2012 What engine size?

Over on Kropotkins site he has an interview with Filippo Preziosi that I am sure you have all read. http://www.motomatters.com/interview/2010/05/05/filippo_preziosi_interview_clever_rules_.html One part that I found very interesting is:



Quote:

MM: Any thoughts about 2012? Have you thought about whether you will be building a 1000cc or will you be sticking with the 800?



FP: We are thinking about a new bike, but we don't know the displacement, because the fuel limit will remain 21 liters, and the bore will be limited to 81mm. So, it's not clear that 1000cc is the best idea. So you have to produce the most efficient engine in order to get the most out of the 21 liters you are allowed to use.



MM: What's the key point? What's the most important factor in doing that?



FP: I think it's just attention to details. Because the rules are specific in some areas. You cannot use direct injection, because the fuel pressure is limited. You cannot use exotic materials, because the ratio between the stiffness and the weight is fixed, so there are a lot of constraints that push you to develop a more efficient engine itself, without designing very strange things.





When I read this I understood it to mean that maybe they will build an engine somewhere between 800cc and 1000cc displacement. Are they allowed to build for example a 900cc engine as long as the bore is 81mm? If so what are the implications of being able to build an engine that falls anywhere between the 800cc and 100 cc limits from an engineering perspective, torque and horsepower. I am sure rpm potential would differ between different displacements.

I think its a great step. It kinda brings back the experimantation of yore, which by the virtue of the fact that there is so much known today, has possibly limited big development in the "finding the best relationship between fuel/energy/HP/torque.



Hope they do truly get into the possiblities.

Fuel pressure is not limited anymore so I'm kind of wondering if this is something Kropotkin had stored away for a rainy day. I find it hard to believe that Preziosi missed the memo in February that abolished the 10bar limit on fuel pressure. It's kind of important to know if you're an engine designer.



The fuel capacity rules are a travesty. I'm really tired of watching the riders turn into fuel efficient skeletons who ride pocketbikes for sport. The sport really fails to capture my imagination anymore.



Bore limitations are okay, imo. Stroke limiting would be much better, imo, but playing around with bore and cylinder count to find optimal performance is a lot more expensive.



Bye bye FB Corse. Another GP dream sacrificed and burned on the alter of Japanese hegemony.

mylexicon said:

Fuel pressure is not limited anymore so I'm kind of wondering if this is something Kropotkin had stored away for a rainy day. I find it hard to believe that Preziosi missed the memo in February that abolished the 10bar limit on fuel pressure. It's kind of important to know if you're an engine designer.



The fuel capacity rules are a travesty. I'm really tired of watching the riders turn into fuel efficient skeletons who ride pocketbikes for sport. The sport really fails to capture my imagination anymore.



Bore limitations are okay, imo. Stroke limiting would be much better, imo, but playing around with bore and cylinder count to find optimal performance is a lot more expensive.



Bye bye FB Corse. Another GP dream sacrificed and burned on the alter of Japanese hegemony.

Click to expand...

FB Corse are out anyway Lex.Julian Ryder stated that Franco Uncini times them at a session somewhere a week or so ago and they didn`t hit the mark which is a pisser for the grid.Like you ,I`m finding it dissolusioning purely down to the grid size.2012 can`t come quick enough!

What exactly are they trying to achieve with fuel limitations. Is it a horsepower thing, is it a safety thing, is it an eco thing. I tell you what it is, its crazy. Can you imagine the amount of money that has been spent trying to figure out how to get maximum hp to the finish line. 100's of millions spent thru the paddock for the price of 20 gallons of fuel per event. Its ....... insane.They talk about cutting costs so more people can get involved and here come this aberration . Somebody is going to have to grow a sack and take charge and quit trying to appease every ....... manufacturer on the grid. Here are your rules, here are your different rules, and here are your totally different rules.Its like they are trying to create a ....... soap opera.. This is really not that difficult, you let everyone know what the rules are, if they dont like it, sorry. They will ..... and moan and threaten to leave , but in the end, they will stay. 1000cc max, whatever configuration you like, whatever bore and stroke, limited or no electronics, no fuel limitations. Lets go racing.

povol said:

