| Author | Message | ||
     Jaimec |
Maybe Pedrobot was shaken by the "Boos" he received in Indianapolis and is working on developing a personality? | ||
| 12r |
Maybe the best option would be to use a 'spec' ECU rather than common tyre. That way the electronics could be limited and supervised by the organisers. Each team would be issued an official sealed 'Race' ECU for each bike by race control at the start of the weekend, as well as having their own for practice and testing reasons. These could be recalled and checked/replaced easily by the organisers on a regular basis. Don't they all use the same Marelli Marvel hardware anyway ? But the variations in each motorcycle means that the teams have to write their own software  | ||
| Jaimec |
Considering the various engine configurations used in MotoGP, a spec ECU doesn't sound practical or possible. | ||
| Azxb9r |
They have gone to a "Spec" ECU in F1. It does not seem to have had much effect one way or the other. I personally like the idea of letting each manufacturer develop their own electronics, but get rid of the traction control. | ||
| Jaimec |
One thing I DON'T want to see in MotoGP is seeing it go in the rumored direction DMG is taking AMA racing. The last thing I want to see is a two-wheeled NASCAR. Might as well just renew the BMW BoxerCup series if we want to put racers on nearly identical machines with just paintwork differentiating them. As exciting as that series was, I still want to see the most technologically advanced machines (as envisioned by each manufacturer) being piloted by the most talented riders on the planet. If I wanted to see NASCAR, I'd WATCH NASCAR (I don't). | ||
| Redbuelljunkie |
Watching grass grow is more exciting than watching AMA Superbike for the last few years (or should we call it "Suzukibike"). The best racing in North America has been Moto-ST, ASRA, AFM and other "Club Racing" type series that so many people seem to complain about. Other than Moto-GP, I don't care how fast unlimited-budget factory teams can make a bike go- it doesn't relate to my world. I am much more interested in seeing how competitive a bike that I can buy off the showroom floor is. And how could bikes look/sound more the same than recent AMA Superbike?... they're all Japanese I-4's, and if it weren't for the colors/logos and where the exhaust is- I would have no chance of telling them apart. No one has trouble distinguishing a Ducati from a Buell, or an Aprilia, or a BMW, Bi-mota, Triumph... you get the picture. What is the point of racing a bike with 50-60 more horsepower than stock, especially if you're beating someone who can only afford to squeeze 40 hp more out of their bike. The race bikes should reflect the power of the bike we can buy- that's how to get real competition, and realistic comparison between manufacturers. It's not like these stock bikes are slow... I certainly cannot tell the difference between a bike flying past me at 160 mph and one doing 180 mph. I'll take realism over "flash" any day. As to riders, sure, there are personalities I like, but I mainly support brands- not riders. If a Buell is racing, it can have as many different riders as they want to put on it- I will still root for the Buell. If a rider I like changes to a Honda, I will no longer pull for them, just because I don't like Honda. So, for me, the "best" bikes are the ones I like, and the "most talented riders" are the ones who are winning on the bikes I like. It's just that simple. I am extremely excited about the DMG/AMA season next year. I watch Moto-GP for "cutting-edge" technology, just as F-1 is for auto racing. After all, that "high tech" Moto-GP stuff will eventually end up in the showroom, and therefore on the AMA grid in the form of trickle-down technology. So, in reality a full grid of showroom stock bikes are the most technologically advanced machines (just not necessarily from this year). It's damn sure a guarantee they'll be faster than the year before! Bring on the future of AMA racing! | ||
| Redbuelljunkie |
Oh, yeah, about Moto-GP... the truth is technology doesn't necessarily mean going faster than ever before, but making the most out of what you've got. The fact is bike speeds are starting to exceed the design limits of the tracks, so something must be done to slow the bikes down. I personally am just as impressed with a bike than can "do a lap in 1:25" and a bike with 200 less cc's being able to match it- that's technology! And I believe this is the true spirit of Moto-GP race technology. (Message edited by redbuelljunkie on September 30, 2008) | ||
| Fresnobuell |
I always thought a class of bone stock bikes would be neat. It wouldn't be showcasing bikes that are ALMOST the bike you can buy on the showroom floor (ie Superstock), but the would BE the bike you can buy off the showroom floor. | ||
| Trojan |
