Michelin's Last Stand

Late in the article Rossi is quoted as stating that he prefers the 990's, no TC and a single spec tire. Well of course he would since it would garrantee him titles. The other teams, not having Rossi at the helm, want technical means to even up the advantage or what is the use of racing with Rossi in the series.

The tire thing plays out this year to be what it is. I think Michelin will stay in the series with the B teams (maybe Lorenzo due to pressure from Rossi), try to develop good tires, and try to gain more A teams eventually. Bridgestone wants someone to beat. They won't go for a one tire series because what can they advertize? "We are better than...well there is no competition so we can't say". No they want to advertize that they beat the .... out of Michelin and visa versa. Conspiracy theories aside I think a spec one supplier tire is not practical and not happening. The problem is that no one wants to lose or more accurately will accept losing. But someone has to lose and guys like Pedrosa can only win if a certain set of circumstances allow. He has management that will press the circumstances to allow for him to win. The real problem is Dorna's ability to bend. Or fold. They fold up like old lawnchairs.

Michelin will make better tires. Last couple of races both were on the podium. That being said I might switch from Michelins to Pirellis next year for a change. A buddy races supercorsas and they are ridiculously sticky compared to my Powers.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ Sep 19 2008, 04:21 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Michelin will make better tires. Last couple of races both were on the podium. That being said I might switch from Michelins to Pirellis next year for a change. A buddy races supercorsas and they are ridiculously sticky compared to my Powers.

Go to any track and pick up a handfull of used tires. Even qualifyers last a few thousand miles.
Don't worrie about rain or heat in tires. Those tires are so sticky that they work better than road tires on dry regardless of heat. In the rain, pump up to max rated pressure for the tires, and you will have a tire that works better than any sports road tire on it's normal pressure.
But don't use michelin. Pirelli, Dunlop and Metzler are all fine.

Dani Pedrosa is the only current rider that seems capable of beating Valentino Rossi.”
mu hahaha Honda have really lost it since Rossi left havent they,
“Honda will not abandon our partner of many years after just one bad season.”
But 1 and a half is enough?or is that the PRICK sorry Puig factor
"requesting Bridgestone tires for both his riders" So Fukui wasnt against giving Nicky a fair chance

Rossi believes that the best formula would be to go back to 990cc and ban traction control. Dorna has the power to impose a control tire system, a ‘commercial’ matter, but all matters of ‘technical’ concerns must be agreed upon by the MSMA, and a return to 990cc and a ban on traction control would not be approved by the current MSMA members.

A single tire rule would make clearer who the better riders were - taking away the emphasis on who made the best tires. Yeah - I love being a gear-head, but my primary focus in racing is on the riders, bike second, tires third.

What I'm wondering is: how much audience, and how much income - will they have to lose - before the MSMA ........ change their mind. Or perhaps more directly - how much loss will have to be incurred before the members of the MSMA are replaced with more savy people? You know . . . money talks etc.

The future changes to the formula are what intrigue me most about the tire situation. Michelin ruled the roost in the 990 days.

If they ban TC and return to 990, how badly will Michelin be hurt if they drop out now? or if Ezy imposes a single tire for 2009?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Keshav @ Sep 19 2008, 12:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>What I'm wondering is: how much audience, and how much income - will they have to lose - before the MSMA ........ change their mind. Or perhaps more directly - how much loss will have to be incurred before the members of the MSMA are replaced with more savy people? You know . . . money talks etc.

I think the factories race to advertise, and to develop technologies. The further we get into constrained rules and control parts, the less development will be useful to road ranges. The factories will be trying to hang onto that element for as long as possible before their presence is reduced only to a marketting capacity, which would make it harder to justify the budgets.

There's what...5 riders left on Michies?

Drop the .... out already

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Sep 19 2008, 04:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I think the factories race to advertise, and to develop technologies. The further we get into constrained rules and control parts, the less development will be useful to road ranges. The factories will be trying to hang onto that element for as long as possible before their presence is reduced only to a marketting capacity, which would make it harder to justify the budgets.

That is SO wrong. TC on Road bikes will never include the foremost techincal advances they are working on now. GPS and/or gyro, position sensors for suspension.... all this is totally race spesific. A clever TC that do without input but the rev counter gear pos, and throttle pos would gain Road going bikes massivly, but that is out of the question now.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Sep 19 2008, 04:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>That is SO wrong. TC on Road bikes will never include the foremost techincal advances they are working on now. GPS and/or gyro, position sensors for suspension.... all this is totally race spesific. A clever TC that do without input but the rev counter gear pos, and throttle pos would gain Road going bikes massivly, but that is out of the question now.

