WSBK vs MotoGP

For those who are interested, I have a piece up on the site about the Flamminis efforts to get the CRT rules stopped. Enjoy:

http://motomatters.com/analysis/2011/03/07/the_2012_motogp_revolution_part_2_motogp.html

The best racing to be seen last year was in the various 600cc classes around the world.



I think MGP and WSB could take a big step toward more exciting races by forbidding TC!



It is a slap in the face to real racers like Roberts, Lawson, Rainey, Schwantz, Gardner (King of grit), Doohan and many more that it should be so easy.



Think of WSB when the control tire came about. The racing was close, the action fierce, and the smoke poured from the rear tires so bad you thought they just blew the motor!

BHarvey said:

The best racing to be seen last year was in the various 600cc classes around the world.



I think MGP and WSB could take a big step toward more exciting races by forbidding TC!



It is a slap in the face to real racers like Roberts, Lawson, Rainey, Schwantz, Gardner (King of grit), Doohan and many more that it should be so easy.



Think of WSB when the control tire came about. The racing was close, the action fierce, and the smoke poured from the rear tires so bad you thought they just blew the motor!

Click to expand...

It's more likely that drafting is what keeps the racing close. As long as riders can hold the tow, no one will be able to break away.

A complete mess

and to think what the Motogp championship had at its door (990era)

it comes across in every series Bikes F1 open wheelers Etc always some rules changes/mis interpretation of that rule/s

that fook things up that's it then it's open war .... flinging



In recent times Teams kwak/zuki/Roberts/private etc have been fleeing Motogp like rats from a sinking ship (ffs Factory Yamaha cant get a sponsor)

and its going to continue and if the rites start it aint going to do nothing to bring large grids back to motogp



i'll take WSBK/WSSP/BSB/NW200/ROADRACING Etc over MotoGP racing Any day in recent times

fook MSMA/FIM/DORKNA



Btw Good Stuff Dave

BHarvey said:

The best racing to be seen last year was in the various 600cc classes around the world.



I think MGP and WSB could take a big step toward more exciting races by forbidding TC!



It is a slap in the face to real racers like Roberts, Lawson, Rainey, Schwantz, Gardner (King of grit), Doohan and many more that it should be so easy.



Think of WSB when the control tire came about. The racing was close, the action fierce, and the smoke poured from the rear tires so bad you thought they just blew the motor!

Click to expand...

I can't help but notice you left out a couple of Italians in the 'real racer' category who raced and won with no TC, and who are still competing, and being slapped occasionally.......

Talpa said:

I can't help but notice you left out a couple of Italians in the 'real racer' category who raced and won with no TC, and who are still competing, and being slapped occasionally.......

Click to expand...

Itallians, no TC ....... but Ago has stopped racing



You are seriously delusional Talpa

Limiting the 990's to 15000rpm was prolly all they needed to do. Sadly they fooked it up and fooked allot of racers and teams with it.

Kropo, another outstanding piece of reading. Excellent work.

heyhuub said:

Limiting the 990's to 15000rpm was prolly all they needed to do. Sadly they fooked it up and fooked allot of racers and teams with it.

Click to expand...

Rev limiting the 990s would have led to an era of epic motorcycle competition. Even after the ill-fated switch to the 800s, rev limits still could have made a huge difference when they were proposed at the end of 2007 (Ducati were for rev limits at the time despite having the fastest bike).



They just need to stop the nonsense. The 21L rule and 800s with unlimited engine speeds are causing exponential cost growth. The current solution of 4-cylinder 81mm engines is nothing more than Dorna seizing control of the technical regualtions b/c they have lost faith in the MSMA. They should be doing something that encourages innovation. Imo, they need to establish a set displacement and then rev limit.



An even better solution would be to eliminate all fuel and displacement regulations and use the tires to control the top speeds. At circuits where tires were inadequate (i.e. Mugello or Estoril) they could run air restrictors. Not perfect, but 1,000,000 times more innovative than the current garbage they refer to as MotoGP.

mylexicon said:

An even better solution would be to eliminate all fuel and displacement regulations and use the tires to control the top speeds. At circuits where tires were inadequate (i.e. Mugello or Estoril) they could run air restrictors. Not perfect, but 1,000,000 times more innovative than the current garbage they refer to as MotoGP.

Click to expand...

I generally don't mind your stuff Lex, but this one has me stumped .....



this is a development formula still isn't it?



In part if they are to maintain it as a development series then they need to give them something to develop to, not restrict down till they can ride it, hell why not ride a 44 gallon drum with a stick of dynamite in it ( the secret would be in the explosion ).



I know its a hard balance to do it, but in reality dropping the size is the best option by me ..... even JB thinks they should go 600.

And its an option/formula that has always worked, ie. 800's far outperform WSBK's ........ thats development, and if they went 600 they would develop those to outperform SBK's.

BarryMachine said:

I know its a hard balance to do it, but in reality dropping the size is the best option by me ..... even JB thinks they should go 600.

And its an option/formula that has always worked, ie. 800's far outperform WSBK's ........ thats development, and if they went 600 they would develop those to outperform SBK's.

Click to expand...

Dropping the capacity would do exactly what cutting the capacity to 800cc did: increase cost exponentially.

mylexicon said:

An even better solution would be to eliminate all fuel and displacement regulations and use the tires to control the top speeds. At circuits where tires were inadequate (i.e. Mugello or Estoril) they could run air restrictors. Not perfect, but 1,000,000 times more innovative than the current garbage they refer to as MotoGP.

Click to expand...

Despite all of the lip service paid to "making racing safer" through technical limitations, your idea to use tires as the limiting factor for top speed is extremely dangerous. Like catastrophically dangerous; racers would die.