The race bikes should reflect the power of the bike we can buy- that's how to get real competition, and realistic comparison between manufacturers. This class already exists...it's called Superstock. However it has never been as popular with fans, teams or manufacturers as Superbikes, which is why it has always been the support class and not the headline act. Even if everyone fielded stock or close to stock bikes it would still be a battle between the big 4 Japanese companies and Ducati, simply because they are prepared and able to put mega dollars into racing. Until Buell, Triumph and the other minor players do the same they simply won't compete on the same level. If you have 'stock' racing the big 4 will build a stock bike that has all of the necessary parts to qualify but with the attributes and technology of a current Superbike racer. You only have to look at the 'homologation specials' built by Yamaha, Honda, Ducati, BMW and now KTM etc just to qualify bikes for Superbikes to see that a mere regulation change won't stop them. If you want the very best racing then you need less regulation, not more. Take a look at the Le Mans type sports car racing that is currently undergoing a huge resurgence in popularity, and has the biggest variety of engines and chassis in 4 wheeled motor sport at present. They have kept regulations to a minimum to encourage innovation, which has led to massive technological input and cars such as the Audi and Peugeot diesel powered Le Mans cars. If AMA racing is boring now because Suzuki dominate it, whose fault is that? Certainly not Suzuki. What will happen when the DMG takes over? Teams will race the bike that is the most competitive, so after an initial period of variety you will see the same brands at the front every week yet again. Then what, ban the most successful bikes? MotoGP has fallen into the same trap by being pressured into a one make tyre rule next year. It will not make the racing closer, nor will it aid safety (as is cited as the reason for changing), but will reduce competition. The guys at the front this year will still be at the front next year, regardless of rule changes. | ||
| Blake |
I agree, Superstock won't improve competitiveness. The Suzuki brand dominated there in AMA this year too, yes? I think Rossi's significant change in success when switching from Michelin to Bridgestone refutes that a single tire won't help improve parity. Didn't Pedrosa also switch to Bridgestone? | ||
| Jaimec |
I recently read an article that stated Livio Supo was the one who arranged the switch from Michelin to Bridgestone for the Ducati squad way back when. His logic was that there was no way they could beat Rossi on the same equipment he was using so he decided to try a new tactic. It worked last year! | ||
| Jaimec |
Suzuki wins AMA Superbike year after year for three reasons: 1) Mat Mladin 2) Ben Spies 3) They are the ONLY team running in AMA Superbike with full factory support. | ||
| Trojan |
I think Rossi's significant change in success when switching from Michelin to Bridgestone refutes that a single tire won't help improve parity. Didn't Pedrosa also switch to Bridgestone? Pedrosa had a pretty good season overall on Michelin before just a couple of well publicised failures. My argument is that the top five riders will remain untroubled by a change in tyre manufactruer (even more so now that Bridgestone has been chosen as THE spec tyre, even though bids do not close until Oct 3rd!). All of the top guys are already on Bridgestone rubber, so there won't be much change over the winter except that Dovizioso is likely to join the top guys sooner rather than later. The argument that races will be safer using exactly the same tyre as this year is seriously flawed (as was the reasoning for changing from 990 to 800cc), and will not slow corner speeds. In fact it will bunch the field at the same high corner speeds they currently race at. The problem with changing rules to even out racing is that the teams with the biggest budget will always find the way round them, whether by being able to pay for the top riders, by employing the top tuners or simply cheating (and affording to cheat), the cream will always rise to the top. Where does DMG go if one team dominates the 'new' American Superbike class, which is a distinct possibility? | ||
| Sd26 |
Suzuki wins AMA Superbike year after year for three reasons: 1) Mat Mladin 2) Ben Spies 3) They are the ONLY team running in AMA Superbike with full factory support. Don't leave out the crew of Don, Rich Doan, Peter Doyle, etc. Give them all a different manufacturer, and I'd put money on them putting their riders on top, given that the riders are putting in the effort required. | ||
| Jaimec |
Want to lower speeds? Put them all on Cheng Shin tires. | ||
| Redbuelljunkie |
How "stock" is superstock? I'm thinking more along the lines of the Moto-ST formula- where the winners have to be dynoed after the race. If you write rules that state the race bikes have to be within a certain percentage of the stock model's horsepower and weight, you then grid races with bikes of similar power. This would, in my opinion, result in competitive, real-world comparable racing. (Message edited by redbuelljunkie on October 01, 2008) | ||
| Trojan |
