MotoGP New rules 2013. One bike + 5 engines max & Less mechanics

I see no reason to ban slipper clutches. What's the point? One could ban electronically controlled slipper clutches, but to ban them in general makes no sense to me, in particular as they provide a rather simple means to improve engine reliability.



I am also in favor of steel brakes, but I don't expect them to be the solution for bringing up massive duels in the braking zones again. As said a millions times before, the problem lies in the lack of lines to choose, as the fuel/TC/electronics situation makes for only one fast line. So here's one more voice for banning TC, or at least settling for a much simpler shared ECU.



However, I can understand that the manufacturers opposing to that. The technology is finally trickling down on a bigger scale, many new road models even in mid-range come up with some sort of TC, and I have the feeling that it's quite well appreciated. Still not sure if it enhances safety (does it keep you on the right side of the edge, or does it encourage you to override your limits under the false premise that it's safer now?), but this is another issue.



As for the revs, it should be at least 15.000, though I would think 16.000 would be more appropriate. The goal should be to establish a limit that one has to do some serious work for on the tuning side of things, but without getting into rocket science. Maybe the better approach would be to ban some exotic materials such as titan (or is it already banned? not quite sure on this, sorry) and some freaky compounds. Because these are what really let the costs explode without having any positive effect on technology for the road. [Not to speak of the ecological implications that are connected with most of these rare and expensive materials].

Nick. Just get sponsored by Kentucky growers... they got cash!

Mental Anarchist said:

I feel somewhat justified in my little crusade to raise the awareness of the focus of Dorna and media being cost cutting rather than the growing the sport now that the likes of Lin Jarvis are also beginning to champion the same cause and Krop has started to include this in his most recent articles. I would not be so arrogant to say that these esteemed folks have taken their cues from me but it does show I have been on the right track.

Click to expand...

That's why I like you more than Barry!!!! ;

There are so many options for raising revenue. Keeping costs in line is paramount indeed, but it is a poor manager/owner who foci is cost cutting over revenue growth!

sewarion said:

I see no reason to ban slipper clutches. What's the point? One could ban electronically controlled slipper clutches, but to ban them in general makes no sense to me, in particular as they provide a rather simple means to improve engine reliability.

Click to expand...

very simple reason.

with the slipper clutches and the non-existent engine braking modern gp bikes ride as easy as 2 strokes into the corners and are smooth 4 strokes on the way out.



it's like taking the worst out of both worlds



watch an older superbike race and see the top guys braking hard ,fighting the sliding rear with controlled throttle. that's what i'm talking about.



braking and downshifting properly on a motorcycle are the most difficult things and thats what i want to see

Mental Anarchist said:

MickD,

I have been consistently championing the need to increase revenues for some time. I appreciate that you have noticed. Your take on my referencing is exactly how I meant it to be also.



It is a shame that some posters due to their own insecurities need to put my comments down to inept rantings and Stoner appreciation. How ever I find it difficult to connect the philosophy of increasing revenues as opposed to cutting costs as some Stoner conspiracy.

Click to expand...

The only thing you have "consistently championed" is to blame every possible thing on Rossi and claimed its all been detrimental to Stoner. You have blamed the financial woes on GP and have laid it at the feet of Valentino. I don't think there is anything you have not blamed on Rossi while in the same breath shown how this somehow has repressed Stoner, your spots are always on display. I see through you. Dogs balls, remember?



Btw, how is your Stoner tire conspiracy going these days? Is Dorna/Bridgestone still sabotaging him?

I think steel brakes are a good idea. Carbon discs will never filter down to the street and it can only make the braking zones larger.



1 bike rule, don't like it, it's fine for the lower classes but this is motogp, if a rider biffs his bike and I'm paying to watch I want him out there ASAP if he's healthy.



Limiting mechanics? I'm guessing it's not the extra mechanic that costs the big $, it's the ten guys in the tent on the laptops....

online mag a few pages of Jerez info



http://mag.gpweek.com/#folio=9



page 9 through to page 20



http://mag.gpweek.com/#folio=20



here you have it been said the first rumblings of maybe a Bridgepoint idea wsbk motogp merger is the long term thinking after all

Dont worry cause there wont be a 2013 season.. We will all be dead or fighting zombies.

xx CURVE xx said:

Dont worry cause there wont be a 2013 season.. We will all be dead or fighting zombies.

Click to expand...

READ THE BIBLE READ THE BIBLE READ THE BIBLE

Pigeon said:

here you have it been said the first rumblings of maybe a Bridgepoint idea wsbk motogp merger is the long term thinking after all

Click to expand...

What would be Bridgepoint's financial incentive for halving their revenue-generating race weekends? And since the same company owns both series, there's no way one series would be allowed to sue the other.

xx CURVE xx said:

Dont worry cause there wont be a 2013 season.. We will all be dead or fighting zombies.

Click to expand...

dude have you forgotten the plan?championship races will be held daily at the ring if we're not able to smoke those basterds away within a couple of months.

cliché guevara said:

dude have you forgotten the plan?championship races will be held daily at the ring if we're not able to smoke those basterds away within a couple of months.

Click to expand...

yeah but it wont be televised and we're only fast enough to entertain our selves

Pigeon said:

online mag a few pages of Jerez info



http://mag.gpweek.com/#folio=9



page 9 through to page 20



http://mag.gpweek.com/#folio=20

Click to expand...

Michael Scott's analysis is well ahead of the game, imo, but I think he has made a critical error. He does not consider the effect of a combined CRT series on the production market.



