http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport...one/8088272.stm

Unbelievable, cost capping, sure? That's wasting a few million easily.

Very sensible decision. It's a complete waste of money that will add nothing to the racing once everyone teams have it and I seriously doubt that any KERS system developed for F1 would be of practicle use on a road car.

I've enjoyed kers vs non-kers and the extra dimension its brought to racing

Was a daft decision to bring it in anyway. The FIA talk about cutting costs, and talk about a potential standard KERS system..........so by having KERS they've gone totally against the cost cutting excuse, and the fact they want/wanted a standard KERS system meant that any money spent this season by teams would be wasted anyway as at most it'd be for 1 season before a standard version would be introduced. As some people have said before as well, everyone would have it, and everyone would use it at the same time, making it pointless basically as it'd be like racing with no cars using the system in the first place, because nobody would have any advantage

I thought FOTA wanted hi-tech F1?

Don't get me wrong, I agree with scrapping it but it's a total waste of money.

BMW are to blame IMO, they vetoed the decision to scrap it for 2009 and now ended up dropping it themselves. Hopeless.

Theres other hi-tech things that are more usefull.Like someone already said,when everyone has KERS its redundant.

They shouldn't have introduced it at all. It's neither "green", nor widely applicable. If they need short boost, they have it in higher engine revs, controlled by the SECU without the weight penalty.

They thought it would give them a competitive advantage so I don't blame them. Hindsight is 20/20.

Good. And oh boy BMW look stupid now.

edit: So I guess minimum weight goes back to 605 kg's? Teams agreed earlier to raise to 615 kg's.

I guess it could have worked as a principle has the limitations been eased off, sticking the power to 80hp over 6 seconds was not very challenging and as many found, was not worthwhile.

Now allowing an "unlimited" power usage over say, 10 seconds would have been far better and everyone would have gone for it pushig the technology further.

Dare I say, F1 KERS is primitive compared to what some manufacturers are doing with it.

BMW should pay developing costs to Ferrari/Mclaren/Renault for their KERS systems

Originally the teams wanted bio-fuels in 09 and KERS post 12, FIA insisted that it demonstrate its eco sensitivity and moved it to 09. In 08 the teams wanted a delay but as mentioned BMW vetoed the delay.

BMW...

My oh my. Williams spent all that money on the Kers company - what is it going to do with it now?

I don't understand this. I mean, what the hell is going on? Do they, internally, know how much this has costed Ferrari and McLaren? Not to mention Renault and BMW as well. This was a FIA decision for crying out loud! I want the money back! Bernie better pay or he'll be serving Bloody Mary's from his nose. Max, Idiot!

Who cares? They are not part of FOTA.

Thanks god. KERS is a complete joke, Brundle summed it up when Heikki blasted back past Barrichello today - is it real racing or plastic racing?

Plus, KERS has been Mosley's pet project - indeed, he explicitly stated several times over the winter that KERS was the kind of technical challenge that F1 ought to be about, and not aerodynamics and engine performance - so FOTA has clearly taken the opportunity to take a big dig at Mosley there.

Funny how he banned it 10 or so years ago when Mac wanted to introduce it, on cost grounds.

That would be hilarious if the FOTA teams (i.e. non-capped) decide to drop it but the capped teams decide to use the full 160BHP boost they are to be allowed. It would be complete and utter annihilation.

Maybe Ferrari exercised their veto while he was supportive?

Ferrari didnt have a veto 10 years ago.

The caped teams will first need to find a way to develop a performant KERS with peanuts instead of money, cause the 40 million will be not enough.

In fact all the teams had a veto 10 years ago, and any changes were taken only with a 100% agreement from the teams.

I know,but we didnt have the special veto we got in 2005. People trying to spin like its ferraris fault.

I know, they always do, it's what makes them feel better.

It's funny that Max is the reason for the biggest cost in Formula 1 history and yet he is the one who says all the teams need to cut costs.. Seems the old dirt ball has lost his mind! TG KERS is finally looking to be gone. Waste of time and energy and a billion dollar folly!

What a farce, indeed I liked the element of Kers v Non-Kers. After only a year its a bit of an embarrassment for Mosely, never mind BMW but alas there's a good chance one of them won't be there next year and by that I don't mean Mosely.

Quite the opposite for me. KERS cars have been impossible to pass and has made a joke of some of the racing.

Completely pointless and an insane waste of money.

If they want push to pass, as other say give a temporary raise in revs or go turbo and give a temporarily raise in boost.

Well this just about shoots down any chance of Williams coming back into the FOTA fold - unless they don't mind writing off the Kers company they bought.

Well one route to this would be that Williams (as a non-fota team) should have a useable KERS in a couple of races.......this from all accounts, will make more sense to be used once the allowed 'boost' is increased as the flywheel is quite heavy but can store alot of energy......and is actually a green tech(not that this seems to matter to the FIA).

So some of the new teams could buy this off the shelf from Williams, hence they have no RnD costs to factor in

Me too.

Yes it is a question, what a FOTA decision means. Does it mean anything? FOTA doesn't represent all the existing teams even, never mind next year's newbies. In the current climate FOTA 'deciding' something probably means Max will rule the opposite

Even though we know Brundle talks a lot of sense, I do sometimes disagree with him. Ironic that he doesn't like KERS racing when he is a fan of refuelling. IMO refuelling is far worse and the passing in the pits and non-management of fuel and tires for an entire race are examples of this.

