WSBK Considering drastically lower Fuel Limits

mylexicon · Sep 11, 2010

povol said:
So now you knew they were after a rev limit. Does that mean your backing off your insistence that there already is one. I cant keep up with all the flip flops. If they already have it, why move publicly towards something that already exists. I know, their conscience is bothering them and they cant live with the lie any more. Or maybe they figured they had been caught by the god like Lex and it was time to come clean. Just because you hypothesized for over a year that WSBK had a rev limit, and now they talk about the possibility of one in the future, does not make you a soothsayer . Go ice down your elbow and shoulder, this does not help your argument one iota.

No, I'm stating the events from the perspective of people who do not think the sport is rev limited. To them, Krop posted an article about fuel-limiting WSBK, I explained to everyone that the MSMA were actually after a rev limit (lower than what they have now), and then Krop confirmed a few hours later. What happened to all the people who thought the MSMA would never and could never rev limit? They must be stunned. Krops reports that the MSMA want fuel limits, I tell people not to worry b/c the MSMA wants a (new) rev limit, I explain why, and then Krop confirms the rev limit.

The reason they are making it public is b/c they can't hide a 10%-15% drop in revs. They can disguise the drop in power by pretending to fuel limit the sport or they can go to stock internals and then pretend that the stock parts have reduced power, but that lie would only be building on the half-truth they already tell. Plus, the MSMA members who've committed to GP are probably displeased with the marketing value other brands, Aprilia particularly, get from winning a rev limited class (that the public think has no horsepower cap). Now that Ducati have been accused of being whining cheaters, even they want the public to know that WSBK is rev limited. We will see whether the tell everyone that the sport is already rev limited. I doubt it, but maybe I will be pleasantly surprised.

Kropotkin · Sep 12, 2010

I think what I, and many others, would say is the following:

1. No rev limit currently exists in WSBK

2. The MSMA are considering introducing a rev limit in WSBK.

Given that the Japanese manufacturers can and do operate as a cartel sometimes, that does not exclude the Japanese manufacturers from informally agreeing not to pursue revs at the expense of all else. However, given that BMW and Aprilia are now also in the series, and in no way interested in any under the table agreements between the Japanese factories, even if at one point there was an informal agreement, it's been utterly disregarded now.

mylexicon · Sep 12, 2010

Kropotkin said:
I think what I, and many others, would say is the following:

1. No rev limit currently exists in WSBK

2. The MSMA are considering introducing a rev limit in WSBK.

Given that the Japanese manufacturers can and do operate as a cartel sometimes, that does not exclude the Japanese manufacturers from informally agreeing not to pursue revs at the expense of all else. However, given that BMW and Aprilia are now also in the series, and in no way interested in any under the table agreements between the Japanese factories, even if at one point there was an informal agreement, it's been utterly disregarded now.

The aggressive WSBK competitive model explains nothing about the sport, and it isn't even consistent with the non-aggression principle the MSMA announced in 2003. It doesn't explain how 5 different manufacturers can win when the horsepower spread between the machines is supposedly as much as 30hp. It doesn't explain how the most powerful bike on the grid (allegedly) can't win a race, and it can't even draft by the Suzuki in a straight line.

The rev limit, on the other hand, explains everything. The code breaks itself when you have the key. I'm practically cheating. Why should I be the only person who has access to it? It's written down in the BSB Evo rulebook.

It satisfies the non-aggression principle. It explains why Ducati switched to 1200cc. It explains why Suzuki were suddenly competitive in 2009 after raising engine bore by only 1mm. It explains why all of the manufacturers have raised bore numbers by at least 1mm. It explains how 5 manufacturers can win even though the horsepower spread is allegedly 30hp. It even explains that the MSMA are actually after a revised rev limit even though they announce fuel restrictions. It explains why Yamaha didn't endorse the measure.