What exactly are they trying to achieve with fuel limitations. Is it a horsepower thing, is it a safety thing, is it an eco thing. I tell you what it is, its crazy. Can you imagine the amount of money that has been spent trying to figure out how to get maximum hp to the finish line. 100's of millions spent thru the paddock for the price of 20 gallons of fuel per event. Its ....... insane.They talk about cutting costs so more people can get involved and here come this aberration . Somebody is going to have to grow a sack and take charge and quit trying to appease every ....... manufacturer on the grid. Here are your rules, here are your different rules, and here are your totally different rules.Its like they are trying to create a ....... soap opera.. This is really not that difficult, you let everyone know what the rules are, if they dont like it, sorry. They will ..... and moan and threaten to leave , but in the end, they will stay. 1000cc max, whatever configuration you like, whatever bore and stroke, limited or no electronics, no fuel limitations. Lets go racing.

Click to expand...

This is what I and many others want,good shout Pov.

povol said:

What exactly are they trying to achieve with fuel limitations. Is it a horsepower thing, is it a safety thing, is it an eco thing. I tell you what it is, its crazy. Can you imagine the amount of money that has been spent trying to figure out how to get maximum hp to the finish line. 100's of millions spent thru the paddock for the price of 20 gallons of fuel per event. Its ....... insane.They talk about cutting costs so more people can get involved and here come this aberration . Somebody is going to have to grow a sack and take charge and quit trying to appease every ....... manufacturer on the grid. Here are your rules, here are your different rules, and here are your totally different rules.Its like they are trying to create a ....... soap opera.. This is really not that difficult, you let everyone know what the rules are, if they dont like it, sorry. They will ..... and moan and threaten to leave , but in the end, they will stay. 1000cc max, whatever configuration you like, whatever bore and stroke, limited or no electronics, no fuel limitations. Lets go racing.

Click to expand...

Well - even knowing it will never happen - here's my suggestion for the engine rule



Set max capacity: change this from time to time - say every 5 years - start with 1,000cc

Nr. of cylinders - as many as the manufacturer chooses

Bore & Stroke: whatever they measure.

Fuel Capacity: as much as needed for competitive, exciting & entertaining race

Fuel type: Combustible





Go back and read about some of the bikes in the 1930's and 40's - there was innovation - and oh yeah bring back the Rotary Nortons or Yams or Ducs or even Rotary H's.

Get the f..k rid of the Nanny rules

Weight of bike: What it weighs

the .... twits that are making these rules should be taken outback and beat with a rusty motorcycle chain.

ptk50 said:

Well - even knowing it will never happen - here's my suggestion for the engine rule



Set max capacity: change this from time to time - say every 5 years - start with 1,000cc

Nr. of cylinders - as many as the manufacturer chooses

Bore & Stroke: whatever they measure.

Fuel Capacity: as much as needed for competitive, exciting & entertaining race

Fuel type: Combustible





Go back and read about some of the bikes in the 1930's and 40's - there was innovation - and oh yeah bring back the Rotary Nortons or Yams or Ducs or even Rotary H's.

Get the f..k rid of the Nanny rules

Weight of bike: What it weighs

Click to expand...

Even though i dont totally disagree with that, it would open another spending war to achieve lighter space aged unobtanium, which would no doubt cost more than the electronics war they are in now

povol said:

What exactly are they trying to achieve with fuel limitations. Is it a horsepower thing, is it a safety thing, is it an eco thing. I tell you what it is, its crazy. Can you imagine the amount of money that has been spent trying to figure out how to get maximum hp to the finish line. 100's of millions spent thru the paddock for the price of 20 gallons of fuel per event. Its ....... insane.They talk about cutting costs so more people can get involved and here come this aberration . Somebody is going to have to grow a sack and take charge and quit trying to appease every ....... manufacturer on the grid. Here are your rules, here are your different rules, and here are your totally different rules.Its like they are trying to create a ....... soap opera.. This is really not that difficult, you let everyone know what the rules are, if they dont like it, sorry. They will ..... and moan and threaten to leave , but in the end, they will stay. 1000cc max, whatever configuration you like, whatever bore and stroke, limited or no electronics, no fuel limitations. Lets go racing.

Click to expand...

Throw out the manufacturers by running whatever rules the FIM/Dorna want?!



I'm glad to see you've finally come around. I also think the manufacturers would stay in GP.



