MotoGP considering move to standard ECU

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(michaelm @ Dec 20 2007, 08:07 AM) [snapback]104907[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
Apart from my doubts that dorna know anything about bike racing, or indeed care about bike racing per se at all other than for any commercial potential it might have, empirical evidence ie the 2007 season would suggest they are incompetent at devising technical regulations. I don't think the technical regulations should be decided by current competitors or at least not individual ones. On reflection the quotes are undated as others have said and the idea of a control ecu was raised quite early in the season and is theoretically attractive, so this may be nothing to do with rossi.

I would prefer that motorbike guys decide the regs. How about a committee of ago, doohan, schwantz and rainey?



Dorna = series promoters
FIM = rule making entity

Also, all of those guys still have ties to Honda, Suzuki, and Yamaha. How are they supposed to unbaised? Especially when Schwantz is all but offically running Martinez' MGP team in 09?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jjok @ Dec 20 2007, 03:25 PM) [snapback]104902[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
I thought it was meant to be a prototype series.

If Rossi feels so uncomfortable about traction control then maybe he should switch it off on his own bike. This is more to do with the fact that Ducati's ECU is working better than Yamaha's.


no i just think its gettin more of a hinderance to riders rather than being any help (for some), its annoying for the riders who do better without it and its annoying for the riders who do better with it and thats just tough crap (make it even for all), this argument will be both ways, i fully agree that a standard ecu will make it even for all riders.

who thinks that a standard ecu will be better? i think it will 100%

the fighting on the circuit should be done by the riders not because someone has better electronics than the other.

it should be bike manufacturers, tyre manufacturers and the rider, nothing more nothing less.

what next for motogp ???? autopilot????

standard ecu ftw

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(phleg @ Dec 20 2007, 04:57 PM) [snapback]104914[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
Erm, do explain.


Before the bikes where really fast in a straight line but lost alot in the corners, now we take a little bit off the topspeed but increase corner speed and we get a faster lap.

but the closer exciting racing is not happening.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(an4rew @ Dec 20 2007, 07:52 PM) [snapback]104928[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
Before the bikes where really fast in a straight line but lost alot in the corners, now we take a little bit off the topspeed but increase corner speed and we get a faster lap.

but the closer exciting racing is not happening.


1. Erm, most accidents happen in the corner, you don't want to be going faster if thats the case.

2. Erm, no ....?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Racejumkie @ Dec 20 2007, 10:55 AM) [snapback]104923[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
Perhaps it was not there intention to discredit the neutrality they are supposed to show all the competitors (if we are to believe those that supported the DORNA-Rossi-Bridgestone affair). It was pulled off so blatantly one-sided in the public eye that they have now invited skepticism, even when they make worthwhile proposals like this ECU idea. I for one think that a control tire would have made the racing more even, but it seems that Dorna only used this proposal to use it as a <u>threat</u> and never really intended to put it on the table as a good-faith improvement strategy and commitment to the contest of MotoGP.


Preach on, brotha.

This is spot on. The DoRna-Rossi-Bstone deal is compelling evidence that the FIM have lost control over the governing of the sport or have given Dorna an increased responsibility. Why the hell would the FIM care if one rider gets Bridgestone--that's a marketing problem. The FIM isn't going to micro manage on that level. They are more interested in figuring out how to keep all the series they govern from overlapping. They are trying to figure out how to write technical specs that allow manufacturers to produce fewer machine variants and race in more series.

Skidmark, when I talk about a bungled change I don't mean the rearrangement of the grid--that stuff happens. I mean the tire rules they made, that nearly forced a Michelin control tire because B-stone couldn't/wouldn't supply. Those same rules are now effectively reversed. The move to 800s was supposed to keep things the same but make it a bit slower , but that rule change has lead to more rules discussion. Now they are thinking about a ban on TC, implementing stock ECU's, and making a control tire. Passing is completely gone, battles are much smaller, there is 1 fast racing line, and race pace management is a distant memory. Remember when riders used to ride at 90% then use the last 10 laps to jockey for position and sprint for the finish. What happened? Dani and Casey just point towards the sunset and blast away letting the electronics do the subtle work (the artistic bit that you claim is now more prevalent) while they hit their marks.

