What's ever really evolved in motogp. Fine tuning it not really evolving is it? It's supposed to be prototype racing but its only prototype as in you cant buy the exact model.
What the difference between an R1 and an M1? Not enough to be called a prototype imo. You see more prototypes in the I.O.M TT with the electric bikes.
Its a very fine line Rog isn't it? By your argument i'd agree that if prototyping is considered that, then yes the bikes are not prototypes, but more evolutions. They have been kept this way due to regulations to keep costs and/or speeds down. I read an article once that if F1 engineers had a free reign they'd be able to build a 1500hp twin turbo F1 car with closed wheels, closed cockpit and able to corner so fast the driver would need a G-suit!
Should MotoGP have an electric class? Should they go diesel? (I wonder if Audi will build a diesel Ducati!) Because with regards to the otto cycle engle, we are near the limit of development. You have variable port forced induction now and engines as efficient as they pretty much can be short of a revolutionary new discovery. There is things like oval pistons etc but they have been tried before, and I think it also sucks that Dorna have enforced a 4 cylinder rule. Think of the 3 and 5 cylinder bikes that used to be out there!
Yeah because Otto cycle engines, telescopic forks, chain drive ect ect is all new prototype stuff. Very original
Just look back when we had the Elf honda with the hub steering twin wishbone. The Norton Wankel, kawasaki mono .... ect. The only prototype ive seen in recent times was Ducati and their carbon frame. Before 06 so i doubt you have ever heard of them !
My university lecturer made a statement once that is very true and has stuck with me: "The only thing thats changed in engine development over the last 100 years is the materials used, and use of electronic control" At the moment the thing that can be developed most is electronics and thats why they are expensive. Even when I worked at Mclaren 10 years ago the electronics were good enough then that the car could drive its way around the circuit, and even things like changing the resistor location on a circuit board cost £1500. Why? Because they can. I was told once that the minute supplier hear the workds 'Racing Team' then the product price doubles and as Flavio Briatore said once "If you were given $180 million a year to race shopping carts, then it would cost $180 million a year to race them"
As for teams "Sticking to what works". Yeah, sure they are....because in the case of say Yamaha it works. They are winning races and championships and due to the bean counters they cannot risk changing. Racing used to be both branding and also testing of road going developments for Motorcycle companies (because thats where they get their revenue after all). However, would the bosses at Yamaha now be able to afford to take the risk of saying "We are going to build and develop a trellis CF chassis" and spend two or even three years down the field while they do it? No, because even as a championship front running team they cannot find a sponsor, so what chance would they have if they were also rans?
The result of the world now being run by bean counters. Good for profit, bad for sport. I suppose this is a result of tobacco money going out of motorsport. They had the money from tobacco but know need to focus this sport on sales to compensate.
There will be many here who have known me a long time that are going to jump on me for contradicting myself from my stance years ago. Guilty .
Exactly, the premier classes of motor racing are no longer racing, they are a business and unfortunately the racing suffers. Thats why in terms of raw excitement you see far better 'racing' at a club or sometimes national event than in something like MotoGP or F1.
Costs need to come down thats for sure. And I miss the old idea of satellite teams using GP engines and making their own chassis, and they were certainly far more competitive than the CRT's.
