Launch control SCRAPPED for 2009!!!!!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Slide @ Feb 18 2009, 12:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>clarkjw is pinky's sister >.<
No way man. Clarkjw has some decent takes, thought I see you don't agree.

Pinky is just a dumb illiterate hater like this guy:

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Neville Bartos @ Feb 17 2009, 11:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yeah and look where Rainey ended up...........................

Even though, I haven't even seen Pinky stoop to this guy's level.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Feb 18 2009, 10:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>This is not a step in the right direction, this is the proliferation of the problem.

The problem is not technology, the problem is the role technology plays when engines have narrow power bands. Engine capacity is still too low to provide ample low-end power without super expensive engine internals. Regardless of what technology they eliminate, only one racing line will be fast.

Elimination of electronic suspension is the real f-u to Ducati and racing fans alike. It has been widely reported that the Duc requires electronic rear suspension to make any pace. Elias was lap traffic until Ducati gave him the full spec. Furthermore, electronic suspension is one of the few technologies that might be applicable to the road riders and track-day warriors alike. Who wouldn't like the ability to adjust suspension characteristics based upon the lean angle. Electronic suspension might save a $20,000 dollar investment and a lot of pain; especially in the wet.

Electronic suspension is raising cornering speeds. They have a control tire to regulate corner speeds. Why don't they use it?!

BTW who was it that said they need to regulate average speed? Average speed is lap time. I don't think they need to regulate average speed, but I do agree with the premise of the post. They need to regulate the performance criteria they are trying to control. When they write complicated rules, they drive costs up, even if they write more cost-cutting rules.

I don't know how this .... passed, but leave it to the Japs Manus! And yes, I said avg speed to contrast top speed. I could of said minimum lap times.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (clarkjw @ Feb 18 2009, 01:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I don't know how this .... passed, but leave it to the Japs Manus! And yes, I said avg speed to contrast top speed. I could of said minimum lap times.

Minimum lap times? Are you saying it should be illegal to go too quickly?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (clarkjw @ Feb 18 2009, 10:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I don't know how this .... passed, but leave it to the Japs Manus! And yes, I said avg speed to contrast top speed. I could of said minimum lap times.
you've just spent around 20 very stupid posts....

20 more and i will find you

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Feb 18 2009, 10:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Minimum lap times? Are you saying it should be illegal to go too quickly?
A top speed limit would do most of the correcting.
But yes, for a number of reasons:
Safety as bikes evolve to have higher corner speed/more hp.
I don't want to watch an F1 race, where everything corner squared off or powerslid.
I was saying it in the context of eliminating the displacement restriction altogether.

The limits would be based mostly on safety and hard to circumvent (unless riders go so fast they have to stop and wait before they cross finish line to make min time, but even that could be fixed by saying the last x km of a lap need to be within y% of the time of the first x km of the lap, based on circuit). Currently riders aren't too close to 250cc corner speed, but with electronics and unrestricted displacement, they'll get there AND be faster on straights. I'm talking if bikes started going 10 secs faster, riders (and fans) would start dying, quickly. A lap speed limit would basically limit the contest for excessive horsepower/torque, which was a major component of costs. It is completely subjective, but could easily evolve with the sport. That's the point of my proposals. Rules that naturally evolve with the sport and don't hinder road technology development or raise costs.

Edit: Slide you've offered nothing to the discussion but negativity. I can no longer see your posts.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Feb 19 2009, 08:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>This is not a step in the right direction, this is the proliferation of the problem.

The problem is not technology, the problem is the role technology plays when engines have narrow power bands. Engine capacity is still too low to provide ample low-end power without super expensive engine internals. Regardless of what technology they eliminate, only one racing line will be fast.

Elimination of electronic suspension is the real f-u to Ducati and racing fans alike. It has been widely reported that the Duc requires electronic rear suspension to make any pace. Elias was lap traffic until Ducati gave him the full spec. Furthermore, electronic suspension is one of the few technologies that might be applicable to the road riders and track-day warriors alike. Who wouldn't like the ability to adjust suspension characteristics based upon the lean angle. Electronic suspension might save a $20,000 dollar investment and a lot of pain; especially in the wet.