What more do people need to start using it for themselves? I've linked to the articles in which the MSMA states that WSBK is non-aggressive. I found the rev limit references in a rulebook that uses FIM homologation procedures for everything. BSB even recently kicked Aprilia out of Evo b/c Aprilia started selling RSV's with a camshaft variant. BSB classified it as aftermarket, but after the FIM cleared the cam, the Aprilia was let back into Evo. I've used the rev limit to explain the past, interpret the present, and you can even have an educated guess at the future.

People should use the rev limit model at the very least so they don't have to make all caps posts on your sight about the demise of WSBK and the evil people in the MSMA. Those remarks apply to GP where there is a horsepower war at all costs no matter how boring or expensive the racing gets.

povol · Sep 12, 2010

mylexicon said:
No, I'm stating the events from the perspective of people who do not think the sport is rev limited. To them, Krop posted an article about fuel-limiting WSBK, I explained to everyone that the MSMA were actually after a rev limit (lower than what they have now), and then Krop confirmed a few hours later. What happened to all the people who thought the MSMA would never and could never rev limit? They must be stunned. Krops reports that the MSMA want fuel limits, I tell people not to worry b/c the MSMA wants a (new) rev limit, I explain why, and then Krop confirms the rev limit.

The reason they are making it public is b/c they can't hide a 10%-15% drop in revs. They can disguise the drop in power by pretending to fuel limit the sport or they can go to stock internals and then pretend that the stock parts have reduced power, but that lie would only be building on the half-truth they already tell. Plus, the MSMA members who've committed to GP are probably displeased with the marketing value other brands, Aprilia particularly, get from winning a rev limited class (that the public think has no horsepower cap). Now that Ducati have been accused of being whining cheaters, even they want the public to know that WSBK is rev limited. We will see whether the tell everyone that the sport is already rev limited. I doubt it, but maybe I will be pleasantly surprised.

Where and when did that take place. The original article was about fuel limits or an alternative hard rev limit. Krop has not confirmed anything you say as far as i can see. If anything, he has debunked it.

mylexicon · Sep 12, 2010

povol said:
Where and when did that take place. The original article was about fuel limits or an alternative hard rev limit. Krop has not confirmed anything you say as far as i can see. If anything, he has debunked it.

Me: The government built an A-bomb by utilizing this secret project called the Manhattan project.

Everyone: You're full of it.

Me: No. There are German scientists in the desert. I've seen the documents. I've seen the light from giant explosions. Too big for normal weapons.

Everyone: You're imagining things.

FDR: [six months later] We're going to build an A-bomb using a project called the Manhattan Project.

Everyone: See?! You're crazy! There never was an A-bomb, they're just starting now.

Me:

povol · Sep 13, 2010

mylexicon said:
Me: The government built an A-bomb by utilizing this secret project called the Manhattan project.

Everyone: You're full of it.

Me: No. There are German scientists in the desert. I've seen the documents. I've seen the light from giant explosions. Too big for normal weapons.

Everyone: You're imagining things.

FDR: [six months later] We're going to build an A-bomb using a project called the Manhattan Project.

Everyone: See?! You're crazy! There never was an A-bomb, they're just starting now.

Me:

So you have seen documents that state there is a rev limit in WSBK, and have witnessed it first hand. End the debate, show us. Quit dodging the questions, where and when did Krop confirm anything you have said?

Kropotkin · Sep 13, 2010

mylexicon said:
The aggressive WSBK competitive model explains nothing about the sport, and it isn't even consistent with the non-aggression principle the MSMA announced in 2003. It doesn't explain how 5 different manufacturers can win when the horsepower spread between the machines is supposedly as much as 30hp. It doesn't explain how the most powerful bike on the grid (allegedly) can't win a race, and it can't even draft by the Suzuki in a straight line.

Electronics = corner exit speed = lower top speed. Which is how come the Ducati (which is well down on HP) can keep up with the fours - they get off the corner much better. In the 125s, I've seen a couple of hp deficit translate into a 30 km/h top speed deficit. You can see the same in Moto2: identical engines, but corner exit speed dictating a 15 km/h top speed deficit.

