Red Bull will rue their lack of KERS.

[Pup]

Meh, I don't buy it one bit. Abandoning KERS is a story for the press - they just couldn't get it to work. Seb burned up his unit in Q1 so they decided to switch it off for the weekend. But, being Red Bull, they've got to play like it was all a big plan. Luckily for them their car is fast enough without it. The moment they get it figured out, it will be back on the car.

And they'll need it, because that McLaren is going to get real quick real fast.

[Mysticf1]

There is an interview floating around (sorry can't remember where) with Horner after the race, He basically says they had reliability issues with KERS on friday so chose not to run it for qualy and the race and that they didnt want to let their rivals know this for whatever reason.

[Robbobnob]

not too much solid evidence going on in this thread...

Q: Lewis has KERS on his car. You don’t have KERS on you car?
SV: We do have KERS on the car, but we didn’t use it. It is not that we take it down and then are lighter than the rest. That was in 2009 when you could take it down and play around with the weight. And I was wondering why nothing was happening… (laughs) But let’s be serious again - we have to get it working for Malaysia.

Direct quote from Seb saying they didnt take the unit out, must be to do with the mandatory weight distribution, so no benefit in terms of CoG. But as Martin Brundle said, the KERS regeneration requires the break balance to be shifted forward so could have made the car much more drivable.

As for the Red Bulls starts, since Singapore last year the RB6 was one of the quickest off the mark, whether this comes down to a function of their grid slots or their engine map setting or whatever. However there is no regulation on the speed at which the car must be in order for KERS to be used, so this leaves the posibility that such RedBull system could exist, though the evidence against them using it at the start of the Australian GP is immense

[myurr]

I was under the impression that there was a rule banning the use of KERS during the first phase of the race - can't remember if it was speed or distance based or both.

This was to prevent the teams using KERS as a kind of traction control.

[segedunum]

Well, they haven't go it in the car because they won't compromise the car for it, that much is certain, and that will affect reliability.

A start-only KERS would seem plausible, but then, why would you carry around something that is useless for the rest of the race even if it is lighter and easier to package? I doubt whether they left a full system installed if they weren't using it because it's a bit of a penalty to carry around.

I'm puzzled about their starts though. If they really weren't carrying it then I fully expected them to be swamped by the KERS enabled cars.

[Richard]

myurr - KERS can be used from the start line.

tumbarello - The 100kph limit is an urban myth. The teams can use KERS from stationary if they want. However there was a theory discussed in 2009 that the most effective use of energy is to use it once they have gained traction. Using KERS in a standing start would increase wheel spin.

[myurr]

@ricahrd leeds - that wasn't the case in 2009. Are you sure the rules have been changed?

[Richard]

myurr - its not changed, they've always been able to use KERS the start. There was talk from the non-Kers teams to prohibit it, but that never happened. That's why we saw Hamilton gain places from the start in 2009 to compensate for the MP4-24's woeful quali performance.

There is no rule prohibiting it, so I can't quote the lack of a rule!

[Tamburello]

myurr - KERS can be used from the start line.

tumbarello - The 100kph limit is an urban myth. The teams can use KERS from stationary if they want. However there was a theory discussed in 2009 that the most effective use of energy is to use it once they have gained traction. Using KERS in a standing start would increase wheel spin.

Could be but it's a myth that people who should know better have been perpetuating, e.g. the BBC commentators.

[Richard]

"can't" is an ambiguous word. It can mean legality, or it can mean practical limitation.

Commentators are correct in that the most effective use is once the car has gained speed, but that is not to say there is a rule prohibiting KERS at low speeds.

[Giblet]

My understanding which might be wrong or right is that the cars are traction limited until that speed anyways so there is no need to use it below 100 because they can't put the power to the ground.

Makes sense if you are feathering the throttle to keep the wheels from spinning, how will putting an extra 80hp help?

[Hangaku]

My understanding which might be wrong or right is that the cars are traction limited until that speed anyways so there is no need to use it below 100 because they can't put the power to the ground.

Makes sense if you are feathering the throttle to keep the wheels from spinning, how will putting an extra 80hp help?

It helps the hoon-factor, of course

Your understandins is the same as mine, btw. That said, different tires, different set of numbers. It might not be 100 with the Pirelli rubber.

[she_spools_180]

My understanding which might be wrong or right is that the cars are traction limited until that speed anyways so there is no need to use it below 100 because they can't put the power to the ground.

Makes sense if you are feathering the throttle to keep the wheels from spinning, how will putting an extra 80hp help?

i agree, if you are still not at (or near) WOT at that point, there is no point wasting KERS, to add 80hp, when you can probably just add that with your right foot, and probably much more accurately,

[Richard]

just add that with your right foot, a probably much more accurately,

Indeed, KERS is on/off, there's no feathering at all.

[segedunum]

Didn't think this rule existed. It would be impractical to enforce for one thing.