New Rules for 2014

Can we Run a raffle the winner picks the 2015 rules. thank fook this Horse .... is ....... off behind a pay wall.


 


2014 Rules version 2 is out Monday. after mugello. version 3 after Catalan.

Krop has already said that Suzuki will be running a prototype bike.

Does this mean we can go back to Factories, Satilites and Privateers?


.... the 4th podium spot.

I watch the Speedtv coverage for races.  I have never seen or heard them mention anything about CRT.  I have never seen a podium ceromony and minimal Parc Ferme coverage. I didnt know there was a ceromony for the 4th rider  As far as I know CRT does not exist.  I dont see it, hear it or read about it.  Of course I know about it but my point is that the average fan that doesnt read forums and Motogp.com etc barely knows it even exists.


I said when they proposed it that I didnt understand what it was and now 2 years later I can still say the same.


Whats the point of CRT?

JohnnyKnockdown

3524761369954768

I watch the Speedtv coverage for races.  I have never seen or heard them mention anything about CRT.  I have never seen a podium ceromony and minimal Parc Ferme coverage. I didnt know there was a ceromony for the 4th rider  As far as I know CRT does not exist.  I dont see it, hear it or read about it.  Of course I know about it but my point is that the average fan that doesnt read forums and Motogp.com etc barely knows it even exists.


I said when they proposed it that I didnt understand what it was and now 2 years later I can still say the same.


Whats the point of CRT?

Click to expand...

 


So you can get a nice photo on the start line.

JohnnyKnockdown

3524761369954768

I watch the Speedtv coverage for races.  I have never seen or heard them mention anything about CRT.  I have never seen a podium ceromony and minimal Parc Ferme coverage. I didnt know there was a ceromony for the 4th rider  As far as I know CRT does not exist.  I dont see it, hear it or read about it.  Of course I know about it but my point is that the average fan that doesnt read forums and Motogp.com etc barely knows it even exists.


I said when they proposed it that I didnt understand what it was and now 2 years later I can still say the same.


Whats the point of CRT?

Click to expand...

Grid fillers. They are bound by rule to run so many bikes. They  fell below that number, and viola, cheap knockoffs of  Superbikes were allowed  into the pinnacle of bike racing.

Jumkie

3524491369938723

http://motomatters.com/news/2013/05/30/motogp_s_claiming_rule_to_be_dropped_fro.html


 


Discuss.


 


Questions:  


 


1. Will they still have the four-dicks style podium with a "non-MSMA"/CRT/non-prototype/grid filler" in parc firm?


2. Would any factory opt to get the Dorna ECU to get more fuel & engines (technically, thats what a few are doing anyway right?)


3. Wil they continue to get a special tire dispensation?


4. Will they change the name to fool the public (not that most aren't already fooled) into thinking these entries are competitive?


5. How long will these new rules last?  A year, two?


6. ART wasn't an errr "factory" entry, but will this bring in more non-factory factory entries even though they will be using the Dorna issued <strike>spyware</strike> software?


7. Will Suzuki enter as "Suzuki" or more like a "CRT" or whatever they are called now.

Click to expand...

 


1. Probably, but so long as they don't start handing out a trophy and champagne, everyone can continue to ignore it.


2. Aprilia are the most likely with their pseudo 'privateer' entry. That ART bike with extra fuel and engines could actually start to become a threat.


3. They have to have different tyres or the class really will be pointless. The MotoGP tyres are too specialised for even the 'privateer' bikes to make use of in any fast way.


4. I'd say the non-MSMA bikes will become known as the 'privateer' entries, although that has never been a term that makes any sense at the world class level.


5. Who knows where the world will be at in two years time? If the HRC customer bikes and Yamaha engines prove popular enough, the whole sub class could be dropped. Or they could turn the whole sport into the Ducati Cup and really sort out the 'talented riders' from the 'Ben Spies'.


6. Maybe Kawasaki could have a go? Their Superbike engines have always had the grunt, but the chassis never really came together. Could be a cheap way back in?


7. Suzuki will be a proper factory entry. Can't wait to start cheering on my favourite underdogs again, hopefully with DePuniet and Crutchlow.

