Test times Australia

Now to answer (or at least throw some crap into the discussions) Jumkies question of what Suzuki can or need to do to improve or become more competitive.


For me, I will be inmterested to see if the global financial situation (mismanagement) assists or detracts from the Suzuki effort, either way there is a ready made excuse.

I have a suspicion that R&D budgets etc will be cut by Honda definitely (given their F1 situation and talk of bikes), Yamaha and possibly Ducati (although I doubt Ducati so much). This should or could lead to lesser development and therefore improvement for those factories and thus allow Suzuki and Kawasaki to close the gap somewhat as both of those teams are two bike teams only (other manufacrturers are four bikes or more strong) and one woudl expect that costs would be significantly less for a two bike team.

But, assuming their is no levelling caused really they need to start again.

In 2008 both riders complained of the same problems with drive and steering, so they need to sort that, but how?

If Suzuki want to progress they need to start poaching top technicians from other teams/manufacturers or even categories.

The problem must firstly be addressed at factory level to ensure that the right personel are in the right jobs (this would include manager then riders, team technicians etc) and that they are listened to and heard back at the factory. Without the full support of the factory even VR woudl struggle.

Once/If the factory gets sorted then look at the team. Are the personel in the team the right people or should they try to poach (we are not talking riders at this point)?

Is the team management fighting for the riders in the manner that I suspect Burgess would for Rossi (I suspect not but then, JB is JB)?

The last component is the riders but this does not exclude them from taking some of the blamefor the performances.

Whilst SPies did perform well, he was familiar with or had equal experience on two of the tracks and had no pre-conceptions of the bike (which is the big plus). But, across a season woudl he have been as competitive as CV or LC (not answering as it is hypothetical)?

For me, both Suzuki riders need to improve in 2009 but I also doubt that Suzuki would risk (or waste) time by getting rid of both riders for 2010 (a very large risk).

IMO, Suzuki have a long way to go and a lot of work (Kawasaki in the same boat), but they woudl be the smaller budget teams and perhaps we expect to much of them given their competitors budgets.






Garry

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (xx CURVE xx @ Nov 28 2008, 02:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>news flash....SUZUKI have sucked in Moto GP FOREVER.


Always? Uh no . . . actually Barry Sheene won two championships on Suzukis '76 and '77
Lucchenelli in '81 and Uncini in 82
Schwantz in '93
KR Jr. in 2000

And they podiumed lots over the years. Not so bad for a relatively small company.
I'd say they've lost their way - but wouldn't discount the possibility of a resurgence.
It's really a question of a change in management and a more aggressive attitude towards
racing. It takes shitloads of money to dominate simultaneously in the USA and Europe
the way Honda has done.

Now Kawasaki . . . I don't know why they bother. Y'know KHI makes a lot of their money
building subway cars for cities all over the world. I think part of their problems is that
the motorcycle and subway car R&D departments are sharing engineers - which would
go a long way towards explaining why the Kwackers share weight and handling
characteristics with a Bronx bound A Train.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Dec 13 2008, 12:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Whilst SPies did perform well, he was familiar with or had equal experience on two of the tracks and had no pre-conceptions of the bike (which is the big plus). But, across a season woudl he have been as competitive as CV or LC (not answering as it is hypothetical)?

Forever the skeptic eh Garry? You are a careful man.

I think Spies, obvioulsy barring health, accidents/DNF's, would have easily outshone both CV and LC. Just my opinion. I think that Spies is the real deal. Its understandable that you take the, might be good until proven good route, its the safe way. My question to you would be, how well does he have to do in WSBK his first year, all things considered? Or is he not proven until he reaches MOTOGP and races there? (I am assuming you think that the AMA SBK doesn't prove anything)

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Dec 13 2008, 03:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I have a suspicion that R&D budgets etc will be cut by Honda definitely (given their F1 situation and talk of bikes), Yamaha and possibly Ducati (although I doubt Ducati so much). This should or could lead to lesser development and therefore improvement for those factories and thus allow Suzuki and Kawasaki to close the gap somewhat as both of those teams are two bike teams only (other manufacrturers are four bikes or more strong) and one woudl expect that costs would be significantly less for a two bike team.






Garry
you assume that suzuki & kawasaki are going to ignore the finacial problems that is affecting everyone else. besides that you seem to think or should i say put forward the theory that just because suzi & kwaka only field 2 bike teams that it cost them less. you must remember that the other factories are paid fat leasing fees for all those satelite machines as well as all the extra parts. honda, ducati & yamaha costs would not be that much different. the big difference is r&d & how much of the expense is the sponsor covering so it seems to me having only a 2 bike factory squad does not make it cheaper for them. now i think both suzuki & kawasaki need to increase their r&d budgets & offset that expense with some big money sponsors.... easier said than done i know... especially now.

