Are we heading for a series called "MOTO 1"

barbedwirebiker · Dec 2, 2011

This maybe obvious but I aint seen it commented on yet. We already have Moto 2, next year Moto 3. Will 2013 bring about the inaugural Moto 1 championship????

Regardless of "prototype/production" based rules it seems from a marketing point of view that this is a natural progression.

stiefel · Dec 3, 2011

Don't care what they call it. Personally, I hope they will merge SBK and Grand Prix racing and create a two- or even three-tier system with prototypes, CRT's and production racing all combined. A similar thing works very well in the Le Mans series. It has the benefits of not having to compromise between different conceptions of the essence of the sport, big grids and increased viewing pleasure because we's have multiple races in one.

Why? Because SBK and Motogp are competing over an ever decreasing pool of resources. Because SBK lacks talented riders in the prime of their career while Motogp does not have enough entertainment value for many (though definitely not all) fans of motorcycle racing. Because we all have to accept that fans value different things about the sport but everybody benefits from keeping the sport open to a wide audience without dumbing it down to just a show. Because SBK has become way too technologically advanced. Because allowing the heavily modified motorcycles that are now racing in SBK, and that resemble their production origins ever less, to move into GP racing makes room for true production racing again.

Because many fans of the sport, including me, greatly value the prototyping within a given formula aspect of racing, believe that GP racing should be pushing the technological envelope and value the presence and contributions of the manufacturers.

In the words of Buddy Miles 'We've got to live together'. I believe this is the way forward.

I have spoken.

Kropotkin · Dec 3, 2011

The series will never be called "Moto1". Indeed, people have got a right dressing down from Dorna for using that term. Dorna have massive amounts of money tied up in the marketing of the brand "MotoGP" and they are not about to toss that down the toilet and start again on Moto1.

mylexicon · Dec 3, 2011

Imo, Dorna/Bridgepoint should spend a lot less time turning MotoGP into a production series, and a lot more time differentiating SBK from GP while promoting motorcycling in general.

SBK should move to a new displacement "base" at 800cc for 4-cylinder engines and 1000cc for twins. Supersport should be 600cc triples and 750cc twins. I would like to see a third class for 400cc twins and 500cc supermonos. The purpose of an 800cc base is straightforward; get SBK away from MotoGP, and create a new capacity that makes it easier for the MSMA to pass Euro emissions and American noise standards. In addition, use engine scaling so the manufacturers have more interchangeable parts. Strengthen the homologation standards so the parts on their SBK must trickle down. For instance, the piston, intake valves, exhaust valves, cylinder, rods, pins, etc are the same on the SBK as the SS and ST. For twins, the trickle down could be from 1000cc twins to 500cc monos. Maybe even specify inline layout for 3s,4s, and free engine layout for twins. Homologate tuning kits and electronics for every bike, and specify certain attributes like static compression ratio and electronics strategies. These rules would also be beneficial for the TT championship that is supposedly on the horizon.

MotoGP should remain full prototypes. 16,000rpm, 24L in MotoGP with almost no other restrictions. Moto2 600cc full prototypes 16,000rpm 24L with 4-cylinder rule and Spec ECU with limited stategies. I'd prefer 750cc, but the 600cc I-4 engines would be left without a seat when the music stopped. MSMA will never go for it. I guess Moto3 can stay the same as it is now, though I'd prefer 500cc prototypes 16,000rpm twins or some such. MotoGP should be creme de la creme pros, not children who should be in high school (even if they are amazing).

Moto1? I hope not. WSBK-MotoGP merge? I really hope not b/c the manufacturers aren't going to sell GP bikes or anything close at an affordable price. Keep the series separate and make sure FIM competition has at least 150 seats up for grabs. Motorcycling will need them when India and China get involved.

Anyway, it's the off-topic season.

