Jump to content


Photo

Is KERS dead?


  • Please log in to reply
74 replies to this topic

Poll: Is KERS dead? (174 member(s) have cast votes)

  1. Yes, KERS will remain and become required. (114 votes [65.90%])

    Percentage of vote: 65.90%

  2. No, KERS will die. (30 votes [17.34%])

    Percentage of vote: 17.34%

  3. Yes, KERS will remain in 2010 but not beyond. (29 votes [16.76%])

    Percentage of vote: 16.76%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Ricardo F1

Ricardo F1
  • Member

  • 38,850 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 17 April 2009 - 14:42

Very interesting to see more and more cars abandon the KERS system this weekend, McLaren seem to be the only team that has it working well, though BMW joined them this weekend in finally putting it on both cars. Renault were seen in the garage taking off the system in order to add ballast to the front of the car, Ferrari have ditched it and Kimi seems to not notice any difference. Steve Matchett railed on the whole concept of KERS last night (again I believe) - and quite rightly pointed out it's likely to be useless in transfer to road cars because road cars are already using systems of this nature. He fundamentally believes that fuel usage and limitation would be a far better push toward more economical engine design and would greater influence the car world as a whole.

Given the struggles the teams are having, given the apparent uselessness of the system on the whole, is KERS dead?

Advertisement

#2 TheD2JBug

TheD2JBug
  • Member

  • 1,507 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 17 April 2009 - 14:45

please kill it . It's a joke

#3 Zarathustra

Zarathustra
  • Member

  • 306 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 17 April 2009 - 14:46

If it wasn't limited to 80hp for 6.7s it'd be useful.

#4 Orin

Orin
  • Member

  • 8,444 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 17 April 2009 - 14:47

Can't say I hate the system, but neither do I think it's been worth the amount of money invested in it. They ought to concentrate on making adjustable wings as effective as possible.

EDIT: but I voted that it will remain, perhaps a single KERS might be a better idea, though I can't see Mercedes and BMW agreeing to it.

#5 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,871 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 17 April 2009 - 14:47

I don't think it is dead in F1, I think it will be made to work somehow. Whether by introduction of a standard unit or increase in minimum weight.

#6 Dunder

Dunder
  • Member

  • 6,784 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 17 April 2009 - 14:49

Quite the opposite, I think.
The rules will be adjusted from next year which lift/reduce the restrictions on KERS use which make it essential.

I personally don't like KERS/Power Boost/Push-to-pass type things but given the nature of the FIA (like a dog with a bone) they will not let it die.

#7 werks prototype

werks prototype
  • Member

  • 5,801 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 14:50

I hate to say it but it is probably the variance between the different systems which is ultimately killing it. And if you think about it this is precisley what Mr Mosley was looking for in the first place, a kind of survival of the fittest KERS to emerge via a form of 'natural selection' ;) to act as the standard. Of course we await the interesting Williams variant, but I think everything is going according to plan and we are heading straight to the standard system.

I can imagine Max actually counting the systems demise down in his office/bunker. Two more to go Boris! Boris being his Goldfish.

#8 klover

klover
  • Member

  • 3,862 posts
  • Joined: June 03

Posted 17 April 2009 - 14:51

Originally posted by TheD2JBug
please kill it . It's a joke


Max will not let that happen, it will be an egg in his face after all his preachings. Another big chunk of money gone down the drain to satisfy his experimenting nature.

#9 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 27,687 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 17 April 2009 - 14:51

Originally posted by Zarathustra
If it wasn't limited to 80hp for 6.7s it'd be useful.


Thats the problem with KERS this year. The limits are too low to make it truly worthwhile. Once those limits are opened up then it will be a must have, but then everyone will have it and it will do nothing for the show.

#10 Alfisti

Alfisti
  • Member

  • 27,079 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 17 April 2009 - 14:59

I'd be doing EVERYTHING possible to make it work on my car. In the dry the KERS cars have been nearly impossible pass, the Toyota and RBR guys have been tearing their hair out trying to pass the KERS cars that are something like 1 1/2 seconds a lap slower. When Webber got past Alonso last weekend he TORE AWAY at over a second a lap.

Even off the start it causes mayhem if you do not have it, real mayhem, you're totally helpless. In the past two races i have seen hamilton exit a corner poorly, behind a FASTER car, he presses the magic button and WHOOOOOOSSSSH he goes past.