Electronic suspension is raising cornering speeds. They have a control tire to regulate corner speeds. Why don't they use it?!

BTW who was it that said they need to regulate average speed? Average speed is lap time. I don't think they need to regulate average speed, but I do agree with the premise of the post. They need to regulate the performance criteria they are trying to control. When they write complicated rules, they drive costs up, even if they write more cost-cutting rules.

I would have thought Yamaha would definitely be effected. I know the Yamaha's were using electronic suspension last year in Superbikes. The chances that they were using this system before their motogp team is a little less than zero. I have no idea if Ducati use it or Suzuki for that matter. They both keep their cards pretty close to their chest.

Link below.

Click Me

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Frizzle @ Feb 18 2009, 10:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Click Me
TY, Frizz I really don't know how this happened. Does anyone have details on the restriction? Nicky may be in some trouble.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (clarkjw @ Feb 18 2009, 02:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Edit: Slide you've offered nothing to the discussion but negativity. I can no longer see your posts.

I call that the "chicken ...." button. Don't do it man. Its about tough skin around here.

Curve says rediculous things, but then gives a topical opinion.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Feb 19 2009, 09:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I call that the "chicken ...." button. Don't do it man. Its about tough skin around here.


Yes but you really shouldn't need thick skin.
What's the point of all the keyboard hero name calling ....?
It just changes the discussion from racing to personal insults.
My opinion means diddly just like everyone else, but for what it's worth if they are going to limit electronics in future then starting small is the way to go. So I think the first bans will be to test how it will effect the racing and more electronic bans may follow depending on the success of these first rule adjustments. Lets wait and see what they bring to the show. If it improves the racing then great.

Rules 3 through 5 are just mind blowing.

3. Ceramic composite materials are not permitted for brakes disc or pads.
WTF? EDIT: this doens't mean no carbon brakes, these are even newer and more exotic? Why don't they just switch to spec brakes and rims if they really wanna save money?

4. Launch control system is not permitted.
How will they monitor this?

5. Electronic controlled suspension is not permitted.
This could have a really nice road applications and likely contributes to rider safety. If someone hides a radio chip in a gas chamber, will DORNA find it?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Frizzle @ Feb 19 2009, 08:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yes but you really shouldn't need thick skin.
What's the point of all the keyboard hero name calling ....?
It just changes the discussion from racing to personal insults.
My opinion means diddly just like everyone else, but for what it's worth if they are going to limit electronics in future then starting small is the way to go. So I think the first bans will be to test how it will effect the racing and more electronic bans may follow depending on the success of these first rule adjustments. Lets wait and see what they bring to the show. If it improves the racing then great.
I agree. And as for the name calling - it really gets tiresome sometimes. Clark has come in with some reasoned points of view, apparently not going with the flow (banning most electronic aids), and he gets a ton of abuse for it.
It seems dorna have gone the scattergun approach, banning some things, changing others, in the hope that something will work. The problem is, I don't think they have any idea what they are working to achieve.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (clarkjw @ Feb 18 2009, 03:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>"Rider talent" is code for gay for Rossi, right?
Eat it, Curvey old man.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Feb 18 2009, 03:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The problem is not technology, the problem is the role technology plays when engines have narrow power bands. Engine capacity is still too low to provide ample low-end power without super expensive engine internals. Regardless of what technology they eliminate, only one racing line will be fast.
That's my take on it. It's not as if these electronics were born at the same time as the 800s, a good portion of the 990 era was held under similar conditions yet the torque curve allowed for different techniques and lessened the dependence on TC for fast laps.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Slide @ Feb 18 2009, 03:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>you've just spent around 20 very stupid posts....

20 more and i will find you
Says you. I don't agree with everything Clark has come up with but that's his opinion. Rather than calling his posts "stupid," make some sort of argument based on something. I've seen nothing in your posts other than pro-Hayden, anti-TC rubbish and certainly nothing with any intellectual merit. You're free to express your opinions and I'm certainly nobody to tell you otherwise, but when you start to criticize other people's opinions just know I, and many others here, will be sure to inform you that you don't know .....

