Help Support MotoGP Forum:
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2006
- Messages
- 24,726
- Location
- Your Mom's House
Dr No
This was one reason they .... canned it. You could make way more power based on the ccs assigned to the rotary counterpart compared to the conventional cylinder engine. Sure there was debate as to how to measure the combustion chambers, who cares, its not like fixed ccs are in the spirit of 'prototype' technology, certainly NOT in "production" based racing, less we forget the concessions made for 2, 3, & 5 cylinders.
This was one reason they .... canned it. You could make way more power based on the ccs assigned to the rotary counterpart compared to the conventional cylinder engine. Sure there was debate as to how to measure the combustion chambers, who cares, its not like fixed ccs are in the spirit of 'prototype' technology, certainly NOT in "production" based racing, less we forget the concessions made for 2, 3, & 5 cylinders.
Dr No
SPECTRE
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2012
- Messages
- 2,994
- Location
- Crab Key
Jumkie
Nahh, they .... canned it because it was ..... Crighton took it home. It got lapped. THREE times. They only let it in for novelty "it's harmless" value. The debate wasn't over combustion chamber volume, it was over swept volume. And the swept volume of a Rotary is the sum of all 3 chambers at maximum volume (x2 for the Roton) so it could be considered an effin' monster. Regardless, according to accepted measurement at the time it was a still cheaty 588cc.
Concessions for 2, 3 and 5 cylinders? Do you mean the weight advantages? When did they kick in? Oh yes, once they'd already <u>mandated</u> four-strokes, so they're irrelevant. Prior to that the engine rules only really specc'd the displacement, number of gears, etc. It didn't mandate the engine cycle.(Honda did a 250 turbo experiment in the mid-80s, as it was forced induction it was deemed a 500, so under the 'old rules', prior to this talk of 'Prototypes', there was room for innovation).
Fixed cc's have long been the way to limit a class. And they did bring new techonology that had to battle the existing order in the premier class for years before becoming successful. That'd be two-strokes.
Nahh, they .... canned it because it was ..... Crighton took it home. It got lapped. THREE times. They only let it in for novelty "it's harmless" value. The debate wasn't over combustion chamber volume, it was over swept volume. And the swept volume of a Rotary is the sum of all 3 chambers at maximum volume (x2 for the Roton) so it could be considered an effin' monster. Regardless, according to accepted measurement at the time it was a still cheaty 588cc.
Concessions for 2, 3 and 5 cylinders? Do you mean the weight advantages? When did they kick in? Oh yes, once they'd already <u>mandated</u> four-strokes, so they're irrelevant. Prior to that the engine rules only really specc'd the displacement, number of gears, etc. It didn't mandate the engine cycle.(Honda did a 250 turbo experiment in the mid-80s, as it was forced induction it was deemed a 500, so under the 'old rules', prior to this talk of 'Prototypes', there was room for innovation).
Fixed cc's have long been the way to limit a class. And they did bring new techonology that had to battle the existing order in the premier class for years before becoming successful. That'd be two-strokes.
Dr No
The common rider actually could buy something similar in the showroom during the 750cc era, and the accessibility of 750cc equipment enabled private teams with Supersport tuning capabilities to build reasonably competitive bikes for cheap. The variety of tires helped them improve handling capability even if their chassis was stock or under-developed. Sure, the factory bikes were much more sophisticated than the stock homologation specials, but the homologation specials shared similar materials and design. The racing parts on modern 1000cc machines are as sophisticated as the 750cc homologation specials (genearally), but the stock superbikes are not nearly as capable relative to the state of the art.
The costs incurred by the manufacturers during the 750cc era were derived primarily from manufacturing 500 specials and homologating them for road use in multiple national markets. If the manufacturers revist the homologation special era, the costs can be reduced by eliminating the road homologation requirement, reducing the production quantity, and restricting materials and design. This would allow the national series to have bikes with a much higher level of standard equipment, yet costs can be suppressed by utilizing economies of scale and modifying the tuning rules.
This would put the workaday privateer (Superstock sophistication) closer to the advanced privateer (Supersport sophistication), and they'd both be closer to the factory squads (Superbike sophistication). The manufacturers could also fund their Superbike programs with revenues from selling homologation specials.
