MotoGP is not World Superbikes

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nuts @ Dec 16 2009, 08:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>If satelite or privateer teams get the same gear as the factory teams (which I believe in most cases they do), is only comes down to the people - the riders, and techs, etc.
The privateer and sat teams are just not as good. Simple. (OK, a big part of it is they don't have the money to pay the best people, accepted) but don't make excuses. The teams down the bottom need to get better. They need to attract high paying sponsors that get something for their money.
What would Rossi and JB do on JT's Tech 3 bike. I am guessing exactly what they are doing on the Fiat bike.

Ok - on to the troubles of MotoGP.
Everyone go back to 2006, and wheel out the 2006 spec 990 GP bikes, and lets start from there.
Limit electronic sensors, with a spec ECU system. No back to base data logging during a race or test session. No GPS systems
Rev limit the engines.
Unlimited fuel.
No 6 engine rule.
Hotter grid girls, and more carnaval, party atmosphere at the races. Attract the fans with more than just racing. MotoGP has to attract the glamor of F1, not just the bike nuts / purists. That will bring high profile people, attract sponsors, and bring money into the sport to make it viable.
MotoGP needs private players, like McLaren, Virgin etc, and the market is there.

MotoGP needs to be faster than WSBK, and more exotic. More glamour. More prestige.
I love WSBK, but MotoCP should not even be in the same ballpark as WSBK.
I don't believe there are many satellite teams that get the same kit as the factory squads. Ducati seem to pass their findings along to Pramac in short order, there's a team that's getting the trick kit. Tech 3 Yamaha starts the season the same as the factory but I believe their "factory" rider is the only one who's getting bits throughout the season. I'd be surprised if JT got many significant updates throughout the year. As of last year, Gresini was the only Honda team to get factory bits but only Elias got the goods. Everyone else raced what they were given and in many cases they were racing 2008 models. Next year de Puniet is going to get a factory kit as well but that still leaves a number of Hondas on satellite levels.

I agree with your sentiment that the satellite teams just don't have the talent or resources to compete with the factories. However, I don't buy that they're on level pegging throughout the season. One of the benefits of securing a factory ride, IMO.

I like your ideas though. Revs, fuel, testing and ECU are subjects that need to be addressed that haven't been yet by the Grand Prix Commission. I imagine we'll hear more in February when they meet again.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ Dec 16 2009, 09:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>No one will be trotting out technology that is 8 years old. The 990's of old couldn't lap with the present 800's. The "new" 999's will be a new machine entirely and will have to be. The chassis will have a lot more torque to deal with and increased braking force from vastly higher speeds. The factories will attempt to retain the cornering speed of the 800's if not increase it and harder compound tires will cause other problems. Nope, they'll stay mothballed. WSBK can't hang with the present 800's either and the new 999's will be faster yet. No privateer team will ever get on the podium with any kind of semi stock hot rod production engined bike in motogp. To think that they will is to misunderstand the series completely.
Come on, man. That's just sticking your head in the sand. There are chassis specialists out there who can do the business. Look at the KR211V. Roberts did a great job with the Honda lump and who's to say factories won't be leasing 999cc grand prix engines? Additionally, you look at what those 1000cc WSBKs and they're getting somewhere around 230hp from those engines. Based on Noyes' estimates, with rev limitation, you're looking at around 250hp from the next-gen GPs. There are a lot of capable engineers out there who can solve 20hp with looser regulations than WSBK.

I'm not saying it's a slam dunk, the hot rods are going to win races. But I do think they stand a chance, a better chance than any non-factory equipment on the grid today.

Okay okay, you lot seem rather bright on all things technical to do with this issue but which one of you is intellegent enough to break it down into laymans terms. <u></u>For those who have not heard the term before it's posh for thick ..... who wants to understand but doesn't have the brain power to do so at such a high level as yours.

Go on who's going to do it, who's going to give me that simple explanation of what these changes mean - written pretty much like i did up above

Go on if you do i'll slip you a semi naked picture of me

The idealism of the purist fans is trying. I agree with everything they want for the sport, but the perspective necessary to interpret the sport is lacking, imo. To most of the press and even the MSMA themselves, the sport has been turned into a marketing concept. I'm okay with watching the development of a marketing concept as long is it is clearly identified as such; instead, the marketers are ALWAYS trying to convince us that the contest produces relevant technologies that improve life for the consumers.