This would, in my opinion, result in competitive, real-world comparable racing. In an ideal world yes it would, then you have to factor in one important thing....competitiveness! I have been involved in various one make formulae before now, where the bikes are not only roughly equal but all exactly the same. You still get the same riders winning every week, you still get the accusations of cheating (more so in fact) and you still get the people saying that the rules aren't fair. Racing should be as free from rules, red tape and regulations as possible, and if one team wins every week so be it. It is up to the other teams to up their game. I remember when Mick Doohan was winning every GP race unless he fell off. Or when Agostini was lapping everyone up to second place riding a 4 cylinder MV against Manx Nortons. Nobody suggested that the rules were wrong or that tyres needed to change did they? We just had to wait for a natural successor to emerge. In Doohan's case that was in the form of Valentino Rossi. What Rossi did was make the race look interesting for a while to keep the spectators interested, but in the end he won as easily as Doohan did. Only now do we get the complaints of boring racing, since Stoner was winning by a country mile every week. However, give other teams time and stability in the rules and they will catch up, as they have this year. Racing evolves all the time and changing rules only really delays the inevitable. Leave them alone and a common level will be found. | ||
| Blake |
I agree. I say let's have a class where one may race whatever configuration of motorcycle and engine one desires, no rules other than two tires and two wheels. Well, no two strokes, on account of I don't like two strokes. However, for the other classes, if you want to see parity in racing, I know of no better example than NASCAR. So if anyone can improve parity in AMA Road Racing, don't count out DMG. I've always liked the way the touring car championships are kept competitive, by adding weight to the leading entries. Too easy. Matt, What do you figure would happen to Pedrosa's competitiveness if MotoGP went to a bike+rider minimum weight standard as with Formula 1? I suspect he'd be back in mid-pack. | ||
| Jaimec |
When Formula USA first came along, it had one rule: Motorcycles have two wheels. I remember catching a race at Pocono where supercharged, nitrous burning GSXR1100's were paired off against Yamaha YZF500 GP bikes. The Yamahas nearly lapped the field on the way to victory. Nothing was even CLOSE. What made the racing exciting was all the CRASHING. Formula USA... does that even exist anymore? | ||
| Sd26 |
Well, Forumla USA was originally Bill Huths gig at Willow, then he sold it. By the mid 90's, yeah, Team Valvoline, which was John Ulrich's team, had GSXR1100's running Methanol. No superchargers that I ever remember. I think there were some turbo FZ750's at Willow, but not in the national series. Oliver was on a TZ250 with nitrous, then Roberts brought in old YZR500's. Kurt Hall beat them heads up on one of the Methanol Monsters. Formula USA was purchased by SFX Entertainment, which was purchased by Clear Channel Entertainment, and in 2000, Formula USA was with CCS after a similar set up with SFX buying CCS from Roger Edmondson, then it all went to CCE. I can't remember if FUSA went through to 2005 or not. CCE did not sell the FUSA name to Kevin Elliott when he bought CCS from them at the end of 2005. FUSA was dyno enforced with the 2000 rules. John Ulrich's team won the championship in the big bike class. I think that was Josh Hayes and Grant Lopez on the team. John got a team owner bonus of $50k from the series for winning the championship. | ||
| Jaimec |
Well, one way to equalize the playing field is to make sure NO ONE is happy: http://www.superbikeplanet.com/2008/Oct/081004g.ht m | ||
| Trojan |
That just confirms what I have been thinking about the one tyre rule. There will be no safety benefit but there will undoubtedly be more crashes. Most of the riders/teams signed up to a one make tyre rule simply because they assumed it would give them an advantage to be on the same tyres that Stoner/Rossi/Pedrosa now enjoy, but now they know that they have been sold down the river. I find it amazing that Dorna announced that Bridgestone was the preferred supplier BEFORE the official bids were even submitted, so the whole process pretty much stinks. If they knew that Michelin were not going to bid they should have allowed more time and approached more tyre manufacturers in order to at least give an impression of fairness. If safety was the prime factor then why was there only one bidder (especially as Bridgestone were adamant that they could not supply any more riders this year), and no period of discussion with teams/riders on their thoughts regarding the Bridgestone proposal? What we now have are rules being dictated by the sole tyre supplying company rather than the sport itself. There was a story that Ducati tried a last minute change to Michelin for 2009 in order to keep both manufacturers in the game, but that was scuppered by other teams refusing to move or stay with the French company next year. Ironic given Michelin's improved showing towards the end of this season. Looks like just another railroad job by the organisers in order to try and boost TV ratings and viewing figures, with little actual thought about rider safety. | ||
