KERS at Spa only seemed to be good for overtaking at the start or after a safety car period, then it seemed KERS was simply an anti-overtaking device.

Is this all the device is now offering?

What else do you want it to be?
to cure H1N1??

What we need to see in order to make a good judgement on this, is a race between two KERS cars, because I suspect that would make all the difference. Of course if the FIA really wanted it to be used for overtaking it wouldn't be x seconds per lap, it would be x seconds per race.

When that moron Max Mosley drummed up KERS, it was to cement his legacy in the sport.

Rather than being remembered as a devisive pervert, he pushed hard for a system that would have a green application for the car industry and improve racing.

The thing he didn't do, which was idiotic, was make it mandatory.

So rather than have a whole field using their KERS to spice up the action and create overtaking opportunities, we have two teams using it to ensure they can't be overtaken at all.

well, there was no-one left for kimi to overtake in spa ;)

KERS is also being used to improve overall laptime, especially in qualifying.

And yea, when you have to defend you can use it. And attacking. What more would you want it to do? Jump?

exactly

I'd prefer it if you could only hit the KERS button once per lap.

Yep. It a shame that only two teams are using it. I definitely think that F1 nowadays needs this kind of "push to pass" button, on the other hand I'm not sure if KERS is the answer. It seems that it's just too expensive and it brings along the difficulties in weight distribution. I really think that KERS was the main reason why McLarens and Ferraris were so slow in the middle sector.

It has also become very clear that it's nearly impossible for a non-KERS car to overtake a car equipped with KERS.

If only FIA made it mandatory, then it could be fine. Also there could be a button which disables the rev limiter for overtaking. As for future, I'd very much like to see turbos back in racing. Push-to-pass could be easily made by controlling the boost pressure.

Something like KERS is what F1 really needs to make overtaking easier. They just have to make sure that everyone uses them.

I guess this "all shit KERS" is starting to work. Two wins in last three races is not that bad result, considering the new technique was in competiton first time less than six months ago. Every other technical innovation has needed a lot time in racing to become a winner. It adds a variaton to races. If the team gains something from KERS, it also loses out with balance. So, maybe Ferrari might have had the quickest car around Spa had they never adopted KERS. But as the results stand, this is another win for KERS-system. It is good, as it brings the system to the knowledge of larger public. Anybody who have some knowledge of physichs will instantyly understand the benefits of the system.

The introduction of Kers, and the free reign for teams to decide to take it up or not, along with the aero and tyre amendments has produced one of the most open and unpredictable seasons in years

A season where a minnow can develop a car, using a customer spec, restricted development engine and by Spa can be challenging the might of the highest spending team

I'd say that's quite refreshing

Whether that was by design or not is the question

As for Kers, they should have it permanently "on", so when the driver presses the throttle it's delivered along with the gasoline power

Sort of like a turbo boost

Actually it could have been 3 out of 3

I think if everyone used the same kers system you'd be back at stalemate again

They should introduce more variables, not limit them - allow designers freedom to run different philosophies

So, say allow double the current Kers power and that may cost you, say, 50kg

Some designers might go with that and some might accept a lighter, more nimbler car... sounds like the start of the 80's all over again!

I know what I don't want it to be - a very costly device when all teams could use the same type of push to pass system as A1GP.

KERS is token green technology which cures nothing when it comes to racing.

Well enough was admitted that only at two location track offered some overtaking opportunities for even marginally faster cars (Fisi and Seb both had). It is however also true that Ferrari was deploying KERS strategically and negated any chances chase cars without KERS had. So it is not whom else Kimi should have overtaken as an agressor, but whom he had prevented to overtake him, as part of his defensive strategy.

Someone here consider KERS teams win's to be artificial, because of the help by the device. I would like to remind that every team has a chance to use it, and take "unfair" advantage out of the system.

The system seems to work by now but it has taken long (and lot of money) before it was this usefull as it has been in the last few of races.

To answer the question asked here, it is both an anti-overtake and a pro-overtake device, and the teams that have developped it surely deserve the advantage it gives, they haven't had it easy...

KERS is destroying racing this year. It makes races artificial. Make it mandatory next season or just scrap it.

The same story is with double decker diffusers. How can we judge whether new aero rules work if new diffusers negated desired effect. Somebody in governing body has lost the plot...

This would be a great idea

If kers was spec it would have no effect whatsoever, two cars without KERS can't do any overtaking, the same two cars both with KERS will be at the exact same stalemate just 5mph faster.

For KERS to improve racing the FIA needs to widen it's application, force teams to figure out different compromises ... Team A with 200kw kers/heavier car, Team B with an 80KW kers/better aero, then you might get some racing.

Anything that would give more variables, and freedom in the design philosophies would bebefit F1 a lot. Here's hoping for better future

Indeed. It was ridiculous how some whined on the live thread about Räikkönen overtaking and using KERS (...funnily enough the same people saw nothing wrong with Hamilton passing Webber with KERS at Hungary though..) If nobody had KERS half of the passes this year would have not happened.

The difference is that Hamilton passed Webber and blasted away from him with ease.

Kimi used KERS to overtake Fisi and had to live with him less than a second behind the whole race.

