2014 MotoGP Rules Announced

Andy Roo said:

You are paving the road to hell with nothing but the best of intentions good sir.

Click to expand...

The road to hell was paved in 1949, when the FIM created competition that couldn't be regulated. All competition degenerates into stale contests between corporate giants, but regulatory bodies can break trusts, oligopolies, and monopolies if the competitors are not producing utility or economic progress. Does this regulatory phenomenon exist in MotoGP or any racing series? No. In fact, the manufacturers regulated themselves in MotoGP until recently.



What would you expect to be the result of creating competition without a potent regulatory body to force competition to exist? You'd probably expect the competition to be stale and unsustainable, and you'd expect it to produce almost nothing for society. Hey! That's sounds like racing. Many racing series have simply done away with manufacturer competition b/c they can't figure out how to make it work . NASCAR, for instance, gives everyone the same car. FIA GT3 gives everyone different cars that are adjusted until they all turn the same lap times.



Many series are already in hell, and MotoGP is getting closer by the day.

I like this story about a little .... who goes to a beach after a huge storm. There are millions of starfish on the beach, washed up and doomed. She is however throwing the starfish one by one back into the ocean.



Her father tells her "darling, you cannot possibly save them all", the ..... replies, "yes but I can save this one".



Having swayed my way into a cutsie analogy I don't care about the rules in all those other series. Australian V8 supercars is essentially the same.



British tourers are however super cool as are the many homologation series in car and bike racing. WRC is still manufactuer based and I hear Rossi is considering a drive. I will be then and then only a Rossi fan. Just as there are many one make series there are also many manufacturer based series. I like manufacturer series myself.



I like Honda's racing Yamaha's.



What I have said from day one is that WSBK is better racing and motogp has to stay ahead - it is supposed to be the premier series. With Honda announcing it's V4 RC1000 (I had to name it) homologation bike for 2014 motogp would be better off getting on with motorcycle racing rather than politics 101 (drafting thousands of inane asinine insane rules).



They have had many one make bike series (r1 cup). GT3 racing is not the pinnacle of Motorsport on 4 wheels, it fills a niche. F1 (with manufacturers) is still the pinnacle. These one make series are tangents, never the pinnacle.



The good thing about your suggestion is the fertile ground it creates for a rebel series.





Edit1: I agree about trying to make it work, I thin the governed least is best approach is correct here, but not in healthcare...

Roo, I'm not sure you understand how racing works.



When racing follows its inevitable course; cost, performance, and competition get out of spec. The manufacturers, sanctioning officials, and promoters are forced to find ways to reduce costs, reduce performance, and increase competition (the show). The meetings NEVER go well b/c they are trying to decide what technological aspects of the sport should be sacrificed. In F1, engines were free 3.5L naturally aspirated, then 3.0L 90-degree V10 with valve restrictions, then 2.4L 90-degree V8s with valve restrictions and bore restrictions. Now the engines are all frozen and performance balanced, and the factory teams are trying to exploit 1%-2% aero advantages. The situation is a disaster that has cost F1 quite a few manufacturers over the years. F1 was the last of the car racing series to take the blue pill.



MotoGP is the last real factory racing series on earth, but it is rapidly following in the footsteps of F1. MotoGP has a control tire. MotoGP has bore and cylinder count regulations. The amount of banned equipment grows with each passing season, from direct injection to tire temperature sensors.



A fuel index is the absence of rules, thus, MotoGP bikes from every era would be legal within a single formula. Rules liberalization is important for MotoGP b/c spec racing and performance balancing are killing manufacturing interest. ALMS/FIA have announced fuel-flow limiting starting in 2014 for the WEC P1 prototypes. F1 will use a similar system for their new 1.6L V6 formula.



I suppose we can wait 10 years for MotoGP to copy F1 or they can do something innovative now.

mylexicon said:

Satellite teams basically use the same bikes as the factory. Why shouldn't they have the same fuel allocation? Satellite teams use the same fuel capacity right now. You'll notice that I didn't require satellite teams to use the same allocation as the factory team at each race. IRTA can take extra fuel and push for an odd win or two. The situation is actually better for them than it is now.



