WSuperbike faster than PrototypeGP

Andy Roo said:

Lex, the 750/1000 formula died with a little gem from Honda called the CBR900RR - WSBK is dictated by the market - you of all people must respect that!

Click to expand...

The CBR900RR b/c riders couldn't get their hands on RC30s and RC45s due to high prices and low production quantities. The original CBR900RR was about 125hp, which is reasonable for expert riders who want power on the street or at a track day. The latest 1000cc SBK engines produce nearly 200hp, an increase of at least 50% over the old 750s (depending on the bike in question). No public roadway (spare the Autobahn) or production tire can handle that kind of power, and most tracks are not equipped to handle bikes with that much power.



I do not wish to stop the production of 200hp SBKs, but I think the Japanese would do well to use SBK to promote a different kind of product--something similar to the bikes that built the SBK industry.

mylexicon said:

Pirelli is already planning to stop supplying the control tire. If SBK uses Pirelli tires comparable to the Bridgestone GP tire, an SBK chassis basically needs to be modified into a MotoGP chassis. It's a waste of money, and it was a somewhat absurd situation conjured up by a couple of Italians who didn't want to play second fiddle to MotoGP.



As long as Dorna doesn't do something controversial with the tires (e.g. reinstate the original 1000cc treaded tire rules), WSBK will be fine.

Click to expand...

??

mylexicon said:

The CBR900RR b/c riders couldn't get their hands on RC30s and RC45s due to high prices and low production quantities. The original CBR900RR was about 125hp, which is reasonable for expert riders who want power on the street or at a track day. The latest 1000cc SBK engines produce nearly 200hp, an increase of at least 50% over the old 750s (depending on the bike in question). No public roadway (spare the Autobahn) or production tire can handle that kind of power, and most tracks are not equipped to handle bikes with that much power.



I do not wish to stop the production of 200hp SBKs, but I think the Japanese would do well to use SBK to promote a different kind of product--something similar to the bikes that built the SBK industry.

Click to expand...

Lex,

I think you may have missed his point somewhat.

Perhaps have another go.

Dr No said:

??

Click to expand...

http://www.superbikeplanet.com/010930fimregs.htm

Glad that daft proposal never saw fruition.

Dr No said:

Lex,

I think you may have missed his point somewhat.

Perhaps have another go.

Click to expand...

I understand his point. My point is that the Japanese were trying to deliver a relatively practical machine to expert riders, but they inadvertently opened a Pandora's box of performance. They crafted 1000cc SBK rules to create a relatively sensible marketplace for affordable, reliable performance. No more homologation specials. Kit parts and air restrictors for everyone. Lower revs. It was a bit naive, like the honorable 276hp limitation on Japanese sportscars.



I'm glad the original 1000cc SBK rules never saw the light of day, but the effect of combining Western excess (specifically Italian excess) with 1000cc SBKs has not been particularly good for the market or the racing industry. This kind of superfluous irrelevance is mostly useful to societal elites with more money than riding passion. Predictably, Ducati, BMW, and Aprilia are gaining market share and profitability by increasing the sophistication of their machines and increasing the price tags.



I admire the principle of catering to market demands, but the current SBK market more closely resembles the GP brand than the SBK brand. The technological sophistication of modern SBKs cannot return to the days of 750cc carburetors, but the usability of the machine can return to the 750cc era, imo.



This would also stop SBKs from turning better lap times than the GP Prototypes, but the reasons would be business and street-rider oriented, not an underhanded business tactic as Jumkie alleges.

mylexicon said:

I understand his point. My point ...

Click to expand...

So you ignored his point?

Dr No said:

So you ignored his point?

Click to expand...

What was his point?

mylexicon said:

What was his point?

Click to expand...

Nice try...hint, there was something about markets.

Dr No said:

So you ignored his point?

Click to expand...

I think lex's point is valid.



The problem is that the FIM should have been in charge of the tech regs for both wsbk and motogp. They haven't been, having sold out to the highest bidder long ago. Venture capitalists being in charge of the tech regs for bike racing is an interesting model, perhaps superior to the likes of the msma being so, but not superior to much else imo.



