From: Julian Bond on 15 Sep 2009 12:29 And just about then Yamaha Italia announce they are closing their WSS team because there's no money left. And just as they're on the verge of winning their first championship in 8 years. -- Julian Bond E&MSN: julian_bond at voidstar.com M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173 Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/ T: +44 (0)192 0412 433 Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/ skype:julian.bond?chat More Y2K Action Urged
From: Mark N on 15 Sep 2009 12:58 On Sep 15, 9:24 am, Julian Bond wrote: > Mark N > >> [1] I wonder about this thing about valves. All the 800s now use > >>desmo or pneumatic valves. So there is scope there for a different > >>capacity limit in Moto1 for steel valve springs. It's revs that cause > >>engine rebuilds and lifetime problems. And steel valves + a larger > >>capacity limit revs. Somewhere around 900-1000cc there's a capacity > >>where the trade off between cc and revs means lap times are about the > >>same as the 800s with the same fuel limit. It might be feasible to > >>fill up the back of the MotoGP grid with prototype chassis and steel > >>valve engines of ~1000cc with no restrictions on where the original > >>engine came from. And there's enough knowledge about very highly > >>tuned production based engines from WSB. And it would provide a route > >>for Aprilia and BMW to get into MotoGP. I'd really like to see an > >>Aprilia RSV4-RRSP in MotoGP. > >> If only we could just get past that Dorna-FIM-WSB agreement. > >I see GP2 as an evolving concept, and I would be very surprised if in > >2015 they're still running a spec motor. And what happens there will > >have an impact on MotoGP eventually, I think the current unlimited > >prototype approach doesn't have long-term legs, especially if GP > >continues down their current rider path, electronic continue to take > >the fun out of it, and if an eventual Rossi departure has a real impact > >on interest. Simply put, Super250s ridden by inbred jockeys just isn't > >the long-term answer. In the end motors will likely become more stock > >or stock-like, more controlled and probably bigger again. How and when > >are the only questions, and watch GP2 for the clues... > > In case you hadn't noticed this is happening right now with a suggestion > for stock based motors in MotoGP for next year running around the > paddock right now. And that whole para was about MotoGP not Moto2. Then > we have the same old, same old, Mark N obsession with "Super250s ridden > by inbred jockeys". Jeez, why do I bother. There has been talk about production engines, but that seems to have been only to get the factories to agree to build and lease motors instead of whole motorcycles at a very high cost, and the notion of real production motors seem mostly dead for now. The other aspect of all this I forgot to mention earlier is the motor restrictions put in now that will, as drafted, limit the factories to six engines next year, and apparently are fully supported by the factories. What that means is the most we could possibly expect is for them to run three engines in the first half of the year and then do a refresh with three updated engines for the second half, but it might also mean essentially static technology for the whole year. That, along with the extended life required, makes these motors more like production motors, they're just race production motors and not street production motors. In that sense it's an evolving solution sort of like the spec motor for GP2, moving away from true prototype and toward something more production-like, and cheaper for the teams in the longer run. But not true street production, which keeps them out of hot water with IMS/ WSB. This is all part of what I think is a positive overall trend for MotoGP, tied to both the premier class and GP2, and what gives me hope for their model of running the series for the future. As for your snideness, here is a quote from Ducati's Suppo in Indy I just read this morning, in the context of marketing the series and sponsorship: "Suppo pointed out that 'the number of Italian and Spanish riders on the grid is crazy. Is rediculous. We have more than half of the grid with Spanish and Italian riders.' Suppo would rather see a more international cast. 'That's why I think and I insist on this. Moto2, that at the beginning everbody complain, at the end of the day was a smart idea, because we need the slow class to be cheap and to be introduced again in the national xchampionships, otherwise we will lose everything. We need to have an English guy, French guy. Otherwise this will remain Italian and Spanish.'" So there's a guy in the middle of the series who sees that reality, the same way I do. You, on the other hand (and moreso Pablo, I would say), seem to be such a GP loyalist, a true believer, that this is all just fine, and you refuse to be critical or even accept some of what has been happening to the rider pool in MotoGP and what negative impact that might have on the series' future. Ditto the bikes. Hell, if it was up to guys like you, not only would they not be dumping 250s, they'd also still be running 500s...