The very notion that we are watching an unregulated contest which represents the cutting edge of the performance threshold is absurd. The sport has the appearance of getting faster each year b/c capacity is restricted. MotoGP is a reflection of what is possible with 800cc capacity, but capacity is one of the least relevant production constraints. From the beginning, the sport was doomed to be anything more than a fun engineering contest, and eventually that contest was hijacked for marketing purposes.

I'd be perfectly happy with the laissez-faire approach if MotoGP were free market capitalism, but it isn't. Wealth is finite (wins), and the GPC doesn't have the power to break monopolies. They haven't broken up Ohlins or Brembo or Marchesini; if anything, the GPC is creating monopolies (Bridgestone). The problem is so SIMPLE. MotoGP lacks effective performance constraints, but rather than violate the sacred marketing ideals (unlimited revs, hp/liter) to develop a new list of rules, they continue to pervert the sport so they can maintain the marketing message and status of the big factories.

The rules aren't effective anymore due to rising material cost and the rising costs associated with improving fuel efficiency. The sport and the marketing message could be maintained if the GPC would simply codify a list of legal materials.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (halfpint @ Dec 18 2009, 04:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Okay okay, you lot seem rather bright on all things technical to do with this issue but which one of you is intellegent enough to break it down into laymans terms. <u></u>For those who have not heard the term before it's posh for thick ..... who wants to understand but doesn't have the brain power to do so at such a high level as yours.

Go on who's going to do it, who's going to give me that simple explanation of what these changes mean - written pretty much like i did up above

Go on if you do i'll slip you a semi naked picture of me
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but here's my take. The return to 1000cc capacity and the legalization of production based bits and pieces is an effort to increase grid sizes. In theory, parts that start out as production and are modified are cheaper than the same part that must go through design, development etc. from the very beginning. It's a cheaper alternative, which in theory, should see more entrants in the series. So far, it's generating interest. There are rumors that Aprilia will join in 2012 with a chassis to house a heavily modified version of the RSV4 motor they're using in WSBK. MotoCzysz is also rumored to be interested after developing their 990cc C1 only for it to be useless when the switch to 800cc was made.

I'm not as technical as many in here, but from what I can gather, limiting the bore to 81mm should keep the revs from reaching astronomical revs as they do at present. The six engines that must last the entire year should also keep revs lower. Someone please correct me if I've got this bit wrong.

Finally, the 1000cc machines should allow for multiple riding styles again. With the limited torque and peaky horsepower delivery of the 800s, the bikes require immense precision, high corner speed and high revs. In order to keep the revs high and to get the most out of their peaky torque curves, the 800s are heavily dependent on traction control. There is a hope that the 1000cc grand prix bikes will have enough torque to allow riders to be less precise. For example, braking deeper into corners, "squaring them up," and blasting out is not possible on an 800 because there isn't enough torque to make up for the lost corner speed. With a 1000, the torque is there to ride in that fashion. Additionally, with a broader torque curve, there is hope that the 1000s will have more traction than the 800s and will not be so reliant on traction control and electronics. Essentially, the hope is that the 1000s will be beneficial to riders of all styles and will lessen the dependence on electronics. By reducing rider aids and making other riding styles relevant again, the hope is that the racing will be closer again.

Does that help any? And to everyone else, did I get it right?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Austin @ Dec 18 2009, 01:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but here's my take. The return to 1000cc capacity and the legalization of production based bits and pieces is an effort to increase grid sizes. In theory, parts that start out as production and are modified are cheaper than the same part that must go through design, development etc. from the very beginning. It's a cheaper alternative, which in theory, should see more entrants in the series. So far, it's generating interest. There are rumors that Aprilia will join in 2012 with a chassis to house a heavily modified version of the RSV4 motor they're using in WSBK. MotoCzysz is also rumored to be interested after developing their 990cc C1 only for it to be useless when the switch to 800cc was made.

I'm not as technical as many in here, but from what I can gather, limiting the bore to 81mm should keep the revs from reaching astronomical revs as they do at present. The six engines that must last the entire year should also keep revs lower. Someone please correct me if I've got this bit wrong.