I agree the technical nature of riding has increased. It is amazing to watch riders pitch the bike to 60 degrees going 10mph faster than last season, but as you've pointed out, the increase in speeds is due to perfected riding, perfected machinery, perfected electronics, perfected tires. The rider is an ever smaller part of the equation. Patience would have achieved the same performance increases without the power vacuum

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(drumfu @ Dec 20 2007, 07:06 PM) [snapback]104925[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
Dorna = series promoters
FIM = rule making entity

Also, all of those guys still have ties to Honda, Suzuki, and Yamaha. How are they supposed to unbaised? Especially when Schwantz is all but offically running Martinez' MGP team in 09?

I was joking, but did deliberately pick riders associated with different companies.

The point is that dorna now seem to be having a large input into the technical regulations. As we have discussed previously, I understand that the sport became too big for motorbike guys to run anymore and required them to get businessmen involved, but they seem to have lost any control. Ezpeleta if he is being correctly quoted in this article seems to think he can make the rules to suit his marketing requirements and the implication clearly seems to be that he will seek advice from various parties rather than get FIM to do it.

Why don't we just leave the rules as they are and hand Vale the next 5 championships in advance? It would save any further tinkering if the tyre and electronics don't give him and Dorna the results they are clearly trying to manipulate. There seems to be a consistent pattern here.

1 - Rossi complains
2 - Ezpeleta makes threats
3 - Dorna and Rossi's demands are met.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<div class='quotemain'>"They didn't want to find an agreement. Now something has been done, we'll see if it's enough. I want to get back to the situation we had in 2005, as far as the balance and the spectacle are concerned."

Let me see who won the title in 2005?
He's about as transparent as a double sided brick wall

The fact is non of this discussion would be happening if Rossi had won the last 2 titles. There would be no talk of tyres, no talk of rider aids and no need to change the rules. As usual Rossi fans see nothing at all wrong with this latest news. He deserves it right? With a bit of luck the other manufacturers will tell Dorna to go jump in the lake.

Disclaimer - This is not a rant against the banning or control of electronic rider aids before anyone tries to turn it into one.
If the manufacturers requested a control ECU or if we had heard mass requests from riders and teams to go down that road - FINE.
However this has been instigated by one rider who just happens to be the most popular rider on the grid. The same rider who hasn't won the championship for 2 years. you don't need to be Einstein to work out what's going on, although if you choose to stick your head in the sand it can easily be ignored and sometimes even vindicated.

Standard ECU is not far from what there is at the moment anyway ...... a lot run the same Magnetti Marelli system

But ..... how it is used is the private and confidential bit. And it is tuned to get the best possible performance from a bike and rider. So if they make it al standard ...... what is the point ...... then all the manufacturers will end up with designing what they see as the best way to construct an engine with a standard ECU.

The only reason there are calls for standard ECU??? its a way of saying "if all things were equal Rossi would win" .... which seems stupid to me anyway as clearly Rossi had a lot more at his disposal than say Stoner or Pedrosa this year ....... so I assume the best TC for him ...... but it still wasn't good enough.

Nup its all just more "the king didn't win ..... even though we believe he is the best!! .... so the reasons he didn't win are ...... the bike, the tyres, the TC, the ECU ....... anything but Rossi himself"

A standard ECU ...... well even though we pretty much already have it .... to standardise how it is used will be a mockery to motogp ( and making the ultimate fast bike ).

Nobody else is whinging about TC, why is Rossi? Why didn't he in 03?, .... 04? .... 05 ?? ......... I'm guessing he thought 06 was just pure dumb luck by Nicky Hayden ...... unfortunately 07 proved that wrong ........ so out come all the excuses. I'm beginning to think its time to "let go" of Rossi before he hinders the development to "walking sticks" at the end of his supposed next 5 years in motogp.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(BarryMachine @ Dec 20 2007, 05:44 PM) [snapback]104951[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
Standard ECU is not far from what there is at the moment anyway ...... a lot run the same Magnetti Marelli system

But ..... how it is used is the private and confidential bit. And it is tuned to get the best possible performance from a bike and rider. So if they make it al standard ...... what is the point ...... then all the manufacturers will end up with designing what they see as the best way to construct an engine with a standard ECU.