Not to say that scrapping motogp entirely and going with wsbk as the premier class may have been the logical way to go if the superbikes are close in performance and much cheaper, leaving aside tradition, that there seems to have been chicanery in favour of some marques in wsbk, etc.

Never said it wasn't, starry eyes.

But in making that point he skated over the counterpoint that undermined the basis for his proposals. Those stars in your eyes may have resulted in you missing it. But it's standard operating procedure for Lex.

Dr No said:

Never said it wasn't, starry eyes.

But in making that point he skated over the counterpoint that undermined the basis for his proposals. Those stars in your eyes may have resulted in you missing it. But it's standard operating procedure for Lex.

Click to expand...

Roo said that buyers asked for higher displacement. True statement, but a market is comprised of buyers and sellers. I addressed the motivation of the sellers.



If the market were lucratively profitable, the sellers would be motivated, but the market isn't profitable for anyone other than the premium brands, who eek out modest profits on their halo SBKs. The Japanese race/build SBKs b/c they want an engineering challenge, and they pilfer profits from cruisers, scooters, and dirt bikes to continue funding the SBK engineering and racing.



How do you motivate a seller? You can offer to pay more money, which doesn't exist in this marketplace. You can offer to purchase a more sensible product, which differentiates MotoGP and SBK on displacement grounds. If you want to see Japanese sensibility in the sportbike segment, look at the 600s. Same bore. Same stroke. Same number of cylinders. Same number of valves. Roughly the same stock horsepower. Minor updates with each passing year to avoid an unsustainable development war in a low-margin, low volume market segment.

Dr No said:

Never said it wasn't, starry eyes.

But in making that point he skated over the counterpoint that undermined the basis for his proposals. Those stars in your eyes may have resulted in you missing it. But it's standard operating procedure for Lex.

Click to expand...

Starry eyed or not, I have found lex's takes on many things interesting over his years as one of the most long term contributors to this forum, which doesn't mean I always agree with him; my politics are very different to his for one.



You are obviously capable of intereresting and relevant posts also, but seldom imo with posts relating to what appears to be your main stock in trade at the moment, which seems to be nitpicking about minor details in lex's posts.

Michael

Read this in a mirror:



Nuf fo tib a tsuj lla s' ti

Dr No said:

Michael

Read this in a mirror:



Nuf fo tib a tsuj lla s' ti

Click to expand...

That doesn't say anything in a mirror b/c some of the letters are backwards. What's a 'dit'?

mylexicon said:

That doesn't say anything in a mirror b/c some of the letters are backwards. What's a 'dit'?

Click to expand...

I'm sure you'll work it out. If not, try Google.

mylexicon said:

... I hope they reduce SBK capacity to 800cc in the near future. The 1000cc bikes can become exotic GP replicas.

Click to expand...

Which would leave what as a source of motive power? The VFR? The F800? The HyperMotard?

Jumkie said:

Haha. Cue up the apologists. Hahaha, oh, the turns are too small for GP bikes bla bla bla. Making a case for why Wsbk outperforms a GP prototype and finding some scapegoat.

Click to expand...

Am I first in the queue?



Looking at your chart, a million-dollar-plus Ducati WSBK, with 20 years of race development behind it, was left behind by a couple of Kawasaki CRT bikes with a total of a years development.



And we know that Hayden is slow as a slow thing on a slow day, so his failure to perform is a given...



So how is it that a bargain-basement racer like the FTR kicked Checa's ...?

Andy Roo said:

I'm with green eggs and ham on this one - no apologists, a GP bike is allowed to be much lighter and without force fed off the shelf electronics

Click to expand...

157kg vs 165kg. Much lighter? Rider alone would account for a greater variance than that.



And electronics on WSBK are as advanced as the current crop of CRT bikes. Not stock, not even close.

Dr No said:

T'would be interesting to find a comparison of WSBK times v MotoGP times at tracks they share.

Anyone know of one?

Click to expand...

There isn't a single track that SBKs are quicker than GP bikes in a race. Where they race the same track, top speed and lap records are all held by GP bikes. Those figures can deceive, though, as sometimes the tracks are different lengths for the different classes.



Easy to prove - Lorenzo vs Biaggi - winner takes all



(my money's on Jorge!)