HP is very much overrated.

povol · Sep 13, 2010

Kropotkin said:
Electronics = corner exit speed = lower top speed. Which is how come the Ducati (which is well down on HP) can keep up with the fours - they get off the corner much better. In the 125s, I've seen a couple of hp deficit translate into a 30 km/h top speed deficit. You can see the same in Moto2: identical engines, but corner exit speed dictating a 15 km/h top speed deficit.

HP is very much overrated.

Not to mention how underrated aero is at 160-200 mph.Be it the bike itself, or the bike with rider. It takes a lot of HP to overcome slight differences in aero defecencies

mylexicon · Sep 13, 2010

Kropotkin said:
HP is very much overrated.

You don't need to tell me. Tell all of the team owners who were ready to hang Aprilia b/c the gear cams helped them add 3-5hp (a meaningless amount from what you are telling me). Tell the manufacturers who insisted that Ducati be air restricted even though they knew that a 1200cc twin would be one of the least powerful bikes on the grid. Tell Pedercini that horsepower doesn't matter as the Paul Birds draft past on the straights.

These people have a very odd sense of fair play, don't you think? They air restrict the Ducati which can barely make 210hp anyway, but the 240hp BMW doesn't seem to bother anyone. The 230hp Aprilia is only a problem when they add 3-5hp with gear cams.

It's a very fascinating sport. WSBK has 5 different winning manufacturers, and every person in the paddock has a hypersensitivity to modifications that could bring more power. As I've said before, the only thing that doesn't make sense is the aggressive WSBK model. It doesn't explain anything you see on the track and it is not consistent with the MSMA's own press releases from the beginning of the 1000cc era.

I don't know for sure that WSBK is rev limited, but the MSMA themselves have said it's a non-aggressive contest. The ontrack events corroborate the MSMA's claim.

povol · Sep 13, 2010

mylexicon said:
You don't need to tell me. Tell all of the team owners who were ready to hang Aprilia b/c the gear cams helped them add 3-5hp (a meaningless amount from what you are telling me). Tell the manufacturers who insisted that Ducati be air restricted even though they knew that a 1200cc twin would be one of the least powerful bikes on the grid. Tell Pedercini that horsepower doesn't matter as the Paul Birds draft past on the straights.

These people have a very odd sense of fair play, don't you think? They air restrict the Ducati which can barely make 210hp anyway, but the 240hp BMW doesn't seem to bother anyone. The 230hp Aprilia is only a problem when they add 3-5hp with gear cams.

It's a very fascinating sport. WSBK has 5 different winning manufacturers, and every person in the paddock has a hypersensitivity to modifications that could bring more power. As I've said before, the only thing that doesn't make sense is the aggressive WSBK model. It doesn't explain anything you see on the track and it is not consistent with the MSMA's own press releases from the beginning of the 1000cc era.

I don't know for sure that WSBK is rev limited, but the MSMA themselves have said it's a non-aggressive contest. The ontrack events corroborate the MSMA's claim.

One more time for the record. WSBK is rev limited during homologation. The rev limit is 13,300rpm and I've had it confirmed.

I don't know for sure that WSBK is rev limited

We are making progress. In one short week, you have gone from, without a doubt, with confirmation, that WSBK was rev limited.Now your not sure but deep in your brain, something tells you it may be.

Im not sure what point you are trying to make comparing Byrds Kawasaki's to Pedercini's. Krop did not say that HP did not matter, he said it was overrated. If Pedercini wanted bikes as fast as Byrds, he could spend the money to achieve it.

Jumkie · Sep 13, 2010

Kropotkin said:
Electronics = corner exit speed = lower top speed. Which is how come the Ducati (which is well down on HP) can keep up with the fours - they get off the corner much better. In the 125s, I've seen a couple of hp deficit translate into a 30 km/h top speed deficit. You can see the same in Moto2: identical engines, but corner exit speed dictating a 15 km/h top speed deficit.

HP is very much overrated.