From: Mark N on 15 Sep 2009 13:44 Julian Bond wrote: > You seem to want to dumb it down but this is a support class that is > part of the pinnacle of the sport show not a support class in AMA. Now > go back and look at WSS this year. Ten Kate are nowhere. The fastest > Honda is a private team. A Yamaha is leading the way. A Kawasaki is > frequently in the leading bunch. So WSS tuning levels are too expensive > for Moto2? I don't think so. > > And it should be apparent by now that I want to go the other way. > Because I want to find out just how fast a production engine based 600 > can be made to go with a prototype chassis and slicks. And the cost > limitation at this level is rebuild intervals not raw parts so the > danger is that they push revs to the point where 500km rebuild intervals > are commonplace. I don't really have a preference, I'd like to see faster more than slower on a presonal level, but that's it. But to me what should drive the decision would be cost considerations, both at the GP level and then the national championship level. If it's so high and the mods so great that GP ends up with two segments, the fast full factory bikes filling all the podiums and then slower privateer bikes filling out a too-small field of 20 bikes or so, and if the cost means no interest in the class at the national championship level, then it's a loser. But if it's too low it's probably not as interesting as it could be, the bikes have to lap faster than WSS machines, and the best production motor probably does most of the winning. So it's really a matter of finding the sweet spot. Which could be different between GP and the national level, of course, if they're running production-based motors. > >The bigger question is, will a national championship run a class which > >both has little appeal to the factories (not their whole bikes) and can > >only include the Japanese motors? If the chassis are cheap enough it > >can develop as a support class, but may have the same problem as > >middleweight FX had here - almost all the factory support remained in > >more established SSport, and it was cheaper for privateers as well. > > That's an AMA perspective not a world perspective. Whether it's better > or worse, it's different. In the rest of the world, senior club racing > and national championships all run to WSS rules with sometimes a 600 > superstock class in parallel. And there is no factory support at all, at > all, in any of it. Even in WSS there's precious little factory > involvement. It's just irrelevant. That may be the case in BSB, but I don't buy your usual "only in America is it different" position. My guess is if you looked at all the world championships worldwide, you wouldn't find every 600 class everywhere using the WSB rulebook. And the claim about factory involvement seems even more dubious, for instance I would be shocked if in Japan they run WSS rules and there is no factory involvement at all. The old AMA is probably at the end of the bell curve, the OEMs had more to do with the winning 600s than in most places and the privateers probably have had less resources upon which to build more heavily-modified motors. But I still think there is an issue regarding running bikes with aftermarket chassis and heavily-modified motors in a national championship, related to the financial and developmental support structure, more specifically the lack of that from the OEMs. Less modified motors almost certainly means a wider spread of the class. > If a national organiser wants to provide a clear route from Club to > National to Moto2 so that new national riders can get into the GP > paddock, then sure, they'll run a national Moto2 championship. Expect to > see a Spanish and Italian national Moto2 championship next year. Which > will mean yet more Spanish and Italian riders jumping straight into > Moto2 the year after. Right now the first Moto2 bikes are being raced in > Spain to shake all the bugs out. Of course their using WSS engines since > the fly in the ointment is exactly when Honda turn up with the 50 or so > that will be needed. Will it Jan or Feb next year? It is the danger, of course, although I think Moto2 has to be better than 250 in terms of spreading involvement beyond Spain and Italy, and also not factoring rider size nearly as much. I really don't think you need a GP2 class in national championships to develop riders for that class in GP, although it helps, really it opens up the class to riders coming off SS or SB machines at the national level or in WSB. That simply doesn't happen with 250 today, or in a long time. The key to opening up the series is breaking the 125 stranglehold - in MotoGP today 12 of the 17 riders came from 125, probably the highest percentage in premier class history, and that number keeps increasing. Moto2 just has to be a step in the opposite direction; how far is the real question.
From: pablo on 15 Sep 2009 13:55 On Sep 14, 11:18 pm, Mark N <menusbaumNYETS...(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > pablo wrote: > > Beep?! Same chassis and tires? You are out... > > If you recall, when the first Yamaha and Suzuki 800s were tested in the > fall of 2006 they were running them in the latest 990 chassis, and the > tire manufacturers hadn't yet built any tires specifically for the 800s. > Honda obviously had an all-new bike, and I don't recall what Ducati and > Kawasaki ran - seem to recall Kawi's 800 motor wasn't ready for testing > right after Valencia, but I may be wrong about that. But the word from > the regulars right away was that the new bikes were faster in the > corners, and they would have to be ridden more like 250s because of that > advantage and the lack of jump off the corners, plus the shorter braking > zone because of the lower top speeds and higher cornering speeds. And > the lap times had hardly slowed at all. So it was immediately a > different world and just based on the basic nature of the motors, > nothing else had appreciably changed. That was then, this is now. There has been progress in both tire and chassis technology to better cope with the higher *overal* speed. From a safety perspective, it was necessary to curb top speed, at least for a little while (they are faster now, of course). Plus I think racing benefits far more from faster corner speed than top speed on the straights. It also hapens to be where riding skills matter the most, braking and cornering. At least they haven't come up with computer assisted ABS... What I am saying simply is that we are witnessing the result of a highly evolved sport, which means that at the very top every single little detail matters. And yes, rider size has ALWAYS been a factor in motorcycle racing, only with the current evolvement of the sport it does so even more - that's one of the side effects of it. I *do* agree that a less highly evolved version of the sport is more entertaining to watch. It may not be the absolutely fastest way around a track, but then again, it is more fun to watch guys sliding and fighting less capable machinery. So I don't have the answers, and it is obvious MotoGP and WSB haven't got them either yet. Because we people watching are hard to lease: give us guys fighting very hard on very equal machines (all entry classes tend to be like that) and we'll still be looking at our watches waiting for the less entertaining top class with the big names and big budgets to truly thrill us because that's where the stars race... we're a contradiction in our expectations.... we want prototypes and the most sublime engineering and the highest possile pace, and yet we want the racing to be very close and entertaining. ....pablo
From: pablo on 15 Sep 2009 15:06
as to the whole nationality thing, it'd be nice indeed to see more diverisity indeed, but then again, not at the cst of having the best riding in the series. it's like saying one would like fewer ethiopians and kenyans dominating the long run events. some stuff is more popular and breeds more competitors in some places. so sure, mtorcycle racing is more popular in spain and italy than anywhere else, and thus that'sthe majority of the paying public is, and thus it'w where most kids pick it up and are matched very competitively against each other early on... but that discussion leads nowhere. let's just say it would be indeed nice if motogp was (a) more outright competitive (b) truly more international but the formula to get there... how? no one seems to have the answers. and they aren't easy, so in the end it's the sponsors' and paying public's money that speaks. |