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (clarkjw @ Feb 18 2009, 04:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Rules 3 through 5 are just mind blowing.

3. Ceramic composite materials are not permitted for brakes disc or pads.
WTF? No carbon brakes? Why don't they just switch to spec brakes and rims if they really wanna save money?
I read today that carbon brakes will still be allowed. The rule is to prohibit any team/manufacturer moving to the full on ceramic brakes used in F1. Am I misled? There is a difference between the carbon brakes in MotoGP and ceramic brakes in F1, correct?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (clarkjw @ Feb 18 2009, 11:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Rules 3 through 5 are just mind blowing.

3. Ceramic composite materials are not permitted for brakes disc or pads.
WTF? No carbon brakes? Why don't they just switch to spec brakes and rims if they really wanna save money?
will make able to swith tires in stead of a whole bike in dry to wet race, which will keep riders from losing their set-up


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (clarkjw @ Feb 18 2009, 11:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>4. Launch control system is not permitted.
How will they monitor this?
they dont have to, its probably quite easy to see


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (clarkjw @ Feb 18 2009, 11:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>5. Electronic controlled suspension is not permitted.
This could have a really nice road applications and likely contributes to rider safety. If someone hides a radio chip in a gas chamber, will DORNA find it?
i cant imagine that any factory will cheat with the bikes, because it would damage their image...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Austin @ Feb 18 2009, 11:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'> Eat it, Curvey old man.
The rule is to prohibit any team/manufacturer moving to the full on ceramic brakes used in F1. Am I misled? There is a difference between the carbon brakes in MotoGP and ceramic brakes in F1, correct?
Meant to edit. Yes, I've found they are different. Carbon will be allowed.

if cerametic brakes also can be used in the wet, this is a very bad rule

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (clarkjw @ Feb 19 2009, 09:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>If someone hides a radio chip in a gas chamber, will DORNA find it?

Well no obviously! ....... because remember, according to some on here, Ducati have secretly stored extra fuel ...... and since discovery of that exrta fuel has mysteriously eluded the scrutineers ...... thats were they'll hide the chip!

what does the electronic suspension do?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BarryMachine @ Feb 18 2009, 11:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well no obviously! ....... because remember, according to some on here, Ducati have secretly stored extra fuel ...... and since discovery of that exrta fuel has mysteriously eluded the scrutineers ...... thats were they'll hide the chip!
that was a long time ago and the links to prove the story were posted at the time so dont ....... start ! Do you have excessive compulsive disorder regarding your stoner infatuation ? its pretty creepy !

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (clarkjw @ Feb 18 2009, 03:06 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>A top speed limit would do most of the correcting.
But yes, for a number of reasons:
Safety as bikes evolve to have higher corner speed/more hp.
I don't want to watch an F1 race, where everything corner squared off or powerslid.
I was saying it in the context of eliminating the displacement restriction altogether.

The limits would be based mostly on safety and hard to circumvent (unless riders go so fast they have to stop and wait before they cross finish line to make min time, but even that could be fixed by saying the last x km of a lap need to be within y% of the time of the first x km of the lap, based on circuit). Currently riders aren't too close to 250cc corner speed, but with electronics and unrestricted displacement, they'll get there AND be faster on straights. I'm talking if bikes started going 10 secs faster, riders (and fans) would start dying, quickly. A lap speed limit would basically limit the contest for excessive horsepower/torque, which was a major component of costs. It is completely subjective, but could easily evolve with the sport. That's the point of my proposals. Rules that naturally evolve with the sport and don't hinder road technology development or raise costs.

Edit: Slide you've offered nothing to the discussion but negativity. I can no longer see your posts.

Yeah, I like the top speed idea, but why don't they simply raise minimum weight and use the control tire to reduce cornering speed.

If you control lap time (average speed), you don't have a racing series.