Kropo, isn't the twin getting off the corner better because it has greater torque (as oppose to HP)? Yes, I agree, electros make this happen, but I'm sure the Jap 4s are not any less sophisticated in their gadgetricky (electronics). So isn't it more a function of how the different engines make their power as oppose to how much power they got? And even this is an oversimplification, as we could greatly complicate this conversation if we start to include the effect of gearing and transmission of torque; not to mention rider shifting to achieve engine RPM at torque peak (even better yet, engine power). Are we talking acceleration vs trap speed/top speed at a given distance, and in a straight line to conclude that HP is overrate? I'm not so sure I agree, HP is not more overrated than torque, as they are a function of velocity (despite how that power is put down).

povol · Sep 13, 2010

Jumkie said:
Kropo, isn't the twin getting off the corner better because it has greater torque (as oppose to HP)? Yes, I agree, electros make this happen, but I'm sure the Jap 4s are not any less sophisticated in their gadgetricky (electronics). So isn't it more a function of how the different engines make their power as oppose to how much power they got? And even this is an oversimplification, as we could greatly complicate this conversation if we start to include in effect of gearing and transmission of torque. Are we talking acceleration vs top speed at a given distance, and in a straight line to conclude that HP is overrate?

The problem with Ducati, is they want the grunt off the corner that the V gives them, plus now they want the top speed that the smaller 4 gives. Its typical Ducati, we want an advantage out of the corners, and at least be even on the straights. That is pretty much an unbeatable bike. The HP potential in the 1200 is there, and waiting for the plate change. Im not 100% convinced that Ducati is really pulling out of WSBK. Until the dead line comes and goes for 2011 entries, im going to treat this as a threat to get what they want

Kropotkin · Sep 13, 2010

Jumkie said:
Kropo, isn't the twin getting off the corner better because it has greater torque (as oppose to HP)? Yes, I agree, electros make this happen, but I'm sure the Jap 4s are not any less sophisticated in their gadgetricky (electronics). So isn't it more a function of how the different engines make their power as oppose to how much power they got? And even this is an oversimplification, as we could greatly complicate this conversation if we start to include the effect of gearing and transmission of torque; not to mention rider shifting to achieve engine RPM at torque peak. Are we talking acceleration vs trap speed/top speed at a given distance, and in a straight line to conclude that HP is overrate? I'm not so sure I agree, HP is not more overrated than torque, as they are a function of velocity (despite how that power is put down).

In brief, you are correct, although the twin doesn't make more torque, it just makes it much more readily available. So we are indeed talking speed trap speed, in other words, speed out of the corner and onto the straight, which is why the Ducati can hang with the fours for so long.

Kropotkin · Sep 13, 2010

mylexicon said:
You don't need to tell me. Tell all of the team owners who were ready to hang Aprilia b/c the gear cams helped them add 3-5hp (a meaningless amount from what you are telling me).

If Aprilia had not started out the year with injectors of dubious legality (prompting the Superbike Commission to issue new rules saying the bikes must use the standard injectors from next year), they may have got a pass on the gear cams, but Aprilia have been pushing the limits of the permissible from before the start of the season last year, when they (and BMW) raced bikes without having sold enough for them to be homologated. Besides, the gear cams was more a matter of price, as I heard a set was something in the region of 25K. In an age of cost-cutting, that doesn't go down very well.

mylexicon · Sep 13, 2010

povol said:
One more time for the record. WSBK is rev limited during homologation. The rev limit is 13,300rpm and I've had it confirmed.

I don't know for sure that WSBK is rev limited

We are making progress. In one short week, you have gone from, without a doubt, with confirmation, that WSBK was rev limited.Now your not sure but deep in your brain, something tells you it may be.

Im not sure what point you are trying to make comparing Byrds Kawasaki's to Pedercini's. Krop did not say that HP did not matter, he said it was overrated. If Pedercini wanted bikes as fast as Byrds, he could spend the money to achieve it.

I can't prove for sure. That's what I meant. There is a reasonable doubt from when Krop said I can't prove they enforce the homologated rev limit in WSBK. This is true. All I have left is overwhelming circumstantial evidence.

