| Author | Message | ||
     Vagelis46 |
''I also agree, why in the heck go 1200cc with a weight penalty when you could stay at the production 1098cc'' When Ducati was racing its race&championship winning 888 (many years ago) they had to add some metal plates at the bottom of the bike to increase its weight. So they are familiar with the technique of increasing the weight but at the same time lowering the centre of gravity. I guess the question is : What suits Ducati best? Extra cc + extra weight at the bottom to lower the centre of gravity OR just race a 999 or 1098 derived bike ?? It seems that it is up to Ducati to choose what suits them best, and then the rules will change to their favour. I am afraid that Ducati is no longer the small moto Company to race against the rich Jap giants. I do not like that. Maybe in a couple of years they will ask for their V-2 to be turbo-charged...... | ||
| Trojan |
I have to agree with Vagelis46, and personally the WSB series has lost a lot of credibility as far as I am concerned. Race series rules should be made by the organisers, not dictated by the manufacturers. Fair enough, some consultation is a good thing, but WSB has once again become too nepotistic for me  Trouble is, money and power talks. The 800cc MotoGP rule was actually 'suggested' and pushed through by Honda and not the organisers, although Big H probably wish they hadn't now that they are getting their corporate arses slapped again  What do you think the reaction would have been if it were Buell asking for a 1200cc limit in WSB? | ||
| José_quiñones |
For MotoGP, yes, for production based racing, heck no. The race organizers don't spend YEARS/MILLIONS developing, building and more importantly, MARKETING and selling bikes. WorldSuperbike/AMA is all about marketing, The majority of manufacturers want the rules to showcase the bikes they produce and want to sell, not some special unobtanium model far removed from the one you want to sell in the showroom. Think RC30/45, Yamaha R7 and of course the HD VR100 & Buell XBRR.
The same as it was when they got the RR into AMA FormulaExtreme. The ripples of that wave are still being felt inside the AMA. From SpeedTV.com
Let's see, compared to a stock XB12R, an XBRR features alternative throttle bodies, special cranks, crankcases, primary gears and other components too! If it's ok for Buell build a not street legal/race only larger displacement version of their "street" bike, why not Ducati, or BMW, or KTM? If it is not ok for Ducati, then it is not ok for Buell or anyone else. You have to be consistent. (Message edited by josé_quiñones on April 19, 2007) | ||
| Vagelis46 |
So is it OK for Kawa to race its 636cc ZX-6 and kick everyone's ass in WSS? This is a street produced bike, right? So they can race it and simply EASILY win. Then Honda will build a 680cc......Then Yamaha will launch a 710cc...... It never ends. The rules are made for the Manufacturers to follow. If they cannot race with the rules, well it is better to withdraw, OR build a bike that follow the rules. For me it is time Ducati launches the 1098R with a V-4 1000cc, engine. The 999R's engine is VERY different than the 999 and 999S. So what is the real problem with a V-4 1098R? I do not buy this "heritage" staff and keeping the V-2 tradition. Maybe their next step for tradition whould be camshafts driven by bevell gears and air-cooled engines.... like the 900SS of the 70s | ||
| José_quiñones |
You forgot the Triumph Daytona 675. The race organizers don't know what manufacturers are working on, they do get hints and stuff ahead of the public, but this is well into the development cycle of a particular model. Production based race rules have to follow the market, the race rules can not dictate what the market produces or what is selling at the moment. Dennis Noyes has a great summary of the situation over on Speed TV.com Part 1: http://sc1.att.mindcomet.net/articles/moto/worldsuperbike/36668/ Part 2: http://www.speedtv.com/articles/worldsuperbike/moto/36767/ Part 3: http://www.speedtv.com/articles/worldsuperbike/moto/36786/ (Message edited by josé_quiñones on April 19, 2007) | ||
| Blake |
Jose, do you really imagine the XBRR is unobtanium? For $30K brand new? If you'd like an XBRR engine, I can direct you to the folks who can sell you one. There are plenty of XBRRs racing the world over. They are not unobtanium at all. If you are a Buell racer and you want some XBRR parts, you can obtain them. Ripples in the AMA? Whatever. Some folks thrive on drama. Others want to go racing. | ||
| José_quiñones |
It's unobtanium if you want to ride it on the street, i.e. it is not street legal. (Message edited by josé_quiñones on April 19, 2007) | ||
| Trojan |
The definition of the term 'modified' needs to cast in stone when it comes to production based race series. It should be possible for me to buy the parts to modify my showroom street bike into a WSB bike. If modification means something that can only be done by the factory, as in the case of the XBRR, then it isn't modified but specially built, period. Production based bike racing needs to be seen to be closely linked to the bikes it is based on, and allowing the 1200 Ducati is another step away from this basis. If Ducati want to race a 1200 twin then they should build it as a 'normal' street bike first, and not some low volume mega price limited edition special just to qualify. The same goes for Buell and the XBRR in my view. | ||