1. Yes, imo. The media exposure is valuable, and 24L competition is different enough to give the CRT spot some meaning.


 


2. No. The manufacturers participate on their terms, and they have taken precautions to make sure they don't become 24L competitors.


 


3. No. Supposedly, the special dispensation is to cope with certain shortcomings of using production engines. CRT will move away from engines that bear any resemblance to stock SBK engines. 


 


4. Competitive Racing Teams (Carmelo, thanks you, Jum)


 


5. I hope the new rules only last until the end of 2016 (2012-2016 is the routine 5-year contract), and the manufacturers transition to something that encourages engine design freedom. Fuel-flow-limiting with 1000cc max and 20L tank is probably the way to go. I want to be rid of 4-cylinder rule, but it has been part of GP for so long, I doubt it will happen. Reboot Moto2 with fuel-flow-limiting as well with 750cc max, 3-cylinder maximum, 16L tank. Reboot Moto3 to 500cc, 2-cylinder max, 12L tank. Current Moto3 bikes, and all of the 14 y.o. kids who ride them, stay at home in the nationals.


 


6. Yes. More constructors will enter hence the "non-MSMA" moniker.


 


7. Suzuki will run as a factory team, but I'd be just as happy if they sold really good bikes to CRT teams.

povol

3524871369965223

Grid fillers. They are bound by rule to run so many bikes. They  fell below that number, and viola, cheap knockoffs of  Superbikes were allowed  into the pinnacle of bike racing.

Click to expand...

 


I can't remember. Did that happen before or after the MSMA overhauled the rulebook? I seem to remember everything working relatively well until some Honda people got a bit too clever.

mylexicon

3525721370029099

1. Yes, imo. The media exposure is valuable, and 24L competition is different enough to give the CRT spot some meaning.


 


2. No. The manufacturers participate on their terms, and they have taken precautions to make sure they don't become 24L competitors.


 


3. No. Supposedly, the special dispensation is to cope with certain shortcomings of using production engines. CRT will move away from engines that bear any resemblance to stock SBK engines. 


 


4. Competitive Racing Teams (Carmelo, thanks you, Jum)


 


5. I hope the new rules only last until the end of 2016 (2012-2016 is the routine 5-year contract), and the manufacturers transition to something that encourages engine design freedom. Fuel-flow-limiting with 1000cc max and 20L tank is probably the way to go. I want to be rid of 4-cylinder rule, but it has been part of GP for so long, I doubt it will happen. Reboot Moto2 with fuel-flow-limiting as well with 750cc max, 3-cylinder maximum, 16L tank. Reboot Moto3 to 500cc, 2-cylinder max, 12L tank. Current Moto3 bikes, and all of the 14 y.o. kids who ride them, stay at home in the nationals.


 


6. Yes. More constructors will enter hence the "non-MSMA" moniker.


 


7. Suzuki will run as a factory team, but I'd be just as happy if they sold really good bikes to CRT teams.

Click to expand...

As late as 2006, there was a V5 on the grid, Thats not so long ago

povol

3526951370138115

As late as 2006, there was a V5 on the grid, Thats not so long ago

Click to expand...

 


We were rid of the 4-cylinder rule for 10 years, but it has returned. I think the motorcycle industry need to experience a renaissance before technical attitudes are liberal enough to make cylinder count free.

mylexicon

3525721370029099

1. Yes, imo. The media exposure is valuable, and 24L competition is different enough to give the CRT spot some meaning.


 


2. No. The manufacturers participate on their terms, and they have taken precautions to make sure they don't become 24L competitors.


 


3. No. Supposedly, the special dispensation is to cope with certain shortcomings of using production engines. CRT will move away from engines that bear any resemblance to stock SBK engines. 


 


4. Competitive Racing Teams (Carmelo, thanks you, Jum)


 


5. I hope the new rules only last until the end of 2016 (2012-2016 is the routine 5-year contract), and the manufacturers transition to something that encourages engine design freedom. Fuel-flow-limiting with 1000cc max and 20L tank is probably the way to go. I want to be rid of 4-cylinder rule, but it has been part of GP for so long, I doubt it will happen. Reboot Moto2 with fuel-flow-limiting as well with 750cc max, 3-cylinder maximum, 16L tank. Reboot Moto3 to 500cc, 2-cylinder max, 12L tank. Current Moto3 bikes, and all of the 14 y.o. kids who ride them, stay at home in the nationals.


