<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kropotkin @ Apr 7 2010, 06:20 AM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Very quickly, as I'm busy. Love the theory, it's very well thought out. Which is the problem with it, but that's another thing.
You're getting hung up on homologated rev limits and BSB. Bikes are presented to the FIM for homologation. They have lights, indicators, pillion seats, fairings, etc, all of which are homologated. They also have a red line. This is the homologated rev limit. The way I see it, though, is that the rev limit is de facto, not de jure. The bikes are homologated to rev to X, but that doesn't mean they're not allowed to rev higher than X. In that respect, they're the same as indicators, in that the indicator is homologated, but not required for racing. You are assuming that the homologation is more like the fairing or the exhausts, which are supposed to bear a passing resemblance to the homologated item. I do not believe this is the case.
I shall ask Noyes when I see him tomorrow, and I shall make some enquiries in the WSBK paddock at Assen in two weeks' time.
Edited to add: Expecting the Japanese and Italian contingents to respect an unwritten rule is as likely as Osama Bin Laden and Jerry Falwell agreeing on who really is the One True God. Even if they went along just to shut the other party up, they'd completely disregard the agreement once they left the bargaining table.
If the rev limit is de facto, then WSBK definitely has no rev limit. However, if the rev limit is de facto, why homologate it? Homologation is de jure by nature, imo.
If the rev limit is de jure, then WSBK definitely has a rev limit. However, we have no proof that the FIM homologate all bikes at one universal rev limit (as I'm claiming). We have to draw that conclusion from circumstantial evidence like top speeds and acceleration g-force.
The MSMA agreement was my weak first attempt at explaining how the MSMA could impose a rev limit. I think you're right that the MSMA could never maintain a side agreement, and that's why a rev limit (if it is de jure) must be enforced by the FIM. Homologated components cannot be changed unless otherwise stated in the rulebook. Rev-limits are kind of an interesting thing to homologate b/c it isn't a physical component, although, engine dimensions like bore, stroke, and capacity are not really tangible parts either, yet they cannot be modified.
It's very hard to say. I simply find the homogenized straightline performance a bit unbelievable given the technical variety of the engines since 2009. The Aprilia, Yamaha, and BMW should have visible acceleration and top speed advantage on the front straight at least. Furthermore, Ducati are horsepower limited via air restriction. I find it hard to believe that Ducati would accept a horsepower limit unless the other manufacturers were also capped by some performance control. I find it hard to believe that the backmarking factories would ever allow the Ducati to be performance indexed to the front runners if the bikes weren't theoretically equalized.
I really don't know which is harder to believe. A homologated rev limit that has never leaked out in any media, or racing bikes that all go the same speed and produce at least 50hp less than what a production 1000cc engine is theoretically capable of.
