CRT Progress

My thoughts? I was initially in favor of propping up the grid with CRT's, but I do start to forsee some problems, which are related to each other.



Running CRT's and the rest of the field simulteanously is fine in my opinion, although I question the professionalism of BQR entry.

I do have a bit of a problem with running all entries as one championship but with seperate regulations. For one, it makes the speed of the CRT's versus the proto's a real headache. If they go too slow, which many fear, it will be de facto a two tier championship at best, a bit of a farce at worst. If they go too fast, which many should fear, they will have an adverse effect on the number of sattelite bikes on the grid. Why would the Pramacs, Gresini's or LCR's of the world lease a bike when they get a CRT for less and be just as competitive, perhaps even more competitive. 'Cause under the current regulations, I do see a rider like RdP on a bike like the Aprilia posing a serious threat to riders like Abraham and Barbera and who knows whom else.



Which brings me to my next point, the elephant in the room. The fastest, most promising CRT is the one that is clearly breaking the spirit of the rule. We can pretend like it's not the case, but that Aprilia is a factory effort running under CRT regulations. The question is, how long will this situation be allowed to persist. Because if it is for more than one season, you can bet your ... we will have motogp + the aprilia cup. Sponsor money is scarce these days and everyone who invests in the class will be going for the save option.



So what will 2013 be? I think we run the risk of seeing 6 factory bikes and 10 aprilias running 24 liters of fuel. And if you think HRC's influence is bad news, consider Aprilia having that kind of leverage.



Allright, so this may all be a doom-scenario, but I think my fears are not completely unfounded. My simple solution would be to simply be honest about what the CRT's are and run them simulatinousely, but as a seperate championship.

I don't think two-tiers is a good idea. People already complain that WSBK and MotoGP cannibalize one another. Splitting the premier class would cause serious issues.



I also don't really think the Aprilia violates the spirit of the rules. Everyone understood from the outset that collective cooperation was a danger to the manufacturers. They also knew that teams would source information from the manufacturers. The claiming rules are still in affect. If the MSMA have a problem with the spirit of the rules, use claiming. Publish the information.



I think the CRTs are progressing relatively well. The Aprilia looks great, but Aprilia are smarter than everyone else. They know that chassis is the problem, so they've spent a majority of their time at Jerez getting the chassis sorted. Jerez is not a horsepower track so the horsepower dificiency doesn't really show. Suter have gone to the official tests at Malaysia where the CRTs won't match up on single lap times. In Suter's defense, they are probably on the Dorna dole; therefore, they must participate.



My only concern is the Kawasaki engine. I have no idea why people are clowning around with it. BMW, Aprilia, or Yamaha. Otherwise, stay at home b/c the other bikes down't have the bore-stroke to be competitive.

mylexicon said:

My only concern is the Kawasaki engine. I have no idea why people are clowning around with it.

Click to expand...

Because BQR has very strong ties with Kawasaki in Spain, and Kawasaki Spain is probably footing some of the bill.

good post stiefel



i believe the problem is that the aprilia crt machine is just a product of aprilias wsbk campaign thus making only wsbk manufacturers be the only candidates to be able to race competitive crt machines. not because of the engines but rather the chassis and electronics advantage as of now and probably the next couple of years

Randy and Aleix bike:



http://twitpic.com/8tnx5u/full

GPone weighs in...





We just need to be honest about it, rethink the rules, abolish this "Claiming Rule" nonsense, and leave everyone free to race in MotoGP with whatever engine they desire. Only a small technical advantage for production based engines would be needed.

Because - as Filippo Preziosi told us - a prototype engine will always outperform a production engine.

With all of this said, we could happily return to the past, to the golden years of the 500cc category, when you could race with whatever bike you liked so long as it conformed to a few simple rules.





Read more: http://www.gpone.com/index.php/en/201203096271/CRT-un-grande-futuro-dietro-alle-spalle.html#ixzz1oi9vT9u2

Mick D said:

GPone weighs in...





We just need to be honest about it, rethink the rules, abolish this "Claiming Rule" nonsense, and leave everyone free to race in MotoGP with whatever engine they desire. Only a small technical advantage for production based engines would be needed.

Because - as Filippo Preziosi told us - a prototype engine will always outperform a production engine.

With all of this said, we could happily return to the past, to the golden years of the 500cc category, when you could race with whatever bike you liked so long as it conformed to a few simple rules.





Read more: http://www.gpone.com...l#ixzz1oi9vT9u2

Click to expand...

Problem is none of that is what punters want. Punters apparently want close racing. Bikes with very few rules will be wildly different in performance and therefore be extremely spread out. Although many here say they want a 'race what you brung' they don't really want that. Unless of course it is Rossi who has the best bike and is winning everything.

Mental Anarchist said:

Problem is none of that is what punters want. Punters apparently want close racing. Bikes with very few rules will be wildly different in performance and therefore be extremely spread out. Although many here say they want a 'race what you brung' they don't really want that. Unless of course it is Rossi who has the best bike and is winning everything.

Click to expand...

This is what the punters think they want. As povol has said here, and others have said elsewhere, who actually cares about who wins moto 2 really, and how much of its appeal is related to it being a stepping stone to motogp?. There are a myriad of motor racing series in the world with very close racing in which almost no-one is interested.



This is a different issue than whether the current unsustainable cost structure in motogp needs to be addressed though, even taking your frequently made point that dorna have been fairly incompetent promoters of the sport.

michaelm said:

This is what the punters think they want. As povol has said here, and others have said elsewhere, who actually cares about who wins moto 2 really, and how much of its appeal is related to it being a stepping stone to motogp?. There are a myriad of motor racing series in the world with very close racing in which almost no-one is interested. This is a different issue than whether the current unsustainable cost structure in motogp needs to be addressed though, even taking your frequently made point that dorna have been fairly incompetent promoters of the sport.

Click to expand...

Im trying to save them from themselves, but they are hell bent on committing suicide. All the punters know, is that they will agree to anything if they think it will enhance Rossi' s chances of winning. If Moto 2 became the new GP, and Rossi started winning again, they would swear it was the best formula ever. They could care less about prototype racing, and they could care less about close racing.. When Rossi was dominating on the technological marvel known as the RC211v, Honda wasnt evil then. When he dominated on the technological marvel M1, Yamaha wasnt evil. You become evil in GP simply by beating Rossi, it's that simple. Manufactureres who beat Rossi are evil, riders who beat Rossi are evil , fans who dont pull for Rossi are heretics. Dorna better get their head out of their ... and realize that the gravy train is pulling into the station

Mental Anarchist said:

Problem is none of that is what punters want. Punters apparently want close racing. Bikes with very few rules will be wildly different in performance and therefore be extremely spread out. Although many here say they want a 'race what you brung' they don't really want that. Unless of course it is Rossi who has the best bike and is winning everything.

Click to expand...

A few simple rules could be 24L-1000cc-15,000rpm. The racing would be closer than it is now. The costs would also tumble, and the sport would be teeming with new manufacturers. Would it still be MotoGP?



Few people care about the spirit of GP anymore b/c the MSMA have taken the sport to a new low.



The argument about the future of GP reminds of politics--never-ending false dichotomy. Fans are led to believe that liberal formulas and close racing are mutually exclusive. They either support bad prototype formulas, which produce awful racing, or they push for close racing in the form of spec equipment. Two different kinds of suicide. Racing with traditional, open rules is mercantilism. Spec racing is technological communism. Neither work. Has anyone realized that the production market is passing by racing competition? MARKET



The market, a discovery about the tendencies of human kind, demands that open rules and competition occupy the same space. If they do not, legal/economic systems will be created to make sure both are present at the same time. Compared to mercantilism, communism is vastly superior. NASCAR rules the world, but NASCAR is merely a spec of dust in the eyes of the production market.



Open rules and close racing or board the place up until the GPC has an epiphany.

Kropotkin said:

Because BQR has very strong ties with Kawasaki in Spain, and Kawasaki Spain is probably footing some of the bill.

Click to expand...

The CRT rule is NO factory support, if Kawasaki is footing the bill, then BQR will fall into the factory bikes category.



CRT has everything to do with factory support, not what kind of engine/chassis is used.

mylexicon said:

A few simple rules could be 24L-1000cc-15,000rpm. The racing would be closer than it is now. The costs would also tumble, and the sport would be teeming with new manufacturers. Would it still be MotoGP?



Few people care about the spirit of GP anymore b/c the MSMA have taken the sport to a new low.



The argument about the future of GP reminds of politics--never-ending false dichotomy. Fans are led to believe that liberal formulas and close racing are mutually exclusive. They either support bad prototype formulas, which produce awful racing, or they push for close racing in the form of spec equipment. Two different kinds of suicide. Racing with traditional, open rules is mercantilism. Spec racing is technological communism. Neither work. Has anyone realized that the production market is passing by racing competition? MARKET



The market, a discovery about the tendencies of human kind, demands that open rules and competition occupy the same space. If they do not, legal/economic systems will be created to make sure both are present at the same time. Compared to mercantilism, communism is vastly superior. NASCAR rules the world, but NASCAR is merely a spec of dust in the eyes of the production market.



Open rules and close racing or board the place up until the GPC has an epiphany.

Click to expand...

When I attended Colin Edwards boot camp last fall, we had a discussion about fuel management, he said that at the end of the race, all thats left in the tank is (as he spits on the ground) that much.

You can go all out and every 6 laps, the electronics calculate your fuel usage and fuel remaining and at times, the electronics will cut out power for fuel management.

Now if the CRT teams have more fuel, I think fuel management will not be an issue and give them the full out power for the whole race,

making it closer racing with the factory bikes., I think

shovelhead said:

When I attended Colin Edwards boot camp last fall, we had a discussion about fuel management, he said that at the end of the race, all thats left in the tank is (as he spits on the ground) that much.

You can go all out and every 6 laps, the electronics calculate your fuel usage and fuel remaining and at times, the electronics will cut out power for fuel management.

Now if the CRT teams have more fuel, I think fuel management will not be an issue and give them the full out power for the whole race,

making it closer racing with the factory bikes., I think

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure they only need enough for fuel-testing after the race is over. Probably a bit more than spit, but not much.



The CRT rules will probably create decent competition between factory teams and CRTs, but the rules are arbitrary. Under what pretense should a CRT be given more fuel than a factory team? If the pretense is "production engines", MotoGP will have to write a tuning rulebook to define "production engine" based on FIM homologation procedures (basically WSBK). The claiming rules are apparently insufficient anyway b/c Aprilia are running WSBK components w/o any worries.



The basis for giving CRTs more fuel is subjective. The engine must be "production" as decided by a panel of MSMA officials. MotoGP uses two different sets of rules to govern 1 championship. Bringing new competitors to the track is necessary, but create a rules standard that allows them to compete under objective guidelines.

mylexicon said:

I'm pretty sure they only need enough for fuel-testing after the race is over. Probably a bit more than spit, but not much.



The CRT rules will probably create decent competition between factory teams and CRTs, but the rules are arbitrary. Under what pretense should a CRT be given more fuel than a factory team? If the pretense is "production engines", MotoGP will have to write a tuning rulebook to define "production engine" based on FIM homologation procedures (basically WSBK). The claiming rules are apparently insufficient anyway b/c Aprilia are running WSBK components w/o any worries.



The basis for giving CRTs more fuel is subjective. The engine must be "production" as decided by a panel of MSMA officials. MotoGP uses two different sets of rules to govern 1 championship. Bringing new competitors to the track is necessary, but create a rules standard that allows them to compete under objective guidelines.

Click to expand...

Don't know how to highlight but

If there's a spit in the tank.

There's enough in the fuel pipe to the block to test.

shovelhead said:

The CRT rule is NO factory support, if Kawasaki is footing the bill, then BQR will fall into the factory bikes category.



CRT has everything to do with factory support, not what kind of engine/chassis is used.

Click to expand...

You haven't read the rules. The CRT rule is "any team that we, the Grand Prix Commission, decide is a CRT, is a CRT". They could be backed by HRC and racing RC213Vs, but if the GPC decide unanimously that such a team is a CRT, it is a CRT.

mylexicon said:

I'm pretty sure they only need enough for fuel-testing after the race is over. Probably a bit more than spit, but not much.



The CRT rules will probably create decent competition between factory teams and CRTs, but the rules are arbitrary. Under what pretense should a CRT be given more fuel than a factory team? If the pretense is "production engines", MotoGP will have to write a tuning rulebook to define "production engine" based on FIM homologation procedures (basically WSBK). The claiming rules are apparently insufficient anyway b/c Aprilia are running WSBK components w/o any worries.



The basis for giving CRTs more fuel is subjective. The engine must be "production" as decided by a panel of MSMA officials. MotoGP uses two different sets of rules to govern 1 championship. Bringing new competitors to the track is necessary, but create a rules standard that allows them to compete under objective guidelines.

Click to expand...

Two things:



1. the reason for giving the CRTs more fuel is to cut the costs of electronics. So much of the factory efforts in electronics is aimed at providing smooth throttle response while saving as much fuel as possible. They put a lot of their efforts into managing corner entry in particular (this is by far the most difficult part to control without extra fuel) to save fuel which they can then burn on corner exit and in acceleration.



2. Nobody has anything to say about the engines used by the CRT teams. They are irrelevant. Production engines are being used because they are affordable and they are available. But if Ilmor, or even Honda (watch this space) wanted to build a prototype engine from scratch, purely for racing, and supply it to a CRT team, they are more than welcome to. The only restriction on CRT engines is that the team has to be willing to sell it to a factory team for 20,000 euros.

Kropotkin said:

Two things:



1. the reason for giving the CRTs more fuel is to cut the costs of electronics. So much of the factory efforts in electronics is aimed at providing smooth throttle response while saving as much fuel as possible. They put a lot of their efforts into managing corner entry in particular (this is by far the most difficult part to control without extra fuel) to save fuel which they can then burn on corner exit and in acceleration.



2. Nobody has anything to say about the engines used by the CRT teams. They are irrelevant. Production engines are being used because they are affordable and they are available. But if Ilmor, or even Honda (watch this space) wanted to build a prototype engine from scratch, purely for racing, and supply it to a CRT team, they are more than welcome to. The only restriction on CRT engines is that the team has to be willing to sell it to a factory team for 20,000 euros.

Click to expand...

Right, I understand those points.



All I'm saying is that MotoGP has two sets of rules for 1 championship. The definitions to assign the rules are not objective. Using subjectivity as a mechanism to resolve disputes is a time tested concept. Using subjectivity as a rulebook has not been productive.



The GPC are being lazy. They could easily say that any engine with the same block, case, bore, stroke, valve-count and valve-actuation method (spring, desmo, pneumatic) as an engine homologated for FIM production racing is CRT. They could specify that any manufacturer with an FIM Grand Prix championship must use 21L for motorcycles powered by a non-CRT engine. Triumph are the only major brand who haven't won a GP title. Inmotec are CRT legal.



Not a good long-term solution, but it is better than the subjectivity of claiming.

povol said:

Im trying to save them from themselves, but they are hell bent on committing suicide. All the punters know, is that they will agree to anything if they think it will enhance Rossi' s chances of winning. If Moto 2 became the new GP, and Rossi started winning again, they would swear it was the best formula ever. They could care less about prototype racing, and they could care less about close racing.. When Rossi was dominating on the technological marvel known as the RC211v, Honda wasnt evil then. When he dominated on the technological marvel M1, Yamaha wasnt evil. You become evil in GP simply by beating Rossi, it's that simple. Manufactureres who beat Rossi are evil, riders who beat Rossi are evil , fans who dont pull for Rossi are heretics. Dorna better get their head out of their ... and realize that the gravy train is pulling into the station

Click to expand...

Mate, that is a fair rant..... What are you on?





Also, If MotoGP stops catering for 'punters' (ie. the vast majority of MotoGP: and sport fans), it will gather no money from sponsorship and will disappear. Without eyeballs on the screen and people through the gate, there will be no money for MotoGP.



This forum is not representative of the average person watching. I doubt most people want to watch a procession of a small number of extremely expensive bikes. I think they probably want to see close racing, with the best riders on the world, with great looking and sounding bikes. Maybe it is time to start moving in that direction. A control ECU has done wonders for F1, which has now got itself together after being unbelievably boring.





I like Mylexicon's Idea. I think the actual "claiming rule' is silly and allow the use of superbike style engines rather than let teams 'claim' engines.

browney said:

Mate, that is a fair rant..... What are you on?





Also, If MotoGP stops catering for 'punters' (ie. the vast majority of MotoGP: and sport fans), it will gather no money from sponsorship and will disappear. Without eyeballs on the screen and people through the gate, there will be no money for MotoGP.



This forum is not representative of the average person watching. I doubt most people want to watch a procession of a small number of extremely expensive bikes. I think they probably want to see close racing, with the best riders on the world, with great looking and sounding bikes. Maybe it is time to start moving in that direction. A control ECU has done wonders for F1, which has now got itself together after being unbelievably boring.





I like Mylexicon's Idea. I think the actual "claiming rule' is silly and allow the use of superbike style engines rather than let teams 'claim' engines.

Click to expand...

If history is any indicator, Moto GP is going to slide back further into obscurity regardless of what rules package they introduce. When Rossi was injured in 2010, television ratings dropped over 50% for the races he missed, and rebounded immediately the race he came back.That tells me that their is millions of fair weather GP " fans" who will simply disappear in the near future when Rossi becomes irrelevant and then retires. I repeat, this not about close racing, it never was. Thats just the narrative that Dorna and the yellow horde are using to equal out the machinery now that Rossi has alienated himself from both Honda and Yamaha. All these rules do is pull Yamaha and Honda backward, because Ducati is unable to move forward at the same pace. Why anyone would want to see riders tooling around a racetrack 2-3 seconds off their potential is beyond me. All that does is open up the sport to guys who are not worthy of the title of Moto GP rider. Hell, if you hindered Usain Bolts ability to run 9 second 100's by strapping 50 lb weights to his legs, i could then be a world class sprinter. Its like DSB this year, is there going to be close racing with 8-10 guys capable of winning, sure there is, because you have 8-10 guys who are comfortable at DSB speed. Raise that performance by a second per lap and some of those 8-10 disappear from the front. Raise it 2-3 seconds and the truly fast guys will separate themselves from the pack. That is racing. Anything else is contrived and punishes greatness.