| José_quiñones |
I agree | ||
| Rocketman |
After what's been said this week in the motorcycling press I can't understand how some can think the rules have been changed to favour Ducati's performance. The rules are going to be changed to allow Ducati to race with a larger displacement. If that gives Ducati an advantage running with air restrictors and weights, then every third race the advantage will be addressed accordingly so as Ducati don't have an advantage. WSB to me is the pinnacle of production based racing machines. If the series is pegged to reflect much closer association between race bike and road bike equivalent, that for me is a bum deal. I want to see how much performance the best tuners and teams in the world can squeeze out of production based bikes, no matter how far from production the difference is. If production based race bikes can get near or past Moto GP, then great. That just tells me Moto GP needs to up its game and go back to physically larger bikes and larger capacities. Now that Moto GP is four stroke, I wonder if some see WSB as having some of its shine took off. WSB is the pinnacle of production based racing, no matter how far modification goes. If I were not so interested in modified production based bikes, perhaps in an effort to watch bikes race close to what anyone can really buy, then I'd watch Supersport and be done with it. I don't need to though, as we have both Supersport to satisfy such a need, and WSB to satisfy a different need. We have a choice, so why change it so's we don't? Rocket | ||
| Trojan |
The whole premise of Superbike racing was to race 'production based' machines in a series where the spectator (remember them?) could have some affinity with the bikes on track and relate them to the bike in his garage. In the early years it was possible to win on a bike bought from a showroom and modified by the rider/team, as in the case of Fred Merkel's Honda and even Carl Fogarty's 888 Ducati. These may have been expensive homologation specials, but you or I could still walk into a dealership and buy one if we had the cash. These days the bikes bear almost no resemblance to the bikes that we buy other than badging, and to me that is damaging the integrity of the Superbike formula. In fact they have changed so much that the Superstock class has had to be introduced to fill the gap. It would now be impossible for a normal punter to order a Ducati/Honda/Suzuki from a local dealer (or even national distributor) that is even close to the bikes that race at the front of the field in WSB/BSB. The electronics packages alone would probably cost more than a couple of new 999 Ducatis (if you can find a new 999 to buy that is). Ducati, like every other manufacturer, could build a bike to fit into the current rules. It just so happens that the Ducati V-twin isn't competitive enough in it's current form without mega expensive tuning and electronics, and Ducati don't like it. If Ducati don't like it then they should build a bike that is competitive within the framework of the current rules rather than posture, threaten and throw their weight around. In fact Ducati already have a suitable machine in the new Desmosedicci, but they don't want to race that as it would be 'too expensive' for them to race. What they now want is to race a bike that is not even the same capacity as the production 1098, but has an extra 100cc on top! Of course they say that this is in the interest of costs and that the bike won't be tuned to anywhere near the level of the 999....rubbish. They will tune it to within an inch of it's life if that is what it takes to win, and will use every trick and loophole in the rules that they can find. Any factory team who says that they won't do so is telling huge fat porkies. Isn't it ironic that, throughout the years that Ducati dominated Superbike racing against the 750 four cylinder opposition, they never once said 'We don't think that this is fair, let's up the four cylinder capacity to 1000cc so that they can be more competitve at less cost to them'. We already have MotoGP for prototype bikes, and if you want to see non production based racing then we have 250GP, 125GP, Supermono and numerous other classes to choose from. Superbikes should stay with the formula that has been such a success over the years and not bend to pressure from the Prima Donna Ducati bosses. Superbike racing is enjoying it's highest popularity for years at the moment, and that is due to the presence of the big Japanese factories once more, and to Pirelli control tyre formula that ensures close racing between them. Every time that that WSB has 'massaged' or relaxed the rules in the past it has been less than a resounding success. Weight or intake restrictions open up a huge can of worms in technical scrutineering and a corresponding increase in accusations of cheating and post race protests, sometimes leading to results changes days after the actual race. Allowing 'non production' bikes to compete has ended with egg on faces too, with both the Petronas and Benelli projects failing to live up to the initial hype even after the organisers bent the rules to allow them to compete. Ducati also need to realise that they are no longer the big cheese in WSB, no longer supplying most of the grid with bikes like they used to. If Ducati pulled out of WSB it would mean the loss of 3 bikes, and the series would recover pretty quickly. If Suzuki, Honda or Yamaha pulled out the series and the Superbike concept would suffer much more. | ||