The common rider actually could buy something similar in the showroom during the 750cc era, and the accessibility of 750cc equipment enabled private teams with Supersport tuning capabilities to build reasonably competitive bikes for cheap. The variety of tires helped them improve handling capability even if their chassis was stock or under-developed. Sure, the factory bikes were much more sophisticated than the stock homologation specials, but the homologation specials shared similar materials and design. The racing parts on modern 1000cc machines are as sophisticated as the 750cc homologation specials (genearally), but the stock superbikes are not nearly as capable relative to the state of the art.
The costs incurred by the manufacturers during the 750cc era were derived primarily from manufacturing 500 specials and homologating them for road use in multiple national markets. If the manufacturers revist the homologation special era, the costs can be reduced by eliminating the road homologation requirement, reducing the production quantity, and restricting materials and design. This would allow the national series to have bikes with a much higher level of standard equipment, yet costs can be suppressed by utilizing economies of scale and modifying the tuning rules.
This would put the workaday privateer (Superstock sophistication) closer to the advanced privateer (Supersport sophistication), and they'd both be closer to the factory squads (Superbike sophistication). The manufacturers could also fund their Superbike programs with revenues from selling homologation specials.
mylexicon
Lex the reason its in .... is the factory proto's in wsb and the homologation specials took the series there,there aint no money and its almost motogp,go to bsb rules cut costs and closer racing,what is it with you and 750s and homologation specials???? its history and its time to look to the future for it to survive and cost cutting is a start.
Lex the reason its in .... is the factory proto's in wsb and the homologation specials took the series there,there aint no money and its almost motogp,go to bsb rules cut costs and closer racing,what is it with you and 750s and homologation specials???? its history and its time to look to the future for it to survive and cost cutting is a start.
Dr No
SPECTRE
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2012
- Messages
- 2,994
- Location
- Crab Key
No.
If you think a factory YZF750SP or OWO1 was anything remotely like what you could shell out for at a dealer, then you've swallowed what SBK was (is?) selling. Cheap? I don't think so. Compared to what?
Worse is the idea promulgated above that it amazing that they can keep up with 'prototypes'. Back in the 500 era, the winning Dukes had cases that would last a session. A 500 or 250 might change rings and maybe pistons. Has it improved in the MotoGP era? How many engines did JL get through? And Biaggi?
Anyway, on rereading, most of that was Just a rant against Diesels...I'll climb down from this hobby horse.
{thedeal's post went up while I was typing, this is a reply to Lex's 17:47 post}
If you think a factory YZF750SP or OWO1 was anything remotely like what you could shell out for at a dealer, then you've swallowed what SBK was (is?) selling. Cheap? I don't think so. Compared to what?
Worse is the idea promulgated above that it amazing that they can keep up with 'prototypes'. Back in the 500 era, the winning Dukes had cases that would last a session. A 500 or 250 might change rings and maybe pistons. Has it improved in the MotoGP era? How many engines did JL get through? And Biaggi?
Anyway, on rereading, most of that was Just a rant against Diesels...I'll climb down from this hobby horse.
{thedeal's post went up while I was typing, this is a reply to Lex's 17:47 post}
thedeal
If Ducati were to homologate the D16RR, the BSB formula would cease to work. The AMA and BSB formulas exist b/c WSBK has liberal modification rules, which negate the benefits of homologating D16RRs. If you want the stock production bikes to remain as they are, the WSBK rulebook needs lot of modifications or the FIM need homologation specials. You've already said you don't want lots of mods, and you probably don't want to pay $70,000 for a stock SBK (D16RR). Guess what? You want homologation specials.
This isn't rocket science, and I'm incredulous as to how your assessment of the situation could be ...-backwards. The problem with the 750cc homologation era was that the manufacturers subsidized the cost of competition by producing 'race' bikes at a loss. As a result, the privateer flourished. The grids overflowed, and the national series were strong and produced strong riders. The current 1000cc bikes are even more sophisticated than the 750s (in some ways), but the manufacturers do not build homologation specials. Therefore, when the Flamminis created the current rulebook, the cost of building race bikes was dumped onto the private teams and the regional distributors. Naturally, the sport has more manufacturers, but the privateers are going bankrupt, grid numbers are plummeting, and the national series are contracting.
The FIA fixed these problems many years ago by using new homologation systems. Long story short, the organizers raised the minimum production quantity, and they homologated the standard stock machine. Then the manufacturers and organizers worked together to create several different tuning rulebooks to meet various safety constraints, financial constraints, and production relevancy requirements. The manufacturers built vehicles to each of the rulebooks, and the entire vehicle or a modifications kit is homologated as race-only equipment. For example, the FIM would homologate a stock CBR1000RR, then they would homologate an endurance model (or kit), a national SBK kit, an international SBK kit, etc. The race-only homologation restriction tell the manufacturers what they can race, but they do not dictate the business of what the manufacturers must sell to the punters.