So KERS in Hungary only made Hamilton's life easier, as he pitted later than Webber and had a much faster car, so that he could pit the 2nd time and still rejoin in front of Webber.

In Spa KERS won Kimi the race.

And I expect that it will be much worse in Mozna with the very low DF set-ups. KERS equipped cars will simply destroy the rest of the field.

A good question. My suggestion: Keep Kers, but only allow drivers to use it to pass people, not to defend positions. You will get some good dices between cars then...

The simple way of doing this is to only allow a certain number of seconds use per race, rather than per lap.

Yea I bet kimi was thinking get away from me!

Was great to see though...

I'm not sure about that. They will be hard to pass, but they will only gain a place on the start and first lap. Hard to tell if the worse balance will offset the increased power.

And, if KERS is an advantage at Monza, it's about time - the cars with it has been disadvantaged through most of the season. You can build a better car at more circuits without it.

But yes, the idea is flawed from the start, since if it was mandatory we would only maintain status quo - we wouldn't get more overtaking. This is actually in a smaller version Max two-tier formula in practice.

Not entirely. Chasing faster car could save up the power while forcing the leading one to use his up in defending.

If Fisichella had had KERS, he could have used less or none from La Source to Les Combes and go for the pass before the Chicane instead. If Räikkönen chooses not to use KERS after La Source, Fisichella will have a big opportunity to pass then. Remember that for the best effect KERS needs to be applied as soon as downforce gives enough grip. It doesn't help much once speeds are near 300km/h already. This gives a tactical advantage to the chasing car.

Then congrats to Ferrari for developping a good and reliable KERS system. The other teams could have done the same if they wanted to.

It works both ways.
I think they should be allowed to use more of it.

I don't think a good tow is worth 80hp for several seconds

Besides, if they both hd Kers and used it the way you suggest the favour would be returned by Kimi the following lap

And you could also say the same if there was no Kers

If he was close enough to Kimi he could have got a tow and passed - he didn't because Kers kept Kimi clear

yes, I said that in other threads.

Kers makes racing artificial

PS: nothing agaisnt Mclaren and Ferrari.

Kers allowing overtaking at the start and after safety car periods is making it an anti-overtaking device?

nobody complained after German GP because Mclaren was the faster car anyway.

In Spa Kimi had the 4th best pace.

Once ahead, the faster car will drive away, KERS or no KERS. Fisi would simply defend the first long straight and by the next he would be too far to catch.



Agreed. I was not discussing this scenario.

I dont think Fisi was actually that much faster than Kimi or you'd have seen him challenge at least once during the race. Vettel was the fastest.

2 laps for overtaking against 42 laps using it for defense......

Have a look at the 1981 season - it's exactly what Gilles and Didier did then with their turbo cars.
I liked the diversity of it then - the turbo cars had a power advantage but some handling disadvantages as well - and I like it that way now.

Yeah right, even more artificial rules

I like KERS. It should be better if every team had a good working KERS. shame on the budget situation.

KERS can be used to both attack and defend as we saw with Kimi in Spa.

much worse? or much better?
these teams put huge amounts of money in their kers program, other teams used those money to optimize their aero, their chassis etc, didn't have to make room for kers, with all the necessary compromises. it was THEIR call.
once the kers teams do get the most out of their cars the kers benefit will be crucial
unfortunately it took too long for them, but it's high time they get some ROI for all the effort put in

KERS was introduced quite a few years ago by McLaren, only for FIA to ban it. When FIA reintroduced the system they had a very detailed specification about it's use and power. That's the problem, not the technology itself. Many roadcars do for instance already have a sort of KERS system without extra motors/generators or batteries; instead they simply use the conventional alternator and battery to store energy during braking. Other road cars are equipped with heavy motors and batteries for a much more powerful system. I think the F1 teams need the same option. If they want they can run a lighter but less powerful system, or they can go for a heavier but also more powerful system. That way we will see greater speed differences at different parts of the circuit; cars with more powerful KERS system will have a higher top speed but will suffer when turning.

Today all engines produce about the same power and the cars are very similar due to the detailed regulations. This may decrease the lap time difference between the first and last car on the field, but it also has a negative effect on overtaking.

Unrestricted KERS could be step to fully electric F1 cars (at big $)?

Perhaps for time being, electric F1 cars will have very good acceleration but poor top speed and heavy weight. Unrestricted "HYBRID" could make good F1 cars with better acceleration and same top speed? Could encourage Toyota... for a mere extra $200m per season for this electric stuff it will be true "green" marketing platform

Unrestricted KERS will not be a step toward fully electric F1 cars, a battery simply can't store the amount of energy required within a realistic mass and volume. The function of the system is only to recover energy otherwise lost as heat through the brakes.

With unrestriced KERS I think the teams would also be forced to investigate options to electrochemical batteries as the power density offered by a battery is rather limited. Commercial battery manufacturers claim to have reached power densities in the order of 4.5 kW/kg, in other words a 15 kg battery can provide the current 60 kW boost. The same battery can probably store 2700 kJ, which is more than adequate for kinetic energy recovery.

I think a regulation that demand that the teams must use the same KERS system for more than one race also is neeeded. To use a new battery for every race is not green marketing.

saying kers in anti overtaking is like saying the throttle is an anti overtaking device