Grand Prix Commission decides on single tyre rule for 2009

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SuperShinya56 @ Sep 28 2008, 05:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>In all honesty...who cares? As long as each series puts on a great show, and in my opinion that means putting more emphasis on rider's input rather than technology. MotoGP will always be the cream of the crop as far as 2 wheel racing goes, so i guess the 'suppose' difference should be better riders race in MotoGP whereas second tier riders race in WSBK.

It's like F1 and the now defunct CART series.


The relationship between F1 and CART is nothing like that of WSBK and Moto GP.


I think the point is that if the sbk and moto gp bikes begin to lap at about the same speed, but the budget for a moto gp team is 10 times that of a sbk team, then moto gp suddenly becomes a much less attractive proposition to manufacturers.

At least in WSBK, there is a direct link between the consumer product and the bike being raced.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (an4rew @ Sep 28 2008, 07:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I would love Dunlop to make a bid and have all classes... theres nothing wrong with their tyres in the lower classes.

Bautista broke Nakano's 8yr lap record today.

They also have the advantage of having ran a racing team in motogp...
i agree, it would be great to see dunlop get it, they say the best things comes to those that wait

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bonnielass @ Sep 28 2008, 01:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I thought the idea of prototype racing was that all aspects of the bikes design/engine and safety features where developed and tested on the track.Nah, there are always limits of some sort.

I heard Maxxis were bought recently by a rich Middle east company and are thought to offering Dorma a astronomical bid to run there tyres in the single tyre MotoGp.

good, i'm tired of tire ..........let'm race

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Sep 28 2008, 11:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>That's kind of the whole idea about Control Tires. Just a few types are picked out and offered the riders. For SBK I think they only have three tires to choose from (Soft, Medium, Hard) and that's it. No dual compound, no spcial constructions, nothing... Wheels only made from oak, only steam power allowed.......................

If the purpous of a change in tire rules are mainly for making them go slower in the turns the easiest way would be a control tire.It could also be both manufacturers still there but with a restriction how to make the tires,but that would be harder to keep in check.
As i have understood ,it is not yet decided definitely that there is to be a control tire until the manufacturers have had their say before the 18th of October.
So couldn't the outcome be both manufacturers making control tires with restrictions in material or something?
I don't know that much about how they make a MotoGP tire but they use lots of chemicals apart from plain rubber.Substances could be banned just like in the petrol they use.
I don't know but if they are supposed to slow the developement/speed increase down how are they going to do that and at the same time be sure to beat the laptimes of WSBK?

Just a stupid thought,one idear could be to allow the same rules with tire allocation and just allow manufacturers to bring too hard tires exept Q tires.But then again just about every tire had to be checked by judges...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Andy Roo @ Sep 28 2008, 09:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>What was interesting (if only for a day) with the Ducati to Michelin rumours is the alignment of bike and tyre manufacturers along the lines of country (or region) - it was really looking like Japan v Europe at one stage.
I was certainly intrigued by that prospect.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Sep 28 2008, 09:38 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>like no one has bid for it yet and i gather michilin and bridgstone are not too keen. "in principle" is ezys get out clause if know one bids for it. i think there are serious problems ahead for dorna over this decision.
Exactly, as Lex said in the Ducati/Michelin thread, the manufacturers still have some pull with tire manufacturers. 'Become control supplier and forget about having your tires on our road bikes'. Although I still think that someone will make a bid.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SuperShinya56 @ Sep 28 2008, 11:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Alright this is great news...bring on the 1 tire supplier. I just don't get those who oppose the 1 tire rule, my thinking is that they want the unfair advantage so that they're favorite rider may have a chance to win against the front runners. Either that or they like watching round black rubber circles fight amongst eachother as though they have a breathing pulse in them..... mind as well root for the rubber trees where they get their rubber from at least it's a living thing.
It couldn't be the fact that some people appreciate prototype racing. I love close racing, don't get me wrong. But there is something to be said about the pinnacle of prototype racing. The best riders on the best motorcycles fitted with the best tires changed by the best crews and all of it developed by the best engineers each factory has to offer. It's a cool thing.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SuperShinya56 @ Sep 28 2008, 11:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>In all honesty...who cares? As long as each series puts on a great show, and in my opinion that means putting more emphasis on rider's input rather than technology. MotoGP will always be the cream of the crop as far as 2 wheel racing goes, so i guess the 'suppose' difference should be better riders race in MotoGP whereas second tier riders race in WSBK.

It's like F1 and the now defunct CART series.
But F1 is a world championship and CART was a domestic series. As two-stroke said, if lap times get too similar between the two then sponsors and eventually manufacturers are going to stop spending all the extra money on GP. If you have two series running very similar lap times, both with very good racing and both has its own superstars, which one are you going to spend the money on? We need to be careful not to blur the line between the two, because if that line gets too blurred then MotoGP could very well be redundant to accountants.

Sorry, double post.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Austin @ Sep 29 2008, 11:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It couldn't be the fact that some people appreciate prototype racing. I love close racing, don't get me wrong. But there is something to be said about the pinnacle of prototype racing. The best riders on the best motorcycles fitted with the best tires changed by the best crews and all of it developed by the best engineers each factory has to offer. It's a cool thing.

To me the idea of slowing bikes down in corners is the absolute antithesis of racing. How is it safe to reduce grip?

