Comments on: Upgrade works for Red Bull and McLaren ditch KERS (British Grand Prix round-up)

By: alejob

alejob — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:24:38 +0000

Well it’s good to see how the new RB5″B-spec” with a new nose cone much wider and flatter that works perfectly with the up-graded double deck diffuser. This create a perfect airflow from the very begining of the car until the back.
Also not only were the new upgrades that gave RBR the big gap, were also de cold temperatures giving a hard time to the Brawn GP cars because they never could get the most of their tyres. Even when you watch the race you can see Jenson Button entering the corners (50 meteres before) doing zig zag trying to warm the tyres, but it was impossible.

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:16:54 +0000

I think these figures might be over stated here

I think the true cost is about 5-6 million for Mercedes i am sorry i do not belive any team has spent 350million devleping KERS as that is the whole budget of a very big team.

By: F1Fan

F1Fan — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:40:35 +0000

Very interesting interview w/ Button on Autosport.com. Here is the link: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/76480.

It makes sense that Brawn may well be able to turn the tables on RBR in the next 2 races, due to the multitude of heavy breaking zones in these circuits.

But something tells me that RBR will have further updates on their car to try and improve in these areas, specicic to the upcoming tracks.

By: Random Chimp

Random Chimp — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:51:35 +0000

Good idea.

By: Becken

Becken — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:40:27 +0000

Martin Whitmarsh said that "they took KERS because of the weight distribution issues." I just love the last two paragraphs of his interview to autosport:

"I don't think we have necessarily got that right and I think we have spent too much time probably being overly analytical and not enough time being straightforward pragmatic – what is it? "Don't know how it works, but it's on another car, let's take it and put it on ours! That is a good old fashioned approach to it, we need a bit of that and we are applying a bit of that right now."

By: Internet

Internet — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:03:28 +0000

McLaren ditching KERS was the worst thing they could have done. Their car is a dog and unless they completely redesign the sidepods, it is even slower without KERS. Had McLaren kept the KERS, Lewis would have been able to pass more people in the race.

By: spanky the wonder monkey

spanky the wonder monkey — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:58:54 +0000

the graphic is just that. a graphic. it indicates how much time has been used with KERS actived rather than how much charge may be in the system. well, that’s my take on it anyway.

By: m0tion

m0tion — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:58:25 +0000

Isn’t anyone going to target the DDD loophole as being bad for racing? I haven’t heard confirmation that it will be explicitly excluded next year yet. I also believe they should have some sort of instrument test for wake turbulence generated and to set a limit, If they can do performance testing for safety they should be able to do it for competition.

By: W-K

W-K — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:24:34 +0000

Ref KERS I have seen two reports on the costs, one says the teams have spent over 1.5 billion so far, the other said one team has spent 350 million plus it costs several 100 thousand/car/race to run it. Would not be possible to develop it or run under Max’s proposed cost restrictions.

Also think that the KERS cars were designed to be KERS cars and changing them to be not KERS cars is not that simple.

By: W-K

W-K — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:11:48 +0000

Just maybe, the battery pack is not big enough to give the whole 6.x seconds, so that it needs topping up as it does the lap. It is the lightest system.