#11 Scotracer

Scotracer
  • Member

  • 2,722 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 17 April 2009 - 15:02

The only reason KERS has any affect on the race is that not all cars have it - as soon as every team gets it it's going to be the same when we were without it.

Something to think about: KERS costs + V8 dev costs > V10 engines in 2005


:mad:

#12 Buttoneer

Buttoneer
  • RC Forum Admin

  • 16,871 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 17 April 2009 - 15:28

Originally posted by Clatter


Thats the problem with KERS this year. The limits are too low to make it truly worthwhile. Once those limits are opened up then it will be a must have, but then everyone will have it and it will do nothing for the show.

They might be low, but this year, when there are haves and have-nots, the difference is obvious even if only from the startline. I think if you can get it to work reliably, you simply cannot afford to be without it.

The minute teams start sorting those diffusers out, those with KERS will become the pole-sitting winners.

#13 BiH

BiH
  • Member

  • 2,340 posts
  • Joined: September 05

Posted 17 April 2009 - 15:37

Originally posted by Scotracer
The only reason KERS has any affect on the race is that not all cars have it - as soon as every team gets it it's going to be the same when we were without it.

Something to think about: KERS costs + V8 dev costs > V10 engines in 2005


:mad:



if KERS is forced next year I imagine lots of teams that are not running it now will struggle with reliability, weight distribution and tyre wear like the teams with KERS are doing now so I think next years teams that are running KERS now will have advantage.

#14 Dragonfly

Dragonfly
  • Member

  • 4,496 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 17 April 2009 - 15:48

If you read my signature you'll see my opinion on KERS and that it is born dead already in this particular form.
I am afraid though that Max will push with a standard one which is even worse.
First of all I don't see any good reason for the presence of such a complicated, dangerous and ureliable appendage in an F1 car.
Engines currently run rev limited. If the aim (and I don't see any other reasonable one) is to provide some extra power for attacking and defending a position all can be easily done with the help of the SECU almost free of spendings.
By just allowing higher revs for a limited period.

#15 VicR

VicR
  • Member

  • 1,965 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 16:06

It will remain for sure. But it's clearly no benefit to use an untested system right now. But you have to start using it right now in order to be ahead in the future.

I just wonder who came up with the 6.7 second a lap rule? Every circuit has a different lap distance. Wouldn't it be better to give the teams, using KERS, a fixed amount of time at every race instead? Say 6-7 minutes and you can use when you want. Storing the energy is not a problem.

#16 lwd

lwd
  • Member

  • 215 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 17 April 2009 - 16:16

If Ferrari had leapt up the field during todays practice sessions, I would have said yes it's dead, seeing as they are racing without it this weekend.

But they have not, and have said they are missing performance from not having it.

As the season goes on it will become a must I think.

#17 engel

engel
  • Member

  • 5,037 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 17 April 2009 - 16:27

Originally posted by BiH



if KERS is forced next year I imagine lots of teams that are not running it now will struggle with reliability, weight distribution and tyre wear like the teams with KERS are doing now so I think next years teams that are running KERS now will have advantage.


Or they 'll just buy somebody else's functional KERS ;)

#18 Scotracer

Scotracer
  • Member

  • 2,722 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 17 April 2009 - 16:34

Originally posted by VicR
It will remain for sure. But it's clearly no benefit to use an untested system right now. But you have to start using it right now in order to be ahead in the future.

I just wonder who came up with the 6.7 second a lap rule? Every circuit has a different lap distance. Wouldn't it be better to give the teams, using KERS, a fixed amount of time at every race instead? Say 6-7 minutes and you can use when you want. Storing the energy is not a problem.


The amount comes from the energy output limit which I believe is 400kJ per lap, which equated to 60kW over 6.7 seconds (Power = Energy/Time)

I don't know why they chose 400kJ but there you have it.

#19 shonguiz

shonguiz
  • Member

  • 1,844 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 17 April 2009 - 16:36

Originally posted by Zarathustra
If it wasn't limited to 80hp for 6.7s it'd be useful.


Exactly i have never understood why neither teams nor FIA didn't think about extending these limits.