Finally, the 1000cc machines should allow for multiple riding styles again. With the limited torque and peaky horsepower delivery of the 800s, the bikes require immense precision, high corner speed and high revs. In order to keep the revs high and to get the most out of their peaky torque curves, the 800s are heavily dependent on traction control. There is a hope that the 1000cc grand prix bikes will have enough torque to allow riders to be less precise. For example, braking deeper into corners, "squaring them up," and blasting out is not possible on an 800 because there isn't enough torque to make up for the lost corner speed. With a 1000, the torque is there to ride in that fashion. Additionally, with a broader torque curve, there is hope that the 1000s will have more traction than the 800s and will not be so reliant on traction control and electronics. Essentially, the hope is that the 1000s will be beneficial to riders of all styles and will lessen the dependence on electronics. By reducing rider aids and making other riding styles relevant again, the hope is that the racing will be closer again.

Does that help any? And to everyone else, did I get it right?

As far as I know, you've reasoned correctly.

I'm not sure about the riding style stuff though. The tires will ultimately determine how the bikes are ridden, imo. If the riders prefer to go back to point and shoot, Bridgestone is going to have to build a big squishy front tire than can handle the stress of a 150+ kg bike dropping anchors from 215mph. I think the type of tires Bridgestone will develop for the new 1000s depends upon the fuel regulations and the profile regulations (if they have such a thing). If MotoGP maintains 21L of fuel Bstone may have to stick with the corner speed style tires. If Dorna were to make further profile changes in order to encourage late braking and point-and-shoot (for entertainment purposes), MotoGP might return to the wheel smoking days of late braking.

Imo, multiple riding styles aren't possible without many different tires.

I didn't take tires into account. Thanks Lex, you're always looking out for those details. Very good point, and with the fuel, too. Although, the 990s had fuel regulations in place in 2005 or 2006 or both, although I don't remember if they were as strict as present.

I take both of your opinions seriously. I am a motogp purest and engineering is my field so of course I will be biased in that direction. I view marketing/sales as a necessary evil largely practiced by mundane uneducated liars. So don't mind me if I don't seem to care about what the marketing aspect of the sport is, I don't. I want to see one off super expensive trial and error racing. Lex, you are right to a degree when you say that is not really what we have. But the motor being the only single thing that designates a "brand" (another of my least favorite words just slightly below rapist and I dropped my previously argued chassis) you have to look twice. The engines that are on the track today are generations ahead of the 990's and no super super bike guy in a garage somewhere is going to match them. At best a WSBK motor makes a true 220 hp and they are probably as hopped as they can be. Let's say we spot them 10hp more for a really good tuner. The 800's are at least 10 hp above them and the new 999's are going to be over 30 hp higher. Besides, I just can't see the factories agreeing to a rule set that makes them equal to everyone else and why should they? They've been paying the meal ticket for decades.

Austin, as pessimistic as I seem, I am hoping that motogp continues. But if the series is going to be swamped by Ksr types I'll be honest, I'm tuning out. For crying out loud those guys are more than welcome in Moto2 and I am looking forward to that series bigtime. For motogp though I want a machine no privateer can build. I want a machine that only a multi-millionaire can afford. I am the purest that wants more specialization, not less.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ Dec 18 2009, 06:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Besides, I just can't see the factories agreeing to a rule set that makes them equal to everyone else and why should they? They've been paying the meal ticket for decades.
You've got a very valid point there. I don't think Honda, Yamaha and Ducati want to give up the stranglehold they've got on the series. However, in the interest of the 11 non-factory entrants, the factories need to allow some new blood in the series. They have to give up something. If they don't give up something now, they run the risk of running a series where the only sponsorship money is going to go to them. Essentially they'll end up with a series of their factory bikes, a championship of six.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ Dec 18 2009, 06:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>For motogp though I want a machine no privateer can build. I want a machine that only a multi-millionaire can afford. I am the purest that wants more specialization, not less.
In a perfect world, that'd be great. The technological side of MotoGP is one of the coolest bits about it. Lex points out it's not perfect but it's still pretty special. That being said, the way it's going, there's no hope for anyone not on a factory Honda, Yamaha and Ducati. I think some of you guys have it right in the sense that "if they aren't winning, they should work harder." At the same time, banging your head against the wall can only get you so far. Take the satellite Honda, Yamaha and Ducati riders. For some of those guys, they get what they get and have to make the best of it.

Take a guy like Elias for example. A guy who is proven capable of winning races on the right package. For the majority of his career, he was given what he was given (and what he was given in the 800cc era has not been winning equipment) and has spent that career banging his head against the wall and hoping to angle himself on winning equipment.

