECUs that's under the spotlight.

Sort Comments: Oldest | Newest

Tommo - Unregistered

March 18, 2013 11:52 PM

I do recall someone on here quoting that Vettel had ECU issues as well who was that?

CH and TAG play the blame game while a driver is caught in the middle. I am asotunded by some of the follies in "top flight elite F1" from wheels nuts to jacks and KERS/ECU issues. we are talking millions in budgets not several thousand.

hard to believe at times these guys are the pinnacle of motorsport.

John - Unregistered

March 18, 2013 11:58 PM

Paranoia will destroy ya, as some inventive English chaps pointed out.

If RB were actually consumed by these haunting fears that Webber might beat Vettel, they could, you know, simply not renew Webbers contract..


March 19, 2013 2:09 AM

The alternators were not built by McLaren, only the ECU units, which have been extremely reliable. Yes, the ECU units are randomly distributed. Finally, McLaren's successful bid to supply these units was accepted by the other teams because of their high quality production of aerospace and other components. F1 called for bids and McLaren was chosen. So, this is the context in which Horner strongly suggested an element of foul play and he should know better.


March 19, 2013 8:59 AM

Richard, I know (and you are correct) that the KERS function is a part of the ECU software, so yes the fact that KERS activation was interfered with can be part of the software.
My response and explanations about telemetry supposing to be one way only (car to pit) were based on facts and as a result of the implications of what Horner said “you need to ask mclaren why the ECU didn't work because he (Webber) was blind and had no telemetry”.
I agree with you about the hogwash that goes on here re any team intentionally restricting one of its drivers, there was a time that I felt stronger about it than you as evidenced by the clash I had some time ago with our friends from down under whom without exception were famous to express such opinion on these pages but since then I am happy to say that they and again without exception they seem to have since desists from expressing such opinion. To be continued.


March 19, 2013 9:19 AM

Continued, Yesterday I said that Webber not having KERS available at the start means he had 80hp less than others, yes but not really, my opinion is Webber simply had one of his by now standard bad starts, some technical explanation at least for those interested is needed on this subject.
Assuming that Webber had a KERS issue, by the time the KERS issue came into effect he (Webber) was overtaken (passed) by several cars, that is why I say he had one of by now his trade mark bad starts.
Now here is an explanation as to why I say “by the time the KERS issue came into effect”.
The KERS boost is available and used/operated at the start, but not immediately the red lights turn off, in fact the system can load and release energy (power) at speeds above 100km/h. To be continued.


March 19, 2013 9:35 AM

Continued, furthermore at the start which in itself is a fine balancing act on the part of the driver the engine revs at the clutch bite point (kiss point) is far less than maximum which means the engine is not producing it's maximum HP, the same goes for KERS, the KERS MGU motor develops a maximum of 80hp at 36000rpm (at double the engine rpm) so again same as the engine maximum power output is developed at maximum rpm.
Hope all that is understood and was of help to those interested but with apologises to those not interested in the technicalities.


March 19, 2013 11:10 AM

Prof's, I can only respond to some of the things that I have managed to make anything out of from on your post.
Things that I have talked about are not things that I simply believe in but things that I fully understand as they belong to my line of work.
That even at my age I am still and will never stop learning is a fact of live to me.
All the other stuff you wrote I am sorry to say I can't make anything out of it.
But seriously although I doubt it if you wish to talk this subject over (KERS technicalities) I am willing too.

Harper - Unregistered

March 19, 2013 2:02 PM


My take away from the article is Horner was at pains to make clear it's not RB's fault, that they did not mess up Mark's KERS. It did not strike me as insinuating foul play by McLaren, though a lot of media slanted their reporting towards that take.

Rule no.1 of journalism, find and accentuate conflict! A lot of media folks like to stir sxxx, either to attract eyeballs or because they are being paid by vested interests.

Page 4 of 6
« 1 2 3 4 5 6  »

Join the conversation - Add your comment

Please login or register before adding your comments.

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.

© 1999 - 2015 Crash Media Group | Built by Accelerate Agency

The total or partial reproduction of text, photographs or illustrations is not permitted in any form.