Is Ferrari struggling with their KERS development?
Discussion
I might be a little synical, but with Ferrari coming out and being publically critical about the true benefits of the KERS system that their boss Max Mosley (OK not the real Ferrari Boss - but you know what I mean!!) wanted to introduce in the first place, makes me think that Ferrari technicians are having problems with the system and therefore would prefer it banned to stop their competitors getting ahead of the game.
All sounds very similar to a few years back when Renault mastered their clever mass-damper and Ferrari, along with McLaren had problems replicating it, so got it banned!
All sounds very similar to a few years back when Renault mastered their clever mass-damper and Ferrari, along with McLaren had problems replicating it, so got it banned!
johnph said:
No, I think Ferrari are making some quite valid points about KERS and what an empty gimmick it is.
The only guy whom I have seen quoted is old man Ferrari's son. One presumes that his association with the company begins and ends with nepotism, and his position consists in nothing more than the 10% of the company that he inherited. He may just have blurted out some uninformed opinions, rather than anything representative of the company position.Given Ferrari SpA's relationship with the FIA, it would be odd if, as a company, they were to challenge in public such a highly-visible project.
carbonfootprint said:
Lets hope Ferrari can be the first car company with some balls to make realistic comments about 'green' motorsport (or green BS in general).
I just really hope motorsport doesnt suffer any 'real' damage from the world's fastest growing religion
I fail to see the problem. F1 will be readily armed when the green lobby attacks it and we'll all benefit when the technology is handed down to road cars. Anything that reduces fuel bills is surely a good thing?I just really hope motorsport doesnt suffer any 'real' damage from the world's fastest growing religion
Why do people that are benefitting from technological advances get all hung up on new technological solutions?
I guess I'm in the minority but I find KERS and it's potential applications very interesting. It's not meant to replace the internal combustion engine but compliment it but if it helps keep the greenies of our backs then it's good by me.
And if the technology filters down into road cars then even better - what's not to like about a car that can recoup all/most of that hard won energy as it slows down?
And if the technology filters down into road cars then even better - what's not to like about a car that can recoup all/most of that hard won energy as it slows down?
chris_w said:
I guess I'm in the minority but I find KERS and it's potential applications very interesting. It's not meant to replace the internal combustion engine but compliment it but if it helps keep the greenies of our backs then it's good by me.
And if the technology filters down into road cars then even better - what's not to like about a car that can recoup all/most of that hard won energy as it slows down?
I am a dyed in the wool racing nut. And if the technology filters down into road cars then even better - what's not to like about a car that can recoup all/most of that hard won energy as it slows down?
My blood type is 102RON.
I admire the Diesel's of Audi, Seat and Peugeot even if I am a little sad at the loss of the spine tingling roar of engines such as those in the Panoz in the late 90's early '00's.
Even I see the practical and political value of KERS and whole heartedly support it.
For those that say it is an expensive gesture which will contribute little or nothing to the sport I would suggest they consider the original efficiency of the I/C engine in 1908 and its evolution.
I haven't read enough to fully understand the way KERS works, but in principle it seems a good idea - energy which currently goes to waste being used. Like the OP I too wonder about the reason that Ferrari are criticising it, but then with the person who commented only having links to the Ferrari part of the Fiat empire maybe there is not seen to be much benefit to transfer to Ferrari road cars, but surely this would be different for Fiat. Maybe other manufacturers were further advanced with this than Fiat and have managed to transfer this to F1 hence Ferrari sensing problems.
Not judging yet, lets see how well they do when KERS is on the track.
Not judging yet, lets see how well they do when KERS is on the track.
The ironic thing about KERS to me is the fact that the power output of the device is currently limited by the FIA. Consequently, any old piece of junk can produce the power and again it comes down to how light it can be made...so the teams end up spending their budget on making the thing light, rather than maximising the efficiency of the device.
Or maybe I'm missing something here?
Or maybe I'm missing something here?
The KERS system proposed for F1 is less advanced than the KERS seen on road cars like the Toyota Prius, it has no relevance to road cars and theres no way any manufactue could justify putting R&D money into it because the regulations are so tight. If they allowed a more innovation like originally proposed then i could see apint to it.
rubystone said:
The ironic thing about KERS to me is the fact that the power output of the device is currently limited by the FIA. Consequently, any old piece of junk can produce the power and again it comes down to how light it can be made...so the teams end up spending their budget on making the thing light, rather than maximising the efficiency of the device.
Or maybe I'm missing something here?
You make a good point. The problem with such systems to my eyes(and please accept that i know little or nothing about the tec.) is making them small enough to be viable. Once the size issues have been dealt with, and it has been proved that they work, then the output of them can be increased, with the capacity of the engine decreased to balance the safety issues.Or maybe I'm missing something here?
I would also suggest that the limit has been imposed to stop one team developing a car which could have a theoretical power output of 1,000BHP.
johnph said:
The KERS system proposed for F1 is less advanced than the KERS seen on road cars like the Toyota Prius, it has no relevance to road cars and theres no way any manufactue could justify putting R&D money into it because the regulations are so tight. If they allowed a more innovation like originally proposed then i could see apint to it.
But one of the major areas to develop is surely the size and mass of these systems. I've recently had a hoon in a 450BHP Lexus hybred which IMO is killed by the fact the thing weighs 2 tonnes!3 years of F1 tec making these things smaller and lighter can only be a good thing.
rude-boy said:
johnph said:
But one of the major areas to develop is surely the size and mass of these systems. I've recently had a hoon in a 450BHP Lexus hybred which IMO is killed by the fact the thing weighs 2 tonnes!