I guess I just don't see a reason why MotoGP has to be the old boys club where only six guys can have any reasonable chance of winning a race. MotoGP needs to diversify. Given there is a lot more money and less action in F1, but they have a far more diverse field of potential winners. Look at their list of winners since 2007: Button, Vettel, Webber, Hamilton, Barrichello, Raikkonen, Massa, Kubica, Kovalainen and Alonso. That's from Brawn/Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren, Ferrari, BMW Sauber, Toro Rosso and Renault.

I'm not saying we have to give everyone Valentino's spec M1 or Casey's spec GP10 or Dani's spec 212. I'm just saying why not give potential manufacturers a cost effective means of entering the series?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (halfpint @ Dec 18 2009, 02:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Okay okay, you lot seem rather bright on all things technical to do with this issue but which one of you is intellegent enough to break it down into laymans terms. <u></u>For those who have not heard the term before it's posh for thick ..... who wants to understand but doesn't have the brain power to do so at such a high level as yours.

Go on who's going to do it, who's going to give me that simple explanation of what these changes mean - written pretty much like i did up above

Go on if you do i'll slip you a semi naked picture of me

Well Halfy,

First of all sweetheart, here is the problem: MotoGP is waaay too expensive and people say the racing has become “boring”. The number of riders in a race have become smaller because its so expensive (almost nobody can afford it) and add to this the fact that there is almost no ‘close racing’ (that’s what people say is boring); these two problems have got so bad that the series itself is in big trouble financially and in popularity (so much so that people are turning to another motorcycle series called World Superbike). Most people blame the 800cc engine bikes (which before were 990cc which had more power). The reason they blame the 800cc bikes is because they are very ‘peculiar or special’ to ride. What I mean by ‘peculiar’ is the 800cc bike needs a super complex electronics system to get the most out of it, so riders must ride it almost perfect which seems to have done away with close racing (this means there is no more exciting passing/overtaking and no more battles in tight packs).

Ok, you understand the problem? Now basically here is the solution they are proposing. The last time racing was seen as more interesting was when bikes were 990ccs. So this is why they are proposing to increase the engine size back up to where it was at that time. The idea is this way they will solve the “close racing’ problem. The second reason why they are going to 1000cc bikes is to make it less expensive (they hope). You see, most all motorcycle companies already make 1000cc engine, so the idea is, since they make them already, the participants won’t have to spend millions making one by hand (which is what they do now, this is called ‘prototype’ engines and they are extremely expensive to make). So they are thinking, if we require everybody to race a 1000cc engine (which basically everybody makes now) then the participants won’t have to spend so much money on engines. Since MotoGP is considered to be the most advanced motorcycle racing series in the world, they will allow the engines to be tuned to make more power, which will still cost money; but not as much as if they had to make the engines from scratch. They are also requiring the participants to make their own special ‘chassis’ (this is the frame in which the engine is attached and all the other parts of the motorcycle). They are requiring the participants to make it by hand so that it will still be considered a “prototype” series. This sort of makes sense because you can get a lot of performance out of a bike if you make a great frame for that engine. So since all the participants will get to make their own frame, then these bikes should still be the fastest in the world.

In a nutshell, by going to a 1000cc bike, they are hoping to reduce cost, which will keep the participants already in the series happier and possibly attract more participants to join. Since everybody will basically have a less expensive engine and a special chassis, they hope that this will bunch up the bikes and produce ‘closer’ racing.

Just so you know, this is the theory, but as you know, life is always more complicated. So we will have to wait and see if this produces the results they are hoping for.

Ok, go ahead and send your semi-naked picture to my PM box. High resolution would be nice.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gsfan @ Dec 18 2009, 04:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I take both of your opinions seriously. I am a motogp purest and engineering is my field so of course I will be biased in that direction. I view marketing/sales as a necessary evil largely practiced by mundane uneducated liars. So don't mind me if I don't seem to care about what the marketing aspect of the sport is, I don't. I want to see one off super expensive trial and error racing. Lex, you are right to a degree when you say that is not really what we have. But the motor being the only single thing that designates a "brand" (another of my least favorite words just slightly below rapist and I dropped my previously argued chassis) you have to look twice. The engines that are on the track today are generations ahead of the 990's and no super super bike guy in a garage somewhere is going to match them. At best a WSBK motor makes a true 220 hp and they are probably as hopped as they can be. Let's say we spot them 10hp more for a really good tuner. The 800's are at least 10 hp above them and the new 999's are going to be over 30 hp higher. Besides, I just can't see the factories agreeing to a rule set that makes them equal to everyone else and why should they? They've been paying the meal ticket for decades.

