Considering that this was the same engine that was in the McLaren's that year, which won all but 1 race, just goes to show you how bad the rest of the car is.
Lotus had already one year of experience with Honda in 1988. But they were declasified by McLaren. I remember that it was quite a surprise for them because in 1987 they won two races with it.
@Sokra01 Honda had made a new lower turbo engine for Mclaren for 1988 and Mclaren built a new gearbox for MP4/4 to take full advantage of the new Honda engine.Meanwhile Lotus also got the new engine but used its existing gearbox for the 100T, which meant that Lotus had to titled there engine fore to aft to achieve the right shaft angle. But by doing that Lotus negated much of the benefit that came with the lower engine.
@ShadowFenrir2 One other thing was also during aerodynamic testing they got incorrect data about the drag and downforce which affected them during the entire season and the lotus had active suspension which was driven by the exhaust cam that robbed some power and had negative influence on the fuel consumption
@STEFAZON500 So basically the Lotus 100T was a series of mistakes rolled all into one package but it had the honda V6T to power it out of some of those problems.
@ShadowFenrir2 Basically yes but the car was essentially the same as the 87 model which was designed around senna And Gérard Ducarouge started to loose intrest in the car he departed for larousse for 89. The car had the same problem as the the Williams FW 16(early season) it needed to be driven and setup within a tight limit it wasn't a forgiving car and Senna was the only few people who could drive it at the limit
An absolutely fascinating analysis of one of the fastest F1 cars in '88, especially in describing the characteristics of the Honda engine. No wonder Nakajima didn't qualify in Detroit in this car. It certainly wasn't a knock on Nakajima's abilities, as he is a very smooth driver. The car simply didn't suit him. Even Piquet had a difficult time in the car.
The Master has spoken.....& fairly damning too....!
A super vid, great to see F1 cars at Snett, i saw so many there as a kid (used to cycle up from our village when we could hear them going 'round) incl many of the local Lotus drivers incl. Andretti (with Chapman), Senna, & later Herbert & Zanardi......happy days
Exactly. Stewart gives good insight into the little things that made one team thrive and the other flop. The McLaren was just a better design overall, very similar to the 1986 Brabham, but the BMW engine of the Brabham wasn't a good fit. The Honda fit like a glove, and the aerodynamics were great. Senna and Prost pretty much swept the results table clean that year, and Senna drove a stormer of a race to his first world championship title in Suzuka.
Apparently Jackie, who had not raced in years, correctly identified problems with the Lotus that the team were already working on.
Unfortunately for Nelson Piquet & Satoru Nakajima, while their engines were the equal of McLaren's in 1988 (same engine actually, Honda turbo), the Lotus car itself was not up to the job. It usually had a hard time fending off the faster 'atmo' cars like Williams, Benetton & March.
The driving position looked horrible. Imagine driving that car competitively for a full season! Very hard work. I reckon Nakajima did well considering.
Anyone who doesn't find this interesting is just in the wrong neighborhood. Go Jackie.. Stuff like this allows us to understand how things were. He did like the Honda powerplant, didn't he?
That on-off power delivery is unfortunately the nature of small displacement, super high yielding turbo engines devoid of lag. What I find truly amazing-more so than the engine itself- is that this very same motor also powered the MP4/4 and the McLaren boys had the chassis sorted out and made it driveable (not to mention MP4/4's utter domination never seen again until the advent of Ferrari F2002). (cont. on part 2)
Ele diz que o Lotus-Honda não é um dos melhores carros da história da F1. O teste foi em snetterton. O único destaque do carro é o motor, muito potente (aliás, o mesmo motor da McLaren de Senna e Prost).
Porém, o chassi é pessimo, e o carro muito nervoso. A posição de pilotagem é "quase claustrofóbica", segundo ele.
This has been flagged as spam show
The most narcissistic man in the history of the world.
He thinks driving cars is important and makes him some kind of skillful man who has done worthwhile things. He couldn't be further from the truth.
fancythathat 3 months ago
Considering that this was the same engine that was in the McLaren's that year, which won all but 1 race, just goes to show you how bad the rest of the car is.
DeanoTheLegend87 4 months ago
Everything he says makes Senna look more pro...
ChuckNorrisOfF1 5 months ago
Jackie didn't like this thing at all...
Audioquest56 7 months ago
this is the nicest and most polite way I have ever heard someone calling a car a total shitbox! haha
cassin16 9 months ago
@funkdogg, absolutely agree, Jackie's relaxed manner in explaining things makes it so much simpler. Legend
[---{o}-]
TheStevi555 11 months ago
Very good video.
Lotus had already one year of experience with Honda in 1988. But they were declasified by McLaren. I remember that it was quite a surprise for them because in 1987 they won two races with it.
Sokra01 1 year ago 2
@Sokra01 Honda had made a new lower turbo engine for Mclaren for 1988 and Mclaren built a new gearbox for MP4/4 to take full advantage of the new Honda engine.Meanwhile Lotus also got the new engine but used its existing gearbox for the 100T, which meant that Lotus had to titled there engine fore to aft to achieve the right shaft angle. But by doing that Lotus negated much of the benefit that came with the lower engine.
ShadowFenrir2 9 months ago
@ShadowFenrir2 One other thing was also during aerodynamic testing they got incorrect data about the drag and downforce which affected them during the entire season and the lotus had active suspension which was driven by the exhaust cam that robbed some power and had negative influence on the fuel consumption
STEFAZON500 9 months ago
@STEFAZON500 So basically the Lotus 100T was a series of mistakes rolled all into one package but it had the honda V6T to power it out of some of those problems.
