This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Engine failures to be penalised in MotoGP revamp ?

Joined Feb 2007
6K Posts | 58+
Rovrum S,Yorks Eng
Engine failures to be penalised in MotoGP revamp

By Matthew Birt

MotoGP

29 January 2009 11:25

Casey Stoner or Valentino Rossi could find themselves docked points or relegated to the back of the grid under proposals to slash costs in MotoGP.

Plans to extend engine life by at least 50 per cent and run just one motor for two or three races will be implemented for the 2010 world championship campaign as part of MotoGP’s radical costs cutting drive.

The engine life extension though will see penalties enforced if a rider is forced to change an engine.

Penalties for an engine failing to last the designated distance are also currently under discussion and Ducati boss Claudio Domenicali said: “Of course we are still discussing that (penalties) and we have F1 as an example.

"We still have to define if it is a penalty with points like a rider does the race from the position he qualified but then only gets half of the points he scores in a race. Or you start at the back of the grid with a kind of lag in time in order for it to be safe at the first corner.

"We want to avoid a dangerous situation where you start from the back being the fastest and then you try and overtake four just in the first corner.

"This is still under discussion but there will be some form of penalty. But the rider will be allowed to race.”

Plans also under discussion to limit track time to help extend engine life have raised concerns about fans getting value for money at races.

Practice and qualifying could be cut by 10 or 15 minutes or Friday morning practice might be completely axed.

A limit on how many miles a rider can do in a weekend might also be introduced, Would fewer laps hurt the show for fans? Domenicali said: “Let's say we're considering the whole set of stakeholders, and fans are a very important one.

"So everything we'll do will have that in consideration. We're considering reducing the length of the sessions, just by a small amount, but will remain the same number of events, so we have the Friday, the Saturday, and the Sunday.

"I think everybody has to give up a little bit. In this case, the fan who will be at the racetrack will have to give up just a little bit of laps of the rider passing in front of him, but I don't think this will be a big issue.”

Claudio Domenicalo says putting the fastest rider at the back could create a dangerous situation

moto gp just getting silly now lol
 
These clowns are never going to learn.

F1 is an example of exactly what not to do.

The only reason F1 is still around is b/c it has no competition. MotoGP isn't so fortunate.

All Hail WSBK!

Even worse Ducati are the ones calling for the changes. Of course they are, how quaint. When you have an engine rumored to rev above 20k but you can't make more than 18 or 19 on race day due to fuel restrictions, you'd probably be keen to see penalties for engine failures.

Extend the engine life then penalize failures. Ducati is looking to put a lock on this series.

Personally, I hope they do. Honda screwed it up, it's only right they shouldn't be allowed to win for 10 years.
 
Suzuki might as well quit now
<
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>Plans also under discussion to limit track time to help extend engine life have raised concerns about fans getting value for money at races.

Practice and qualifying could be cut by 10 or 15 minutes or Friday morning practice might be completely axed.

Dorna are full of .... ! Friday Practice may be scrapped because Bridgestone have cut the number of tyres each team can have. Yet another example of Ezy not getting all the facts before introducing a new rule.
<
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Jan 29 2009, 10:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Dorna are full of .... ! Friday Practice may be scrapped because Bridgestone have cut the number of tyres each team can have. Yet another example of Ezy not getting all the facts before introducing a new rule.
<


Wait I've got it!

Why don't they make a rule that says the tires have to last an entire weekend. That way each team will only have to buy one set?

That's a good idea, right? Street tires last for thousands of miles.
<
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Jan 29 2009, 01:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Wait I've got it!

Why don't they make a rule that says the tires have to last an entire weekend. That way each team will only have to buy one set?

That's a good idea, right? Street tires last for thousands of miles.
<


you obviously don't ride...yeah sure street tires last thousands of miles...with a schmuck you or I...not with them
<
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (xx CURVE xx @ Jan 29 2009, 12:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>you obviously don't ride...yeah sure street tires last thousands of miles...with a schmuck you or I...not with them
<


Yes, you're right. That rule isn't harsh enough.

1 set of tires for the whole season. That's more appropriate and more like something Bernie would write.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Jan 29 2009, 06:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>These clowns are never going to learn.

F1 is an example of exactly what not to do.

The only reason F1 is still around is b/c it has no competition. MotoGP isn't so fortunate.

All Hail WSBK!

There is a lot you can say about F1 but they realised budget cuts were needed to keep a grid quite a while ago. I am not saying everything works or that the show is that good in F1 but at least they were paying attention. That engine rule kept some of the less fortunate teams in F1 and today is very accepted. On a personally level, I miss engines having massive blow-ups (Honda 2003 anyone?) but it was one of the best cost-effective measures taken as the richer teams went through 3-4 engines in a weekend.

Oh and F1 is still around because it indeed has no competition. But that has little to do with the cars (IRL cars go faster, GP2 has better races) but everything to do with Bernie E and the hype he managed to build about F1. Something Dorna is trying and failing to do.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Jan 29 2009, 07:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yes, you're right. That rule isn't harsh enough.

