Engine rule

I,m also affraid that we might see a few undeserved reliability problems for top guns and mostly i,m affraid that that even effects the results and the championship.

Imagine if a race like Laguna Seca 2008 or Barcelona 2009 happens between 2 of the best riders, and a few laps before the end at once one of those riders find a reliability problem because of useing that bike for many races, that will @#$# it very badly for all the fans.


I believe Duc,Yam,Hon with all their riders have to complain against this rull, or at least they have to use more bikes for the whole year, something like one bike for 2 races, that the performance of the new bikes dont make too much difference with those bikes that are a few races old.

how can we enjoy the fight between those 4 guys if one of them has a 3 races old bike and the other one has a brand new one?

ALL SORTS OF BOLLOCKS INVOLVED IN THIS.

Dec09

6 Engines For 18 Races

A more significant change for the MotoGP class comes in the engine limits. As previously agreed, for 2010, each rider will have 6 engines to last the entire season. This limit has been agreed to by the factories despite the protestations of most of the riders, who are all afraid that 6 engines simply won't be enough. The penalty for infringing this rule has been changed, making it worse for the riders but better for the manufacturers. Instead of riders being put to the back of the grid and manufacturers being penalized 25 points in the manufacturers championship, two different penalties will be applied. If the extra engine is taken before the race starts, the rider taking the extra engine will start from pit lane 20 seconds after the rest of the field.

<span style="color:#FF0000Edit .... this ......what a stupid rule so we end up with a Kamikaze Rider on track..IDIOTS

If the extra engine is taken during the race (i.e. by switching bikes during a flag-to-flag race), then the rider will be given a ride through penalty. The ride through penalty rules state that riders may not swap bikes during the ride through, so they can't take advantage of the penalty to swap bikes again.

One interesting note - a sure sign that drawing up rules and regulations is the work of human hands - the new regulations read that the ride through penalty will be imposed for violating article 2.3.6. But the introduction of the new engine rules for Moto2 means that the article numbers have been reshuffled, and article 2.3.6 now covers the engine rules for Moto2. This will be fixed, but as the rulebook stands right now, taking an extra engine is not punishable.

Banned Materials

Perhaps the most interesting changes to the regulations concern the banning of materials and technologies. The most significant is the ban on the use of MMC (Metal Matrix Composite) and FRM (Fibre Reinforced Metal). These materials can offer great advantages in terms of weight and physical properties, but can be extraordinarily expensive. They are currently used in high-performance, high-cost areas such as spacecraft and aviation, as well as in some motorsports applications, and the reason for banning these materials is primarily cost. Ilmor experimented with a composite cam cover and some internal baffles made of composites for their X3 MotoGP engine. The banning of their use is probably aimed at the longer term, to prevent the teams chasing revs using lightweight composite materials when MotoGP returns to a 1000cc, bore-limited configuration in 2012. The use of hollow connecting rods has also been banned, with the exception of a narrow oil supply channel for lubricating the small end bearing.

Two other measures are worthy of note. Firstly, tire temperature sensors have been banned, removing one input from traction control system, although the tire temperature is one of the lesser inputs which are used to base traction control on. The other change is the setting of a maximum brake disk size. From 2010, carbon brake disks will be a maximum of 320mm, with that diameter being mandated in 2011, and the choice of two different disk masses. The increasing effectiveness of braking in MotoGP has made overtaking more difficult, and so restricting brake size is an understandable step. The rules have also been changed to ban ceramic disks, which are currently less effective than carbon but which are improving rapidly.

As announced much earlier this year, Constant Variable Transmissions, double clutches (such as used on Honda's new VFR1200), and other automatic gearbox systems are banned, as is variable valve timing and lift systems. The previously announced ban on hydraulic and pneumatic control systems was also introduced, but with an interesting proviso. The ban is to be imposed for all factories currently involved in the sport, but any manufacturer new to the sport in 2010 will be allowed to use the systems for 1 year. This is widely seen as a sop to the FB Corse project, whose three-cylinder engine uses a hydraulically-assisted gearbox. Whether the FB Corse will make an appearance on the grid or not remains to be seen, however.