Notice that as a rookie and World Superbike Champion, JT finished behind both Suzuki riders in the world championship with no podiums (which both Capi and CV got) despite the fact that they rode Suzuki's and he rode the best bike on the grid. It takes a huge leap of faith despite Spies' obvious talent to suggest that he would be able to do a singificantly better job than Toseland using inferior equipment, obviously Suzuki were not willing to make/pay for that leap. As I have pointed out in the past, Suzuki's 08 season fits in well with their general trend of improving results in the motogp era. 2007 should be considered a very impressive anomaly and 08 should not be considered a disaster, as the team is on the right track.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>So you are a Suzuki fan, that is obvious enough. You say get over Spies, why? It is relevant and exposed some shortcomings of the ailing Suzuki GP team which seems to have NO forward leadership nor plan for significant improvement. So don't get annoyed that Spies who may have represented a new direction (at very least young blood) to catalyze a change is brought up as relevant in at very least highlighting some management failure. So maybe "you should get over Spies" and stop whining about what he may have represented when I bring it up for discussion and perhaps contribute to the question: How can Suzuki GP make a significant leap forward.

Gfan, I don't think you realize, but I'm a fan of Suzuki just like you. One of the greatest racers I admire won the 1993 world championship. So I am also frustrated to see this brand (which does make great bikes--both my track bikes are Suzukis GSXR & DRZ). So as I see it, these little baby steps of small and minor improvements (as I see it, the bamboozling of Suzuki fans into believing that they are actually doing something positive) has been nothing but more of the same old .....

Mr Jumkie,

I am over Spies. I called Spies for MotoGP when I haunted the SPEED board several years ago and I was stomaching Hopkins and hoping he would make a diff. But it didn't happen and it won't happen.They have the team chosen and that is what we move forward with.

As far as being symptomatic of Suzuki's problems we think it is a problem, but Suzuki doesn't seem to. They are only interested in development not winning the championship even though they say they are. They can't. They don't have the money and now jebus it is even worse. So they race like hell with what they have. Last year they apparently had a design epiphany. They designed a bike that steered so fast and lightly that the riders couldn't tell whether they had traction or not so they hated it. Back to the drawing board for aerodynamic downforce, more power and a new frame or an entirely new machine. Not something Suzuki was expecting and not something they were going to jump on due to the size of the motogp race effort. The bike they got in the spring of 2008 was what they would race that was clear and it is the same every year.

Okay to your point of what they need. Next year they need more of everything. Yes they need a shakeup and if I thought is was all Denning I would say so but realistically I am in the GWN (Great White North and it is white and damn cold today my friends. I loaded 2 cords of wood into my garage today just for fun) not Europe so I am as far out fo the loop for real-time info as it gets. I think they have the potential to design and build a great machine. I hope they do. But my mental health doesn't depend on it. What do they need? How about 15 more hp? Let that motor sing to 19 500 or 20 000 rpm. The frame has to be able to flex and provide traction at mid lean angles and not force the riders to scrape the fairings in order to keep their lines while the guy beside them hasn't even hit the edge of the tire. The COG has to be higher I think but then what do I know? I just studied mechanics and physics in college. The aerodynamic package has to give more downforce in fast corners and the traction control has to be upgraded an order of magnitude. Spies commented his AMA bike had a more sophisticated electronic package. Did I mention more power? They need more power and they need the bike to be more of a motor based bike like the Ducati. It is all well and good to have gp 250 handling but as the hp rises in the competition the handling takes a back seat.

I want to see them do well but you know what? I can hardly justify the cost of the Motogp.com package to watch the races next year because the ending now is a forgone conclusion. I can download the races the next day for nothing, watch Rossi win, and go do my chores. I think the best years of motogp are behind us.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (frosty58 @ Dec 13 2008, 07:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>you assume that suzuki & kawasaki are going to ignore the finacial problems that is affecting everyone else. besides that you seem to think or should i say put forward the theory that just because suzi & kwaka only field 2 bike teams that it cost them less. you must remember that the other factories are paid fat leasing fees for all those satelite machines as well as all the extra parts. honda, ducati & yamaha costs would not be that much different. the big difference is r&d & how much of the expense is the sponsor covering so it seems to me having only a 2 bike factory squad does not make it cheaper for them. now i think both suzuki & kawasaki need to increase their r&d budgets & offset that expense with some big money sponsors.... easier said than done i know... especially now.