Pander · Dec 3, 2011

mylexicon said:
Imo, Dorna/Bridgepoint should spend a lot less time turning MotoGP into a production series, and a lot more time differentiating SBK from GP while promoting motorcycling in general.

SBK should move to a new displacement "base" at 800cc for 4-cylinder engines and 1000cc for twins. Supersport should be 600cc triples and 750cc twins. I would like to see a third class for 400cc twins and 500cc supermonos. The purpose of an 800cc base is straightforward; get SBK away from MotoGP, and create a new capacity that makes it easier for the MSMA to pass Euro emissions and American noise standards. In addition, use engine scaling so the manufacturers have more interchangeable parts. Strengthen the homologation standards so the parts on their SBK must trickle down. For instance, the piston, intake valves, exhaust valves, cylinder, rods, pins, etc are the same on the SBK as the SS and ST. For twins, the trickle down could be from 1000cc twins to 500cc monos. Maybe even specify inline layout for 3s,4s, and free engine layout for twins. Homologate tuning kits and electronics for every bike, and specify certain attributes like static compression ratio and electronics strategies. These rules would also be beneficial for the TT championship that is supposedly on the horizon.

MotoGP should remain full prototypes. 16,000rpm, 24L in MotoGP with almost no other restrictions. Moto2 600cc full prototypes 16,000rpm 24L with 4-cylinder rule and Spec ECU with limited stategies. I'd prefer 750cc, but the 600cc I-4 engines would be left without a seat when the music stopped. MSMA will never go for it. I guess Moto3 can stay the same as it is now, though I'd prefer 500cc prototypes 16,000rpm twins or some such. MotoGP should be creme de la creme pros, not children who should be in high school (even if they are amazing).

Moto1? I hope not. WSBK-MotoGP merge? I really hope not b/c the manufacturers aren't going to sell GP bikes or anything close at an affordable price. Keep the series separate and make sure FIM competition has at least 150 seats up for grabs. Motorcycling will need them when India and China get involved.

Anyway, it's the off-topic season.

That would never happen, why would manufacturers want to move away from the displacements they all have markets for now ? If anything, it should be MotoGP that should have changed its rules like that, everyone got so hung up on 800cc being a .... class, when in reality it was ........ rule making about fuel capacity, and a totally ridiculous way of making tyres on bridgestones part that 800cc was crap. Im a massive fan of Moto2, my only criticism would be that Honda shouldnt have the monopoly, every manufacturer should be allowed to supply engines.

SBK and MotoGP should never merge, what would be better is if the got rid of the whole "SBK" and "Superstock" and merged them making SBK merely road bikes with no lights and sticky rubber, which would again leave Motogp as the undisputed "premier class". But who cares what I think

Pander · Dec 3, 2011

i shouldnt post when iv had a drink.

mylexicon · Dec 3, 2011

Pander said:
why would manufacturers want to move away from the displacements they all have markets for now?

In the near future, it will probably cost more to make 1000cc SBKs emissions compliant than it will to redesign the engines. The 1000cc SBKs were supposed to be 150hp bikes with 180hp in race trim, but they have evolved into 190hp bikes with 210hp in race trim.

I don't know what they should do about it precisely, but reducing capacity and reducing the number of unique parts (and development cycles for unique parts) would reduce emissions compliance burden and reduce the cost of the bikes, which might improve sales in the long run.

digger · Dec 3, 2011

mylexicon said:
In the near future, it will probably cost more to make 1000cc SBKs emissions compliant than it will to redesign the engines. The 1000cc SBKs were supposed to be 150hp bikes with 180hp in race trim, but they have evolved into 190hp bikes with 210hp in race trim.

I don't know what they should do about it precisely, but reducing capacity and reducing the number of unique parts (and development cycles for unique parts) would reduce emissions compliance burden and reduce the cost of the bikes, which might improve sales in the long run.

hows about we just chuck out the emissions laws and just have big fat loud superbikes?

i also shouldn't post after drinking

stiefel · Dec 4, 2011

mylexicon said:
Imo, Dorna/Bridgepoint should spend a lot less time turning MotoGP into a production series, and a lot more time differentiating SBK from GP while promoting motorcycling in general.

