moto gp class

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yamaka46 @ Mar 15 2008, 03:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Other than that I think your idea of "run what you brung" is great.
You are quite possibly right about fuel limits in general, but in an otherwise unlimited formula wouldn't everyone just build bigger and bigger engines/ run more and more boost etc.

I find the 800's more apt for the formula. I loved the 500's BAck in the MV days it was all a bit sluggy but the two strokes got to a pretty good level. I found the 1000's seemed a bit like tractors when they first came out compared to the 500 2 strokes ( there was suddenly half the screaming noise there used to be). So to hear an 800 in screamer config. is like more back to the 500 days but in an even faster bike.

Another reason I was never fussed about 1000's was that that was WSBK territory, and hence was already covered to some extent. But I guess it took 1000cc in a 4 stroke to at least just surpass what they had in the old 500's.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BarryMachine @ Mar 15 2008, 03:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I find the 800's more apt for the formula. I loved the 500's BAck in the MV days it was all a bit sluggy but the two strokes got to a pretty good level. I found the 1000's seemed a bit like tractors when they first came out compared to the 500 2 strokes ( there was suddenly half the screaming noise there used to be). So to hear an 800 in screamer config. is like more back to the 500 days but in an even faster bike.

Another reason I was never fussed about 1000's was that that was WSBK territory, and hence was already covered to some extent. But I guess it took 1000cc in a 4 stroke to at least just surpass what they had in the old 500's.
I actually think that it took 1000cc to ensure that those pesky strokers were definitely beaten immediately the 4's came along. If they'd gone to 800s straight away then the strokers might have won a few races and more development might have allowed them to continue. IMO Honda hated stinkwheels and wanted to be sure to exterminate them, hence the 1000cc formula at the start.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yamaka46 @ Mar 16 2008, 02:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I actually think that it took 1000cc to ensure that those pesky strokers were definitely beaten immediately the 4's came along. If they'd gone to 800s straight away then the strokers might have won a few races and more development might have allowed them to continue. IMO Honda hated stinkwheels and wanted to be sure to exterminate them, hence the 1000cc formula at the start.

Dead right ....... in dirt bikes the 400 4 strokes was meant to be the 250 equivalent, when they first allowed the "bigger 4 strokes v's 250 2 strokes". The engine technology was not quite that good though really so 2 strokes were hanging in there ...... so they seem to have gone to 450's ..... and that's about sunk the 250 2 strokes.


Honda allways hated 2 strokes. But they finally surcame to the pressure and made the CR250 dirt bike .... which kicked them off into a whole new world of competition. But at every oportunity they still seemed to want to bury them ...... when XR's first came out they even claimed that this bike was a 2 stroke killer ....... turned out to be just another slugbarely better than their 4 stroke trail bike

Soichiro?? Honda allways had the ideology that 4 strokes were the go. When regulations began to call for more fuel efficiency and less polution, I guess they got there way finally.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yamaka46 @ Mar 15 2008, 02:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Nooooo. No fuel limits. It makes not one jot of difference to the environment given the huge amount of stuff and people that are transported around the world for a seasons Motogp whether the fuel for a race is limited to 21 litres or not at all. What limiting fuel does do in the modern electronic era is mean that the electronics need to take over to ensure that the fuel lasts the race. Hence the comments by the British Eurosport team at Qatar regarding changing/leaning off fuel maps as the race progressed. This negates any "saving" of the tyre a rider may make if that does not also save fuel - although he could go faster due to the fact that his tyres are still fine, the electronics will have to limit the revs due to the fuel limits.

Other than that I think your idea of "run what you brung" is great.
The fuel limit was never about the environment from my point of view, although I suppose its a factor. Without a fuel limit, there'd be almost no restriction on the power available to teams. I think the line has to be drawn somewhere.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Orrmate @ Mar 15 2008, 04:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The fuel limit was never about the environment from my point of view, although I suppose its a factor. Without a fuel limit, there'd be almost no restriction on the power available to teams. I think the line has to be drawn somewhere.
There are much better ways to limit power than keeping reducing the fuel allowed, especially bearing in mind that this is supposed to be a racing series.

If you've ever watched Le Mans then you'll have seen what happens when the cars are trying to maximise the fuel on a stint - there is only one racing line for them (partially due to the lap being so long) which will eek the fuel out so that the best number of laps possible is completed during each stint. With Le Mans having a mixture of car types, and therefore speeds, on the same circuit this actually adds to the dangers - the prototype cars need to take there lines and woe betide any of the lower formulae entrants who get in their way.

