Is MotoGP just R&D for Scooters
- Thread starter JohnnyKnockdown
- Start date
Joined Mar 2005
7K Posts | 20+
Woody Creek
As has been pointed out before, development of the engine is the costliest bit in the game. Surely by drastically reducing that cost by removing fuel limitations, you can remove that enormous barrier to entry and field significantly larger grids. Sponsorship money is hard to find at this point in time, that's true. But it's easier to find a fraction of €30 million than it is to find €30 million.
In my opinion, removing the MSMA makes complete sense from that aspect. I'm just of a personality that suffers from nerves with such a drastic change. Will there be the money to run the circus without the manufacturers? The racing in the AMA has been significantly better since they kicked the manufacturers out, but I'm still unsure if the series is better or worse for it.
If they don't spend the money on fuel efficiency then they will spend it on other aspects of the engine. I don't see how would removing the fuel limitation increase the grids, i really do not. And to be totally honest I don't see what's so exciting about significantly larger grids. I remember in the late 80s there were like million bikes on the grid but I was only really interested in what Lawson, Gardner, Rainey et comp were doing at the front. I didn't care about some guys battling for 20th 3/4 of a lap down...
Joined Mar 2005
7K Posts | 20+
Woody Creek
Like Lex and Kropotkin have said, it's a barrier to entry. Getting 800cc engines to make the 240bhp, or whatever they're making now, with 21 liters means enormous amounts of research and development, which costs an enormous amount of money. Removing this means that the series is opened up to programs who are interested in making go fast engines for comparably less money, which there are a fair number of. At the very least, there are more programs interested in making go fast engines for less money than there are programs interested interested in making fuel-efficient go fast engines for lots of money.
And deep grids are good for championships. If you have 24 bikes on the grid, suddenly it's not so easy to cruise around and collect a point or two. Every point must be earned. With a season shaping up to be as close as this one is looking, that's a good thing, in my opinion.
Remove the fuel limits (and impose a spec ECU) and the factories walk. The factories are the only entities who can afford to pay the 30-50 million a year it costs to develop and run a MotoGP bike (or in the case of Suzuki, 10 million a year). The only team that finds that kind of cash is Ducati, with Marlboro. Lots of teams can find 2-3 million in sponsorship, so that would be a realistic cost for the bikes (though star riders will always cost more, and generate more income), but nobody except Ducati can find 30 million.
ok that's in theory, but in practice which programs are we talking about? i don't remember there was this great interest in entering the MotoGP before the fuel limit.
Joined Aug 2007
11K Posts | 3K+
Pomona NY
Truly - I am not fishing here. I can only suppose I am really naive. Other than the moral or ethical considerations - how was tobacco different than any other corporate entity?
All the money the tobacco companies poured into MotoGP made the teams think that attracting sponsorship was easy. When it was really just the only place that tobacco companies could spend their money. It left the teams living in a false reality.
Joined Mar 2005
7K Posts | 20+
Woody Creek
I don't have those answers. But based on the success of the Moto2 platform, and the large number of entries for Moto3 and CRT, I have to believe there is an interest for participants in a more cost effective MotoGP. Just my opinion.
Joined Aug 2007
11K Posts | 3K+
Pomona NY
Makes a lot of sense. Thanks. It must have been wrenching when tobacco went. I've only been following MGP since
around 1980 and for years tobacco sponsorship just seemed like a fact of life.
Dunno about that. I for one wouldn't want to go back to the days when back markers would be lapped 4 or more times and the riders with real chances at the championship had to get past rolling chicanes in the crucial final laps.
I won't debate the exact moment Group C died b/c the various theories are just a distraction at this point. We both agree that value for money ultimately killed Group C (the fan exposure was there but probably not the Concorde), and value for money is causing the decline of MotoGP.
My main point is that Group C and MotoGP have followed a similar trajectory. If fuel is restricted, braking is wasteful. In Group C they spent bundles on aerodynamics. In MotoGP the tire suppliers spent bundles on tires. In both situations, the exponential cost growth distracted from the fuel-efficiency of engines. In Group C, it turned out that big turbocharged engines were best (not terribly useful for production). In MotoGP it turns out that pneumatics (not useful for production bikes) are required to achieve fuel efficiency and performance. Both series cut fuel capacity rather aggressively, and when reform was critical, both series believed engine capacity changes were the silver bullet.
I don't know what will ultimately happen as a result of 81mm 1000cc 4-cylinder engines, but we have a situation where everyone is unhappy. Neither Honda nor Yamaha want to run 1000cc engines. Suzuki have not committed to run MotoGP from 2012. Ducati's entire program relies on tobacco money. The sport is perched precariously atop the motorcycle racing pyramid, and the poor condition of GP is surely part of the reason Ezpeleta introduced Supersuperbikes (CRTs) as a fall back.
I don't understand what Ezpeleta is doing. I can think of at least a half dozen manufacturers who would be happy to divide up Honda's and Yamaha's marketshare. Honda and Yam aren't even necessary for selling the show b/c brands like MV Agusta, Norton, and BMW can carry the show.
Joined Apr 2011
1K Posts | 87+
Pangea
I think he is moving towards Moto1. As Krop said he can not make the change dramatically because all the manufacturers will take their bat and ball. So by bringing in what are effectively Moto1 teams he can start building a second field of teams which gives him leverage. In Moto2 the bikes are named after their chassis and the engine is irrelevant. I can see in Moto1 in a few years time you will get chassis suppliers and engine suppliers. As an example you may get Chassis supplier A, B & C and then engine supplier 1, 2 & 3. The combinations of the 2 are numerous and could lead to good quality competition but allow fan interest to be generated around the technical aspects of the different options and components of the mousetrap.
If he can manipulate the rules during the transition period so that Moto1 bikes become as competitive as the Factory Prototypes then the fans will not feel like they are being duped. The icing on the cake will be if the racing between Moto1 bikes is a significantly better spectacle than the racing between the Factory bikes.
Why go the Moto1 route? It shouldn't be difficult for Dorna to obtain prototype engines if the formula is improved. If Dorna throw out Honda and Yamaha, how many manufacturers would be clamoring to steal their marketshare? Honda and Yamaha have no leverage which is what makes this situation so perplexing. It makes me wonder if they have a contractual agreement with Bridgepoint to keep Honda and Yamaha even if they are damaging the sport. Dorna are either cowards who are too afraid to trade Honda and Yamaha for legacy brands like BMW, MV, and Norton; or Dorna have their hands tied by a terrible contractual agreement with someone, imo.
Also, the A B C 1 2 3 arrangement won't work unless they are preparing a standard engine with identical mounting points. Only 3 combinations are possible based upon what the chassis manufacturers want to do.
Joined Apr 2008
7K Posts | 3K+
Out of Nowhere
Joined Apr 2008
7K Posts | 3K+
Out of Nowhere
You are obviously forgetting about a billion Indians there. 90% of motorcycle sales in India happen in the 100cc category and the sole criteria for the buyers of these motorcycles is excellent fuel efficiency (in the range of 60-75 km per liter).
