F1 teams to abandon KERS in 2010

2010 F1 season

KERS is legal for 2010 but the teams may not use it

KERS is legal for 2010 but the teams may not use it

All bar one of F1′s 13 teams have agreed not to use KERS in 2010.

This comes after the 2010 F1 rules published by the FIA yesterday indicated they may continue to use the energy recovery technology next year.

Representatives of all 13 teams – the FOTA eight plus the previously suspended Force India and Williams, and the three newcomers Manor, Campos Meta 1 and USF1 – attended a FOTA Technical Working Group meeting in Valencia yesterday. (See here for a list of representatives)

All bar one of the teams are believed to have committed to not running KERS in 2010. The decision will now go to the F1 Commission to be considered.

It is not known which of the teams opposed the decision. Earlier this year Ferrari’s Stefano Domenicali criticised BMW for standing in the way of an agreement that could have prevented KERS being introduced. Although they are set to quit F1 at the end of the year, BMW is understood to have submitted an application for next season in the hope of selling their team, and they are still listed on the FOTA website.

Read more: F1 2010 rules: KERS to stay

Advert | Go Ad-free

77 comments on F1 teams to abandon KERS in 2010

  1. S Hughes said on 20th August 2009, 21:11

    Aaah yes, as I said in a previous post, I would wait with bated breath before I actually believed that KERS would be allowed next year. As it is almost undoubtedly McLaren who will be the only team to use it, it is unlikely to be authorised after all. I thought it was too good to be true. What I find pretty revolting is how fair McLaren are, and how spiteful and unfair the other teams seem to be. Not one team or driver supported Lewis and McLaren over his Spa appeal last year, and yet McLaren were one of the teams that wrote to support Alonso and Renault over the Hungary appeal this year. McLaren didn’t oppose the Schumacher testing either. And yet any legal advantage they might have by dint of spending money and the skill developing this KERS system is denised them by the other teams. Just loathsome.

  2. If it’s not McLaren they you would have to hear the board asking Haug how a race-winning, and fabulously expensive technical advantage was simply given away to make a nice with competitors.

    I wouldnt care if Williams or McLaren ran it alone. When Williams came out with active suspension and laid waste to the field, I said bully for them. That’s F1: work smarter, work harder, or get dusted. This is not a childs’ brithday party where the pinata is lowered for the younger kids.

    F1 has always been about technical leaps forward by a few, and catch up by the rest. And in all events, the move forward through innovation. The idea that the racing is ruined by technology and advanced design is not the “received view” among afficionados. In fact if you don’t know or don’t care who Gordon Murray, Adrian Newey, Tony Southgate, etc, are, you are probably not an afficionado as much as a simple spectator, whose interest is limited to what does or doesn’t happen for a hour and 45 minutes on a Sunday.

    • Martin said on 21st August 2009, 0:48

      Excellent post. That is an excellent way of telling a real fan from a poser. If you know just the drivers and the teams you dont understand the whole package.
      the technology is the reason F1 is the way it is and the rationale that limiting cost will make for better racing is rediculous.
      Open wheel racing in the US is sad and they all use the same chassis and motor for the most part.
      This ruse they are starting with limiting budgets downward is only going to make the big players find a different way to get in the testeing they need, ban or not. They can form teams that only exist to test and willnot fall under the FIA jurisdiction.

      The more you limit and choke innovation, the worse the situation will get.

    • Leaf said on 21st August 2009, 2:10

      I agree wholeheartedly with you DMW. Well said. Only thing I could add would be that apparently Max and the FIA, and Bernie for that matter too these days, (even though he employed Murray), have forgotten who those people are.

    • Florida Mike said on 21st August 2009, 2:20

      Excellent argument. Can I add Colin Chapman to that list. I remember watching Andretti/Peterson walking away from everyone who didn’t have ground effects.

      I understand that the cost, complexity and safety issues of KERS make it an easy (and logical) target for elimination. I probably won’t miss it from F1, even though the Hybrid road cars we might eventualy buy might evolve a little slower without this advanced proving ground.

  3. djdaveyp said on 20th August 2009, 21:28

    I’m all for getting rid of big ugly wings and bringing back ground effect, brabham style! :D (hiccup!)