The production market is already much too expensive, primarily for Japanese tastes. Hotting up SBK and dumbing down GP is the exact opposite of what the Japanese want, and the motorcycle industry in general. SBK should be burning the midnight oil to make sportsbikes production relevant again, and find new cost efficiencies that will make their products affordable in the developed world as well as the developing world.



The problem is definitely lack of differentiation. Acknowledging the problem and eliminating the possibility of differentiation (something the manufacturers have apparently always wanted) is not a solution.

mylexicon said:

Michael Scott's analysis is well ahead of the game...

Click to expand...

Its ok, I don't think its particularly good or bad, just ok. He said Dorna is slowing the factory bikes down, that is contrary to the evidence. If anything, Dorna is trying to speed up CRTs to compete with factory entires, or have the factory bikes not been going faster than the previous formula?



I also highly disagree with his conclusion to merge both series.

mylexicon said:

The production market is already much too expensive, primarily for Japanese tastes.

Click to expand...

But is that their primary market for high-end sportbikes? In the U.S., the 1% has been doing very, very well despite downturns, and happily snaps up halo models like S1000RRs and RSV4s. If Honda re-introduces a V4 superbike, the waiting list will be months-long by the end of the first day.



I agree that for us in coach, paying more than $10K for a two-wheeled toy is painful (especially now without easy credit), and that the technology curve will have to flatten in order to make sportbikes more affordable, but I think the market for over-the-top homologation specials is quite healthy.

Jumkie said:

Its ok, I don't think its particularly good or bad, just ok. He said Dorna is slowing the factory bikes down, that is contrary to the evidence. If anything, Dorna is trying to speed up CRTs to compete with factory entires, or have the factory bikes not been going faster than the previous formula?



I also highly disagree with his conclusion to merge both series.

Click to expand...

His article has three important attributes, in my estimation.



1. Why does the FIM have two series that are basically identical to one another?

2. The production MARKET has become so advanced over the decades that the production personnel are starting to take the design lead from the race personnel.

3. Dorna have devoted a lion's share of their personnel and budget to restricting prototype technology.



If the homogenization of MotoGP and WSBK were the result of market forces, I'd agree with Scott--racing owners should get "sensible". However, the homogenization of MotoGP and SBK is the result of forces that do not reflect the consumer market, hence the marketplace has died without the prevalence of lose credit and export-friendly Japanese monetary policy. For ten years, the Japanese have demanded production relevant race bikes (they have lazily pursued that goal). For ten years, Ducati has adamantly demanded homologation specials. For political reasons (aka incompetence), they cannot find a compromise.



People watch GP and SBK. They look relatively similar. The fan walks into a dealership to find a limited production GP-replica 1000cc motorcycle with a $50,000 price tag. The bike is covered in exotic parts. The same fan also finds fully-faired SBKs, built according to efficiency standards, with costs around $7,500-$10,000. The SBKs look the same as the GP replica, but they understand the difference. Similarly, car fans understand the difference between a Corvette ZR1 or Nissan GTR and a Ferrari 599XX, though they are not fundamentally different in aesthetic, layout, or performance (except 4wd).

mylexicon said:

Michael Scott's analysis is well ahead of the game, imo, but I think he has made a critical error. He does not consider the effect of a combined CRT series on the production market.



The production market is already much too expensive, primarily for Japanese tastes. Hotting up SBK and dumbing down GP is the exact opposite of what the Japanese want, and the motorcycle industry in general. SBK should be burning the midnight oil to make sportsbikes production relevant again, and find new cost efficiencies that will make their products affordable in the developed world as well as the developing world.



The problem is definitely lack of differentiation. Acknowledging the problem and eliminating the possibility of differentiation (something the manufacturers have apparently always wanted) is not a solution.

Click to expand...

200 hp, fully adjustable suspensions, world class braking systems, unheard of reliability for 14k. The bikes are a steal at those prices. Suzuki is offering 60 months zero interest. How is that not affordable. Unfortunately, its insurance that has squashed sport bike sales, and unless they start making 40 hp " sport bikes" it will remain a niche segment for racers, rich kids, or older dudes like myself with better claims records.You really cant blame the insurance companies either, the numbers dont lie. I always said it was stupid to expect an insurance company to total a bike because it had a scratched swing arm, forks, and busted fairings from johnny squid dumping it at 5mph in a parking lot. The insurance could be affordable if you went in with the understanding that busted plastics will be replaced, but scratched metal does not warrant replacement At one point, you could drop your bike, collect an 8k check, buy it back from the insurance company for 2 grand, put a grand worth of plastic on it and viola, you still have your bike and 5 k in your pocket. No wonder they dont want to insure them anymore.

Jumkie said:

Its ok, I don't think its particularly good or bad, just ok. He said Dorna is slowing the factory bikes down, that is contrary to the evidence. If anything, Dorna is trying to speed up CRTs to compete with factory entires, or have the factory bikes not been going faster than the previous formula? I also highly disagree with his conclusion to merge both series.

Click to expand...

For today that is true, but the proposed changes for 2013 and beyond are without a doubt geared at slowing down factory Moto GP bikes. More weight,less revs, steel brakes, less engines etc etc etc.

povol said:

No wonder they dont want to insure them anymore.

Click to expand...

Go on. Say it: graduated licensing. Start by just saying the word "graduated", then tomorrow say "licensing", then start to reduce the interval and pretty soon your inner nanny-stater will cry out proudly.



Seriously though, the people who can buy a $14K bike without blinking are more likely to gravitate to a conversation piece (MV F4, etc.), than a less expensive but just as effective track tool. I'm going to guess sales figures for Suzuki are still depressed, while those for boutique bikes are still healthy.