As far as Motogp is concerned I don't think that the discrepancy between the teams would cause this kind of issue, but the fact remains that as you minimise the fuel available you limit the lines that can be taken in order to eek the fuel out at maximum speed. This eventually leads to processional "races" where riders need to take more risks in passing in order to minimise the time spent off the optimal line.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gary @ Mar 11 2008, 12:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>in my opinion the 500cc class was far more entertaining than the now 800cc.
it was a case of rider and machine,the back tyre lighting up was a joy to watch,alas no more due to the puters and traction control.

what do you think ?

I think motogp is more entertaining now than it ever has been before. I don't like the 4 stroke switch from a technical standpoint because the rules had to be written to make superior technology obsolete for commercial reasons. But these things are needed sometimes for the series to progress, and i think the result has been excellent. Its always worth considering that if the 500cc formula could feasibly have continued the technology would have progressed into something with all the electronic and tyre technology that makes motogp bikes so much more stable in comparison.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yamaka46 @ Mar 15 2008, 04:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I actually think that it took 1000cc to ensure that those pesky strokers were definitely beaten immediately the 4's came along. If they'd gone to 800s straight away then the strokers might have won a few races and more development might have allowed them to continue. IMO Honda hated stinkwheels and wanted to be sure to exterminate them, hence the 1000cc formula at the start.

Spot on. Honda never managed to win any title in the old 4-strokes times, but they did try! They reluctantly adjusted to the 2-strokes era (even if eventually they were exceedingly successful) and were still trying to compete against the 2-strokes in the early 80's with the famous oval piston 8-valve per cylinder 4-strokes 500cc prototype which was hopelessly raced by Spencer...

my views may be extreme but if i had my way motogp would be same bike, same tires, same everything. that way it would all be down to the rider and we could enjoy some real racing instead of 5 second gaps and excuses post checkered flag

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (DirtyD86 @ Mar 17 2008, 02:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>my views may be extreme but if i had my way motogp would be same bike, same tires, same everything. that way it would all be down to the rider and we could enjoy some real racing instead of 5 second gaps and excuses post checkered flag


That sort of racing (all on same equipment) is called IROC (in USA), and hasn't been very successful. What a thought, totally spec bike, tyres, fuel, and no need or reason to have any motorcycle companies develop new ideas or products. Heck if they had been smart, they would have done that in the 1950s, and then we could all enjoy riding around on 500cc 4 stroke singles. Wow.

or...... Present technological challenges to be solved. Hence the fuel limit makes companies develop competing fuel management technologies, with some brilliant solutions presented. Valve actuation...there is a better way than using spring return poppet valves that started in late 1800's. Traction control that can provide benefits for street riders, the majority of whom are no where near racer ability. Note that the ability to use all these new technological advances is just another aspect of rider development. Is it fair to say that only pinball machine games are the real thing because they have all this mechanical action but computer games are .....? So if you are a pinball wizard like Rossi, maybe you can't stand the guy with a guitar controller rocking out like Stoner does. And case in point, Stoner is one of 4 guys with virtually the same bike, but the only one who seems to be able to ride it. Put Rossi on a bike like Stoner's and maybe he wouldn't be able to make the top 10 (Melandri didn't, and he has beaten Rossi before), because Rossi lacks the kind of rider ability to ride like that? Remember, what is required for rider ability is different at different times. In the 50's, no one wore knee sliders or needed them. But knee sliders meant some riders tried to ride to close to 100% and crashed. In the old days, that could be fatal. That is why riders like Hailwood were better riders than when Kenny Roberts came along, because Hailwood could win at Isle of Man (where Kenny was afraid to race because of the danger) and two weeks later, Hailwood could beat Roberts at the British GP and all on a privateer bike. So was it a mistake to let technology make better tyres so that knee dragging became the way to go? I think not, and in the same sense, the electronic controls just up the ante, more is required out of the rider to be able to ride the bike. Will Rossi beat Lorenzo this year even once? (probably, is my guess, but Lorenzo is more of the TCG type as Rossi calls it and will do better).



Got to admit, the run what you brung and limit only the fuel consumption is an interesting concept.

I want to see traction control done away with, not because I think it is pushing stoner beyond everyone one else, but the reason I started watching motorcycle racing was because of the riders decided the results not the electronics

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dylan @ Mar 17 2008, 01:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I want to see traction control done away with, not because I think it is pushing stoner beyond everyone one else, but the reason I started watching motorcycle racing was because of the riders decided the results not the electronics


How long ago was that?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dylan @ Mar 17 2008, 01:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I want to see traction control done away with, not because I think it is pushing stoner beyond everyone one else, but the reason I started watching motorcycle racing was because of the riders decided the results not the electronics


look at f1 they got ride of TC.

end of day there were no real suprises as to who was still fast.

kimi and lewis.

tc dont turn a .... driver great

motogp is not only the best rider, it about the best equipment, best engineers, best personell. note this doesnt necessarly most money as ducati has proven.

if you want mediocre rider, mediocre technology, mediocre mechanics, then go watch the AMA.