 


6. Yes. More constructors will enter hence the "non-MSMA" moniker.


 


7. Suzuki will run as a factory team, but I'd be just as happy if they sold really good bikes to CRT teams.

Click to expand...

Why and how, where are these engines going to come from? why and how are the industry going to produce 750 triples in a stagnant market? The CBR engine has been developed is supersport for 20 years and produces good usable power and is very reliable. Moto 1 engines are purpose built race engines (moto x) and redeveloped for tarmac and quite reliable considering. Where are these 500 twins coming form? The economy is in trouble, even the Spanish sponsers are feeling the pinch and they are the backbone of Moto gp.Have you ever visited planet earth Lex?

thedeal

3528841370266662

Why and how, where are these engines going to come from? why and how are the industry going to produce 750 triples in a stagnant market? The CBR engine has been developed is supersport for 20 years and produces good usable power and is very reliable. Moto 1 engines are purpose built race engines (moto x) and redeveloped for tarmac and quite reliable considering. Where are these 500 twins coming form? The economy is in trouble, even the Spanish sponsers are feeling the pinch and they are the backbone of Moto gp.Have you ever visited planet earth Lex?

Click to expand...

 


The engines would be maximum 750cc and maximum 3 cylinders. Quite a few existing engines fit that description or could be mildly modified to work. Yamaha are already working on a 750cc triple that was displayed at MOTY. I suppose the formula could be 750cc 4-cylinder, at which point, Suzuki's 750cc would be legal, along with all of the existing 600cc bikes.


 


The engines would be a maximum of 500cc and 2-cylinders. The current 450cc dirtbike engines would be legal, along with all existing twins under 500cc.

Moto1 engines aren't reworked 250 4-strokes. All of them have been fresh sheet designs and the one that is successful is Euro45K. The Honda is very much productionised and look what trouble it has against that $$ KTM. Ioda had a go and the thing was a disaster.


A 500cc twin? What a Kwaka Ex500 motor versus a hand grenade Aprilia 450 V? Making one of those go fast will make that KTM single look cheap.


 


I don't understand your point about 'engine design freedom' when what you're promoting is a production based formula. There's more to 'design freedom' than the number of cylinders.

They certainly were when the lass kicked of.

Dr No

3529281370304992

Moto1 engines aren't reworked 250 4-strokes. All of them have been fresh sheet designs and the one that is successful is Euro45K. The Honda is very much productionised and look what trouble it has against that $$ KTM. Ioda had a go and the thing was a disaster.


A 500cc twin? What a Kwaka Ex500 motor versus a hand grenade Aprilia 450 V? Making one of those go fast will make that KTM single look cheap.


 


I don't understand your point about 'engine design freedom' when what you're promoting is a production based formula. There's more to 'design freedom' than the number of cylinders.

Click to expand...

 


Doesn't have to be production based. Just pointing out that quite a few legal engine architectures already exist, and those engines could be modified. 


 


Free engine design is more than just cylinder count, but free engine rules are more than just engineering guidelines. Free engines are a sanctioning method that shape the economic backbone of private governance. If the rules mandated 750cc triples with 81mm bore, costs would rise sharply b/c none exist. The MSMA wasted millions converting MotoGP from 990cc 26L-22L to 800cc 21L to 1000cc 81mm 4-cylinders 21L. By contrast, a freer engine formula, for instance 1000cc w/ fuel-flow-limit and 20L fuel capacity limit, would make legal every MotoGP engine ever built. Naturally, the manufacturers will continue spending, but they have options.

I think the main problem with your proposal is you're mistaking legal for competitive.


This is a competition, right?

thedeal

3529581370335412

They certainly were when the lass kicked of.

Click to expand...

Yeah, the MDS Moriwaki or whatever it was that raced in the Japanese series had a CRF based engine. I can't recall whether they ever made it to Moto3 WC

MotoGP is a joke, worse then how F1 is now.  Do we blame it on technology?  The economy? 


 


Sad indeed.