I'd be drunk if I gave the satellite teams a season-long advantage over the companies who supply them with equipment.



Yeah, the formula encourages riders to bail, but that's by design, and it's not too different from the situation now. If the manufacturer puts in the work, the rider stays. If they slap ... around and their developments don't keep pace, the rider leaves. The only difference is that they don't have the luxury of sitting around until their competitors find a spare $100M. The fuel index is always coming after them, which increases competition and the pace of development. No offense to Doohan, but '94-'98 wasn't terribly entertaining, especially since Honda won 41 of 44 GPs during the last 3 years of Doohan's reign. Lack of competition between the manufacturers is not good for the sport or the competitors. Riders like Doohan shouldn't be marginalized b/c the manufacturer they rode for had an unbeatable bike.

Click to expand...

Doohan era was different to the current problems. Doohan simply operated at a time Rainey and Schwantz were missing. Bring them back and both Yamaha and Suzuki would have still been competitive. At present we have plenty of talent but boring racing ever since the spec tire.



Your fuel index is an interesting idea. At least you are thinking outside the square. But i find it too complicated. The better indexing imo is either through air intake or tires. Of the two, tires are by far the best option.



Enter as a factory bike with unrestricted electronics, then take the penalty of a spec tire. They have the biggest budget and can make the bike suit the tire.



Go for the spec electronics, get unlimited tire options, meaning the ability to have prototype tires made specially to suit the bike, and be allowed to switch to any tire supplier any time. They have the smallest budget therefore need the tire to suit the bike. Allow the old favourite SNS for the poor CRT .......s, not the privileged MotoVR few. Much simpler and easier to regulate. If factories get too far behind, they can easily and quickly update the spec tire.

Let the factories / teams choose whether they want to use the spec electronics OR the spec tire. Magneti Marelli (wasn't it?) provides the spec ECU. Multiple tyre manufacturers start the season with one set (soft/medium/hard) of designated spec tires. If teams choose to use the spec ECU, they might receive upgraded tires as the season progresses. If they stick to the spec tyres, they can develop the electronics to suit the needs of the tires.



Btw:

thedeal said:

Im glad you touched on groub b,a friend of mine has an imaculate 6R4,he saved it before it got butchered in rally cross and has it on the road on limited mileage ill get some snaps,beautiful and still very quick car.

Click to expand...

Snaps, dude!

birdman said:

Doohan era was different to the current problems. Doohan simply operated at a time Rainey and Schwantz were missing. Bring them back and both Yamaha and Suzuki would have still been competitive. At present we have plenty of talent but boring racing ever since the spec tire.



Your fuel index is an interesting idea. At least you are thinking outside the square. But i find it too complicated. The better indexing imo is either through air intake or tires. Of the two, tires are by far the best option.

Click to expand...

Any formula must be capable of dealing with a Doohan-era. In this regard, a fuel-index would do more than Dorna's egalitarian 1000cc-81mm-24L-specECU formula. Of course, the purpose is not to change the winner for entertainment's sake, but to make sure the manufacturers and riders are always challenged in the name of sport, thus, entertainment. To this day, Doohan still takes flack for winning his early titles against weak riders and for winning his late titles against weak manufacturers. If not for 1992, some people would probably claim he was never a great rider. Lack of competition is not good for the riders, manufacturers, or the sport.



The spec-ECU vs. spec-tire is an interesting formula, but I wonder if it would work. I'm sure the competition would be interesting, but you'd have to assume that Bridgestone would build the best prototype tire, and they would be supplying the control tire. How does the situation benefit them? Also, the manufacturers would be pouring money into chassis development to utilize prototype tires or to deal with competitive adjustments to the control tire. If they want to spend their budget on fuel efficiency, how does the formula benefit them?



I chose to index fuel b/c the MSMA have made it clear that fuel-limitation is their preferred performance control. I think it would be more fun to narrow the tires and reduce the machine weight. The tires would only be capable of handling 200-220hp. Almost any manufacturer can achieve this kind of power from 1000cc maximum displacement, but narrower tires do not give Honda or Yamaha a major advantage so they are not interested.