back to the future

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jun 16 2007, 07:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>1. I thought the whole point of this discussion is that you felt that Ducati should be allowed to increase their capacity to make them more competative and the racing fairer.

Are you pulling my leg or just acting dumb?
You claim that the twin was sooo yesterday. I showed you it's not, and that Hondas move had nothing to do with the non existing traction control.

I don't mind discussing this, but if you, by now, still think this is about Ducati getting competetive you've missed the point by a mile. They want to stay competetive through a model change and stay competetive at a cost that are closer to what the other factories spend.
The 999 is gone, dead, burried, as of to years ago.
The 1098 is here, take it or leave it.
Their 999 are operating at totally different restictions under the SBK regulations as a twin. They are allowed a near free for all modifications of the engine, way beyond what the fours are allowed. That's why they stay competetive (with the same capasity) but there are two problems:
1. The 999 is dead, as you probably noticed by now.
2. The machines have become pure prototype engines and are multiple times as expencive to maintain as the fours.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>I was arguing that if ducati do not feel that they are competitive (which i do not necessarily agree with), then they should not bend the rules to suit them. However your 'proof' quoted above makes this whole discussion obsolete as you have just said that a 999 is currently competive. I suppose you, like ducati just want it to be more competitive than all the other bikes.

Again, discussions become fairly obsolete when you haven't gotten even the basics.
Ducati want to run under the same, stricter, tuning restrictions as the fours pluss using an additional air restrictor, to do that and be competetive they have to use a larger capasity engine.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>2. How many people where buying 1200cc twin superbikes before ducati decided they needed this advantage in wsbk?

none, ducati never sold a 1200 street bike.
The 1098 however have set sales records all over before the new 1200 limit even was mentioned. It is also widely used in superstock racing.
And the 1098 as a model will come next year as a special edition bored to 1198 as the homologation model used in SBK.

And they don't want an advantage, they want fair racing.
any manufacturer will allways try to get any advantage they can get. thats their ....... job and obligation to their customers and fans. Just like Honda do tiem after time in MotoGP. We can only hope that flamini learned from previous mistakes and make the rules so that we can have fair racing with all kinds of configurations.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Jun 17 2007, 12:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Are you pulling my leg or just acting dumb?
You claim that the twin was sooo yesterday. I showed you it's not, and that Hondas move had nothing to do with the non existing traction control.

I don't mind discussing this, but if you, by now, still think this is about Ducati getting competetive you've missed the point by a mile. They want to stay competetive through a model change and stay competetive at a cost that are closer to what the other factories spend.
The 999 is gone, dead, burried, as of to years ago.
The 1098 is here, take it or leave it.
Their 999 are operating at totally different restictions under the SBK regulations as a twin. They are allowed a near free for all modifications of the engine, way beyond what the fours are allowed. That's why they stay competetive (with the same capasity) but there are two problems:
1. The 999 is dead, as you probably noticed by now.
2. The machines have become pure prototype engines and are multiple times as expencive to maintain as the fours.

Again, discussions become fairly obsolete when you haven't gotten even the basics.
Ducati want to run under the same, stricter, tuning restrictions as the fours pluss using an additional air restrictor, to do that and be competetive they have to use a larger capasity engine.
none, ducati never sold a 1200 street bike.
The 1098 however have set sales records all over before the new 1200 limit even was mentioned. It is also widely used in superstock racing.
And the 1098 as a model will come next year as a special edition bored to 1198 as the homologation model used in SBK.

And they don't want an advantage, they want fair racing.
any manufacturer will allways try to get any advantage they can get. thats their ....... job and obligation to their customers and fans. Just like Honda do tiem after time in MotoGP. We can only hope that flamini learned from previous mistakes and make the rules so that we can have fair racing with all kinds of configurations.

I can assure you i am not dumb. We all know that Honda left superbikes in protest to the tyre rule which they didn't approve of. But on their return they realized that with the improvements in technology the v-twin design was inferior and went with a four (which was within the rules). This is an example of how to compete fairly in a series.

Also you are a fool if you do not realize that the 999 is dead because Ducati chose to make a bigger bike instead of a better one of the correct capacity for superbikes, when this bike didn't fit the rules of the series they claim to rely on so much for sales, they complained. That is an example of a not fair way to compete in a racing series.