Advertisement

#20 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 17 April 2009 - 16:38

Ferrari's is unreliable in a possibly dangerous way (coolant leaks, do we know?), Renault and BMW's destabilises the car under braking, none of the fastest cars have it. Mac's is the only one that works well, and as the car gets faster the kers is going to piss everyone else off. Look at Webber last race, in a much faster car he had to overtake Lewis 3 times (?) to finally get clear.

Max has taken against the batteries, quite rightly because they have to be thrown away after every race, and the flywheel kers isn't working after a year's+ development because (AFAIK) there are no bearings that are both low friction and robust enough.

So this will be the one and only year for kers IMO, until better technology comes available. If McLaren get into contention towards the end of the year there will be a lot of bitching about it this year, too.

#21 Scotracer

Scotracer
  • Member

  • 2,722 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 17 April 2009 - 16:38

Originally posted by shonguiz


Exactly i have never understood why neither teams or FIA didn't extend these limits.


They did it for costs and equivalence reasons - if they made it unlimited you would have the manufacturers like Toyota and Ferrari spending ridiculous amounts of money on research into KERS systems that could potentially give 50% power back (or more!) to go on top of the 750BHP from the engines. I believe the limit is to be increased in 2010...doubling it I think.

#22 metz

metz
  • Member

  • 9,827 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 17 April 2009 - 16:39

:confused: let me see. The thread title and the poll are two different questions.
A Yes to one would require a No to the other.
And a No to one would require a Yes to the other.
Not well thought out. Sort of like the KERS experiment itself.... :drunk:

#23 shonguiz

shonguiz
  • Member

  • 1,844 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 17 April 2009 - 16:44

Originally posted by Scotracer


They did it for costs and equivalence reasons - if they made it unlimited you would have the manufacturers like Toyota and Ferrari spending ridiculous amounts of money on research into KERS systems that could potentially give 50% power back (or more!) to go on top of the 750BHP from the engines. I believe the limit is to be increased in 2010...doubling it I think.


I wasn't talking about making it limit free but they could for example make it usable for 10s.

#24 shonguiz

shonguiz
  • Member

  • 1,844 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 17 April 2009 - 16:46

Originally posted by undersquare
Renault and BMW's destabilises the car under braking


And that's based on ?

#25 Scotracer

Scotracer
  • Member

  • 2,722 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 17 April 2009 - 16:47

Originally posted by shonguiz


I wasn't talking about making it limit free but they could for example make it usable for 10s.


You can ;)

#26 leomax

leomax
  • Member

  • 151 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 17 April 2009 - 16:51

Originally posted by shonguiz


Exactly i have never understood why neither teams nor FIA didn't think about extending these limits.


AFAIR,its the teams who wanted the limits.The safety aspect.
Then the team principals didnt want some team with superior KERS to steal the show (looks like it backfired).

Raising min weight would help immensely.I dont know how they are going to store 800KJ without raising min weight next season (unless std KERS comes in).

#27 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 17 April 2009 - 16:53

Originally posted by shonguiz


And that's based on ?


Ask nicely and I might tell you ;)

#28 Madras

Madras
  • Member

  • 3,911 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 17 April 2009 - 16:59

I dont like Kers.

#29 Lukin83

Lukin83
  • Member

  • 754 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:15

That's an funny coincidence - no one with a double diffuser uses KERS and vice versa. Seems like the KERS pack invested into higher speeds at straights, while the rest remained faithfull to highest possible downforce and cornering speed. Maybe without the limits the battle between them would be more even.
What's also funny: once the teams will merge these two concepts the cars will probably be faster than ever - and Max/Bernie wanted them to be slower this year :p


Originally posted by undersquare
Ferrari's is unreliable in a possibly dangerous way (coolant leaks, do we know?), Renault and BMW's destabilises the car under braking, none of the fastest cars have it. Mac's is the only one that works well, and as the car gets faster the kers is going to piss everyone else off.


Isn't Ferrari's and Renault's systems the same? If I recall correctly the only difference between them is a storage (different batteries, possibly placed in a different places too). Also, I don't remember anyone from BMW complaining on braking stability.

Originally posted by leomax
Raising min weight would help immensely.I dont know how they are going to store 800KJ without raising min weight next season (unless std KERS comes in).


I remember Thiessen saying that changing the rear tyres size would bring almost the same benefit as rising the minimum weight of the car (less amount of ballast would be needed then).