I don't assume that it will affect them less.

Instead what I suggest is that being a smaller team (# of bikes) the % impact in overall dollar terms will be less and as such there is a possibility that the resulting impact could be less in results terms.

I woudl expect however that the factories bear the main cost of R&D whilst the sponsor dollars go towards the day to day running of the teams (salaries, expenses etc). If this is corrcet, or even partially correct any financial impacts at the factory will heaviliy impact the R&D areas (as you suggest) and it is here where I see the real impacts occurring (longer term).





Garry

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SackWack @ Dec 13 2008, 05:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Forever the skeptic eh Garry? You are a careful man.

I think Spies, obvioulsy barring health, accidents/DNF's, would have easily outshone both CV and LC. Just my opinion. I think that Spies is the real deal. Its understandable that you take the, might be good until proven good route, its the safe way. My question to you would be, how well does he have to do in WSBK his first year, all things considered? Or is he not proven until he reaches MOTOGP and races there? (I am assuming you think that the AMA SBK doesn't prove anything)


I have every right to be sceptical as in world terms Spies has done nothing other than get good results in three appearances and reject a fourth opportunity.

He had not and has not ridden on the majority of circuits at which MotoGP nor has he competed in a World Championship, he has not ridden the circuits and as we have seen this year with Lorenzo, talent needs experience to be displayed else you end up battered.

Spies may have produced superior results to eirther of the other two riders, just as he could well have failed miserably and therefore dented his future prospects at world level. IMO, he showed something that should have been noted and duly was noted, no more, no less.

I do not get to see AMA so I cannot judge him in those terms as from results (and this has been said many times) he was in a team that won everything and that will always weigh in my judgements until I see something else. His competition in AMA is difficult to judge at World level as they do not compete and as I have said, I do not see the AMA series (just as I suspect you do not see the ASC which has good riders) so judging against other series is difficult.

Now, that said, his times thus far in WSBK testing have been impressively quick and consistent. He has turned a number of laps in practice and appears to have the right attitude in terms of his desire to test, test and test again to make the machine and himself into the package that is needed. But he still has not raced these guys or these tracks yet.

To answer the 'when is he proven' question, IMO he does not need to make it to MotoGP but display a consistency in terms of results in the WSBK. To me WSBK is an extremely competitive series in it's own right and is not a shadow of MotoGP and I cannot say where AMA sites in any picture (compared to BSB etc).

As for your question about what he would need to do, IMO if he finishes top 5 in the WC that is exceptional for a first year WSBK rider on unfamiliar tracks, new team, tyres etc. Add to this the new culture that he needs to acquaint himself with and a top 5 result is expceptional, top 10 would be very good. If he wins the WC (and IMO it is possible as it is with all riders) then he has gone beyond exceptional.

He now has an opportunity to display the talent that some people say he has but the world has not seen fully displayed yet, lets juudge where he sits in World terms around November 2009.





Garry

Great thread gentlemen, all very good posts. (Except for you Tom)

Nah really, some great thoughtful posts. Nice to have a grown up thread for a while. I agree with most what you guys are saying. The global mismanagement will for sure be a twist in the next few years. I'd just like to add that though Honda is in many ways the Evil Empire, we can I think agree that they are committed to wining (though they have made many mistakes, most namely by getting rid of the best rider ever....Hayden, hahahaha, jk, Rossi.) But despite what .... we can talk about Honda, its clear they were more committed than Suzuki. Now if the mighty Honda is feeling the pinch, well I'm gonna go with Frosty's take and predict that Suzuki will not close the R&D gap as they will decrease their budgets accordingly. You all made great points, and I agree with most, but in a nut shell, Suzuki is simply not as committed to winning. (Oh, and I'm not buying the 'they are a small factory' comment, since they are large enough to make an impact.

Carry on gentlemen.

(I'm putting the Spies thing on the shelf, simply because its just too speculative. And on another note, it will make my WSBK viewing more enjoyable...as if that were possible) Hey BEN, can we get a new forum title page like we have for MotoGP chat, but make it specific for WSBK? I have a feeling you're gonna get more hits this coming year. SERIOUSLY!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Dec 14 2008, 08:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You all made great points, and I agree with most, but in a nut shell, Suzuki is simply not as committed to winning. (Oh, and I'm not buying the 'they are a small factory' comment, since they are large enough to make an impact.


I cannot disagree with the highlighted comment (which was made earlier by someone else from memory as well (was it Frosty?) and in that I do find it a shame (I think Kawasaki want to win but have no idea how at this stage).