Austin, as pessimistic as I seem, I am hoping that motogp continues. But if the series is going to be swamped by Ksr types I'll be honest, I'm tuning out. For crying out loud those guys are more than welcome in Moto2 and I am looking forward to that series bigtime. For motogp though I want a machine no privateer can build. I want a machine that only a multi-millionaire can afford. I am the purest that wants more specialization, not less.

NASA technology, hp/liter, and unlimited revs are the marketing concept. Maximum speed given a certain capacity is the marketing concept.

The objective reality (from my point of view) is that MotoGP is basically a meaningless engineering game that has little relevance to the production market b/c the production market doesn't have capacity limitations. Not only are the capacity limitations unrealistic, the minimum dimensions also have little or nothing to do with an average sized human-being. The minute dimension are also contributing to the performance problems.

500cc GP wasn't originally about badass manufacturers, it was more like a bunch of well funded garage prototypers who wanted to win and have fun. The sport didn't become a manufacturers-only club until the marketers got their hands on it. They used technology and exotic materials to make the sport cost-prohibitive for privateer teams and they did it by exploiting the woefully ill-equipped regulatory bodies who lacked the technology and the staff to regulate performance and materials. Why else would the manufacturers pay tens of millions of dollars every season to develop technologies and materials that have nothing to do with the production market if not to create an artificial measure of superiority? We know the competitors have pure intentions, but the bean-counters in the marketing departments aren't releasing funds b/c they love the thrill of victory.

The new rules make a lot of sense b/c the manufacturers will probably build 81mm 1000cc production bikes so they can create a link between MotoGP and WSBK. Once the 81mm production bikes are available, the manufacturers won't care if people use them to race in GP b/c the technology is already widely available in the production market. The small teams can prototype newer better parts as the years go by until they have slowly developed their own prototype engine.

But the new rules do restrict engine design creativity for the purpose of controlling performance. We have the ability to control performance without destroying the variety of machines, but the marketers don't want to redefine the sport, imo. If the GPC created rev-limits or horsepower limits or piston velocity limits, the manufacturers would probably withdraw b/c the new regulations don't meet with company marketing objectives or the brand identity they want to convey to the end consumers (or some other veiled remark meaning, "we can't buy victories").

Marketing is definitely the problem, but marketing is the part you love most, GS. I don't hold it against you b/c I know engineering is much more important than just a marketing exercise, but in the case of GP, exotic engineering is just a marketing concept designed to separate the mega-corps from private engineering firms. The MSMA are the best thing about the sport and the worst thing about the sport. If I managed GP I'd probably do like Ezy--count the money first and then hit the sauce to numb the pain of living in a perpetual no-win situation.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pigeon @ Dec 14 2009, 08:21 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>MotoGP should not be about aping a formula from another class. Let the engineers off the leash and let's get back to top-flight exotica, and all without the geeky bloke at the back of the garage with his laptop interrupting things with complex rider aids and traction programmes.
I expected more from Dorna when it came to the future of the sport I love.

Yes of course we all want it to remain the formula 1 of motorcycle racing; the problem is this has been unsustainable to a point of critical meltdown. Did he not see that about three factories threatened to leave and one of them followed through?

And the highlighted sentence above is like saying he wants it to be sunny outside but without the heat and bright light, it’s simply impossible. Any machine that is gonna produce that much brute and might must be tamed to be useable. Sure we can do away with say launch control so the rider can feather the clutch, but I doubt we will significantly get rid of traction control in favor of massive highsides. And it will be difficult to dial back to the 06 quality of loose enough to produce close and spectacular racing but tamed enough to keep the riders fairly planted. It’s a pipe dream, and one that has become impossible.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Dec 19 2009, 02:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well Halfy,

sweetheart, What do you want???