KERS vs non-KERS racing was quite interesting in the same way that two different types of cars or bikes can be e.g. one is faster on the straights compared to corners. Anyone who saw Rossi vs Stoner at Laguna Seca last year will know what I mean. I agree with Anomnader, KERS vs non-KERS brings a new dimension. Although for more years with everyone with KERS I think will take away from this.

impossible to pass?
then put a freakin kers on the other car
you can't just have all the advantages..
you go for a fast design, well balanced => no kers
you make mistakes and end up behind a kers car? tough luck, what do you want?

you people moan about impossible passing, yet you forget we put the fastest cars in front after q3 and then we are surprised there is no passing..who should pass who?!


and why is that joke of a racing? you seem to agree that a faster car through turns should be able to pass a faster car on the straights?

Just for accuracy's sake, Williams' spending on KERS has been a tiny fraction of what Merc, Ferarri, Renault and oh yes BMW, have each spent. Williams thought they were terribly clever doing it on the cheap. And wanted to sell their system as the standard one. Only problem being, they haven't (yet) got it to work properly.

KERS has been a crazy waste of money, inflicted by an out of touch, technically illiterate, Prius-driving FIA President.
That money-pit alone out to be a resigning issue.
But dictators don't resign.

I imagine that the investment Williams made in the Kers company is a far greater percentage of its available resources than the investment in Kers represents of the available budgets of any other F1 team.

do you seriously think we actually gonna have that cost capped/non cost capped nonsense in 2010?


I absolutely dont see it.

Either all the teams in F1 then run under a cap... or the thing is scrapped.

oh and yes, 40mill wont be enough to develop a KERS system and I doubt the manufacturers will sell theirs when they arent using them except the Williams flywheel thing sees the light of day.

F'ing BMW apparently they tried to block this move for 2010 as well!! And they say they have dropped KERS for all of this year. Damn hypocrites!!
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/75945

KERS was part of what the manufacturers wanted when the engine freeze was attempted by the FIA. The big teams wanted KERS.

The problem with it, has been car balance (because of the too wide front slick tyre), and also because it has only been 60 hp. If one were to have a formula where KERS aided overtaking, then instead of having 6.5 seconds of 80 hp, the cars should be able to have 3.25 seconds of 160hp extra, or 1.625 seconds of 320hp. 1.625 seconds of 320 hp would allow a car to go much faster on the main straight, and be geared for it. The result would be that a faster car could sit behind a KERS using car, and then overtake it on the straight. Perhaps!

The batteries were also a problem with KERS - they cost far too much, both to replace and to transport. IF the team had of using flywheels, then a flywheel would not have cost much because it would have lasted a whole season, and there would have been no air transport safety issues. But the teams went for batteries and complications. What a shame IMO.

That FOTA want to get rid of it, is just a reaction against the FIA. Yet the manufacturers are the ones who both wanted it, and yet some of the teams made it fail this year (due to refusing to fix the tyre balance problem). KERS has failed not because of the FIA - its failed because of the inability of the FIA to follow what Bridgestone wanted to do, and narrow the contact patch of the front slick tyres.

I quite like the idea of recycling braking energy. Not so much for the short boost, but anyway. They should store energy in all braking and use it in all acceleration. And no efficiency limitations. Only then we will se who can build a kers.

KERS should only be in F1 if the technology has a direct impact on improving road car efficiency and emissions, in its current form it does not. As clever as Williams flywheel is, it really is limited to racing under the current F1 rule set, as are the other systems in use.

Good riddance (if it happens).

Actually, I give BMW Sauber a lot of credit. Yes, they pushed for it last year and even veto'd the suggestion this year. They even admit that they would like to retain it for next year. However, they have agreed to abide by the majority vote of FOTA. That alone deserves respect.
It also means that FOTA can work conflicts out among themselves.
Democraticly.
And that is a good sign and a breath of fresh air, compared to the constant bickering and self interests we have seen.

edit; Where did they say they will drop it for the rest of the year? There are at least 3 tracks left where it would be an advantage.

This is just another example of how stupid FOTA is becoming.
They complain they want the series to be the most advanced in the world and then complain about a new item coming into the sport.
Talk about wanting their cake and eating it.

This is just another stupid demand added to an ever growing list of demands being put forward by a bunch of over paid and over rated spoilt brats.
Carry on like this teams and ever more fans are going to say up your we want the sport not the brats that the teams have become.

Why havent KERS teams asked FIA for an improvement in either duration or power? I see no statements from them.

Hindsight is 20/20 but my sight is also 20/20 and millions cheaper

This was an obvious boondoggle from the start.

The name even sounds like "Curse"


KERS failed because it was ****ing stupid. The attitude that race cars must be relevant to road cars is idiotic. KERS is the godhead of this idiocy.
Next time someone tells you that F1 is a pinnacle of technology remember KERS.
F1 is should be the pinnacle of competition with some nice technology, but the pinnacle of technology is and always has been aerospace.


I am glad to see this potentially lethal, "green" bullshit (toxic one use batteries) is gone.

I think the issue here is relevance. It is not a relevant technology. Road cars dont need overtaking buttons.

BMW topic on this forum.

But Turkey has one of the largest flat out sections on the calendar so since they didn't use it there they aren't many other places where they would.