About Us
Launched in 2005, this website started out as a dedicated F1 forum (hence FORUM…ula1.com) offering debate and banter on all aspects of Formula One and other motorsport categories.
Read moreDiscuss the sport you love with other motorsport fans
I always said KERS was donna die out quickly. yeah the straight line speed blah blah blah, but at the end of the day, it was dangerous, expensive and heavy. its benefits rarely outweighed its negatives (literally!)
it wont be back, and if it is, then all teams should have it as a disadvantage, but i ask anyone defending the costs and use of KERS, does Brawn GP use it?
I always said KERS was donna die out quickly. yeah the straight line speed blah blah blah, but at the end of the day, it was dangerous, expensive and heavy. its benefits rarely outweighed its negatives (literally!)
it wont be back, and if it is, then all teams should have it as a disadvantage, but i ask anyone defending the costs and use of KERS, does Brawn GP use it?
To (sort of) answer your post, i don't think the example of Brawn is relevant, basically because KERS wasn't brought in to increase outright performance. It's intentions were good in theory and occasionally on paper, and it could have killed two birds with one stone in some ways - improving F1's green credentials and increasing overtaking - yet it failed. Why? Very simply because like the BMW guys say: it wasn't mandatory from the start!
At least the technology has been transferred to general road car use, any ways to save a little more of the precious fossil fuels are good by me, i don't want to be forced into driving some dull electric/hybird!
Woo!
Kers are useless! A waste!
Woo!
Kers are useless! A waste!
Your new avatarIs it getting too Warm in ster??
wonder if they'll have revised body work soon then?
this is what a two teir championship would of almost been like also the KERS cars have been pretty poor this year apart from certain tracks would have simlar situation with two teir only much worse.
Basically KERS wasn't brought in to increase outright performance. It's intentions were good in theory and occasionally on paper, and it could have killed two birds with one stone in some ways - improving F1's green credentials and increasing overtaking - yet it failed. Why? Very simply because like the BMW guys say: it wasn't mandatory from the start!
I wonder if we can point to this as a reason Ferrari and McLaren had bad starts to this year. A car out of the box that is a second slower in the beginning than the rest of the field due to the weight. And then mucking up the balance and design trying to remove it.. It could be the reason why Macca can't get a grip on the performance of the rear end.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/76402
Where's Williams?
See our F1 related articles too!