| Rocketman |
Matt, I understand how you see it that way but you appear to lay these proposed changes at Ducati's door whilst expressing your personal desires to see closer to stock production based racing, which comes across to me as a somewhat biased opinion. Before Moto GP switched to 990cc in 2002 concerns had been raised in WSB that the series might slump, and the works teams withdraw. To combat Moto GP a set of rules were proposed in September 2001 to introduce 1000cc limits for all bikes starting 2004. This rule was brought forward a year and introduced into WSB at the start of the 2003 season. 1000cc wasn't introduced to get the fours competitive against the Ducati's. It was done to keep WSB where it is now today. The level to which WSB racing has risen above what one can buy in the showroom, we should summarise by understanding Paolo Flammini's words from 2001, to quote, "After 15 years of growth in World Superbike, what started out life as a streetbike-based support class has developed into a world-class spectacle. That four stroke formula has become a potent pretender to the more purebred two-stroke Grand Prix circus". For me WSB racing isn't about what I can afford to buy in the showroom because it would cost a small fortune anyway as an homologation special, so it matters not the bikes raced today are unobtainium examples regardless. WSB isn't and shouldn't become a series orientated towards the privateer teams. It should be the absolute pinnacle of production based racing as it stands to showcase the best of the best. Anything less in an effort to get closer to what actually is available on the showroom floor should and already is well represented in racing if what you say is correct about World Superstock. Then that is the place where privateer teams and racers should be racing. Perhaps in an effort to move up to WSB when and if they can make the grade. For me, the situation with Superstock is that it is the series that seems to be lacking in factory support. Manufacturers supporting Superstock racing should not see it as an excuse to downgrade or save money by wanting WSB to downgrade to Superstock levels. They should run in both series, or just one, and leave the one they don't race in alone. There is room for both to coexist. Rocket | ||
| Trojan |
The one thing that I forgeot to mention was costs. Superbike costs are now the preserve of major manufacturer/distributor teams, with fewer and fewer 'privateer' teams taking part. WSB may have increased in popularity but grids are smaller and actual spectator attendance is down on what it used to be (not helped by staging races in the middle of the desert either). Superstock style tuning rules are the only answer if Superbikes are to continue as a viable series into the future. You only have to look at how many teams/riders have left WSB/BSB/AMA and moved into British, US and World Superstock racing in the last few seasons to see the way things are moving. Superstock racing is no longer the place for small individual privateers racing out of the back of a panel van (although these do thankfully still exist), but is becoming much more professional in image and organisation. All of the top British Superbike teams, led by HRC, are in favour of Superstock style tuning rules to keep the lid on costs for everyone involved in BSB, and with the current lack of outside finance coming into the sport that can only be a good thing. Ducati would then of course qualify to race with the 1098 motor in exactly the same way that they are allowed to race in current Superstock competition. I suspect though that would not satisfy Ducati bosses. Interestingly, although the 1098 has been performing well in World Superstock, it has fared less well in domestic UK Superstock racing. The reason for this is that the design of the swingarm makes it almost impossible to run the required gearing for the UK circuits, leaving the bikes overgeared and out of touch with the leaders by a long way. You'd think a company with a racing heritage such as Ducati would have covered this when they designed the bike wouldn't you? 1000cc wasn't introduced to get the fours competitive against the Ducati's. It was done to keep WSB where it is now today Actually the 1000cc 4 cylinder rules were introduced in an effort to entice the major Japanese manufacturers back into the series, after they left en masse leaving just Suzuki to soldier on with the GSXR750 for a couple of seasons. At that point WSB was on it's death bed and was basically a Ducati cup competition. Without the rule change I doubt if WSB would exist today. | ||
| Blake |
Jose, Are you saying that the modifications on the leading machines in AMAFX or Superbike are obtainable by folks wanting to put them parts on their street bikes, and it would be legal?  I thought we were talking about racing machines. In that arena, the XBRR is far from unobtainable. The XBRR is as much related to Buell's production bikes as the leading AMA superbikes and FX machines are to their production versions. | ||