Ten years ago, I would have fully agreed with you. Given the current state of economic affairs in general and the problems both series are facing with keeping their grids healthy, I believe it is time to reconsider the feasibility of keeping the classes separate.

mylexicon said:
MotoGP should remain full prototypes. 16,000rpm, 24L in MotoGP with almost no other restrictions. Moto2 600cc full prototypes 16,000rpm 24L with 4-cylinder rule and Spec ECU with limited stategies. I'd prefer 750cc, but the 600cc I-4 engines would be left without a seat when the music stopped. MSMA will never go for it. I guess Moto3 can stay the same as it is now, though I'd prefer 500cc prototypes 16,000rpm twins or some such. MotoGP should be creme de la creme pros, not children who should be in high school (even if they are amazing).

Grand Prix car racing has had restrictions on technology since 1922. Since the 50's, it's even in the name: formula 1. In motorcycle GP racing, restrictions were there from the start. I think it's wrong to equate prototype racing to little or no restrictions. Restrictions have always been an accepted and a necessary part of Grand Prix racing. As technology evolves, the rules of the game sometimes need to be adapted in order to keep the players alive.

I do agree that currently, the game is over-regulated. Dictating 4 cylinder 81 mm bore effectively kills diversity in the engine department. I don't like it.

mylexicon said:
Moto1? I hope not. WSBK-MotoGP merge? I really hope not b/c the manufacturers aren't going to sell GP bikes or anything close at an affordable price. Keep the series separate and make sure FIM competition has at least 150 seats up for grabs. Motorcycling will need them when India and China get involved.

I suggested a merge, not replacement. I used the Le Mans series as an example. You can't buy an Audi R8/10/15 or an Peugot 908. You can't buy a Porsche RS Spyder either, you can get a road going Radical, you can buy a road-going Lotus Esprit and take out the engine (it's used in LMP2) and put it into a custom made chassis. You can definitely pick up a DBR 9 or a 911 or a Ferrari 550 and get it into race trim. If you can afford it, of course.

Does any of this sound familiar?

Let's not kid ourselves, are the CRT's not basically Carmelo's way of filling the grid with superbikes without stepping on the Flammini's toes too much? What about that Aprillia RSV4 Randy was running last test? Wasn't that basically a slightly modified superbike with Bridgestone tires?

If swims like a fish, smells like a fish and tastes like a fish, why not just call the damn thing a fish, cook it like a fish and season it like a fish? At least then we might get a nice dinner out of it.

stiefel · Dec 4, 2011

Pander said:
SBK and MotoGP should never merge, what would be better is if the got rid of the whole "SBK" and "Superstock" and merged them making SBK merely road bikes with no lights and sticky rubber, which would again leave Motogp as the undisputed "premier class". But who cares what I think

This is actually what I was hinting at when I wrote 'make room for true production racing again'.

I should perhaps clarify that the rules in a combined Motogp-superbike class would have to be such that true factory prototypes should win as long as they exploit their technological advantages while 'superbike' entries should be allowed to .... around with their bikes enough to run reasonably close. Like a current WSBK front-runner should probably already be able to.

That way, you'd have stock-racing in WSBK (this is what our showroom bikes can do on the racetrack), heavily modified superbike racing in Motogp (this is what our production bikes can do in full race trim against million-dollar prototypes) and a few factory-prototypes that keep pushing the envelope within a set of limitations that are also heavily influenced by the manufacturers (this is what we can do with our knowledge and our cash). Aprillia and BMW might be able to develope into prototype efforts. Ducati can take a step back if need be, rather than sink.