The only reason there are calls for standard ECU??? its a way of saying "if all things were equal Rossi would win" .... which seems stupid to me anyway as clearly Rossi had a lot more at his disposal than say Stoner or Pedrosa this year ....... so I assume the best TC for him ...... but it still wasn't good enough.

Nup its all just more "the king didn't win ..... even though we believe he is the best!! .... so the reasons he didn't win are ...... the bike, the tyres, the TC, the ECU ....... anything but Rossi himself"

A standard ECU ...... well even though we pretty much already have it .... to standardise how it is used will be a mockery to motogp ( and making the ultimate fast bike ).

Nobody else is whinging about TC, why is Rossi? Why didn't he in 03?, .... 04? .... 05 ?? ......... I'm guessing he thought 06 was just pure dumb luck by Nicky Hayden ...... unfortunately 07 proved that wrong ........ so out come all the excuses. I'm beginning to think its time to "let go" of Rossi before he hinders the development to "walking sticks" at the end of his supposed next 5 years in motogp.


yeah, because F1 went to a standard ECU because Rossi complained

On a seasonal note, I have about as much faith that the FIM and FIA technical committees act independently of dorna and mr ecclestone respectively as I do in santa claus. At least bernie was at one time a motor racing guy.

The ultimate power in both motogp and F1 obviously rests with the manufacturers both theoretically and in reality, and to a lesser extent with other equipment suppliers like tyre manufacturers, as without them there is no show. However in practice they are easily manipulated and set against each other, as bernie has demonstrated in F1 for many years and dorna are now demonstrating in motogp.

I don't think it is a good idea for the manufacturers to set the rules either, as the end result of this is likely to be purely engineering based regulations with little or no place for riding or driving talent at all, which some would say is already happening.

The point about Traction control is being raised now because of how dominant it is becoming... i don't think they had it in 02,03,04 (Gibernau's power slide in 04 was awesome) but maybe 05 was the first year it came in experimentally.

and Why would stoner be whinging about something that makes the big Ducati handle like a Yamaha on drugs?

At the end of the day a level playing field shows you the true great riders... where you don't have to say hes good because he has a Ducati or Honda.. or hes a traction control boy.

There would be no excuses for anybody.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(an4rew @ Dec 21 2007, 02:23 PM) [snapback]104975[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
The point about Traction control is being raised now because of how dominant it is becoming... i don't think they had it in 02,03,04 (Gibernau's power slide in 04 was awesome) but maybe 05 was the first year it came in experimentally.

and Why would stoner be whinging about something that makes the big Ducati handle like a Yamaha on drugs?

At the end of the day a level playing field shows you the true great riders... where you don't have to say hes good because he has a Ducati or Honda.. or hes a traction control boy.

There would be no excuses for anybody.

There is a level playing field in that the regulations are the same for everyone, but teams with greater resources to expend almost invariably still have an advantage so surely if a smaller team like ducati have a technical edge for a single season, which I agree they did in 2007, this should be cause for praise rather than condemnation.

I don't have a problem with technical aids including traction control being reduced if this is feasible, and stoner is on record as saying he preferred the 990 formula.

I admit the possibility that stoner is a fast but crash prone rider who has stopped crashing only because of improved rider aids, but there are at least two other possibilities. One is that at age 21 his riding improved from when he was 19 or 20. It is not unprecedented in bike racing history for a rider to improve, particularly at a young age . The other is that he tried too hard when he was on less competitive machinery, which is his most recent explanation for the 2006 season, one which obviously may be self serving.