| Rocketman |
Yes that is correct Matt. But those teams left WSB racing not because Ducati were winning, but because they no longer were manufacturing a 750cc sports bike , except Suzuki, who have done so continuously since the mid 80's. Flammini introduced 1000cc, as those that left had 1000cc sports bikes in their line-up, to entice those that left back into WSB, and it worked. I do take on board everything you mention with regard to cost, though I'm of the opinion there are those teams who can afford to go racing, and in both WSB and Superstock. Can you say if these teams, like Ten Kate for example, are in favour of what you speak, and if so, does such a wanting from these teams mean the end of Superstock as a series if WSB moves closer to Superstock rules. If not, how will each series coexist if they are so close to one another? As always Matt, your commentary is wonderful and very enlightening. Keep it coming. You never know. You might end up persuading me to see sense, lol. Rocket | ||
| Rocketman |
C'mon Blake. You're splitting hairs on that one, lol. We all know what Jose is saying. The XBRR hasn't been homologated, for starters. Is not nor ever will be a road legal bike. Has not passed laws in any country to be a road legal bike. The XBRR was and is built as a thoroughbred race bike. No matter the proddy racers too are thoroughbreds with only a handful built each year at thousands of dollars / pounds / lira / yen cost each, they still have their roots in the showroom and can be mimicked by anyone wishing to upgrade a proddy version. It might cost a lot of money to do so, but not necessarily. Remember the first season of the 999. Chili refused to ride his works 999R at his home race. Instead he bought a 998S from his local dealer. Had his mechanic swap some choice items between the two very different models, and Chili took a win on what was essentially a showroom bike with some (all be it) serious factory parts fitted. Could one do this with an XBRR? No has to be the answer, as there is no road bike XBRR in existence. Yeah I know. Now I'm splitting hairs, lol. Rocket | ||
| Blake |
The XBRR has indeed been homologated and accepted in AMA Formula Xtreme. It meets the rules and is homologated as a race modified XB12R. The factory superbikes are not now nor will they ever be road legal bikes. Nor have they passed laws in any country to be a road legal bike. The machines that are road legal may look like the factory racers; that's about it. Pretty sure you already agreed with that point. All Buell lacks for bridging the gap in your eyes and those who see the issue similarly is to put a detuned XBRR style engine into an XB12RR street bike and spend lots of money to get it street certified. Big deal. Why spend a lot of money to do that, when it doesn't make any sense? So let's stop splitting hairs. | ||
| Rocketman |
The XBRR has indeed been homologated and accepted in AMA Formula Xtreme. It meets the rules and is homologated as a race modified XB12R. Never heard of those series on the world stage, and the XB12R looks nothing like an RR. The factory superbikes are not now nor will they ever be road legal bikes. It doesn't matter, as street bike versions already exist that actually look like the factory race bikes. Nor have they passed laws in any country to be a road legal bike. But the street bike versions have, in many countries. More importantly, the street bikes, especially the homologated versions, often find their way to the track, and in many cases end up as full on Superbike racers. Just not works versions. Many of these will retain parts fitted from new when they go racing. The machines that are road legal may look like the factory racers; that's about it. But it matters not. They still exist and plenty do go racing too (see above). Pretty sure you already agreed with that point. Obviously Blake, I see how you're attempting to suggest one could turn an XB12 into an XBRR. That is pretty much a futile exercise given you might as well buy the real deal. But wait. There's only 50 odd ever made, and half at least are in private ownership / collections where they'll never get near a race track parking lot, never mind actually race. So why split hairs when the whole thing is lost in translation for the XBRR? Rocket | ||
| Trojan |
The XBRR has indeed been homologated and accepted in AMA Formula Xtreme. It meets the rules and is homologated as a race modified XB12R. And as we now know, yet another example of organisers 'bending' the rules to suit a manufacturer and coming out of it with egg on their faces and sullied reputations all round. The XBRR is not, and never was, a modified road going XB12R, and no amount of bluster & flannel can make it so. Melting down a set of crankcases from one bike and recasting them into another design is not modifying but re-manufacturing, and is certainly not within the spirit or letter of any production based rules that I can think of outside the lone AMA's FX series (A series who's rules are shared by no other racing organisation world wide). The difference between even the very modified WSB bikes and the XBRR is that the WSB manufacturers have sold a qualifying amount of road bikes that the WSB bikes are based on (including unaltered crankcases funnily enough). If Buell had done a similar thing and had the decency to make even 50 road based XBRR bikes I would have said well done, good on ya, best of luck. But they didn't, so it ain't ever going to be a modified road going XB of any description to me, but a race bike from the ground up. I am not criticising the XBRR as a race bike, just the smoke and mirrors, and 'Emporors new clothes' syndrome that has grown up around it in order to convince people that it is a modified XBR. Let's just stop the pretence and move on. | ||