Tires absolutely must have a healthy margin of safety to operate above the speeds demanded of them on the track. As with any technical limitation, engineers will flirt with that limit to extract maximum performance. Minor engineering mistakes or 1% tire defects will results in gruesome high-speed crashes.

Agile said:

Despite all of the lip service paid to "making racing safer" through technical limitations, your idea to use tires as the limiting factor for top speed is extremely dangerous. Like catastrophically dangerous; racers would die.



Tires absolutely must have a healthy margin of safety to operate above the speeds demanded of them on the track. As with any technical limitation, engineers will flirt with that limit to extract maximum performance. Minor engineering mistakes or 1% tire defects will results in gruesome high-speed crashes.

Click to expand...

The tire is ALWAYS the limiting factor. Riders go to the limit of what the tyre can do in every braking zone, in every corner and in every acceleration zone. Lowering the performance of the tyre will not create a more dangerous situation it just lowers the speed where the limit is reached. The goal of a racer is to get as close to the limit as possible.



Good racing in my opinion happens when the performance of the tyre is less then the potential of the bike as in the 990 era where the bike could over power the tyre at any point. This is when costs are also controlled because more machine performance does not equal more speed so there is no point in increasing machine performance.



In my view 4 factors could control costs and speed whilst improving racing.

1. Lower tyre performance

2. More engine capacity/cube's

3. Less gears (5 instead of 6)

4. As much fuel as you need

Mental Anarchist said:

The tire is ALWAYS the limiting factor. Riders go to the limit of what the tyre can do in every braking zone, in every corner and in every acceleration zone. Lowering the performance of the tyre will not create a more dangerous situation it just lowers the speed where the limit is reached. The goal of a racer is to get as close to the limit as possible.



Good racing in my opinion happens when the performance of the tyre is less then the potential of the bike as in the 990 era where the bike could over power the tyre at any point. This is when costs are also controlled because more machine performance does not equal more speed so there is no point in increasing machine performance.



In my view 4 factors could control costs and speed whilst improving racing.

1. Lower tyre performance

2. More engine capacity/cube's

3. Less gears (5 instead of 6)

4. As much fuel as you need

Click to expand...

I totally agree and look at when the Pirelli came into WSB. The lap times were WAY slower than with the Michelin the previous year but the racing was awesome and the smoke poured!

Kropotkin said:

Dropping the capacity would do exactly what cutting the capacity to 800cc did: increase cost exponentially.

Click to expand...

Watch it brother... you don't want to tangle with Barry. He's an engineer.

Agile said:

Despite all of the lip service paid to "making racing safer" through technical limitations, your idea to use tires as the limiting factor for top speed is extremely dangerous. Like catastrophically dangerous; racers would die.



Tires absolutely must have a healthy margin of safety to operate above the speeds demanded of them on the track. As with any technical limitation, engineers will flirt with that limit to extract maximum performance. Minor engineering mistakes or 1% tire defects will results in gruesome high-speed crashes.

Click to expand...

Have you raced? Why does a tyre without a "margin of safety" have any effect on a motogp racer? Joe Bloggs may suffer but Stoner, Lorenzo, Rossi et al? Give me a break. Are you a HSE womble? Check out some of the old races before tyres lasted the whole race. You don' even have to go back too far - try 2000 for a start. Did you even watch racing before todays AE dominated "spectacle"? /end rant!

BarryMachine said:

this is a development formula still isn't it?

Click to expand...

You are right about the formula concept. Supposing MotoGP/500cc were built around the formula concept (though they've never been branded as "formula") abandonment of engine displacement rules would probably upset the continuity of the sport from an engineering standpoint. However, you'll notice that when they rebooted 500cc, they specifically decided not to give it a displacement designation. The same is true for Moto2 and Moto3. I'm sure they simply wanted the flexibility to change displacement if necessary, but moving away from engine displacement branding may also give them the flexibility to abandon displacement altogether.



I'm not terribly obsessed with no displacement or capacity, but I think it would do wonders for the sport by allowing teams to create real innovations rather than spending undisclosed millions on fuel injectors and gear boxes that skirt the rules. Like Livio Suppo said, it would be nice if they used some NASCAR sensibilities as well. I'm not entirely sure what Livio meant when he referenced NASCAR, but I'd like to think that he meant air restricted racing on tracks where top speeds were unsafe. They only air restricted at a couple of circuits in NASCAR, I'd reckon they'd only need restrictors at a few MotoGP tracks as well. Best of both worlds, imo. Track owners can build what they want without worrying about top speed. Motorcycle manufacturers can build whatever they want.

You guys are completely missing the point. There is a difference between "make tires less grippy" (how tires were historically / backtrack progress) and "use tires to limit top speed (by presumably using tires that can't dissipate the heat)" The way they fail is completely different, and the "margin of safety" is not the same as "limit of grip" that racers are working around it is literally a margin of safety to prevent major failure. It's not safe and no racing body would ever allow it.



Maybe lexicon just explained his idea wrong, but the way he described it (teams running restrictor plates at fast circuits to avoid hitting speed limits imposed by the tires) is a terrible idea and I stand by my criticism of it.

Kropotkin said:

Dropping the capacity would do exactly what cutting the capacity to 800cc did: increase cost exponentially.

Click to expand...

Yes but, is it not a trade off between cutting costs, and loosing the original intent of the series ie. development, and looking like another SBK series?



Cos thats what I see happening.

BarryMachine said:

Yes but, is it not a trade off between cutting costs, and loosing the original intent of the series ie. development, and looking like another SBK series?



Cos thats what I see happening.

Click to expand...

MotoGP is entertainment. The MSMA will be history, as soon as Ezpeleta has managed to chase the manufacturers away, and they can return to the spirit of the series, as it started back in 1949: Let's see who can go fastest on a bike.