FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Denthúl]

It's use is not in question but it's cost is.

Out of all the teams who have developed KERS, Williams' system is the cheapest, at one point it was reported that they spent £2million in comparison to the likes of McLaren and Honda spending in excess of something like £300million. To help develop KERS Sir Frank invested in a local company that specialises in the KERS process.

So there you see, Williams aren't overspending or stretching their budget here, it's just another shrewd bit of business by Sir Frank.

The fact that Williams intends for their KERS system to be used in things such as public transport is also something that would live up to the idea of introducing KERS in the first place, and the fact that it uses a flywheel system could prove far more relevant than the battery-based systems of other teams.

[7UpJordan]

It's use is not in question but it's cost is.

Out of all the teams who have developed KERS, Williams' system is the cheapest, at one point it was reported that they spent £2million in comparison to the likes of McLaren and Honda spending in excess of something like £300million. To help develop KERS Sir Frank invested in a local company that specialises in the KERS process.

So there you see, Williams aren't overspending or stretching their budget here, it's just another shrewd bit of business by Sir Frank.

The fact that Williams intends for their KERS system to be used in things such as public transport is also something that would live up to the idea of introducing KERS in the first place, and the fact that it uses a flywheel system could prove far more relevant than the battery-based systems of other teams.

Yep, and no sign of McLaren putting KERS on any of Mercedes' road cars.

[Denthúl]

Yep, and no sign of McLaren putting KERS on any of Mercedes' road cars.

Aye. I can't really see much use for the battery-based systems in cars. I'd definitely think the mechanical system would be a better option. Possibly cheaper, too, since it wouldn't have to be as good as the F1 equivalent.

[Jabberwocky]

How long is the design stage on a Mercedes? I would not expect it to be seen on a merc road car for at least another 1-2 years

[Gilles 27]

I know someone who is developing a KERS system for a car manufacturer atm and he reckons that the KERS systems in F1 are completely irrelevant to road production models and that if Mercedes/BMW etc wanted to make a KERS system for their road cars they would have to start from fresh.

[Jabberwocky]

I would imagine that road versions would have to be more efficient. as the last time I checked Buses Don't slam on the brakes at 200mph to build up energy.
Also they are not limited to how much energy that can be stored/used.

For the Williams system, to use that on a bus then to get the extra energy then 1 of 2 things must happen to increase the kinetic energy stored in the device

a, more mass must be added
b, the mass must spin faster

[Denthúl]

I know someone who is developing a KERS system for a car manufacturer atm and he reckons that the KERS systems in F1 are completely irrelevant to road production models and that if Mercedes/BMW etc wanted to make a KERS system for their road cars they would have to start from fresh.

I imagine this would all be down to the fact that a Formula 1 car would always create the energy in larger amounts, and much more quickly, than a road car ever would, as well as the release being completely different. In Formula 1 it is used as a boost, in road applications it would surely be used to power the car without burning fuel. Right?

I would imagine that road versions would have to be more efficient. as the last time I checked Buses Don't slam on the brakes at 200mph to build up energy.
Also they are not limited to how much energy that can be stored/used.

For the Williams system, to use that on a bus then to get the extra energy then 1 of 2 things must happen to increase the kinetic energy stored in the device

a, more mass must be added
b, the mass must spin faster

I think the concept is far more feasible for road-use, though.

[Jabberwocky]

I think the biggest downfall with the Williams KERS system in a race is the gyroscopic effects of the spinning mass in the car. for road use then that is not something to worry about.

[Frosty]

Out of all the teams who have developed KERS, Williams' system is the cheapest, at one point it was reported that they spent £2million in comparison to the likes of McLaren and Honda spending in excess of something like £300million. To help develop KERS Sir Frank invested in a local company that specialises in the KERS process.

So there you see, Williams aren't overspending or stretching their budget here, it's just another shrewd bit of business by Sir Frank.

A bit miss leading cost there it cost Mercedes around £70 million by the time they raced in Australia and i don't think the package has changed that much since.

[bud]

It's use is not in question but it's cost is.

Out of all the teams who have developed KERS, Williams' system is the cheapest, at one point it was reported that they spent £2million in comparison to the likes of McLaren and Honda spending in excess of something like £300million. To help develop KERS Sir Frank invested in a local company that specialises in the KERS process.

So there you see, Williams aren't overspending or stretching their budget here, it's just another shrewd bit of business by Sir Frank.

yeah you pointed it out nicely..The Williams system might be cheap but the others arent. KERS as a whole is expensive you cannot deny that! For the good of the whole grid it would be logical to scrap it as FOTA has out forward.

but it seems Williams is only caring about WIlliams and not F1.

[7UpJordan]

It's use is not in question but it's cost is.

Out of all the teams who have developed KERS, Williams' system is the cheapest, at one point it was reported that they spent £2million in comparison to the likes of McLaren and Honda spending in excess of something like £300million. To help develop KERS Sir Frank invested in a local company that specialises in the KERS process.

So there you see, Williams aren't overspending or stretching their budget here, it's just another shrewd bit of business by Sir Frank.

yeah you pointed it out nicely..The Williams system might be cheap but the others arent. KERS as a whole is expensive you cannot deny that! For the good of the whole grid it would be logical to scrap it as FOTA has out forward.

but it seems Williams is only caring about WIlliams and not F1.

Well, just like the outcome of the DDD fiasco, the other teams should have thought harder and maybe they could have gone the same way Williams and spent much, much, much less. It's not Williams' fault that they want to stick with KERS just because they found a cheaper way of doing it, infact development of the FW31 AND KERS for Williams has probably cost much less than just the McLaren MP4/24 alone.

[bud]

Whether it's Williams fault they found a unique company to buy out technology is irrelevant, the fact remains that F1 is all about cost cutting and as a whole KERS is expensive majority of the grid don't want it for that reason! yet Williams doesn't give a s*** as long as it's not expensive for them the rest of the teams can screw themselves! Williams are positioning themselves in an awkward position in regards to I ter team relations.


And Denthul battery operated KERS are already in use the Prius for example stores kintic energy

[7UpJordan]

Whether it's Williams fault they found a unique company to buy out technology is irrelevant, the fact remains that F1 is all about cost cutting and as a whole KERS is expensive majority of the grid don't want it for that reason! yet Williams doesn't give a s*** as long as it's not expensive for them the rest of the teams can screw themselves! Williams are positioning themselves in an awkward position in regards to I ter team relations.


And Denthul battery operated KERS are already in use the Prius for example stores kintic energy

It's Williams' fault they found a unique company to help develop KERS??

F1 today IS all about cost cutting, and Williams developing KERS, but doing it a cheap way, so they can continue to cut costs. In reality, it's the other teams' fault that KERS is so expensive for them because they didn't think carefully developing it. If all the other teams had gone down the fly-wheel route, nobody would be complaining at all because to the likes of McLaren a fly-wheel system would be peanuts to them. So in effect, the other teams have dug their own grave.

[Denthúl]

Hopefully it will prove to be another example of Williams creating something good at a lower cost than rivals.

[bud]

Ok maybe look at it this way,
what's cheaper

A. No kers
B. Williams Kers
C. Ferrari Kers

F1 doesn't need Kers it's a logical thing to ditch to save costs.