I do not buy into the 'small factory' argument either as Ducati have shown what can be acheived, but a small budget is something altogether.

Does anyone have information on the total dollar spends of each manfactirer by team?

If it is around somewhere I reckon that could make interesting reading and another good subject for discussion.





Garry

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Dec 14 2008, 09:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You all made great points, and I agree with most, but in a nut shell, Suzuki is simply not as committed to winning. (Oh, and I'm not buying the 'they are a small factory' comment, since they are large enough to make an impact.
As I understand it, they have a very small Moto GP race research and development team. The enduring black humour in the paddock reagrding this is that you can fit them all into a hire car at the airport. So if the worse was to happen en route to the circuit Suzuki simply wouldn't have any race technical department left on the pay-roll.

Suzuki may not be where they ought to be compared to the other factory teams, but they've done alright considering the riders they have. Vermeulen is a big disappointment, he is young and supposedly hungry....but is getting spanked by his older teammate. Of course we all know Loris Caparossi is a great racer so I'm not going to hold that against Vermeulen, BUT Chris really needs to up his game and show that he is the #1 rider. I just think Suzuki lacks a championship caliber rider who can take charge and motivate the team and give them some glimpse of hope, I just do not see that in Vermeulen or old Caparossi.

How do you quantify commitment to winning? Are people seriously suggesting that Suzuki's management, race team or riders dont really want to win?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Dec 15 2008, 09:42 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>How do you quantify commitment to winning? Are people seriously suggesting that Suzuki's management, race team or riders dont really want to win?


I wouldn't say so (well not from my side), but I do not feel that the commitment matches that of others because of the realities of their situation (call it a fatalistic approach if needed).

IMO, the team (riders, techs managements) desperately want to win, the R&D guys want the team to win because it shows their abilities and skill. IMO there is no doubt in that.

But, the factory is not so 'keen' (not in true meanings) because they pull the purse strings and will only make a specific amount available to the team and it is known that the money is insufficient. So the team is leaft to do the best with the goods at their disposal which depsite the best efforts of themselves, riders and R&D it is not good enough because they cannot spend the necessary dollars to get that extra 'edge' or 'component' required.

Thus and this is my wording here the factory (bean counters) lacks commitment necessary in order to allow the team to produce the goods which leads the team to a malaise and the subsequent frustration leads to poor and poorer results.






Garry

Suzuki are apparently pulling out of WRC; I don't know what implications this has for their motogp effort.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Dec 15 2008, 11:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I wouldn't say so (well not from my side), but I do not feel that the commitment matches that of others because of the realities of their situation (call it a fatalistic approach if needed).

IMO, the team (riders, techs managements) desperately want to win, the R&D guys want the team to win because it shows their abilities and skill. IMO there is no doubt in that.

But, the factory is not so 'keen' (not in true meanings) because they pull the purse strings and will only make a specific amount available to the team and it is known that the money is insufficient. So the team is leaft to do the best with the goods at their disposal which depsite the best efforts of themselves, riders and R&D it is not good enough because they cannot spend the necessary dollars to get that extra 'edge' or 'component' required.

Thus and this is my wording here the factory (bean counters) lacks commitment necessary in order to allow the team to produce the goods which leads the team to a malaise and the subsequent frustration leads to poor and poorer results.






Garry
that i cannot argue with, top post.

the team personnel IMO are up to the task, its the upper management (bean counter as gaz put it) that are hamstringing the effort. it happened in WSB in 2008 too, so it seems to be factory related, not team related.
and as a suzuki fan it really f$%king hurts to say that because it means the future looks bleak...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ Dec 15 2008, 06:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I wouldn't say so (well not from my side), but I do not feel that the commitment matches that of others because of the realities of their situation (call it a fatalistic approach if needed).

IMO, the team (riders, techs managements) desperately want to win, the R&D guys want the team to win because it shows their abilities and skill. IMO there is no doubt in that.

But, the factory is not so 'keen' (not in true meanings) because they pull the purse strings and will only make a specific amount available to the team and it is known that the money is insufficient. So the team is leaft to do the best with the goods at their disposal which depsite the best efforts of themselves, riders and R&D it is not good enough because they cannot spend the necessary dollars to get that extra 'edge' or 'component' required.

Thus and this is my wording here the factory (bean counters) lacks commitment necessary in order to allow the team to produce the goods which leads the team to a malaise and the subsequent frustration leads to poor and poorer results.






