Time for a change in racing?

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

Now that sounds like a challenge.

Indeed, the power has to be produced by burning something...

[yorkie_chris]

Obviously you're not going to get 80mpg at 180mph

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

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

YES!!!

Or wankel engined 275 running on Avgas? or a 8 pot rotary 350 with supercharger.

Handling would be paramount so we'd see hub centre steering and all sorts of other weird and wonderfuls coming out.

The Ducati Desmo was designed as a V4 for GP to Suit the regulation restrictions. thats why they still use a V twin for Superbike and road racing. The V twin suits the regulations better.

Change the regulations and you shape the type of motorcycles and motorcycling fundamentally.

The route to more speed and higher lap times should be based not solely on power. The WSB bikes are running about 2.5 seconds a lap slower than the GP bikes but cost 10% of the GP bikes to put a team together.

are GP bikes 10 times more technologically advanced?

C

[jambo]

Originally Posted by Berlin

The route to more speed and higher lap times should be based not solely on power. The WSB bikes are running about 2.5 seconds a lap slower than the GP bikes but cost 10% of the GP bikes to put a team together.

are GP bikes 10 times more technologically advanced?

C

Last time I checked the difference wasn't all that great, there's not a lot of road bike left in a WSB front-runner.

I like the idea but I have to say I think it's flawed.

Changing to a BHP cap won't lead to hub-centre steering, or 250 turbos (all of which sounds very 80s). Bike manufacturers spent years trying to find what works, the reason bikes are so similar is that they've found a formula that does.

You can get 100BHP from a 2 stroke 250.

We already have classes down on power, Supersport 600, and superstock classes, any number of club races, the mini-twins, 250 and 125 GPs.

The fact is the public want to pay to see the biggest boys go fastest on the best toys, so that's where the money goes. Now when you go to road racing circuits like the NW200 the playing field is very different, you clearly don't need, or can't use 200BHP in poor conditions on the roads, even if the speed limits and other vehicles are removed.

Current efforts to reduce fuel loads and capacity in MotoGP have simply led to more expensive, complex bikes, as getting the power delivery out of a smaller engine is harder. Back when you had 990cc to play with 250BHP was easy. Now from 800 it's harder, guess what, the companies with the biggest pockets did well. Meanwhile all the independants (and some of the main factories) have gone.

If you want good racing make R&D cheap, don't reward people with the deepest pockets that can afford to develop a 180cc 100bhp bike that's fragile and built of exotic metalergy.

Just my thoughts

Jambo

Retain engine size, make manufactures work on extracting large bhp whilst retaining reliability. It can only be a good thing if you can have an engine giving 180 bhp reliably, then detuning it for another bike should retain that reliability and still be more than enough

I would like to see, in racing, KERS type systems. KTM had one penned for their 125, but Dorna rejected it. Idiots.

Originally Posted by jambo

I like the idea but I have to say I think it's flawed.

Changing to a BHP cap won't lead to hub-centre steering, or 250 turbos (all of which sounds very 80s). Bike manufacturers spent years trying to find what works, the reason bikes are so similar is that they've found a formula that does.

.

We already have classes down on power, Supersport 600, and superstock classes, any number of club races, the mini-twins, 250 and 125 GPs.


Jambo

That formula is entirely based on the regulations in place for the specific race series. The bikes have evolved due to being limited by engine size and other restrictions. Theya re the best at what they do due to having to work within those restrictions.
and racing in the 80's was about as exciting as it got. I clearly remember shouting for Ron Haslam on the hub centre steered Elf bike and the same for the rotary Norton. Racing was fantastic.

I'm also really looking forward to the Electric TT this year for the exact same reasons.

Regarding the classes down on power. Which is more exciting to watch? Elbow barging, place swapping Supersport 600's or the procession that is GP?

They [GP] will all be working to produce a more powerful bike for next years racing and the whole cycle will repeat again and again until we can buy bikes that produce 250bhp rear wheel hosepower and have 7 idiot settings that take away 75% of it so they can actually be used on the road.

The idea I'm talking about is personified in Single series racing. The BMW cup, The KTM series, the Hornet cup, Minitwins. All fast and furious races with lots of exciting and interesting action. And anyone of the boys out there could win. Not just those with the deepest pockets.

However, single series racing also limits the riders to the same *everything*. But opening up the restrictions to use the same engine and then "anything else goes" as far as chassis, brakes, tyres etc it would lead to higher innovation.

Now add in extra points for producing the same power using a smaller engine with forced induction or different engine configuration and suddenly you have a carrot to tempt smaller engine innovation.

We already have access to more power than we can realistically use (which is why the French limit everything to 100 BHP) so we don't need more, but the system is set so that the only way to get a faster bike is by producing more and more... and more.

C

[jambo]

Originally Posted by Berlin

The idea I'm talking about is personified in Single series racing. The BMW cup, The KTM series, the Hornet cup, Minitwins. All fast and furious races with lots of exciting and interesting action. And anyone of the boys out there could win. Not just those with the deepest pockets.

However, single series racing also limits the riders to the same *everything*. But opening up the restrictions to use the same engine and then "anything else goes" as far as chassis, brakes, tyres etc it would lead to higher innovation.

This I agree with, though if you were to say ban, telescopic forks Showa and Ohlins would each design a system and sell to part of the field, Within 2seasons everyone's on nearly the same system as one works better.

Originally Posted by Berlin

Now add in extra points for producing the same power using a smaller engine with forced induction or different engine configuration and suddenly you have a carrot to tempt smaller engine innovation.

This I disagree with. If people are allowed to use any means to produce their 100BHP, and get more points for using smaller engines, then the companies with the deepest pockets win. No independant can afford to run with a tiny forced induction engine machined from scratch. Anyone can afford a de-tuned SS600 engine. So Honda win.

You want fun racing you want a set of rules very much like the ones drafted up for the GP250 replacement class. I believe everyone will be running 600cc engines (I think Honda has won the contract to supply all of them) and you can bolt your own chasis to that.

Should anyone want to, they can buy your engine off you for a small fixed fee after any race, this stops people throwing thousands at an engine in trick parts, or cheating too obviously.

All the engine development concerns go out the window overnight, and people concerntrate on building a good bike. Watch this class

Jambo

Edit:
See from Post #26 onwards in this thread: http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.php?t=114818&page=3
Up to this point we weren't sure on the rules, but the ones proposed there have some interesting points.

It became apparent later that there would be one control engine, made by one manufacturer for the whole field

Originally Posted by jambo

Should anyone want to, they can buy your engine off you for a small fixed fee after any race, this stops people throwing thousands at an engine in trick parts, or cheating too obviously.

Can't the big guns jus buy up the good engines? So all the little teams who are just getting going have to start again?

[fizzwheel]

Originally Posted by FlyinCustard

Can't the big guns jus buy up the good engines? So all the little teams who are just getting going have to start again?

Yes they could, but then the little team could just buy the engine back again. As if I understand the process rght, the purchase price of the engine is limited and is therefore kept at a reasonable cost.