This has nothing to do with that other rider whom you love and I respect, since a winner of a single world championship of whatever nationality or personality type cannot validly be compared with a five-time championship winner.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(michaelm @ Dec 21 2007, 02:55 PM) [snapback]104980[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
There is a level playing field in that the regulations are the same for everyone, but teams with greater resources to expend almost invariably still have an advantage so surely if a smaller team like ducati have a technical edge for a single season, which I agree they did in 2007, this should be cause for praise rather than condemnation.


That can work both ways, If Honda or Yamaha find something expensive Ducati could be left out in the cold.

Theres a good chance of that happening as you said Ducati are a small manufacturer who don't have the massive resources of Honda for example.

Then it would not be fair on Ducati, hence a more regulated championship might be better for everyone longterm and keep costs down and theres smaller teams like KR are having a hard time of it.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(an4rew @ Dec 21 2007, 03:39 PM) [snapback]104984[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
That can work both ways, If Honda or Yamaha find something expensive Ducati could be left out in the cold.

Theres a good chance of that happening as you said Ducati are a small manufacturer who don't have the massive resources of Honda for example.

Then it would not be fair on Ducati, hence a more regulated championship might be better for everyone longterm and keep costs down and theres smaller teams like KR are having a hard time of it.

I admit the validity of this line of argument, but previous periods of prolonged technical dominance by honda did not seem to create anything like the same concern as one year of ducati dominance .

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(michaelm @ Dec 21 2007, 03:49 PM) [snapback]104988[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
I admit the validity of this line of argument, but previous periods of prolonged technical dominance by honda did not seem to create anything like the same concern as one year of ducati dominance .


I agree, but i was so happy when Valentino left Honda.... because it was getting repetitive.

Maybe the reason theres alot of concern over one year of Ducati dominance is Stoner... how well hes adapted to the bike and matured as a racer. Its hard to digest, so we look at things like traction control and other excuses but at the end of the day i keep an open mind that hes improved.

I love the fact that people try to make Ducati out to be some sort of mom and pop shop.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(xx CURVE xx @ Dec 21 2007, 05:16 PM) [snapback]104995[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
I love the fact that people try to make Ducati out to be some sort of mom and pop shop.

They are compared to honda, but admittedly not compared to KR racing . I actually accept that yamaha are not necessarily all that wealthy, particularly with the salary (well deserved) that they are paying rossi; I doubt that their piano division is keen to cross subsidise.

Ducati are likely to become even less of a mom and pop operation if they continue to win motogps and make bikes like the hypermotard s and get people like you to buy them . I am seriously considering taking up riding at my advanced age with the eventual aim of getting one myself.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(xx CURVE xx @ Dec 21 2007, 05:16 PM) [snapback]104995[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
I love the fact that people try to make Ducati out to be some sort of mom and pop shop.


Agreed.

Ducati as a company is TINY compared to the Jap 4.

But Ducati Corse? I've heard that their racing budget from Marlboro is over £30m+ a year.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(phleg @ Dec 21 2007, 05:53 PM) [snapback]105006[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
Agreed.

Ducati as a company is TINY compared to the Jap 4.

But Ducati Corse? I've heard that their racing budget from Marlboro is over £30m+ a year.

I agree with rossi's stance on cigarette advertising and don't think the ducati racing team should be sponsored by marlboro. Ducati obviously have a reasonable budget (and a fair amount of political influence) in superbike racing as well.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(xx CURVE xx @ Dec 21 2007, 09:16 AM) [snapback]104995[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
I love the fact that people try to make Ducati out to be some sort of mom and pop shop.


It is.

Ducati don't have anything to do with these bikes they are built by Corse which is a tiny Ducati-owned think-tank of intensely passionate motorcycle engineers and a small group of technically gifted workers.

Corse is self contained, it has 100 employees. Probably only 75 are available at any given time for the GP squad, the others are dedicated to the other factory teams. That's it, 75 people from concept to race paddock when it comes to the GPs.

KR sources the most expensive bits of the bike. I think I remember KR saying they had a little under 50 people (probably more like 40 now), so Ducati Corse and KR are similarly sized. Obviously, one has a slightly better budget.