FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[hamilton08]

whats the point of 13 teams spending money on the same KERS when if all 13 teams use it then there is no advantage gained and it will only make overtaking harder making the sport more boring.

so whats the point of wasting money on something that is not needed

[IceManpjn]

I reckon someone will argue otherwise, but it seems to me that KERS was supposed to improve overtaking but instead would be more of a defensive mechanism preventing overtaking. Regardless, I went into 2009 cautiously optimistic about KERS but here at the end of the season I haven't been sold on it.

[FerrariFan63]

In theory, if all the teams have KERS, then overtaking should be enhanced. If a faster driver with KERS is behind a slower driver, then the slower driver will have to use KERS to defend, while the faster driver will be able to hod on without using it. Then later in the lap, the slower driver will have an exhausted KERS, while the faster driver has both a faster car, and KERS. Hence an overtake.

Unfortunately, this theory falls down completely when you have a track with only one or two overtaking opportunities. As the slower driver only has to defend once or twice a lap.

[Jabberwocky]

I think KERS should be totally unrestricted. that way it will become more efficient and have more practical use to the road. Plus the team that does the better job will be have more power and be able to overtake more.

my only worry is that it will end up like the turbo era with the engine will only be used to charge the KERS and not drive the wheels.

[cap-dude]

I hate the FIA trying to make F1 look green. It's like throwing a piece of lettuce on top of 60 oz steak.

Formula isn't green, and it more than likely will never be green, until everyone drive's hydrogen powered cars, and we all fly on zero emission flights. It's all pathetic in my opinion. If they FIA actually want to do something green, they want to look the amount air miles F1 does.

[ivey]

:rolleyes: I hate the FIA trying to make F1 look green. It's like throwing a piece of lettuce on top of 60 oz steak.

Formula isn't green, and it more than likely will never be green, until everyone drive's hydrogen powered cars, and we all fly on zero emission flights. It's all pathetic in my opinion. If they FIA actually want to do something green, they want to look the amount air miles F1 does.

You are somewhat right, they are making F1 green in false prospects imo. Transporting is the biggest issue here.

[scotty]

In theory, if all the teams have KERS, then overtaking should be enhanced. If a faster driver with KERS is behind a slower driver, then the slower driver will have to use KERS to defend, while the faster driver will be able to hod on without using it. Then later in the lap, the slower driver will have an exhausted KERS, while the faster driver has both a faster car, and KERS. Hence an overtake.

Unfortunately, this theory falls down completely when you have a track with only one or two overtaking opportunities. As the slower driver only has to defend once or twice a lap.

Yep, as we've seen with Kovalainen ALL SEASON. The boost time should be halved and the power (at least) doubled. I swear more people would have taken KERS on if you could just use it to develop as much power as possible rather than being restricted to 80hp - another example of poorly conceived and overbearing rules in F1.

:rolleyes: I hate the FIA trying to make F1 look green. It's like throwing a piece of lettuce on top of 60 oz steak.

Formula isn't green, and it more than likely will never be green, until everyone drive's hydrogen powered cars, and we all fly on zero emission flights. It's all pathetic in my opinion. If they FIA actually want to do something green, they want to look the amount air miles F1 does.

I like that analogy. All the green stuff only came in because it was the flavour of the month, now it's all about cost cutting, so these technological steps forward like KERS have been convieniently and quietly shelved for the moment.

[Frosty]

In theory, if all the teams have KERS, then overtaking should be enhanced. If a faster driver with KERS is behind a slower driver, then the slower driver will have to use KERS to defend, while the faster driver will be able to hod on without using it. Then later in the lap, the slower driver will have an exhausted KERS, while the faster driver has both a faster car, and KERS. Hence an overtake.

Unfortunately, this theory falls down completely when you have a track with only one or two overtaking opportunities. As the slower driver only has to defend once or twice a lap.

Yep, as we've seen with Kovalainen ALL SEASON. The boost time should be halved and the power (at least) doubled. I swear more people would have taken KERS on if you could just use it to develop as much power as possible rather than being restricted to 80hp - another example of poorly conceived and overbearing rules in F1.