Garry

bullseye! excellent post gaz. the teams defo have the commitment as well as the r&d guys & they wouldn't be racing if they didn't think they could achieve success. it's the pencilneck suits that are pinching of the needed flow of funds for the team to be competetive. kawasaki have the excact same problem imo.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (frosty58 @ Dec 15 2008, 02:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>bullseye! excellent post gaz. the teams defo have the commitment as well as the r&d guys & they wouldn't be racing if they didn't think they could achieve success. it's the pencilneck suits that are pinching of the needed flow of funds for the team to be competetive. kawasaki have the excact same problem imo.
Wrong-headed rule changes have made it hard for the less resourced manufacturers to compete in the current formula, although even honda who were reputedly major instigators of the formula now seem to be finding the going a bit rich. Was suzukis relative budget any better in the 500cc era when as someone mentioned earlier in the thread, perhaps aided by some fairly significant riding talent, they won several championships?. I think ducati's recent success involved an entirely different approach than usually taken by the japanese factories, and is not necessarily sustainable anyway; ducati corse itself is also reputedy well funded by marlboro et al.

I think the team has the will to win. IMO it seems with what they are given to race they are in the series only to develop ideas for the GSXR program. If they win, like they do sporatically, fantastic. There may be a faction in Suzuki that expect to see wins out of the program but they aren't willing to commit the extra funds required to make it happen. Probably because they know even if they do Yamaha and Honda can outspend them making there effort redundant.

The new GSXR1000 k9 has more upgrades than the motogp bike for gods sake. I just read the article in Motorcyclist mag and it has 2 pages of detailed upgrades. It is essentially a completely new bike. Engine, frame, suspension. Everything. 2 years after the last totally new bike. It is obvious where the money goes. 191 crank hp. How much more hp has the motogp got?

I'm sure with the lead story on the motogp.com site being CV's disappointing year that Suzuki will feel even more pressure to commit money/resources to the team but with the pressure on fiscal restraint they may not have a choice but to cruise for a while at the same level.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Dec 15 2008, 01:42 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>How do you quantify commitment to winning? Are people seriously suggesting that Suzuki's management, race team or riders dont really want to win?

You see how you twist things? This is why it’s impossible to have a reasonable conversation with you. You are either dense or you do it on purpose. (I think both).

Tom, do you understand the difference between not having as much commitment to win and not wanting to win? Am I really suppose to carry a conversation with somebody who can't reasonably distinguish between the two? If I believed you just don't understand, I might be more patient to clarify, but I have a hunch you just do it to troll and get a reaction (and with the added benefit of having an ally).

Nobody is saying they are NOT wanting to win, but their level of commitment is lacking when compared to other teams. I think Gaz pretty much nailed it when he points to the higher ups of the company, but I would take it further and say, it is a problem at the ground racing line level as well. The team of individuals on the racing line for the most part all have a healthy commitment and want to win. However, 'wanting' to win is not enough. There must also be sound principle and practical steps to achieve this goal. Have you ever heard of the sports cliché often spoken of the winners; "They just wanted it more."? Well this is unquantifiable to be certain, but it’s a very real phenomena. But the team as part of a greater entity is lacking in their commitment to win evidenced by their sub par results over their history and considering their resources available. It just can't be that Honda & Yamaha have more money, put also that they implement it with the mindset that winning is the only option.

You ask how you can "quantify" commitment. I'm assuming you are asking a rhetorical question; one that can be easily answered by examining the input and output as a function. We can see the output of Suzuki, which has scarcely and rarely won titles and podiums. How about the input? Suzuki is not some small company; they are a rather large conglomerate. They are present in many other forms of motorcycle racing and some have been very successful (AMA & WSBK). So what is the problem at the MotoGP level? This is what we are talking about here Tom. And one reason I am proposing is that they do NOT have the same level of commitment to win. They have not taken the resources available and successfully competed at this level where they have had success in other series. I understand that prototype racing pose a unique set of budgetary obligation, but the endeavor of racing at this level is not unique. The enterprise of racing is fairly standard, even in a non-standard series as is prototype racing. So from my limited vantage point, I propose that their is a element of commitment that is not being matched in relation to more successful teams.

Consider for a moment the privateer that was Team KR. They pretty much lived and breathed racing. They retooled every aspect of their machine. Redesign chassis, designing their own exhaust. Trying different engines, even designing their own power plant, etc., and doing it with limited resources. Here is a team whose life was about the enterprise of racing competition. Even though they lacked results, we all knew they had outstanding commitment to winning and competing. It is this element that seems to be missing with MotoGP team Suzuki. It’s this mindset, that you find in companies like Yoshimira or Ferrari (as an example) who are in the business to compete.