Unlimited 1000s would break the bank, though. I understand they probably want the bore limit b/c they can got to the motherships and say that one more engine redesign to 81mm will be all they need for a while.



I think 81mm is way too high, though. 260 horsepower is fun if they raise the minimum dimensions of the bikes so that real people can ride them, but if they keep these pocketbikes, it's going to be too much horsepower. Once bore is frozen, it will cost a lot of money and it will anger a lot of people if they end up going lower for safety reasons. Better to start at 78mm and go up slowly as time and budgets allow.



Seriously, if they adopt 81mm 1000s and someone is badly injured or worse, they sport would meltdown on the spot. A more conservative bore number and slightly less horsepower will give them a little bit of wiggle room. Bore will be interesting since it will decide the eras now. The 78s, the 79s, the 80s, the 81s, etc. If you start at 81, we're going to be stuck there for a long time.

mylexicon said:

Throw out the manufacturers by running whatever rules the FIM/Dorna want?!



I'm glad to see you've finally come around. I also think the manufacturers would stay in GP.



Unlimited 1000s would break the bank, though. I understand they probably want the bore limit b/c they can got to the motherships and say that one more engine redesign to 81mm will be all they need for a while.



I think 81mm is way too high, though. 260 horsepower is fun if they raise the minimum dimensions of the bikes so that real people can ride them, but if they keep these pocketbikes, it's going to be too much horsepower. Once bore is frozen, it will cost a lot of money and it will anger a lot of people if they end up going lower for safety reasons. Better to start at 78mm and go up slowly as time and budgets allow.



Seriously, if they adopt 81mm 1000s and someone is badly injured or worse, they sport would meltdown on the spot. A more conservative bore number and slightly less horsepower will give them a little bit of wiggle room. Bore will be interesting since it will decide the eras now. The 78s, the 79s, the 80s, the 81s, etc. If you start at 81, we're going to be stuck there for a long time.

Click to expand...

Who said a damn thing about throwing the manufacturers out. That is your never ending agenda, be it AMA or GP. All i said was sensible rules need to be made without catering to different factions. IIf a faction gets pissy about it, tell them that is the way it is, your welcome to play or your free to go.. That would be quitting, not being thrown out.

povol said:

Who said a damn thing about throwing the manufacturers out. That is your never ending agenda, be it AMA or GP. All i said was sensible rules need to be made without catering to different factions. IIf a faction gets pissy about it, tell them that is the way it is, your welcome to play or your free to go.. That would be quitting, not being thrown out.

Click to expand...

That's exactly what InFront and DMG did in WSBK and AMA. Granted, one set of rules was a little bit better than the other. I seem to remember you having a meltdown when the manufacturers started pulling out.



Anywho, I think you've got it right this time. Dorna/FIM need to put their foot down and make some changes. If the manufacturers leave, so be it. Others will move in and take their place.

mylexicon said:

That's exactly what InFront and DMG did in WSBK and AMA. Granted, one set of rules was a little bit better than the other. I seem to remember you having a meltdown when the manufacturers started pulling out.



Anywho, I think you've got it right this time. Dorna/FIM need to put their foot down and make some changes. If the manufacturers leave, so be it. Others will move in and take their place.

Click to expand...

I had a meltdown over DMG's arrogance that led to the mfg's leaving. That and the cheater bike in DSB was more than i could take.Supposedly, there are no " factory teams" in WSBK, but we know better.

In an effort to have a discussion about MotoGP and bikes instead of what we are having for lunch and our travel plans I thought I would reinvigerate this topic with news from the latest AMCN. FP has suggested that Ducati are seriously considering either a 900cc or 930cc bike for 2012. Reasoning being the fuel limit and that there is likely no point in running 1000cc because of it so they are doing the R&D on what capacity provides the best power, torque and rideability for the 21 litres.



Oh by the way I am having toast for breakfast.

TP70 said:

In an effort to have a discussion about MotoGP and bikes instead of what we are having for lunch and our travel plans I thought I would reinvigerate this topic with news from the latest AMCN. FP has suggested that Ducati are seriously considering either a 900cc or 930cc bike for 2012. Reasoning being the fuel limit and that there is likely no point in running 1000cc because of it so they are doing the R&D on what capacity provides the best power, torque and rideability for the 21 litres.



Oh by the way I am having toast for breakfast.

Click to expand...

Jam or Marmalade?