They should try that on a road safety campaign with the mums and dads and kids and stuff. "In order to make the roads safer for everyone we've decided to mandate the maximum friction coefficient to make sure no one has too much grip, as you know it’s much better to spear off into a tree if you push it a bit too hard into the corner rather than surviving”. It has moved beyond sublime, past ridiculous and I cannot believe some people are sucked in by the line “Racing is good when you go slowly around corners”

Time to buy a postie bike and go and race in the CT110 cup if you want to go slow...

I’m all for watching some guy leant over to 50 whatever degrees going round a racetrack faster than anyone on a motorcycle ever before. It chills my blood (in a good way). It is a cool thing that.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Austin @ Sep 29 2008, 11:53 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>If you have two series running very similar lap times, both with very good racing and both has its own superstars, which one are you going to spend the money on? We need to be careful not to blur the line between the two, because if that line gets too blurred then MotoGP could very well be redundant to accountants.

I've been pushing this barrow for a while - a super bike costs about 200K to build (cited from AMCN) and one of these gp bikes costs 2 – 3 million.

You slow them down and motogp is history. Bayliss is less than a second slower than a 990 at Phillip island on his 1198, he is two seconds behind Stoners record and would have qualified in the top ten in motogp on a road bike.

How do you set Ezy up in a small business? Give him a big one and wait…

The solution lies in 990s. Control the ECUs if you want to, tires are already controlled and in 2009 Dorna will at least tell us so. Corner speeds would be reduced so Ezy can play his 'safety' card. But with the sheer power of the 990s lap times would be protected. Even if they did come close to SBK, 990s can clip 220mph. No more line blurring.

Over simplified, shortsighted and under-thought-out? Absolutely. But it makes beautiful sense in my head.

BoOOOOOOOOOooooooooo! A pox on them. This will suck entirely. The idea that everyone will get good tires is ludicrous. All you'll get is average tires that spin up and stick like crap. Why develop an engine that has 240hp when you can't get it to the ground? Might as well just run the engine you have now for 10 years...

The 800cc are still slower than the 990s in top speed, yet they go through the corner so much faster that all 990 track records have been broken. Tires have played a key role in this, and Bridgestone's strength lies in their side grip that allows a rider to open the throttle earlier with the bike still inclined (thanks also to TC of course which has become indispensable to exploit these tires!).

In five years of MotoGP 990, no bike ever hit the barriers. In 2 years of 800cc with increased corner speed, it has happened several times that a bike hit the barriers. If they allow this trend to go on, they would have to modify all the tracks to allow for more safety room around corners. Many tracks can not extend them further and would have to be scrapped from the series...
This is what really worries Ezpeleta! No need for conspiracy theories.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Andy Roo @ Sep 29 2008, 09:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>To me the idea of slowing bikes down in corners is the absolute antithesis of racing. How is it safe to reduce grip?

They should try that on a road safety campaign with the mums and dads and kids and stuff. "In order to make the roads safer for everyone we've decided to mandate the maximum friction coefficient to make sure no one has too much grip, as you know it’s much better to spear off into a tree if you push it a bit too hard into the corner rather than surviving”. It has moved beyond sublime, past ridiculous and I cannot believe some people are sucked in by the line “Racing is good when you go slowly around corners”

Time to buy a postie bike and go and race in the CT110 cup if you want to go slow...

I’m all for watching some guy leant over to 50 whatever degrees going round a racetrack faster than anyone on a motorcycle ever before. It chills my blood (in a good way). It is a cool thing that.

I've been pushing this barrow for a while - a super bike costs about 200K to build (cited from AMCN) and one of these gp bikes costs 2 – 3 million.

You slow them down and motogp is history. Bayliss is less than a second slower than a 990 at Phillip island on his 1198, he is two seconds behind Stoners record and would have qualified in the top ten in motogp on a road bike.

How do you set Ezy up in a small business? Give him a big one and wait…

Perfect! Haven't read a better post in some time. Keep it coming Andy!

Give it to Dunlop and be done with it.....everyone gets to start over with development....

If Bridgestone gets the contract,how is this going to slow the bikes down.If tire development stopped today,would the bikes still not go at least as fast as they are now.This is a ruse saying its about safety,its about rider mutiny and Dorna trying to head it off.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Sep 29 2008, 08:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>If Bridgestone gets the contract,how is this going to slow the bikes down.If tire development stopped today,would the bikes still not go at least as fast as they are now.This is a ruse saying its about safety,its about rider mutiny and Dorna trying to head it off.

Freezing it as it is now would still do. The problem is if the higher corner speed trend continues at the current pace,--one would have to redesign most tracks...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Sep 29 2008, 08:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>If Bridgestone gets the contract,how is this going to slow the bikes down.If tire development stopped today,would the bikes still not go at least as fast as they are now.This is a ruse saying its about safety,its about rider mutiny and Dorna trying to head it off.

It depends on what kind of tires they allow under the control tire system. They may very well leave dual compound tires and lots of special models, effectivly generating an imediate slowdown.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J4rn0 @ Sep 29 2008, 10:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Freezing it as it is now would still do. The problem is if the higher corner speed trend continues at the current pace,--one would have to redesign most tracks...

Oh come on...you're acting as if they are going some 50mph faster in the corners or something.

I like the control tire "in principle", but as I know Dorna and all their favoritism, they will find a way to get a SPECIAL set of the "SAME" tires to a special few.

If Bstones don't get it, the only reason should be that they didn't want it. If Michelin gets it, is just more proof that MotoGP is WWF.

As far as those that asked why if some think MotoGP is rigged do people watch it...WWF has plenty of viewship.