I'm hoping everything will come out in the near future. Suter have chosen to use the BMW engine in their new CRT. Soon, I'm sure they will be testing it, and when that finally happens, people will see the same BMW engine with the same WSBK parts and the same 24L of fuel go screaming past the camera at over 15,000rpm while producing between 240-250bhp. People will start asking questions.

That's if the MSMA don't spill the beans first. What better way to differentiate the series and restore GP to the limelight that telling everyone WSBK has a rev limit, or by imposing a new one?

It's only a matter of time. I'm just tired of waiting, and I have a bit of trepidation that the Flamminis might manage to cut a deal to keep the rev limit under the table, even though Dorna want it to be made public (b/c it makes GP look better). MSMA are probably not entirely enthusiastic about blowing WSBK's cover b/c they have to sell those bikes. They don't want to knock the luster off too much.

mylexicon · Sep 13, 2010

Kropotkin said:
If Aprilia had not started out the year with injectors of dubious legality (prompting the Superbike Commission to issue new rules saying the bikes must use the standard injectors from next year), they may have got a pass on the gear cams, but Aprilia have been pushing the limits of the permissible from before the start of the season last year, when they (and BMW) raced bikes without having sold enough for them to be homologated. Besides, the gear cams was more a matter of price, as I heard a set was something in the region of 25K. In an age of cost-cutting, that doesn't go down very well.

Why do they need special injectors and gear cams? Aprilia have already got most of the bikes dominated from a horsepower standpoint. Yamaha is equal. BMW is supposed to be superior, never seen it happen though.

Upgraded fuel injectors and gear cams (which allow more accurate cam timing and therefore more lift and duration) are both techniques for improving mean pressure by altering stoichiometry. If you can't chase revs, and you can't increase displacement, you obsess over pressure. All of Aprilia's "illegal" mods are pressure mods. No one seems to stress too much about bore differences between the bikes even though they are a much greater determinant of peak horsepower. The manufacturers foresake bore (legal way to make horsepower on the road bike) and they chase relatively meaningless 1%-2% increases in mean cylinder pressure. Strange, no?

Is it not slightly unusual that Suzuki would show up to compete with a bike that they know is 30hp down on the S1000RR. Is it not slightly unusual that when Suzuki redesigned their bike in 2009, they intentionally used a bore number that was significantly less than every other bike on the grid (same as what they did in 2005 actually)? Is it not strange that BMW can't even break Suzuki's tow on the front straight?

And the list of anomalies goes on and on and on. Horsepower isn't that important, but empirical evidence shows that BMW and Suzuki don't have any fundamental differences in handling capability. If all of the bikes come out of the final turn nose-to-tail (like they do quite frequently), where is the power? I see the power in Superstock where we know Badovini has 15hp on the field. I see it in GP where there is a horsepower war (at all costs). But it's not quite showing up in WSBK.

All of the bikes go the same speed in a straight line, and the "cheaters" spend their waking hours trying to implement pressure mods. What could this mean?

Kropotkin · Sep 13, 2010

mylexicon said:
Is it not slightly unusual that Suzuki would show up to compete with a bike that they know is 30hp down on the S1000RR. Is it not slightly unusual that when Suzuki redesigned their bike in 2009, they intentionally used a bore number that was significantly less than every other bike on the grid (same as what they did in 2005 actually)? Is it not strange that BMW can't even break Suzuki's tow on the front straight?

Suzuki built a road bike they wanted to go racing with. BMW (and Aprilia) built a race bike for the road.

mylexicon said:
And the list of anomalies goes on and on and on. Horsepower isn't that important, but empirical evidence shows that BMW and Suzuki don't have any fundamental differences in handling capability. If all of the bikes come out of the final turn nose-to-tail (like they do quite frequently), where is the power? I see the power in Superstock where we know Badovini has 15hp on the field. I see it in GP where there is a horsepower war (at all costs). But it's not quite showing up in WSBK.