#30 RoutariEnjinu

RoutariEnjinu
  • Member

  • 2,359 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 17 April 2009 - 17:42

FORUM NAZI ALERT!

Your thread question is posed the opposite of the poll question, it hurt my BRAIN :drunk:

#31 senna da silva

senna da silva
  • Member

  • 4,449 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 17 April 2009 - 18:29

If McLaren and Mercedes are the only ones to make it work, then it will be banned. :lol:

#32 Ricardo F1

Ricardo F1
  • Member

  • 38,850 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 17 April 2009 - 18:33

Originally posted by metz
:confused: let me see. The thread title and the poll are two different questions.
A Yes to one would require a No to the other.
And a No to one would require a Yes to the other.
Not well thought out. Sort of like the KERS experiment itself.... :drunk:

Did I ask for a poll on the thread title? :p

#33 peroa

peroa
  • Member

  • 8,985 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 17 April 2009 - 18:53

Originally posted by senna da silva
If McLaren and Mercedes are the only ones to make it work, then it will be banned. :lol:


But so far it really seems that the McMerc system is the best in the class. The car also seems to be well balanced and easy on the tyres.
The only question is if this compromises the aero of the car.

#34 Montoya1

Montoya1
  • Member

  • 571 posts
  • Joined: September 05

Posted 17 April 2009 - 19:12

I would much rather know if drivers are using the adjustable wings, and when (has anyone yet?), than know about this crazy and pointless idea from the WanKERS at the FIA.

#35 Dmitriy_Guller

Dmitriy_Guller
  • Member

  • 4,106 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 17 April 2009 - 19:17

Originally posted by Scotracer
The only reason KERS has any affect on the race is that not all cars have it - as soon as every team gets it it's going to be the same when we were without it.

I disagree. KERS allows faster cars stuck behind slower cars to concentrate their advantage over one straight. If both cars have KERS, then slower cars have to use it up just to stay ahead, while the faster car behind can save it for when the slower car runs out of it.

#36 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 17 April 2009 - 19:17

Originally posted by Lukin83

Isn't Ferrari's and Renault's systems the same? If I recall correctly the only difference between them is a storage (different batteries, possibly placed in a different places too). Also, I don't remember anyone from BMW complaining on braking stability.


I think Ferrari are water-cooling their batteries, without knowing I suspect that's the cause of their reliability problems, Kimi in a cloud of steam and it being mentioned as a safety issue, and the same fault being spotted on Massa's car without it being in use. You might be right about BMW, I was going on Dr Mario saying they had Kubi's car at break-even for pace with/without it then F1 Live saying they're taking it out overnight. Hard to know though, Massa saying he misses it and Kimi saying it doesn't make any difference; anyway McLaren is the only car that visibly gets a boost. So I think those without could well not bother, maybe some B-spec cars could be designed and optimised without it, even, as you say all the fastest cars don't have it.

#37 F1Champion

F1Champion
  • Member

  • 2,928 posts
  • Joined: September 01

Posted 17 April 2009 - 19:18

Originally posted by Zarathustra
If it wasn't limited to 80hp for 6.7s it'd be useful.


True. But I also think that controlling the fuel load and fuel feed, would push engine efficiency design a step forward. However that's not to say that engine design hasn't already been pushed to the limit. You might struggle to find useful transferable gains to road cars.

#38 Welsh

Welsh
  • Member

  • 599 posts
  • Joined: April 05

Posted 17 April 2009 - 19:27

I dunno why people are saying KERS is dead.

Firstly Ferrari have teething problems with theirs and secondly KERS is not relevant to all tracks anyway. It appears China has no benefit?

I do agree that KERS at the moment does not have any "wow" factor or obvious boost to the driver/car.

It needs revision for next year really.

#39 Boing 2

Boing 2
  • Member

  • 2,537 posts
  • Joined: June 08

Posted 17 April 2009 - 19:28

far better off putting a fuel flow limiting valve in the car to limit max flow, this would force manufacturers to create powerful AND economical engines, directly relevant to road cars. if you want you can add a pass button to boost flow for a set period.

beauty of this is that when cars get too fast you just turn the flow down and reduce speeds.

Advertisement

#40 Atreiu

Atreiu
  • Member

  • 10,077 posts
  • Joined: May 07

Posted 17 April 2009 - 19:35

It was better before when they had to deal with turbo boost and fuel consumption.