1 set of tires for the whole season. That's more appropriate and more like something Bernie would write.
<
<
<
<
i remember when F1 had the no tyre change rule and they were falling apart during the race. Why dont these office boys keep out of it and let the men who know decide whats best regarding rule changes.

that's have a vote of no confidence regarding Carmelo Ezpeleta. here's my vote !
 
The one bike per race rule I was reading about on crash should make wet-dry races interesting
<
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Sally @ Jan 29 2009, 11:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Oh and F1 is still around because it indeed has no competition. But that has little to do with the cars (IRL cars go faster, GP2 has better races) but everything to do with Bernie E and the hype he managed to build about F1. Something Dorna is trying and failing to do.

Agreed.

However, it seems like many people are focusing on the cost of winning. The cost of winning is irrelevant b/c there will always be large differences in team budgets and the winners will always spend every penny they can get their hands on. You can't limit the amount teams spend or the amount they can get their hands on. The only thing that matters is the cost of building a competitive machine that can be used to develop technology and create brand awareness.

The cost of building a new competitive GP machine is still rising rapidly and the restrictions on what can and can't be developed grow everyday.

The new rules are designed entirely to prop up satellite efforts. More satellite teams will not help GP regain its former luster.

Only the emergence of new privateers and manufacturers who have ambitions to create new technologies and develop new road going motorcycles.

Right now neither GP nor WSBK provide a platform for emerging companies to develop new technology because of the enormous expense involved with producing a competitive engine. Lengthening engine life and shortening the duration of practice and testing are simply token efforts to make it appear as though DORNA are doing something.

No progress will be made until they drop displacement rules and fuel rules and embrace the simplicity of a top speed limit. I also suggest they lift restrictions on aspiration.

Personally, I'd like to see the day when GP has so many entrants in the premier class that they have to run multiple races. The kiddies can cut their teeth in the best of the rest flight, while the world's best do battle in the best of the best flight.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Jan 29 2009, 09:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>No progress will be made until they drop displacement rules and fuel rules and embrace the simplicity of a top speed limit. I also suggest they lift restrictions on aspiration.
thats all you had to say bro
<
 
wow its all going wrong.. i have to say if they want to use engines for a few races there are going to have to limit rpm's because that is where most failures (not all) come into play, in the high rpm's.

reducing the revs by a few thousand rpm engine failure rate should be much lower.

but docking WELL EARNED points off a rider if they have a engine failure is just plain DUMB.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pigeon @ Jan 29 2009, 06:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Penalties for an engine failing to last the designated distance are also currently under discussion and Ducati boss Claudio Domenicali said: “Of course we are still discussing that (penalties) and we have F1 as an example.

"We still have to define if it is a penalty with points like a rider does the race from the position he qualified but then only gets half of the points he scores in a race. Or you start at the back of the grid with a kind of lag in time in order for it to be safe at the first corner.

<span style="font-size:14pt;line-height:100%"We want to avoid a dangerous situation where you start from the back being the fastest and then you try and overtake four just in the first corner.

Interesting view from a guy who has seen his own riders countless times coming from the back of the grid on kamikaze attacs into the first corner.
<
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Jan 30 2009, 02:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Interesting view from a guy who has seen his own riders countless times coming from the back of the grid on kamikaze attacs into the first corner.
<


I'm confused. The dangerous situation he's referring to, isn't that also referred to as racing?
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Jan 31 2009, 03:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I'm confused. The dangerous situation he's referring to, isn't that also referred to as racing?

Racing Yes but where do you draw the line with safety.
We saw a prime example of this in Qatar 2004

Rossi started last and it was a "Red rag to a bull situation"
we saw Rossi ploughing into turn 1 with some strong over takes and barging into people
then he fell off on lap 3 or 4 ? where he had got up to 4th place it was great viewing
but even Rossi lost it on that day.

If this situation can happen at every race with new rule changes how many riders are going to be involved in a accident trying to get through the field

Most I'd say so its not good for the riders the sport and viewing
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pigeon @ Jan 31 2009, 08:29 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Racing Yes but where do you draw the line with safety.
We saw a prime example of this in Qatar 2004

Rossi started last and it was a "Red rag to a bull situation"
we saw Rossi ploughing into turn 1 with some strong over takes and barging into people
then he fell off on lap 3 or 4 ? where he had got up to 4th place it was great viewing
but even Rossi lost it on that day.

If this situation can happen at every race with new rule changes how many riders are going to be involved in a accident trying to get through the field

Most I'd say so its not good for the riders the sport and viewing

Now that's more than a far stretch. Rossi was mad becuase og Giebbernau and the punishment he recived and might have been a bit too agressive, but a fixed rule regarding engines would be an intirely different situation. Besides, Rossi is the best proof of all, as the number of times his been in 10th or further behind into first turn is probarbly higher than the number he has been on the podium.
 

Recent Discussions