:rolleyes: I hate the FIA trying to make F1 look green. It's like throwing a piece of lettuce on top of 60 oz steak.

Formula isn't green, and it more than likely will never be green, until everyone drive's hydrogen powered cars, and we all fly on zero emission flights. It's all pathetic in my opinion. If they FIA actually want to do something green, they want to look the amount air miles F1 does.

I like that analogy. All the green stuff only came in because it was the flavour of the month, now it's all about cost cutting, so these technological steps forward like KERS have been convieniently and quietly shelved for the moment.

[autogyro]

Nope, Kers was prevented from being used by Fota because the big car manufacturer teams wish to control the technology developed from Kers in the hybrid car markets. They want development to stop with their inefficient first generation energy harvesting systems so that they can use the huge amounts of our tax money that they are now living off as subsidies.

How much profit have they made and will they make from these markets?
It will be far greater than what they have spent on F1 Kers.

Meanwhile, superior Kers systems are being prevented from being developed and electric road vehicle development is being put back possibly by a decade.

If Kers is not re introduced, then F1 does not deserve to continue as an example of the latest world technology because it will no longer be so, having sold out to the modern weedy computer game generation.

[Tony_sa]

.

[headless]

whats the point of 13 teams spending money on the same KERS when if all 13 teams use it then there is no advantage gained and it will only make overtaking harder making the sport more boring.

so whats the point of wasting money on something that is not needed

They will all have to compete and use them at the best times.

[myownalias]

The whole cost cutting thing came around because of FIA meddling in the first place; in the 90s; the heyday of F1 in my opinion (bearing in mind I have only seriously watched F1 since '92), F1 was great to watch; wheel to wheel racing, thrills and spills galore. Over the years it has become more and more diluted by FIA meddling meaning teams had to spend more and more to keep the speeds up; F1 isn't that much slower now than it was in the 90s; just that it takes more and more cash to get around FIA sanctioned rules. I remember when we had aerodynamic KERS; we called it slipstreaming; something that seems to not exist in modern Formula 1!

[texasmr2]

The whole cost cutting thing came around because of FIA meddling in the first place; in the 90s; the heyday of F1 in my opinion (bearing in mind I have only seriously watched F1 since '92), F1 was great to watch; wheel to wheel racing, thrills and spills galore. Over the years it has become more and more diluted by FIA meddling meaning teams had to spend more and more to keep the speeds up; F1 isn't that much slower now than it was in the 90s; just that it takes more and more cash to get around FIA sanctioned rules. I remember when we had aerodynamic KERS; we called it slipstreaming; something that seems to not exist in modern Formula 1!

[Flying Finn]

The FIA are friggin crazy!.They ask the teams to develop KERS.Most teams spent >50 mil in one season.Many tried one failed (Renault) and two succeeded (Ferrari and McLaren?) sacrificing a season in the process.
Now these teams are already pissed at not being able to use KERS in 2010.Not to mention this requires them to do additional work redesigning the car (which must be done anyway to accommodate larger fuel tanks).Now proposing the use of a standardized KERS in 2011 will only make the teams angrier!.They do all the development work,they do all the spending,they even sacrificed their chances in the championship and now they have to share the technology with others?!?!.

If they keep doing like this then no one will take the risk of implementing a new technology and wait for the others to do the work.I heard Mercedes spent more than $50 mil of its engine development funds in KERS this season !.They will be pissed for sure unless all teams are compelled to add their name like the engine suppliers name at the end of their names.

[7UpJordan]

The whole cost cutting thing came around because of FIA meddling in the first place; in the 90s; the heyday of F1 in my opinion (bearing in mind I have only seriously watched F1 since '92), F1 was great to watch; wheel to wheel racing, thrills and spills galore. Over the years it has become more and more diluted by FIA meddling meaning teams had to spend more and more to keep the speeds up; F1 isn't that much slower now than it was in the 90s; just that it takes more and more cash to get around FIA sanctioned rules. I remember when we had aerodynamic KERS; we called it slipstreaming; something that seems to not exist in modern Formula 1!

Double

Get rid of the DDD's, re-widen the cars and that should do the trick.