ShadowFenrir2 9 months ago
@ShadowFenrir2 Basically yes but the car was essentially the same as the 87 model which was designed around senna And Gérard Ducarouge started to loose intrest in the car he departed for larousse for 89. The car had the same problem as the the Williams FW 16(early season) it needed to be driven and setup within a tight limit it wasn't a forgiving car and Senna was the only few people who could drive it at the limit
STEFAZON500 9 months ago
An absolutely fascinating analysis of one of the fastest F1 cars in '88, especially in describing the characteristics of the Honda engine. No wonder Nakajima didn't qualify in Detroit in this car. It certainly wasn't a knock on Nakajima's abilities, as he is a very smooth driver. The car simply didn't suit him. Even Piquet had a difficult time in the car.
Treetop64 1 year ago
he can explain it to a 4 year old. jackie is a true legend!
Funkdogg 1 year ago
Is this an F1 car? Cause it looks identical to an indycar.
Regret696 1 year ago
@Regret696 80's f1 cars might look like that
Funkdogg 1 year ago
Comment removed
X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X 11 months ago
@Regret696
This is Lotus Honda 100T driven with average sucess by Piquet and Nakayima in the formula 1 world championship 1988.
X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X 11 months ago
@X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X
Ah ok, it does still look very similar to the champcars/indycars.
Regret696 11 months ago
@X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X
Yes, but since 1989 the cars looked very different. From 1983 (no groundeffect) until 1988 most of the cars looked like this.
X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X8X 11 months ago
isn't the description of the characteristics of that honda engine what all the modern f1 engines have???
ShAwNeXsHeN 1 year ago
they can keep the shell, i want that honda engine!
rofLopolous 1 year ago
The Master has spoken.....& fairly damning too....!
A super vid, great to see F1 cars at Snett, i saw so many there as a kid (used to cycle up from our village when we could hear them going 'round) incl many of the local Lotus drivers incl. Andretti (with Chapman), Senna, & later Herbert & Zanardi......happy days
Ben4810 1 year ago
3:15-4:02 lol
I love how Stewart calmly describes such things XD
csykes23 2 years ago 6
1988 was a crap year. Turbos still had an advantage, but their boost was so low, I remember Berger saying anyone could drive a GP car now.
Fmontes 2 years ago 2
In the McLaren chassis the same Honda V6 turbo engine was unbeatable in 1988.
Eric0816 2 years ago
Exactly. Stewart gives good insight into the little things that made one team thrive and the other flop. The McLaren was just a better design overall, very similar to the 1986 Brabham, but the BMW engine of the Brabham wasn't a good fit. The Honda fit like a glove, and the aerodynamics were great. Senna and Prost pretty much swept the results table clean that year, and Senna drove a stormer of a race to his first world championship title in Suzuka.
antiuser 2 years ago
Great analysis. One suspects contractual issues prevents Mansell or Hill doing something similar today, and we're all the worse for it.
StevenJamesJ 3 years ago
that was probably before it the track was resurfised, the strat is realey pachey!
car looks fantastic through the bomb whole.
he realey knows what hes talking about, if uou havent yet his book is a fantastic read
ja34mo 3 years ago
I like the way he talks, very slow.
RobertNewVision 3 years ago 3
Its nice, specially for foreigns like me =D
felirrari 3 years ago
@RobertNewVision and the accent, very clear :d
that's because he's Scottish...
juansdf1 1 year ago
Jackie is a class act!!!!
superfast30 3 years ago 8
the lotus team really needs to do a little more big the cockpits of they cars because they are limited of movement
kjsh987 4 years ago
Apparently Jackie, who had not raced in years, correctly identified problems with the Lotus that the team were already working on.
Unfortunately for Nelson Piquet & Satoru Nakajima, while their engines were the equal of McLaren's in 1988 (same engine actually, Honda turbo), the Lotus car itself was not up to the job. It usually had a hard time fending off the faster 'atmo' cars like Williams, Benetton & March.
Holden308 4 years ago
The driving position looked horrible. Imagine driving that car competitively for a full season! Very hard work. I reckon Nakajima did well considering.
reynard89 4 years ago 5
bahahaha.... camel helicopter
5starsnitskymatch 4 years ago 2
yeah I find that surprisingly funny too. lol
willywonka4340 4 years ago
lol
crbassassin 4 years ago
jackie if you ever read this you sould do a dvd testing the championship cars from the last 15 ye
ayrtonsenna1960 4 years ago 2
Anyone who doesn't find this interesting is just in the wrong neighborhood. Go Jackie.. Stuff like this allows us to understand how things were. He did like the Honda powerplant, didn't he?
shack544 4 years ago
That on-off power delivery is unfortunately the nature of small displacement, super high yielding turbo engines devoid of lag. What I find truly amazing-more so than the engine itself- is that this very same motor also powered the MP4/4 and the McLaren boys had the chassis sorted out and made it driveable (not to mention MP4/4's utter domination never seen again until the advent of Ferrari F2002). (cont. on part 2)
willywonka4340 4 years ago
(cont. from part 1)
Hats off to Gordon Murray, the father of the F1 Road Car (inspired by his daily driver, the Honda/Acura NSX)!! :-)
willywonka4340 4 years ago
Hehe, Jackie tells it like it is. :D
wipeout2098 5 years ago
Pena que não dá pra entender muito do que o Jackie diz.
anascimento 5 years ago
Ele diz que o Lotus-Honda não é um dos melhores carros da história da F1. O teste foi em snetterton. O único destaque do carro é o motor, muito potente (aliás, o mesmo motor da McLaren de Senna e Prost).
Porém, o chassi é pessimo, e o carro muito nervoso. A posição de pilotagem é "quase claustrofóbica", segundo ele.
renanlombigous 5 years ago
Ow, cool! Essa da posição eu tinha entendido. Valeu!!!
anascimento 5 years ago