If Ducati were to homologate the D16RR, the BSB formula would cease to work. The AMA and BSB formulas exist b/c WSBK has liberal modification rules, which negate the benefits of homologating D16RRs. If you want the stock production bikes to remain as they are, the WSBK rulebook needs lot of modifications or the FIM need homologation specials. You've already said you don't want lots of mods, and you probably don't want to pay $70,000 for a stock SBK (D16RR). Guess what? You want homologation specials.
This isn't rocket science, and I'm incredulous as to how your assessment of the situation could be ...-backwards. The problem with the 750cc homologation era was that the manufacturers subsidized the cost of competition by producing 'race' bikes at a loss. As a result, the privateer flourished. The grids overflowed, and the national series were strong and produced strong riders. The current 1000cc bikes are even more sophisticated than the 750s (in some ways), but the manufacturers do not build homologation specials. Therefore, when the Flamminis created the current rulebook, the cost of building race bikes was dumped onto the private teams and the regional distributors. Naturally, the sport has more manufacturers, but the privateers are going bankrupt, grid numbers are plummeting, and the national series are contracting.
The FIA fixed these problems many years ago by using new homologation systems. Long story short, the organizers raised the minimum production quantity, and they homologated the standard stock machine. Then the manufacturers and organizers worked together to create several different tuning rulebooks to meet various safety constraints, financial constraints, and production relevancy requirements. The manufacturers built vehicles to each of the rulebooks, and the entire vehicle or a modifications kit is homologated as race-only equipment. For example, the FIM would homologate a stock CBR1000RR, then they would homologate an endurance model (or kit), a national SBK kit, an international SBK kit, etc. The race-only homologation restriction tell the manufacturers what they can race, but they do not dictate the business of what the manufacturers must sell to the punters.
mylexicon
The above makes no sense what so ever,the whole problem is wsb is a silohet class when it should be a production based class as in superstock,we would still have 200bhp and it would be cheap in comparison to today and if all the top guys rode them it would be close and entertaining,all homologation specials do is up the costs,yes the rule book needs a massive shake up to put it back to its conception and i hope Dorna do it,as stock as possible no electronic aids and you still have 200hp monsters that would be fast enough.
The above makes no sense what so ever,the whole problem is wsb is a silohet class when it should be a production based class as in superstock,we would still have 200bhp and it would be cheap in comparison to today and if all the top guys rode them it would be close and entertaining,all homologation specials do is up the costs,yes the rule book needs a massive shake up to put it back to its conception and i hope Dorna do it,as stock as possible no electronic aids and you still have 200hp monsters that would be fast enough.
Dr No
It has titanium connecting rods and gear driven cams. It has 35mm intake valves. It has a carbon fiber front subframe. It has magnesium cam covers. In a rev limited volumetric efficiency formula, with Supersport-ish engine rules and Superbike chassis rules, the D16RR has the components to create a sizable advantage.
BSB competition would not be equal, and the other manufacturers would build homologation specials of their own or withdraw.
It has titanium connecting rods and gear driven cams. It has 35mm intake valves. It has a carbon fiber front subframe. It has magnesium cam covers. In a rev limited volumetric efficiency formula, with Supersport-ish engine rules and Superbike chassis rules, the D16RR has the components to create a sizable advantage.
BSB competition would not be equal, and the other manufacturers would build homologation specials of their own or withdraw.
mylexicon
Another googled pile Lex. This is where you dont get it,you dont build homologation specials you use a formula and if it dont fit it aint in (as above) and if they want to race they obey,you dont need to spend the world to have a race.