[beavis and butthead]KERS sucks hehe he hehe he he hehehe[/beavis and butthead]

#41 Chris Bloom

Chris Bloom
  • Member

  • 650 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 17 April 2009 - 19:49

In 1982 Brabham ditched their BMW turbo engines for the trusty old DFV's after an uncompetitive introduction. They ironed out the problems with the BMW unit and the next year it took them to the championship. I see many similarities between the introduction of KERS and the turbo cars of the early eighties. If the technology is allowed to develop then I'm sure by the end of this season we will have two distinctive groups in F1. Those at the front with KERS and those chasing without.

#42 HP

HP
  • Member

  • 14,383 posts
  • Joined: October 99

Posted 18 April 2009 - 00:26

Originally posted by TheD2JBug
please kill it . It's a joke

+1

#43 HP

HP
  • Member

  • 14,383 posts
  • Joined: October 99

Posted 18 April 2009 - 00:31

Originally posted by Orin
EDIT: but I voted that it will remain, perhaps a single KERS might be a better idea, though I can't see Mercedes and BMW agreeing to it.

Then what is this FOTA proposal about?

http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/73566

2010:

* Engine available at €5 million per team per season
* Gearbox available at €1.5 million per team per season
* Standardised KERS (put out to tender, with a target price of €1-2 million per team per season)



#44 HP

HP
  • Member

  • 14,383 posts
  • Joined: October 99

Posted 18 April 2009 - 00:36

Originally posted by Welsh
I dunno why people are saying KERS is dead.

Firstly Ferrari have teething problems with theirs and secondly KERS is not relevant to all tracks anyway. It appears China has no benefit?

I do agree that KERS at the moment does not have any "wow" factor or obvious boost to the driver/car.

It needs revision for next year really.

The thing is, the most interesting way and environmental friendly way involves Lithium/Ion batteries.

But if Lithium/Ion batteries would make it into everyday cars, Lithium reserves would be mined empty in about 10 years. Which BTW is a huge show stopper for e-cars as well.

And mechanical KERS is stone-age technology, put on steroids for F1 use.

Must have been a good salesman or shameless politician that sold the FiA the KERS idea.

#45 Ali_G

Ali_G
  • Member

  • 18,447 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 18 April 2009 - 00:51

KERS will exit F1 when a person gets either killed or badly injured via being electrocuted by the KERS device.

#46 rye&ginger

rye&ginger
  • Member

  • 231 posts
  • Joined: June 05

Posted 18 April 2009 - 01:06

yeah, so will the use of flamable fuels. :rolleyes:

KERS is here to stay I think. Its an imature technology. Give it a year and it will be quite good I think.

They limited it to allow some reliability to exist. I have read the power and time per lap limits are to be increased in a few years. Makes sense to me.

F1, and racing fans in general are two faced. I hear we want technical competition from so many, and then KERS comes along and is a somewhat novel idea, and its shouted down. Make up your minds!

#47 anthony says

anthony says
  • Member

  • 461 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 18 April 2009 - 01:11

KERS is a disadvantage so far, and if the teams using it remain slower than all the non-KERS cars then it's difficult to see any of them persevering with it right through 2009. But Mosley is determined to enforce some technological development that will offer green benefits if applied to road cars, and KERS is the only game in town, so we must expect that the rules will be changed to make it essential for 2010.

If you increased the maximum energy return and forced non-KERS cars to install an inert object of similar mass to the KERS unit so as to remove their advantage in weight distribution, then KERS would become an advantage and they would all use it.

#48 Saint Devote

Saint Devote
  • Member

  • 147 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 18 April 2009 - 03:44

I hope KERS is vanquished from f1. It does not belong and is only there to appease the enviroment whacko-nazis.

I hate it - only more than the idiocy of pit stops.

#49 Orin

Orin
  • Member

  • 8,444 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 18 April 2009 - 07:56

Originally posted by HP

Then what is this FOTA proposal about?

http://www.autosport...rt.php/id/73566


Me not reading the news? :D

#50 metz

metz
  • Member

  • 9,827 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 18 April 2009 - 08:34

Only Heidfeld and the Macs are running KERS this weekend and Nick said that it is of no benefit at all on this track.
If McLaren are the only ones to use it for the rest of the year, will Max change his mind?