| Vagelis46 |
I have a second thought : If this 1200cc rules change finally convienses KTM, Benelli, AND YES BUELL to enter the WSBK, I welcome the rule change. I read the Benelli's chief director interview on BIKE mag saying that if the rules for cc change, and they can be competitive, they will enter with their 1130cc Tornado. | ||
| Jaimec |
Benelli makes a TRIPLE, not a Twin... | ||
| Vagelis46 |
I know. | ||
| Blake |
Matt, Who at AMA Pro Racing do you imagine has egg on their face or has suffered a sullied reputation and why, for putting into effect rules allowing an American made sport bike to race in an American series? I don't get that point of view at all. The situation as I recall was that many motorcycle road racing fans applauded and supported that effort. If anyone has suffered a hit in reputation in the deal it is Buell and only Buell through their lack of participation in AMA FXthis year. So what? The racing goes on. Not really a big deal. Major kudos to AMA Pro Racing for making it possible for Buell racers to race in the nation's leading roadrace series. I'm a spectator and I don't give a darn if the XBRR is street legal ir not. It used a stock frame, and the stock front brake disk and magnesium versions of the stock wheels. It is unmistakably recognizable as a Buell motorcycle. I just want to see Buells racing in American Motorcyclist Asociation series. If that requires that the rules be adjusted to accommodate that, then so be it. Japan Inc and their much hyped world of four cylinder repliracers do not deserve planet-wide monopolization of motorcycle road racing. Even the IOM TT is bent to their world of four cylinder repliracers. To me, that SUCKS! How friggin' ridiculous is it that in order to compete in the MW production bike based classes one must build a machine that revs to 16,000 rpm and doesn't get into it's powerband until over 8,000 rpm? That is one seriously sucky street bike in my view. The one racing organization that has the rules right is CCS here in America. They want to see all manner of machines compete head to head and so write their rules to maintain parity among them. The horror. You seem so very bothered about Buell being allowed "unlimited" engine modifications. And then take issue with the interpretation of the "unlimited" specifier. Why is it okay to put in completely different cams, or pistons, or valves or any other engine component, except for the cases? The cases are just one of the components comprising the engine, so why if the engine modifications allowed are "unlimited" do you hold the engine cases alone as untouchable while all the other parts may by replaced with completely different custom parts? Does not the XBRR engine resemble very closely the architecture and character of its street bretheren? Darn right it does. Rules is rules, and the rule says that the Buell engine is allowed "unlimited" modification. I dunno, to me that rule seems pretty darn clear. The XBRR has been homologated for racing in AMA FX. Yes? Yes. Some folks may not like that, but it is the truthy. | ||
| Jaimec |
I'd rather see a bike that legitimately meets the rules and requirements that are in place, rather than gets built first, and then gets the rules changed to accommodate it. Much like the Ducati controversy going on now. If Buell wanted to race XBRR's, why not just create a series like BMW did with their "Battle of the Legends" and "Boxer Cup" series? Take a bunch of talented riders, put them on IDENTICALLY equipped motorcycles, and watch the fun. The one Boxer Cup race I saw at Daytona several years ago was some of the most exciting racing I've EVER seen! | ||
| Blake |
Then you will be gratified to learn that AMA Pro Racing's Formula Xtreme rule allowing "unlimited" engine modification with a limit of 1350cc for air-cooled twins had been in effect for years prior to the entry of the XBRR. The rule was in effect and unchanged since the year that Formula Xtreme's four cylinder liquid-cooled displacement limits went from 1000cc to 600cc. The rule was in effect long before the XBRR hit the scene. | ||
| Davegess |
Personally I like the SCCA's production based racing rules. The care nothing about engine, type or displacement. They lump production based cars into classes based on them being competitive with each other. They enforce limited modifications and it a particular make and model of car is winning every race that model is bumped up to the next faster class for the next year. Makes for races full of all kinds of different cars | ||
| Rocketman |
Again, Ducati are not building a bike in an effort to change the rules in Superbike racing. Ducati are upping the capacity of this generation of street sports bikes in an effort to compete in the market place against the ever more powerful four cylinder machines coming out of Japan. In order to compete in the high street Ducati need to compete in Superbike racing. End of the day, Superbike racing is supposed to be a street bike based racing series. If street bikes move with the times, then so must the race series that is there to accommodate them. Rocket | ||