The use of electronics will be limited, but sadly for most fans, only in the area of suspension. Electronically operated or adjusted suspension has been banned, another measure announced earlier this year. No real measures have been taken to limit the use of traction control systems and other electronic engine controls because of the opposition from the manufacturers. Developing electronic control systems is one of the main reasons the factories are involved in MotoGP, and one of the main R&D benefits which they use to justify their participation in the series. Electronic systems will not be regulated away in the future.

Finally, the minimum weights have been bumped up. Where the 2009 four cylinder bikes had to weigh a minimum of 148kg, in 2010 this must be at least 150kg. This added weight removes the benefits of using some of the more extremely expensive lightweight materials, providing a marginal cost savings.


http://motogpinfo.motogp.com/2009/fim/gpcomission_dec09.pdf

Was talking to a bike racing nut mate today, who told me Suzuki had an engine failure at Sepang.
Not doubting my mate (because he knows his ....) but anyone know anything ????

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bunyip @ Feb 11 2010, 07:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well,it would seem that each new engine requires a penalty for that event only, but the penalty is worse than i first thought-effectively 30 secs + behind the field, meaning virtually no chance to finish in the top 6.
Back of the grid would have given an alien half a chance, this just totally fecks up the race

If the end of the season becomes a debacle because of 6+ engines, dorna should consider shutting up shop and gifting to world superbikes the racing scene.

stupid, stupid,stupid, stupid,stupid, stupid,stupid, stupid,stupid, stupid,stupid, stupid,stupid, stupid,stupid, stupid..................................................................!!!!!!!!

This HAS got to come into play sometime in 2010
and will .... a riders & teams efforts up for the whole 2010 season.
Dorna email at the ready

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pigeon @ Feb 11 2010, 09:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>This HAS got to come into play sometime in 2010
and will .... a riders & teams efforts up for the whole 2010 season.
Dorna email at the ready

I think Dorna and the manufacurers are underestimating how negative this is recived among the fans. Can you imagine the reaction from the stands if Rossi are forced to start from Pitlane at Mugello, Stoner at PI or maybe most likely Lorenzo or Pedrosa at Valencia?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Feb 11 2010, 08:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I think Dorna and the manufacurers are underestimating how negative this is recived among the fans. Can you imagine the reaction from the stands if Rossi are forced to start from Pitlane at Mugello, Stoner at PI or maybe most likely Lorenzo or Pedrosa at Valencia?
Dear god, I hope Yamaha's engine isn't that weak! Mugello is in June and is the 5th race of the season. Maybe Misano was what you had in mind in September - the 13th race out of 18.

I do, however take the point that this rule sucks. Have you seen the mooted rule changes for BSB?

<span style="color:#0000FFFrom MCN:

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>Why BSB’s radical new points structure is a winner

By Gary Pinchin - British Superbikes 03 February 2010 15:49

The MCE Insurance British Superbike Championship has a radical, not to mention complicated, new championship points structure for 2010.

It’s all been done with one aim in mind – to spice up the championship in the closing stages of the season, when, as we saw only too well last year, things can tend to get a little stagnant if someone like Leon Camier is running away with the title.

How does it work?

The actual points scoring is the same – 25-20-16-13-11-10–9-8 etc down to one point for 15th place - but for this year the season is split into two.

The first nine rounds (19 races) will become known as ‘The Regular Season’ and riders have to drop their two worst scores.

The top six ‘Title Fighters’ in the standings (which culminates at Cadwell on August 30) then go into ‘The Showdown’ – a straight fight for the title in the final three rounds of the championship at Croft, Silverstone and Oulton.

All the riders outside of the so-called Title Fighters will continue to race for the BSB Riders Cup, adding to their points total (less the two dropped scores) from the end of the Regular Season.