All of the bikes go the same speed in a straight line, and the "cheaters" spend their waking hours trying to implement pressure mods. What could this mean?

The difference between Superstock and Superbikes is in the electronics and the modifications. The stocker the class, the better the BMW does. It's pretty good as standard, but it can't be improved as well as the others. Also, in WSBK, they insist on using their own in-house electronics, if they'd ditch that, they'd be much quicker (see Suzuki in MotoGP).

If there was an unofficial rev limit in place, Kawasaki would say .... you, build an engine that revved to 17K and kick everyone's arses. The limit isn't in the FIM rule book, and therefore it will not be enforced. So anyone turning up with a legal WSBK machine that revs to whatever they can get it to would not be disqualified.

And again, as for top speed, you can find the list of Moto2 top speeds from Indy here: http://resources.motogp.com/files/results/xx/2010/INP/Moto2/EventMaximumSpeed.pdf

The fastest bike was the Kalex machine of Sergio Gadea, which clocked 275.7 km/h. The fastest Promoharris bikes (Harris chassis are notorious for being slow out of corners, see Haojue) was Joan Olive's machine, which hit 264.5. Gadea weights 58 kg, Olive 62 kg. The fastest BQR bike hit 266.6, the fastest Moriwaki clocked 269.9 (with Toni Elias on board).

These are bikes with identical engines in, and riders of similar weight and size. There are two explanations: 1. Aero (which only really starts to come into play over 200 km/h), and 2. getting off the corner.

Now, if the WSBK machines were taken to an airbase and run along a 2.5 km straight, and all topped out at the same speed, I'd buy your conspiracy theory. But top speed at a race track is more about getting off the corner than it is about HP. And getting off the corner is a strange and mystical mix of chassis geometry, tire use, electronic settings, power band, rider skill and many other factors. Revs are such a small part of this.

povol · Sep 13, 2010

Kropotkin said:
Suzuki built a road bike they wanted to go racing with. BMW (and Aprilia) built a race bike for the road.

The difference between Superstock and Superbikes is in the electronics and the modifications. The stocker the class, the better the BMW does. It's pretty good as standard, but it can't be improved as well as the others. Also, in WSBK, they insist on using their own in-house electronics, if they'd ditch that, they'd be much quicker (see Suzuki in MotoGP).

If there was an unofficial rev limit in place, Kawasaki would say .... you, build an engine that revved to 17K and kick everyone's arses. The limit isn't in the FIM rule book, and therefore it will not be enforced. So anyone turning up with a legal WSBK machine that revs to whatever they can get it to would not be disqualified.

And again, as for top speed, you can find the list of Moto2 top speeds from Indy here: http://resources.motogp.com/files/results/xx/2010/INP/Moto2/EventMaximumSpeed.pdf

The fastest bike was the Kalex machine of Sergio Gadea, which clocked 275.7 km/h. The fastest Promoharris bikes (Harris chassis are notorious for being slow out of corners, see Haojue) was Joan Olive's machine, which hit 264.5. Gadea weights 58 kg, Olive 62 kg. The fastest BQR bike hit 266.6, the fastest Moriwaki clocked 269.9 (with Toni Elias on board).

These are bikes with identical engines in, and riders of similar weight and size. There are two explanations: 1. Aero (which only really starts to come into play over 200 km/h), and 2. getting off the corner.

Now, if the WSBK machines were taken to an airbase and run along a 2.5 km straight, and all topped out at the same speed, I'd buy your conspiracy theory. But top speed at a race track is more about getting off the corner than it is about HP. And getting off the corner is a strange and mystical mix of chassis geometry, tire use, electronic settings, power band, rider skill and many other factors. Revs are such a small part of this.