Ah, imagine all the bikes, racing on and on....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b7qaSxuZUg

Pander · Dec 4, 2011

If the two were to ever merge it should only be at the same event, as in........ moto3, moto2, "producton" and then motogp. The only problem would be logistical and paddock sizes. and it would also leave wss and other supporting categories in the ..... That way you wouldnt have such a massive gap from moto2 to motgp and a chance on machinery with advanced electronics, I know there are other downsides which im sure some of you will point in my face, but if the 2 were to merge that could be the only way

DRILL · Dec 4, 2011

The WSBK should be run on BSB `Evo` rules throughout the globe,MotoGP just needs to develop in the right way.....why does it seem that we`re just going round and round......

mylexicon · Dec 4, 2011

stiefel said:
Ten years ago, I would have fully agreed with you. Given the current state of economic affairs in general and the problems both series are facing with keeping their grids healthy, I believe it is time to reconsider the feasibility of keeping the classes separate. Grand Prix car racing has had restrictions on technology since 1922. Since the 50's, it's even in the name: formula 1. In motorcycle GP racing, restrictions were there from the start. I think it's wrong to equate prototype racing to little or no restrictions. Restrictions have always been an accepted and a necessary part of Grand Prix racing. As technology evolves, the rules of the game sometimes need to be adapted in order to keep the players alive. I do agree that currently, the game is over-regulated. Dictating 4 cylinder 81 mm bore effectively kills diversity in the engine department. I don't like it. I suggested a merge, not replacement. I used the Le Mans series as an example. You can't buy an Audi R8/10/15 or an Peugot 908. You can't buy a Porsche RS Spyder either, you can get a road going Radical, you can buy a road-going Lotus Esprit and take out the engine (it's used in LMP2) and put it into a custom made chassis. You can definitely pick up a DBR 9 or a 911 or a Ferrari 550 and get it into race trim. If you can afford it, of course. Does any of this sound familiar? Let's not kid ourselves, are the CRT's not basically Carmelo's way of filling the grid with superbikes without stepping on the Flammini's toes too much? What about that Aprillia RSV4 Randy was running last test? Wasn't that basically a slightly modified superbike with Bridgestone tires? If swims like a fish, smells like a fish and tastes like a fish, why not just call the damn thing a fish, cook it like a fish and season it like a fish? At least then we might get a nice dinner out of it.

The economy is in terrible shape, but the economy was not the reason for creating separate SBK and GP series. Combining them for economic reasons would only create an entirely new set of problems. SBK is for promotion and sales. GP is for prototype development and branding. Those activities are not compatible, hence, the manufacturers have separated them. The SBK and GP brands are not congruous either so combining the two series would probably be like combining oil and water. Even if the SBK rulebook and the GP rulebook remained unchanged, the concept would become muddled. Both series need to get cheaper, but I doubt combining them would achieve that objective.

Prototyping should be relatively free. If prototyping is not free, it has no reason to exist. What needs to be controlled is the way the equipment functions, and the way competition is legislated. For instance, 1000cc-4cylinder-81mm-24L is basically the same as 1000cc-16,000rpm-24L. One of those formulas allows a wide variety of equipment, and the other is like car racing formulas which often use engine spec to reduce development. Both are very strict rule sets b/c both are hard horsepower caps (something MotoGP has never had), but one allows variety and the other does not. The quantity of rules is irrelevant. It's how the rules affect competition.

povol · Dec 6, 2011

DRILL said:
The WSBK should be run on BSB `Evo` rules throughout the globe,MotoGP just needs to develop in the right way.....why does it seem that we`re just going round and round......

I guess thats one way to fool some of the fans into thinking CRT is the pinnacle of motorcycle racing

Search

Search

Are we heading for a series called "MOTO 1"

barbedwirebiker

stiefel

Kropotkin

mylexicon

Pander

Pander

mylexicon

digger

stiefel

stiefel

Pander

DRILL

mylexicon

povol

Similar threads

Recent Discussions