KILL TC!!!!!!!

Slide

Joined Dec 2008

333 Posts | 0+

Lienden

Discussion Starter
• Feb 14, 2009

• #1

kill traction control and stuff, its the devil's electronics >.<

it will save money!!!

the only side effect is... that it will give closer racing, and powerslides(me loves that

)!!!!!!!

anyone who has dorna's phone nr.??? gotta make an important call

 

C

chopperman

Joined Sep 2006

23K Posts | 3+

• Feb 14, 2009

• #2

yup get ride of it.
scrutineers cut any electrical wires that are connected to the wheels i say.

 

M

mylexicon

Joined Mar 2007

8K Posts | 2K+

Texas

• Feb 14, 2009

• #3

I voted certainly, but it's certainly not going to improve the racing.

Low end grunt allows for controllable power. If they would up the displacement and fuel, TC would be less important and more effective at saving people from gruesome highsides.

In reality, it doesn't need to be banned b/c there's no reason the premier class should only be 800cc.

 

D

DRILL

Joined Jun 2005

5K Posts | 1+

• Feb 15, 2009

• #4

Kill it !!!!!!!!

 

xx CURVE xx

Joined Jul 2006

11K Posts | 291+

Texas

• Feb 15, 2009

• #5

You know the 800s may not be so bad if they killed the aids..increase fuel capacity also..

 

BarryMachine

Joined Jun 2007

10K Posts | 1K+

Norah Head

• Feb 15, 2009

• #6

And bring back riders who never used TC too!! ..... I say!

you guys wouldn't remember back that far though

 

C

chopperman

Joined Sep 2006

23K Posts | 3+

• Feb 15, 2009

• #7

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BarryMachine @ Feb 15 2009, 03:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>And bring back riders who never used TC too!! ..... I say!

you guys wouldn't remember back that far though

Yeah your right mate. i only started following motogp when stoner started winning mid way through 07 season

 

xx CURVE xx

Joined Jul 2006

11K Posts | 291+

Texas

• Feb 15, 2009

• #8

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Feb 15 2009, 10:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yeah your right mate. i only started following motogp when stoner started winning mid way through 07 season

Yeah no ....

I remember when "Inverted Forks" was an inovation....

 

Traverser

Joined May 2006

4K Posts | 2+

Mts-7

• Feb 15, 2009

• #9

Kill tc. Also make the "minimum wight" to include the rider.

 

C

chopperman

Joined Sep 2006

23K Posts | 3+

• Feb 15, 2009

• #10

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Traverser @ Feb 15 2009, 08:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Kill tc. Also make the "minimum wight" to include the rider.
yes, i'll vote for that !

 

xx CURVE xx

Joined Jul 2006

11K Posts | 291+

Texas

• Feb 15, 2009

• #11

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Feb 15 2009, 03:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>yes, i'll vote for that !

I 2nd the motion

 

Goatboy

Joined Sep 2006

3K Posts | 4+

Leading

• Feb 15, 2009

• #12

Many have tried.

I think this reference makes me officially old.

I also think taking it away straight away could be bad, but in the long term, yeah. Kill it.

 

G

gsfan

Joined Jun 2007

1K Posts | 0+

Holbrook, ON

• Feb 15, 2009

• #13

Limit it but no way eliminate it. No factory will comply anyway. No rider will agree either. I don't want to see a demolition derby.

 

BarryMachine

Joined Jun 2007

10K Posts | 1K+

Norah Head

• Feb 15, 2009

• #14

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (xx CURVE xx @ Feb 16 2009, 06:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I remember when "Inverted Forks" was an inovation....

Well whoop de doo!! ...... they'll never replace real suspension!! .... "leading link all the way!" I say!!

I shouldn't laugh I used to ride DKWs .... they had leading link suspension

 

xx CURVE xx

Joined Jul 2006

11K Posts | 291+

Texas

• Feb 16, 2009

• #15

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BarryMachine @ Feb 15 2009, 08:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well whoop de doo!! ...... they'll never replace real suspension!! .... "leading link all the way!" I say!!

I shouldn't laugh I used to ride DKWs .... they had leading link suspension

You know what "Sir" for being an elderly man you sure are one little ....... annoying prick..

 

R

rgvneil

Joined May 2006

1K Posts | 0+

Jersey Channel Islands

• Feb 16, 2009

• #16

I guess Curve doesn't know what leading link forks are

 

BarryMachine

Joined Jun 2007

10K Posts | 1K+

Norah Head

• Feb 16, 2009

• #17

Hmmm probably never even seen a DKdub either

 

xx CURVE xx

Joined Jul 2006

11K Posts | 291+

Texas

• Feb 16, 2009

• #18

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (rgvneil @ Feb 16 2009, 07:11 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I guess Curve doesn't know what leading link forks are

Yes i do..although i've not rode a bike of that sort or of that age... what i do KNOW is Berry is a prick... you in leagues now?

here's an example i believe..

6154:indian.htm]


By the way..how do i set ignore on people again?

 

Attachments

• 
  indian.jpg

  631.7 KB

B

babelfish

Joined May 2006

3K Posts | 0+

• Feb 16, 2009

• #19

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ Feb 16 2009, 01:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Limit it but no way eliminate it. No factory will comply anyway. No rider will agree either. I don't want to see a demolition derby.

I agree that the practical implementation would be to limit it. It's far to difficult to control ECU's for any hidden TC algorithems. What would be far easier would be to ban lot's of sensors in the Q and race sessions. Alternativly the sensors may be connected to a completly self contained telemetry unit, like they used to in the "old days".
The result would be a limited TC with far less influence.

 

Slide

Joined Dec 2008

333 Posts | 0+

Lienden

Discussion Starter
• Feb 16, 2009

• #20

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (xx CURVE xx @ Feb 16 2009, 02:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>By the way..how do i set ignore on people again?
press alt - f4