  4. It will be mclaren. If they can get a podium finish in the rest of the races that will promote kers!

    • mp4-19b said on 21st August 2009, 3:09

      hey! now thats a good idea :)

      • mp4-19b said on 21st August 2009, 3:13

        oh! sorry misread your post! thought you said
        ‘IF they fail to get a podium” without kers. Maybe mclaren should do away with kers for a couple of races, just to see how they fare against the rest. Atleast this way the FIA midgets will get to know the usefulness of kers. i suspect they will not finish on the podium without kers.

  5. Prisoner Monkeys said on 21st August 2009, 1:14

    I don’t think it would be a FOTA team who want to run KERS, especially since the other FOTA teams are against it.

  6. I’m thrilled by that news. For some reason, I hate F1 cars being high voltage machines with the gloves and what-not.

  7. matt said on 21st August 2009, 1:53

    After so much investment, I think it is hard to criticise whichever tema it is. And after so much input, I would have hoped that MORE than one team would have choosen to have kept it going, although only if it was a viable opportunity for any team. Which, I suppose, it isn’t.

  8. Leaf said on 21st August 2009, 2:04

    Got to be Williams.
    Wonder what would have happened when their flywheel contraption came flying out of it’s housing at 60,000 RPM?
    Anyhow I read recently they were still working on it to get it operational for their car. (And I thought possibly for road car application?)

  9. Net Sticks said on 21st August 2009, 2:55

    The 8 FOTA team agreed that they will no use KERS next year, but the other 5 can – the rules allow it…

    I think that should be cut out of the rules… after all that bull**it about costs… developing this system cost millions… So why? We is making money with this? Not the F1 Teams… Maybe Bernie, Maybe Mosley… I’d almost bet that have some shares from some companies that provide parts for the system or consulting… It all about money all always!

  10. mp4-19b said on 21st August 2009, 3:19

    i’ve seen a video of that williams flywheel based kers. the flywheel is located just behind the drivers head! isn’t that dangerous. just imagine what would happen if the flywheel were to break loose from the connecting shaft? it would almost certainly severe the drivers head!!Wont a Mechanical Flywheel KERS create some gyroscopic effects on the F1 cars, since they’re so sensitive to any little adjustment.Although two flywheels could cancel out the total inertia when turning, the stresses between the gyroscopes would be tremendous when turning. I think we will still need a gimbal system. what about using two discs spinning in opposite directions?? as the engine itself creates gyroscopic effect,KERS can be used to reduce it. correct me if i’m wrong.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUsZSGXHl-U

  11. No Max, No KERS; what an extraordinary coincidence! Doesn’t anyone remember that the KERS concept was forced down the throats of the sport by good old Max? Most of the teams initially resisted, but had to climb aboard once BMW (curse their name!) insisted on pursuing it.

    I also think it’s the possible influence of the new teams; having to develop a KERS (or buy someone elses system) must be seen as a superfluous added expense.

    I think it will go away for a year or two and possibly make a comeback. I also agree it’s probably Williams not going along to get along. Frank always gets his monies worth on whatever he is forced to spend; possibly by selling his system to those new teams.

  12. wasiF1 said on 21st August 2009, 3:38

    No KERS if it is expensive

  13. Paige Michael-Shetley said on 21st August 2009, 4:16

    I bet it’s Williams. They’ve already said that they’re not bound by FOTA regarding any self-determined technical “regulations” and will thus go their own way. They likely want to put their flywheel system to the test, and let’s not forget that they’ve been at loggerheads with the other teams (particularly Ferrari) the whole year.

  14. manatcna said on 21st August 2009, 5:40

    Only one team running KERS in 2010?

    Yep, It’s got to be Williams

    Winners again – soon

  15. sumedh said on 21st August 2009, 5:53

    Could be either Mclaren or Ferrari.

    Mclaren, because they are vocal in their support of KERS. Ferrari because they are the only team to have used it every race.

    KERS is a huge waste of money. The regulations limiting the use of it to just 6.6 seconds imply that you hardly have any advantage. Why did this one team have to break the ranks!!!

    Can’t be Williams. The flywheel behind driver’s head will be deemed dangerous by FIA, first thing. And in light of recent accidents, can you blame FIA?? Also, I haven’t heard a single word about the flywheel KERS since April. I am pretty sure, they have abandoned it.

    • mp4-19b said on 21st August 2009, 7:14

      KERS is a huge waste of money

      sumedh, are those “Rose Tinted Spectacles” blinding you from seeing the real facts?? i suggest you clean them up :) But i’m in agreement with you regarding the williams kers.Their system is too radical & too complicated to be functional in a formula 1 car. They might just use their kers as ” a ‘bargain” to get back into FOTA.

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.