That has been my contention all along Krop. You might remember the extracted thread on this subject not long ago, a lot of the points you made were covered, even agreeing that the BMW would blow on by the other WSBK's on a 1 mile straight. I even showed Lex a Dyno graph where a stock ZX10 was pushing over 10 more HP at around 7500-8000 than the BMW. If my memory serves me, the graph intersected at around 10k and the BMW kept pulling away. But up until that point,the ZX10 was killing it in out put. Never mind, i found it. This is quite telling as far as how a certain bike creates its power

Values (hp):

ZX10R / BMWS1KRR

3000rpm: 32/25

4000rpm: 48/37

5000rpm: 66/54

6000rpm: 85/71

7000rpm: 103/90

8000rpm: 123/111

9000rpm: 142/130

10000rpm: 156/151

11000rpm: 169/170

12000rpm: 175/181

10596:08zx10rvsbmw1000.jpg]

mylexicon · Sep 13, 2010

Kropotkin said:
The stocker the class, the better the BMW does. It's pretty good as standard, but it can't be improved as well as the others.

But when you jump to CRT trim it is the engine with the highest possible potential (not the Aprilia?!). Is it just me or did Suter just say that the engine has undeveloped potential? BMW can't get the most out of their own engine? Is that what he meant? Freudian slip?

I'm sure BMW's electronics are not as good and I'm sure they struggle to get the chassis working perfectly with the tires, but we've seen Corser and Xaus follow someone out of a turn, stand the bike up, and hit the throttle, but nothing happens. Not even circuits with high trap speeds on the straight like Monza, or Qatar, or Valencia. How does a WSBK engine that can't even pull out of Suzuki's wake, the same engine that is supposedly going to be the GP contender? All they've done is take the exact same engine, and move it from WSBK to a different rulebook (and no homologation procedures) in MotoGP.

The dam is going to break. The MSMA are talking publicly about rev limits and the Suter CRT bikes will be making very high pitched noises in short order. Dorna and IRTA want MotoGP to be differentiated so they want everyone to know that WSBK is rev-limited b/c it takes some of the luster off of the series. I don't know whether or not the MSMA will tell everyone how homologation really works, but surely someone will accidentally spill the beans. I'll be sick if the Flamminis manage to keep this all under wraps.

povol · Sep 13, 2010

mylexicon said:
But when you jump to CRT trim it is the engine with the highest possible potential (not the Aprilia?!). Is it just me or did Suter just say that the engine has undeveloped potential? BMW can't get the most out of their own engine? Is that what he meant? Freudian slip?

I'm sure BMW's electronics are not as good and I'm sure they struggle to get the chassis working perfectly with the tires, but we've seen Corser and Xaus follow someone out of a turn, stand the bike up, and hit the throttle, but nothing happens. Not even circuits with high trap speeds on the straight like Monza, or Qatar, or Valencia. How does a WSBK engine that can't even pull out of Suzuki's wake, the same engine that is supposedly going to be the GP contender? All they've done is take the exact same engine, and move it from WSBK to a different rulebook (and no homologation procedures) in MotoGP.

The dam is going to break. The MSMA are talking publicly about rev limits and the Suter CRT bikes will be making very high pitched noises in short order. Dorna and IRTA want MotoGP to be differentiated so they want everyone to know that WSBK is rev-limited b/c it takes some of the luster off of the series. I don't know whether or not the MSMA will tell everyone how homologation really works, but surely someone will accidentally spill the beans. I'll be sick if the Flamminis manage to keep this all under wraps.

Just look at the graph, even if they are at 8000 RPMs coming out of a corner, the bike with fatter numbers will slightly pull the BMW until its playing catch up the whole straight. I made the comment in the other rev thread that regardless of how much HP the BMW made stock, the Suzuki and Yamaha were better in race trim because of their delivery. Like Krop said, big HP numbers are overrated if you cant use them

Search

Search

WSBK Considering drastically lower Fuel Limits

mylexicon

Kropotkin

mylexicon

povol

mylexicon

povol

Kropotkin

povol

mylexicon

povol

Jumkie

povol

Kropotkin

Kropotkin

mylexicon

mylexicon

Kropotkin

povol

Attachments

mylexicon

povol

Similar threads

Recent Discussions