3 years of F1 tec making these things smaller and lighter can only be a good thing.
But don't those hybrids harness the technical masterpieces that are....batteries?...the manufacture of which has a greater effect on the environment than the benefits they bring in the vehicles...3 years of F1 tec making these things smaller and lighter can only be a good thing.
rubystone said:
rude-boy said:
johnph said:
But one of the major areas to develop is surely the size and mass of these systems. I've recently had a hoon in a 450BHP Lexus hybred which IMO is killed by the fact the thing weighs 2 tonnes!
3 years of F1 tec making these things smaller and lighter can only be a good thing.rude-boy said:
johnph said:
But one of the major areas to develop is surely the size and mass of these systems. I've recently had a hoon in a 450BHP Lexus hybred which IMO is killed by the fact the thing weighs 2 tonnes!
3 years of F1 tec making these things smaller and lighter can only be a good thing.
But don't those hybrids harness the technical masterpieces that are....batteries?...the manufacture of which has a greater effect on the environment than the benefits they bring in the vehicles...3 years of F1 tec making these things smaller and lighter can only be a good thing.
sniff petrol said:
rude-boy said:
johnph said:
But one of the major areas to develop is surely the size and mass of these systems. I've recently had a hoon in a 450BHP Lexus hybred which IMO is killed by the fact the thing weighs 2 tonnes!
3 years of F1 tec making these things smaller and lighter can only be a good thing.
But don't those hybrids harness the technical masterpieces that are....batteries?...the manufacture of which has a greater effect on the environment than the benefits they bring in the vehicles...3 years of F1 tec making these things smaller and lighter can only be a good thing.
I think they would have done much better by moving F1 to a bio-fuel first, then going for energy reclaiming devices coupled with fuel restrictions.
I agree, the thought of a small flywheel spinning at 60000rpm, let loose into the atmosphere is a little frightening.
Let alone the thought of how much pollution to the environment could be caused when a battery bank get's smashed to smitherines in a 200mph Kubica-esque shunt.
Very green isn't it.
It's all pointless. Our effects on the ecosystem of this rock are nothing compared to the solar cycles which rule it.
Global CO2 levels fluctuate in a ~125000 year cycle or thereabouts. Data from ice core samples taken at Vostok, Antarctica.
Compare that the a global temperature fluctuation.
You can see that there was a CO2 peak about 125000 years ago. Were we driving cars then, or just trolling around going "Ugg, Mammoth burger for dinner" (you want fries with that?)
So, clearly, it's got sod all to do with us, and is a mother earth thing.
The politicians are using it as an excuse to tax us more, and to take our minds of other issues.
I agree, the thought of a small flywheel spinning at 60000rpm, let loose into the atmosphere is a little frightening.
Let alone the thought of how much pollution to the environment could be caused when a battery bank get's smashed to smitherines in a 200mph Kubica-esque shunt.
Very green isn't it.
It's all pointless. Our effects on the ecosystem of this rock are nothing compared to the solar cycles which rule it.
Global CO2 levels fluctuate in a ~125000 year cycle or thereabouts. Data from ice core samples taken at Vostok, Antarctica.
Compare that the a global temperature fluctuation.
You can see that there was a CO2 peak about 125000 years ago. Were we driving cars then, or just trolling around going "Ugg, Mammoth burger for dinner" (you want fries with that?)
So, clearly, it's got sod all to do with us, and is a mother earth thing.
The politicians are using it as an excuse to tax us more, and to take our minds of other issues.
Food prices globally are going up because the USA and the EU are not dumping surpluses on the world market like they used to.
The global market has been depressed for about 20 years, which has brought financial hardship and ruin to farmers in non-European, and non-USA states, causing a drop in global output.
Third world countries that have relied on "first world" handouts should have got their acts together sooner, rather than buy guns and ammunition to repress their populations, instead of fix their infrastructure problems and the corruption/crony-ism that is rife in their governments.
I have no sympathy for them at all.
Bio-Gas is made from cr*p, and Bio-Ethanol can be made from non-food plant matter. You don't have to interfere with food production to make bio-fuels, and it's another "scare story" pushed by the tabloid press.
There are two facts in life.
We are all going to die.
Before we die, we're going to be taxed.
Rob.
The global market has been depressed for about 20 years, which has brought financial hardship and ruin to farmers in non-European, and non-USA states, causing a drop in global output.
Third world countries that have relied on "first world" handouts should have got their acts together sooner, rather than buy guns and ammunition to repress their populations, instead of fix their infrastructure problems and the corruption/crony-ism that is rife in their governments.
I have no sympathy for them at all.
Bio-Gas is made from cr*p, and Bio-Ethanol can be made from non-food plant matter. You don't have to interfere with food production to make bio-fuels, and it's another "scare story" pushed by the tabloid press.
There are two facts in life.
We are all going to die.
Before we die, we're going to be taxed.
Rob.
thunderbelmont said:
There are two facts in life.
We are all going to die.
Before we die, we're going to be taxed.
Rob.
The second is not a fact, there are plenty of circumstances that can mean you pay zero tax. You're underplaying the real world effect of bio-fuels too, they have had an impact, even if that could have been avoided.We are all going to die.
Before we die, we're going to be taxed.
Rob.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff