Joined Sep 2007
2K Posts | 60+
here
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ Feb 12 2010, 11:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It is all about balance. The very first practise the 800 bikes were quicker. In no way did the electronics evolve overnight to make that much difference. The bike suddenly was in balance without the engine dominating. The evolution of the 800's is to the point now where it won't make the bikes quicker going back to a 990 engine so why bother? More "Chevy" to ride maybe but this is GP not NASCAR.
There was a school of thought within the paddock in 2007 that said that the power characteristics of the 800s vs the 990s meant that the same electronics from the 990s were much more effective when applied to the less powerful 800s. Less power is easier to control, whether by electronic means or otherwise.
Why do you feel that returning to 990/1000 would not improve lap times? The electronics have developed and the 1000s would benefit from this. The calibration would need to be re-done, but the advances apply equally to 1000cc as to 800cc.
If the rules were changed to limit the electronics then the 1000s might not initially produce the same lap times on the tighter circuits, but given time and sufficient fuel.....
There was a school of thought within the paddock in 2007 that said that the power characteristics of the 800s vs the 990s meant that the same electronics from the 990s were much more effective when applied to the less powerful 800s. Less power is easier to control, whether by electronic means or otherwise.
Why do you feel that returning to 990/1000 would not improve lap times? The electronics have developed and the 1000s would benefit from this. The calibration would need to be re-done, but the advances apply equally to 1000cc as to 800cc.
If the rules were changed to limit the electronics then the 1000s might not initially produce the same lap times on the tighter circuits, but given time and sufficient fuel.....
