Time for a change in racing?

Watching the Superbikes on the red button at the NW200 yesterday got me thinking. They were too powerful to race in the given conditions.

Does this mean that they've passed the limit? why do bikes need to get faster and faster (meaning more and more potential danger is the bloke on it stacks it)?

Isn't it about time we limited the power of the bikes to say 100bhp (nice round figure) and then awarded more points the smaller the engine that wins. So anyone who wins on a 500 that's producing 100bhp gets more points than someone who wins on an 800 with 100BHP and they get more than someone that runs a 1000 with 100 bhp.

No one needs 180bhp on the road. No one actually needs 180bhp on the track. Why is the only consideration when limiting a class engine size/power?

In 10 years time we'll have bikes that have 300bhp and no wet races. Full traction control and accelleration control. the rider will only be there to push the buttons.

Discuss

C

I think the 100bhp is a little too low, but why they went and let IL4's have 1000cc (from 750cc) is beyond me. They should have just brought the twin down to 900cc imo...

Oh well.

[mister c]

It's the usual "mines bigger & faster than yours" routine. Racing is about winning & if you have more power & the handling & rider are better then you win races.
Winning races sells bikes, just look at Ducati. They nearly went under until they started to win races, now everybody wants one.
Who is it that is always kicking up a stink in racing about CCs & power? Ducati, because they know that coming 1st is the formula to sell bikes

I think the 400 class needs reviving. Get some 140kg 20,000rpm screamer with 90-100 hp

[the_lone_wolf]

better yet, why not award points on how little fuel the bikes consume? or who can priduce an engine with the lowest CO2 emmissions on an arbitrary goverment mandated synthetic test cycle, or even which bikes kill the fewest flys during a lap?

[yorkie_chris]

Bah!
Back to 500 2 strokes. Traction control is for poofters.

Originally Posted by the_lone_wolf

better yet, why not award points on how little fuel the bikes consume? or who can priduce an engine with the lowest CO2 emmissions on an arbitrary goverment mandated synthetic test cycle, or even which bikes kill the fewest flys during a lap?

yc:

The thing with giving someone a 400cc/100Bhp and racing them against someone with a 1000cc/100bhp, is that it wouldn't really be fair. The 400 would fly (and probably win) because it would be much lighter than the thou, the power to weight ratio would be much better.

There are fair racing classes where drivers and teams use the same machine (minitwins?), but racing like MotoGP and WSB, BSB etc must be about selling bikes and making money.

Its all about what you want to race, whether you want to win by power or ability and how much money you have.

Look at F1 at the moment. Where is Hamilton now, and where did Button come from..?

Exactly my point Ben! No one would use a 1000 cc engine. and if the points were further stacked towards even smaller engines then they would be produced.

The thinking above is still inside the box. If the manufacurers had to work to a bhp limit then we'd get all sorts of great new bikes showing up.

How about a 250cc Turbo revving to 35,000 rpm and having 4 balancer shafts. Or a Supercharged 350 with variable valve timing and an auto gearbox.

Its the same in many sports where any variables may be restricted or measured it seems we are stuck in the rut of only using one variable. Like bikes are measured in cc's, fisha re measured in pounds in competitions. They could be measured by length, girth, length of fight or many other things but its set in stone that its the weight in pounds that is the parameter that is "good"

We were at the racing at East Fortune and all classes had fantastic racing, expecially the open classes. The guy on bike 21 (minitwin) was blitzing all sorts of others. The tiny guy on the 125 that beat at least 100 grands worth of Ducatis must have been well pleased (and the ducati riders thoroughly ashamed!). The guy on the fastest bike there (the fully race sorted 09 R1) could not lose the guy on the R6 behind him and they both posted fastest times that were exactly the same.

So instead of having the cc as the limiting factor bring in a bhp limit where chassis and RIDER ABILITY make the racing. Add points for gaining that BHP from a smaller engine and in 10 years we'll all be riding turbocharged 250's that will top 180 mph. And will probably get 80 to the gallon too!

But no traction control or other gubbins that dumb down rider ability.
We have bikes with idiot buttons on them now because the bikes are producing more power than people can cope with. Whats the point?

No one needs 180bhp on the road so it would lead to better, more efficient and technologically interesting road bikes too.

C

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by Berlin

in 10 years we'll all be riding turbocharged 250's that will top 180 mph. And will probably get 80 to the gallon too!

Now that sounds like a challenge.