Another googled pile Lex. This is where you dont get it,you dont build homologation specials you use a formula and if it dont fit it aint in (as above) and if they want to race they obey,you dont need to spend the world to have a race.
thedeal
You're going to walk up to the manufacturers with your big swinging ...., and you're going to tell them how to build bikes in the production market? That's rich. Ezpeleta couldn't even accomplish that feat for prototype racing, and Dorna pays the MSMA tens of millions each season. You're just going to tell the MSMA how it is without paying them? You think I don't get it? :lol:
You're going to walk up to the manufacturers with your big swinging ...., and you're going to tell them how to build bikes in the production market? That's rich. Ezpeleta couldn't even accomplish that feat for prototype racing, and Dorna pays the MSMA tens of millions each season. You're just going to tell the MSMA how it is without paying them? You think I don't get it? :lol:
mylexicon
No Lex, the current crop of superbikes fit the formula and are fast enough you just dont need to build expensive homologation specials or spend millions to go racing,that avenue has given us almost prototype racing in a production class and taken the teams to Moto gp levels of cost,but you carry on thinking that more money and more sophistication makes better racing cos it does not.Superstock with the best riders on board would be close,fast enough and a fraction of the current cost, whats wrong with that?
If the financial situation doesnt get any better there will be no sponsers and no racing so costs have to drop not rise.
No Lex, the current crop of superbikes fit the formula and are fast enough you just dont need to build expensive homologation specials or spend millions to go racing,that avenue has given us almost prototype racing in a production class and taken the teams to Moto gp levels of cost,but you carry on thinking that more money and more sophistication makes better racing cos it does not.Superstock with the best riders on board would be close,fast enough and a fraction of the current cost, whats wrong with that?
If the financial situation doesnt get any better there will be no sponsers and no racing so costs have to drop not rise.
thedeal
It's not up to you to decide an appropriate price ceiling for the manufacturers. You could make them race cardboard boxes, if the manufacturers think its important for business, they will spend millions. You waste your time contemplating what the manufacturers should and shouldn't spend, and that's why you can't understand the real problem. If you focus on how the manufacturers spend their money, and what it does to the competition and the business, you won't suggest Superstock.
Superstock merely eliminates the buffer between stock bikes and race bikes by eliminating most of the modifcations. This creates a series of new problems. It doesn't address any of the current problems.
It's not up to you to decide an appropriate price ceiling for the manufacturers. You could make them race cardboard boxes, if the manufacturers think its important for business, they will spend millions. You waste your time contemplating what the manufacturers should and shouldn't spend, and that's why you can't understand the real problem. If you focus on how the manufacturers spend their money, and what it does to the competition and the business, you won't suggest Superstock.
Superstock merely eliminates the buffer between stock bikes and race bikes by eliminating most of the modifcations. This creates a series of new problems. It doesn't address any of the current problems.
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2008
- Messages
- 2,484
- Location
- Tweed Valley Australia
Any amount of money spent developing a WSBK machine can be written up as developing the base machine, it cannot be policed in any way, and the tech finds its way back to street bikes quick enough that they are only 3 to 4 seconds a lap slower at most racetracks.
So in essence it is true that any money spent on the WSBK machine is straight out primary product development.
This is a loophole that Dorna will never be able to circumvent, Dorna may dumb down the class, but that is what everyone is asking for in motogp to curb electronics development anyway. Ultimately Dorna will try to dumb down both classes to make more profit for Dorna, there is no point pissing it all up the wall building fancy electrics?
So in essence it is true that any money spent on the WSBK machine is straight out primary product development.
This is a loophole that Dorna will never be able to circumvent, Dorna may dumb down the class, but that is what everyone is asking for in motogp to curb electronics development anyway. Ultimately Dorna will try to dumb down both classes to make more profit for Dorna, there is no point pissing it all up the wall building fancy electrics?
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2009
- Messages
- 3,155
- Location
- siebenbürgen süße heimat!
what i've been praying for for years 
http://motomatters.com/news/2013/04/01/world_superbikes_to_return_to_its_roots_.html
if dorna get it right for once this would be the best thing to happen to motorcycle racing in...well since i've been watching for sure
too bad we won't talk about racing streetfigthers, s1000rr nakeds,z1000s and fz1s tomorrow
http://motomatters.com/news/2013/04/01/world_superbikes_to_return_to_its_roots_.html
if dorna get it right for once this would be the best thing to happen to motorcycle racing in...well since i've been watching for sure
too bad we won't talk about racing streetfigthers, s1000rr nakeds,z1000s and fz1s tomorrow
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2008
- Messages
- 2,061
- Location
- home
cliché guevara
Damn you.
3469021364809444
what i've been praying for for years
http://motomatters.com/news/2013/04/01/world_superbikes_to_return_to_its_roots_.html
if dorna get it right for once this would be the best thing to happen to motorcycle racing in...well since i've been watching for sure
too bad we won't talk about racing streetfigthers, s1000rr nakeds,z1000s and fz1s tomorrow
Damn you.