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Dec 19 2009, 02:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The second reason why they are going to 1000cc bikes is to make it less expensive (they hope). You see, most all motorcycle companies already make 1000cc engine, so the idea is, since they make them already, the participants won’t have to spend millions making one by hand (which is what they do now, this is called ‘prototype’
DUM DE DUM DE DUM DE DUM......... BRAIN NOW IN OVER DRIVE WILL HAVE TO PRINT THIS ENTIRE CONVERSATION OFF AND HAVE BED TIME READING TONIGHT AFTER I'VE FINISHED WORKING FOR THE RUGBY CLUB - HENSE WHY I AM UNUSUALLY HERE FOR A SATURDAY EVENING


BUT SURELY everything that is ever made has a prototype ok so not half a dozen of the same prototypes for one bike. I assume this is where the cost reached very high levels. But as i said i will read carefully what you have said in bed where i always seem to function and take things in better. that sounds well dirty sorry


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Dec 19 2009, 02:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Ok, go ahead and send your semi-naked picture to my PM box. High resolution would be nice.
Oh now i see first question answered as i said once i've devoured the above posts I'll get back to you with that photo

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (RCV600RR @ Dec 16 2009, 08:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>MotoGP is not WSBK? Not anymore.

The only way MotoGP can realistically differentiate itself from WSBK is to bring back the two stroke motor. Of course, there are commercial questions that make that difficult, but it's actually the only real feasible solution. Give us 600cc 2 Strokes!
Peter Clifford agrees with me:

Of course, interestingly, they[Yamaha] did an awful lot of that with the TZs, the 250s, the 350s and the 750s, and I'm sure that made commercial sense for them because they were selling them and everyone else was racing them for them. I bet you they wish they could go back to that kind of era. But you just can't do that with a four stroke. They're just too expensive to run, the only cheap things to run are two strokes.

http://www.motomatters.com/interview/2009/...1_there_s_.html

Why do away with the 8's though? Aren't they in the buisness of selling bikes as well. Someone who follows rossi or stoner passionatly isn't going to go and by a 10 replica they'll buy and 8 - won't they????? If the cost is too high for prototype 8's why can't they race a suped up version of the bikes we buy????
Surely the sport isn't that popular - to watch and sponsor to warrant two 1000 bike races.

Unless you make it like the premier league and championship where so many get relegated and so many come up. And the winners from BSB and such like have the opportunity to progress.

Quick someone put this through as a proposal to Dorna or whoever, i could be onto a winner here

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (halfpint @ Dec 21 2009, 07:56 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Why do away with the 8's though? Aren't they in the buisness of selling bikes as well. Someone who follows rossi or stoner passionatly isn't going to go and by a 10 replica they'll buy and 8 - won't they????? If the cost is too high for prototype 8's why can't they race a suped up version of the bikes we buy????
Surely the sport isn't that popular - to watch and sponsor to warrant two 1000 bike races.

Unless you make it like the premier league and championship where so many get relegated and so many come up. And the winners from BSB and such like have the opportunity to progress.

Quick someone put this through as a proposal to Dorna or whoever, i could be onto a winner here

They do. They're called Superbikes.

Yeah but the superbikes are 10's aren't they, why not a suped up version of an 8 or have i now completly lost the plot??

Basically with the exceptions of the GSXR750 and the VFR800 (both orphans of sorts & it seems the VFR is movin' on up - 2010 will be a 1200 I hear...) no manufacturer today builds an 800... the 600/1000 combo seems to be the standard...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (halfpint @ Dec 22 2009, 07:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yeah but the superbikes are 10's aren't they, why not a suped up version of an 8 or have i now completly lost the plot??
None of the OEM's make a 800cc sportbike

Back in the day, when Merkel, Spencer, Lawson, Rainey and Schwantz were racing in the
AMA Camel Pro series superbikes were 750cc. That's so long ago I don't even remember
what category the 1000cc bikes were running under. I seem to recall they were allowed
to compete in AMA "Formula One" against 500cc two-stroke Hondas, TZs and the occasional
H1 Kawasaki triples. Pov will doubtless know the answer to that one.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Keshav @ Dec 22 2009, 09:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Back in the day, when Merkel, Spencer, Lawson, Rainey and Schwantz were racing in the
AMA Camel Pro series superbikes were 750cc. That's so long ago I don't even remember
what category the 1000cc bikes were running under. I seem to recall they were allowed
to compete in AMA "Formula One" against 500cc two-stroke Hondas, TZs and the occasional
H1 Kawasaki triples. Pov will doubtless know the answer to that one.
In the day, in Canada, we had "superbike" - 750s and "open" - the bikes you mentioned and many more (some real oddballs - I saw guy racing a CBX ) made for a good show...