But all the races count in the Showdown phase! And it’s the same in the Evo class.

The regular season points for the top six Title Fighters are discarded after Cadwell and they are instead allotted a base level of 500 points - plus podium credit points – points awarded for any first, second and third places finishes during The Regular Season.

Any points the top six Title Fighters score in the three-round, seven-race Showdown are added to their staring points tally (the 500 ‘base’ points plus podium points).

The aim is a championship going to the wire. After the exceptionally dull 2009 season people surely won’t complain against that.

They (FIM, Dorna, whoever) obviously think we're thick. They think we like the idea of 6 engines for an 18 race series - "it'll be so much more fun come the last 6 races than if the riders had an engine per race, honest".

21 litres of fuel - where 22 would get rid of all the fuel saving Advanced Electronics - must be a great crowd puller.

F.ucking with the points system to create a series within a series - that'll please the fans.

Maybe they did research with watchers of "I'm a Celebrity" and other ..... rather than bike racing aficionados.

I think that the basics have been forgotten - racing, rider skill and overtaking. Electronics, fuel saving, durability and bizarre rules are boring to watch over a race, let alone a season. Remember, Dorna et al, TV deals pay only because people want to watch the RACING.

 <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pigeon @ Feb 10 2010, 10:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>ALL SORTS OF BOLLOCKS INVOLVED IN THIS.

Dec09

6 Engines For 18 Races

...If the extra engine is taken before the race starts, the rider taking the extra engine will start from pit lane 20 seconds after the rest of the field.

<span style="color:#FF0000Edit .... this ......what a stupid rule so we end up with a Kamikaze Rider on track..IDIOTS

Well,it would seem that each new engine requires a penalty for that event only, but the penalty is worse than i first thought-effectively 30 secs + behind the field, meaning virtually no chance to finish in the top 6.
Back of the grid would have given an alien half a chance, this just totally fecks up the race

Hum....

I don't think there are RPM limits in place (yet  ).  If you tune an engine to last one race, how much extra oomph could you squeeze from the poor thing?  (Go for it, if it blows, you haven't really lost anything.)  If you could squeeze another ~1250 RPM and ~20 HP out of it, you'd enjoy a power advantage similar to that the 2007 Ducati held at the beginning of the season.  You'd probably need to drop in a different set cams to maximize the extra revs, so some preparation would be required.   And then there's that damnable fuel limit.... 

Do you guys think a Kamikaze rider running a Grenade engine just might be able to make up 30 seconds on a power hungry track?  I can see a factory team giving it a try late in the season, either to gain some cheap TV exposure, or out of sheer desperation if their rider is in the title hunt, yet handicapped by running an old engine.

Another question is this:  Suppose you miss something in QC and suffer several blow-ups early in the year (not to mention fire, gravel ingestion, Kalliokaze high speed ramming, etc.)   Remember, the engines are sealed and cannont be repaired - one pebble down the hatch and it's scrap.  Your 3:1 race:engine ratio is now 4:1 or worse.  How much will you have to de-tune the remaining engines to assure survival?  How fast does the performance vs. lifespan curve fall off?  If the engine's durability tends to fall off a cliff after so many hours, you'd be faced with a hell of a choice:  Cruise around several seconds off the pace FOR THE REST OF THE SEASON (the Big Bosses back at corp. will just love watching you get passed on every straight), or run 1 engine per round and try to make something happen.  I sorta hope this comes to pass, just to highlight the incredible stupidity that passes for 'management' in MotoGP.   

Consistency is going to be at a premium this season. There are a lot of variables that are out of the riders' control that could negatively affect their results. But not falling off could be more important than ever. Colin Edwards, world champion in 2010?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nuts @ Feb 10 2010, 04:51 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Was talking to a bike racing nut mate today, who told me Suzuki had an engine failure at Sepang.
Not doubting my mate (because he knows his ....) but anyone know anything ????

