Unsafe Rules

As far as i can work out, having less fuel and smaller capacity does not cause accidents alone, i think the tyres are easily the most significant factor. They are too durable, too stiff construction and not specific enough for tracks/conditions. Bridgestone need to sort this out, WSBK and F1 both have control tyre regulations working in their favour, in moto2 the tyres seem pretty neutral, in motogp they are damaging the racing, the spectacle and sport as a whole.

Is the capacity change another way of capturing the road bike Market ?



For years, SBK was the relevant product as far as what transpired into sales. 750 , and later, 1000cc machines that looked ( and to some extent were ) like the machine you could go into the bike shop and buy.



GP machines were like F1................. the best the factory could produce with all it's resources thrown into it. Sure, the technology may/sometimes/did find it's way onto the things we could buy, but buy and large, they were pure technological exotica. All right, I can hear the "dinosaur two stroke" comments, but I am refering to frame/chassis development, brakes, suspension ect.....500cc was the class standard at that time, and two bangers were what was being used.



Now, the current bikes are just as exotic ( in that the technology used is very expensive, and we won't see it on the road for years), .........but my thought is that an 800cc bike is not what you will see in the shops.



1000cc, and 600cc are what you can go in and buy.



I haven't really kept up with the political/law suit side of my beloved sport ( I hate that ...., and as much as I know it is a major part of what goes on, I am silly enough to whish it all away and just watch good racing), but isn't WSBK pissed off and trying to take DORNA to court over the the whole capacity thing ?



I read months ( possibly 18 of them) ago that they got shirty when DORNA was bringing in the 600cc Moto2 class............



Like I said, didn't pay attention.............would rather watch the racing.



That's to my detriment.





The only reason I can see for the capacity change is getting market share as far as bike sales go........I mean, if you're coming up trumps in WSBK and MotoGP with bikes that are of the same capacity as you and I can buy..........well.............





EG.......If Honda win WSBK with a 1000 cc machine...........and MotoGP with a 1000cc machine..................the best bike in the world must be that shiney 1000cc honda sitting on the show room floor.........right ?





Just a thought................





maybe a misconceived thought............but a thought all the same.

Fred,



Have a look at the current Aprillia RSV4 - Launch control, wheelie control, traction control. The BMWS1000R, The Ducati 1198 and so on and so forth.



Motogp's problem is that the market catches it too quickly and the real risk is losing relevance.



WSBK and Motogp on lag a couple of years in technology and once we limit motogp (4 cylinders - bore and stroke dictated, rider controls dictated etc) motogp runs the risk of being totally irrelevant.



The day is coming when the technology available on a customer bike dictates one series only and I'm afraid that WSBK will be the survivor on price alone.



If a SBK and a motogp bike (at 30 times the cost) lap roughly the same times then pffft it's gone.



If they slow the corner speeds and reduce lap times then this is a possibility.



If they don't lower the costs then they risk what happened this week at Silverstone - only 12 bikes finish.



Dorna is painted into a corner (that rhymed)

No argument here.









..............losing it's relevance as a real world product may not be a bad thing though..........



Maybe they can go back to overpowered, no traction/launch control, evil handling machines......that would lower the cost....... and then we can just watch the best riders in the world try to ride them.





Like the dirty ol' 500's





Silly dream......I know.



PS......poet, and you didn't know it !

I think it's called vintage or classic racing.



TV audience and sponsorship free!



Really they can only go faster so unsafe will be the order of the day.



And yes I loved 500's, I rode the Suzi RG500 (road version) when it wasn't a classic and it frightened the .... out of me.



I still cannot work out why they changed from the 990 format,

Ahhhhh RG.................. wasn't a classic when I had a spin either, they were only 6 years old then........and yes............scary little monster.



.........I want one,.........But anyone who has one either ,

1) won't sell it ( most want to be buried with it )



2)............have you seen the $$$$$$ they pull ??



I don't want a time warp back to 500's for GP.................. but I did like the fact you had guys racing on what were essentially the worst bikes ( as in evil, bad handling ect) the world could produce.



to over simplify it,



Honda had the power, but no the handling.



Yamaha had the handling, but not the power.



Suzuki had almost the power of the Honda, and almost the handling of the Yamaha ( or was it all Schwantz.........me suspects the latter)



So, when someone was doing well, there was little doubt that the rider was the determing factor.



I am basing this on a comment by Eddie Lawson when asked why he was giving up racing Indy Lites.



" With a bike, it's 80% rider, 20% bike. With a car it's 80% car, 20% driver..............you can be the best driver in the world, but if your cars no good, there is nothing you can do. The only way to go faster is to spend money, and I'm tired of spending my money"





I sometimes wonder , with all the gadgetry, are the bikes starting to drift into the old car equation.



I am not trying to hang .... on any riders ability, as they still have to ride them................but the difference between a good and a bad machine these days seems to be miles.





Rossi on the Duck, Stoner on the Duck....Honda for the last few years.



Did we get to watch better racing in the past as a result of all the bikes being essentially bad ? ( This is from a comment Doohan made when asked about 500's, to which he replied " People think 'cause it's a factory GP bike, it must be the best motorcycle in the world............in fact all these bikes are the worst bikes in the world........too much power, they don't want to turn, and they don't want to stop")



Rainey was on the same bike from 89/90 till his accident.........Suzuki didn't have an evolution with bikes........they just Gave Schwantz a brand new design every year, taking him back to square one ( in as far as having to sort out a whole new lot of problems..........come to think of it........that's why Rainey kept riding the same bike) and Honda...........well.............thing changed as much as they stayed the same.



The result was that we knew that what we were watching (by and large) was the rider at work. Now, for example.........if Stoners traction control( or the like) was to play up during a race, or it's not able to be dialled in to suit the track......whatever..................it doesn't matter how good he is...........he's screwed.







That's like F1................and F1 is boring as bat .... ,.......admittedly, the technology is very interesting, but as far as watching a good , ding-dong race ????







800.........990............whatever............just get rid of the electronics..............give 'em all the same ( although decent ) rubber, and set 'em loose.





Maybe that's why a wet race is still such a good thing to watch. Electronics can only do so much in conditions like Silverstone.



As a footnote..............maybe if they pissed off all the gadgetry, it would be a whole lot cheaper, and people would enjoy the spectacle of watching talent at work.



I mean, Football ( soccer) is the biggest sport on the planet..........no gadgetry........and people flock to it.Isn't this because you get to watch a talented athlete compete at his/her best.............without outside influences ( save a relationship/drugs ect problem) to mess up their performance ( yes I know a pair of boots and a ball is a bit cheaper than a GP bike,and therefore anyone can have a crack at it,)..........but my point is, it brings it back to the person, and the support thereof.



Not too many of us blindly follow a manufacturer.......sure, we may like a particular brand, but from observations, people tend to follow/support their favorite rider.







Does it matter to the Stoner supporters whether he's on a Duck or a Honda ?



And conversley for the Rossi fans.



Didn't we all dislike Biaggi, regardless of what he was riding ??



God forbid bikes turn out like F1.