| Trojan |
The rule was in effect and unchanged since the year that Formula Xtreme's four cylinder liquid-cooled displacement limits went from 1000cc to 600cc. The rule was in effect long before the XBRR hit the scene. If I remember correctly the 600cc FX rules have only been in existence for two years, or around the same time as the XBRR in fact. I think you are confusing Pro Thunder with Formula Extreme. If the XBRR was always legal why all the meetings and decisions to allow it to race, why the resignations from the AMA board, and why the threat of protests from the other major players if the XBRR were to win a race. You missed my point in the above posts. I very much applaud the XBRR as a race bike, was as excitied as every other Buell fan when it was released, and celebrate as much as anyone when it does well. I just can't understand how anyone can classify it as a modified XB, because it isn't. You say teh frame is the same? Actually it isn't, or it certainly wasn't on the FX bikes because it had the XBR frame with XBSS/X side sections welded in for more fuel capacity. Can you or I buy such a frame as a road bike? No. The motor chares almost nothing with the XB motor, including all of the major castings. Can we buy such a motor for our road bike? No. Forks and suspension were Ohlins, Wheels magnesium, bodywork all carbon and completely different to the stock road bike look. Can we buy a Buell road bike with any of these features? No. You are right on one point though. The XBRR was allowed in to the FX series because the organisers were seduced into having an American bike in an American series, and so made the rules fit the bike and not vice versa. Japan Inc and their much hyped world of four cylinder repliracers do not deserve planet-wide monopolization of motorcycle road racing. Actually they do at the moment, simply by virtue of the fact that they are building the bikes that win races. What is stopping Buell, Triumph, BMW, Victory, Voxan etc winning races right now? They don't build competitive race bikes, that's what. If they had the will and comittment to do so then maybe we would see a few more non-Japanese manufacturers step up to the plate in the way that Ducati & KTM have already successfully done. Until that time we will undoubtedly see the Japanese factories dominate racing in almost every format. Even the IOM TT is bent to their world of four cylinder repliracers. To me, that SUCKS! How friggin' ridiculous is it that in order to compete in the MW production bike based classes one must build a machine that revs to 16,000 rpm and doesn't get into it's powerband until over 8,000 rpm? That is one seriously sucky street bike in my view. There is nothing in the rules at the IOM or any other major class that specifies what you say above. That is just the format that works at the moment in production based racing. If a 1350 air cooled twin was the best way to ensure a winning bike then you could guarantee that Honda/Yamaha/Suzuki would build one. Rules is rules, and the rule says that the Buell engine is allowed "unlimited" modification. I dunno, to me that rule seems pretty darn clear. Again, this comes down to that old grey area of what constitutes 'modified'. Certainly to me, and to any of the UK (and most of the world) race classes, and the Oxford English dictionary, modified means: modify • verb (modifies, modified) make partial changes to. The XBRR crankcases are not modified or 'partially changed' XB cases, they are completely different and new items, as are many other components. As for Does not the XBRR engine resemble very closely the architecture and character of its street bretheren? Darn right it does Well the Yamaha M1 MotoGP engine resembles the architechture and character of the R1 and R6, but it would not be allowed in any production based class that I know of. | ||
| Jaimec |
I don't know how we drifted off WSBK rules, but Matt is right; the Japanese are VERY good at building what WINS. They don't build a bike and then whine that it isn't competitive... they see what works and then BUILD IT. Case in point: American Flat Track racing. That was the ONLY racing class that Harley Davidson dominated with the XR750. Didn't take Honda long to figure out that the power characteristics of a 45 degree twin, firing both cylinders on the same stroke, was the ticket to winning that series. Once they did, Harley no longer dominated. When AMA rules gave Ducati a distinctive advantage in Superbike, the Japanese response was the Honda RC51 and Suzuki TLR1000. When the rules were changed again, Honda and Suzuki both went back to IL4s and Suzuki now dominates AMA Superbike (and Ducati took their marbles and went home). The Japanese don't have this "heritage" issue that holds back companies like Ducati and Harley Davidson. For some reason, those companies feel like they HAVE to build a V-Twin racing bike. Well, if that's what you're going to do... then expect to lose if you're going to compete against a company that is more flexible in their thought processes. | ||
| José_quiñones |
Different series, same issues |