I didn't hear about it but even if they did pop one they are last years engines. The new one isn't due until the next test.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yamaka46 @ Feb 11 2010, 03:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Dear god, I hope Yamaha's engine isn't that weak! Mugello is in June and is the 5th race of the season. Maybe Misano was what you had in mind in September - the 13th race out of 18.
I might be wrong here but seem to remember that an engine has to last a complete weekend.
If so we can expect to see the first actions taken already after a few races.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Feb 13 2010, 01:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I might be wrong here but seem to remember that an engine has to last a complete weekend.
If so we can expect to see the first actions taken already after a few races.
The engines need to last, on average, three complete weekends, ie 9 days.

As I said, I hope to god that Yamaha has not built such an unreliable engine that they would require a seventh engine by day 15 (Mugello race day). I don't expect even Suzuki (who needed a seventh engine to manage the last 8 races of 2009) to be that poor in 2010.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yamaka46 @ Feb 14 2010, 01:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The engines need to last, on average, three complete weekends, ie 9 days.

As I said, I hope to god that Yamaha has not built such an unreliable engine that they would require a seventh engine by day 15 (Mugello race day). I don't expect even Suzuki (who needed a seventh engine to manage the last 8 races of 2009) to be that poor in 2010.
What I meant was that there is some kind of penalty if they swap engines during the weekend.
But again I suspect I remember wrong.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Feb 14 2010, 02:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>What I meant was that there is some kind of penalty if they swap engines during the weekend.
But again I suspect I remember wrong.
No, there is no penalty for swapping during a weekend within the 6 allowed motors.

It may even make sense to allocate one engine as a test mule and do all non-race (quali, warmup etc) mileage on that (until it lets go) allowing the other engines to be used just for the races. This is just my idle speculation though.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yamaka46 @ Feb 14 2010, 02:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>No, there is no penalty for swapping during a weekend within the 6 allowed motors.

It may even make sense to allocate one engine as a test mule and do all non-race (quali, warmup etc) mileage on that (until it lets go) allowing the other engines to be used just for the races. This is just my idle speculation though.
Allocating one engine for that purpose from the very start would be to waste a good engine at it's peak. They would defiantly race it at least once before it retires to it's test duties. Other then that I agree. They will try to push some engines way over it's expected life span to keep fresh engines for the races.
And as I said when the first news about this rule came out: Expect some spectacular blow ups with following spectacle of mass crashes when it spills the oil at the entry of a corner.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Feb 14 2010, 11:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Allocating one engine for that purpose from the very start would be to waste a good engine at it's peak. They would defiantly race it at least once before it retires to it's test duties. Other then that I agree. They will try to push some engines way over it's expected life span to keep fresh engines for the races.
And as I said when the first news about this rule came out: Expect some spectacular blow ups with following spectacle of mass crashes when it spills the oil at the entry of a corner.
You are quite right - my idea was they'd use the engine for the first race weekend, then muller it in testing. Just I missed half the thought out when typing it up

I agree that spectacular blow-ups are indeed likely and may result in mass crashes and (though I obviously hope it doesn't happen) injuries. Reminds me of <span style="color:#0000FFthis - wonder if Edwards will be any more impressed in MotoGP.

I think they will only submit 2 engines to begin with so they can continue engine development through the season. As the season unfolds and an engine is finished a new one will be submitted so that there is always a minimum/maximum of 2 engines available in case of a flag to flag race which requires 2 bikes.

What would be interesting is if there was a flag to flag race requiring 2 bikes at the last round or 2 of the championship and the possibility that there is only one good engine left. This could be a championship breaker.

It would be good for the fans if they had to have the engine number displayed on the fairing somewhere so we can see what engine number they are using - E1, E2, E3, E4, E5 or E6.

yeah the Nurburgring major oil slick..lol
yamaka btw your linky is broke

ty np

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pigeon @ Feb 15 2010, 02:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>yeah the Nurburgring major oil slick..lol
yamaka btw your linky is broke

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_08p-414uGY
Fixed it. Thanks for the heads up.