Yea some of the technologies may not transfer directly, but they will always be gathering data about vehicle dynamics and what possibilities there are so its still useful. As i said though technologies are getting less road-relevant. We aren't gonna get carbon brakes, GPS TC or a lot of other stuff any time soon.

But carbon frames?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Sep 19 2008, 05:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yea some of the technologies may not transfer directly, but they will always be gathering data about vehicle dynamics and what possibilities there are so its still useful. As i said though technologies are getting less road-relevant. We aren't gonna get carbon brakes, GPS TC or a lot of other stuff any time soon.

As Roger would say, ......... You are going around in circles again. You said that further constraints would lead to less relevant technology while your examples are a perfect match to prove my point:
Careful restrictions will lead to a lot more relevant technology.
Restrictions to TC would lead to a LOT MORE relevant technology, restrictions on carbon brakes would lead to more relevant technology.
Is it right to limit a prototype seris with that kind of restrictions? I don't know, but there sure are some advantages.

A lot of people like to talk about how placing restrictions on electronics and returning to 990cc displacement will spell the end of all the development and technology that filters down to road bikes. It's not as if development will fully stop. There is still a lot that can be experimented with a 990, things that I can't comprehend. I am not as familiar with the 500s and their development relationship with road-going bikes but I have to assume that even in the twilight of their time, bits were still being discovered that translated to the bikes that made it to the street.

Am I quite off the mark?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ Sep 19 2008, 05:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>But carbon frames?

Possible but not likely. The've become quite common for mountain bikes.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Sep 19 2008, 02:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The future changes to the formula are what intrigue me most about the tire situation. Michelin ruled the roost in the 990 days.

If they ban TC and return to 990. How badly will Michelin be hurt if they drop out now? or if Ezy imposes a single tire for 2009?
I thought a control tyre was a done deal but am having some doubts about this now, particularly since repsol honda /puig actually pulling the right rein would seem uncharacteristic going by their recent form. If michelin really are broke as some maintain I guess this doesn't apply.

If alice ducati (or gibernau ducati) end up on michelins next year it would lend further credence to your hypotheses concerning ezy doing covert tyre deals, or perhaps not so covert as he has more or less admitted he does have substantial control where tyres are concerned. I don't really think tyres are what cost stoner the title this year though.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Sep 19 2008, 04:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You said that further constraints would lead to less relevant technology while your examples are a perfect match to prove my point:
Careful restrictions will lead to a lot more relevant technology.
Restrictions to TC would lead to a LOT MORE relevant technology, restrictions on carbon brakes would lead to more relevant technology.
Is it right to limit a prototype seris with that kind of restrictions? I don't know, but there sure are some advantages.

Good point actually because it can easily go both ways. I agree that careful restrictions could lead to some improvements in the relevance of technology being developed, but unfortunately the technology restrictions that are most commonly discussed are almost exclusively for "closer racing".

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Austin @ Sep 19 2008, 05:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>A lot of people like to talk about how placing restrictions on electronics and returning to 990cc displacement will spell the end of all the development and technology that filters down to road bikes. It's not as if development will fully stop. There is still a lot that can be experimented with a 990, things that I can't comprehend. I am not as familiar with the 500s and their development relationship with road-going bikes but I have to assume that even in the twilight of their time, bits were still being discovered that translated to the bikes that made it to the street.

Am I quite off the mark?

Not at all. First of all chassi development made huge steps forward in that aera. Frames and suspension saw huge improvments. For the engines there were less useful technology but even there we got expansion chambers and exhaust valves as a result of racing technology. I'm pretty sure cooling technology also hugely gained 4 stroke engines.

The funny thing is that in many ways a more restricted regulation and a fixed formula over years would probably lead to more development as they don't have to focus on designing new engines every year and make up those huge gains to optimize to what ever formula is active that current year but use imagination and resources to find samller improvements on a allready well known formula. In the long run that might gain the rest of us more than lots of changes ever second year.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Sep 19 2008, 10:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The future changes to the formula are what intrigue me most about the tire situation. Michelin ruled the roost in the 990 days.

If they ban TC and return to 990, how badly will Michelin be hurt if they drop out now? or if Ezy imposes a single tire for 2009?

Seems to me the the reason Michelin ruled the roost in the 990s era was not because they were Michelin, or that they were more in tune to idiosyncrasies of the 990 - but because they were still allowed the Saturday night specials. Without that advantage - and no increase in R&D - Bridgestone would continue to dominate regardless of how many CCs the bike is.