Of course a manufacturer will try to get every advantage they can get, but the others tend to use engineering, technical skills and decent riders, which are things i find far more admirable. And as for wanting fair racing, this season is one of the most open and fair seasons in superbike for a very long time, no single manufacturer can really claim a massive technical disadvantage except maybe kawasaki who have the weakest bike.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jun 17 2007, 01:30 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I can assure you i am not dumb. We all know that Honda left superbikes in protest to the tyre rule which they didn't approve of. But on their return they realized that with the improvements in technology the v-twin design was inferior and went with a four (which was within the rules).
Exactly hat marvelous technology improements came up? Traction control were an issue for the first time last year, or at least that was the first year it made an impact on performance.
Could it be that Honda saw a much biger market in beefing up their huge success, the Blade, streamlining their sports-series of products as pure IL4's also according to the new ruels. The alternative would be to continue a V-twin that allready were uncompetetive in the market. Cash out huge amounts to make it competetive for racing. Thing is, Honda learned their lesson with their pervious superbike. They cashed out huge amounts to make that competetive when theV-twin advantage was too huge.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>This is an example of how to compete fairly in a series.
This is an example of common sense and a market plan. Fair competetition has absolutly nothing to do with it.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>Also you are a fool if you do not realize that the 999 is dead because Ducati chose to make a bigger bike instead of a better one of the correct capacity for superbikes, when this bike didn't fit the rules of the series they claim to rely on so much for sales, they complained.
They claim ? I suppose you have the figures that prove them wrong, despite the huge success of the 1098? Or is it nothing but ........, again?
- They needed a bigger bore bike to compete with the liter fours on the sales market.
- They wouldn't continue pay out the huge amounts of cash they used on the prototype engines.

That's two undiniable valid arguments. You may claim they ain't enough for a rule change, but plese don't deny reality.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>That is an example of a not fair way to compete in a racing series.
Complaints are "not fair"? Jeeez, what planet do you live on? Fair- Unfair has nothing to do with it. Business does. I t does for Honda that pushed for the liter fours, for the 800 gp, for new heavier limits on 5 cyl, for Ducati AND KTM who pushed for the 1200cc twin limit. Yes, you have to put KTM up on you hate list as well.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>Of course a manufacturer will try to get every advantage they can get, but the others tend to use engineering, technical skills and decent riders, which are things i find far more admirable.
Don't be so F naiv, engineering my .... First of all, Ducati do a much more impressive job on the engineering side. Anyone knowing the difference between 2 and 4 strokes should know that. Making a twin with the same diplacement limit competetive is a technical skill worth noting. But engineering and skill has nothing to do with it, what so ever. Business has, now just as much as when the big four got their will through and got the liter limit.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>And as for wanting fair racing, this season is one of the most open and fair seasons in superbike for a very long time, no single manufacturer can really claim a massive technical disadvantage except maybe kawasaki who have the weakest bike.
Kawasaki has no technical disadvantage, you're mixing the terms, they have the same limits the other makers of four sylinder engines, they're just not skilled enough. Ducati do undinaiably have the engine with the least power but they hang in there, but at a price, and with a model that hasn't been sold for two years.
But youre right, it's quite competetive this year. Weight and inntake limits make sure the Ducati would stay well inside the power output of the fours. Some are allready expecting Ducati not to be very competetive in the start. The new ruels will if nesessarry be adjusted several times during the next season to ensure competetive machinery.
Do you know what the real threat from Ducati was? It was not to leave SBK, but to enter it with the limitied end very exotic Desmosedechi. The closest thing to a roed going GP bike we have ever seen. The £50 000 bike. They threatened to make just enough bikes to make it homologated and it was not an empty threat, they just increased the limit of bikes being made from 200 to 400. Instead of doing that they now agreed to an increased homologation limit of 3000 from 2009.

http://superbikeplanet.com/2007/Jun/e/n070616d.htm

Its interesting that they are leaving the book open as far as rules to be changed on the fly.Kinda like Nascar.And im guessing 9 of 10 racing fans would agree that they will end up with the Ducati as the dominant bike.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Jun 20 2007, 04:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>http://superbikeplanet.com/2007/Jun/e/n070616d.htm

Its interesting that they are leaving the book open as far as rules to be changed on the fly.Kinda like Nascar.And im guessing 9 of 10 racing fans would agree that they will end up with the Ducati as the dominant bike.

That's a strange prediction as the roumors says it will be the results of the bikes that decide the restrictor/weight rules. So, if Ducati dominate they will be restricted further until they are not.

My prediction as a race fan and Ten Kate fan is that the organizers put on a heavy restriction at the start, to minimize the complaints form the "big four" and to generally show that they will not favor Ducati as they did in the past.