| Vagelis46 |
Well done to James Toseland. That fight with Vale was one of the best we have seen this year. Great.... | ||
| Trojan |
Well done to James Toseland. That fight with Vale was one of the best we have seen this year. Great.... Yes it was excellent, although I bet Vale wasn't happy getting held up for 4 laps by JT. James rode really well and 6th place is less than he deserved for all his efforts. Dovizioso wasn't happy with Toseland either after their last lap coming together which allowed Nakano to sneak past both of them. | ||
| Jaimec |
Vale reported that he enjoyed the duel, and that Toseland "Rode like the devil." When he first passed him, Vale figured he was free and clear to pull away (overconfidence?). When Toseland passed him back, it woke him up a bit and he knew he would have to WORK for it. Vale also reported that his "fight" with James was hard, but fair. Maybe Dovi just didn't like being passed when he thought he had the position in the bag. Finally "GO NICKY!!" He is DEFINITELY giving Honda and Repsol a big, flying "**** YOU!!" at the end of the season. I don't care if he wins the championship or not next year... as long as he repeatedly and consistently beats Pedrosa and Dovisioso I'll be content! | ||
| Redbuelljunkie |
+1 Jaimec... Honda can take that RC212V and stick it where the rising sun don't shine! | ||
| Jaimec |
By the way, that was one hell of a podium in Australia, wasn't it? The last three World Champions all standing together. When was the last time something like that happened? | ||
| Jaimec |
It might be my "Provincial American" way of thinking, but Puig sure does sound like an ASS in this interview: http://www.motogp.com/en/news/2008/Puig+on+Pedrosa +Hayden+and+Repsol+Honda+role Looks like Nicky had only one team mate he got along with in his Repsol career and that ended when Rossi switched to Yamaha. Since then he's had to share garage space with Mr. Warmth and Personality himself Max Biaggi, and now that Spanish midget and his ass of a manager. If what Puig says is true, it's no surprise Honda is THIRD in the Constructor's title even though they have one more bike on the grid than either Yamaha (first place) or Ducati (second place). Idiots. Nicky is better off with Casey Stoner. From all outward appearances, it looks like he and Stoner get along. As I said earlier: I don't care if Nicky wins the championship or not next year as long as he consistently beats Pedrosa and Dovisioso I'll be happy. I'll be even happier if he continues to beat Pedrosa this year on the same equipment in the remaining races (so Pedro doesn't have any excuses). | ||
| Trojan |
Puig has efectively been running the Repsol Honda garage for some time now, and they have earned the 'Spanish Mafia' nickname from quite a few pit lane insiders. They have even tried to start pressuring Dovizioso before Indianapolis, which explains the cryptic message on Dovi's helmet 'Don't be afraid of the dark'. Pedrosa may be in for a shock next year with Dovizioso as team mate. For a start, he won't be as diplomatic as Hayden has been, and he has been faster than Pedrosa (and Hayden)most of the year so far riding a customer Honda, so will undoubtedly be quick on the factory bike. Lastly, he has the same 250 riding style as Pedrosa, so should gel with the bike much quicker than Nicky did. As for Puig's suggestion that Hayden copied Pedrosa's settings....Isn't it strange that since the wall went up in the garage Hayden has outperformed Pedrosa on 2 out of 3 occasions. Which must mean that Jolly nice Pedrosa has set his bike up to suit Nicky and not himself. How kind of him  Whether the smiles and backslapping between Hayden and Stoner continues much beyond winter testing remains to be seen. Stoner hardly spoke to Melandri from the day he joined the team, and certainly wasn't going to share any information with him whilst he considered him a threat, so we'll see how they get on come March next year. I find it very ironic that the Nicky and the other Michelin runners have had such a late surge of form, just before the French company finds itself booted out of the series in 2009. Strong showings by Hayden, Toseland, Lorenzo and Dovizioso have shown that Michelin isn't far behind Bridgestone when it comes to grip levels and longevity, and the 'one tyre rule' is being shown as poorly thought out and badly planned already. The CEO of Bridgestone has already said that he expects more crashes in 2009 with the new tyre rules, so the 'safety' reasoning has been blown out of the water before the new season even starts! | ||
| Vagelis46 |
I think comments like the ones from Puig, are good for the sport. They bring more drama in the races, and give us fans many things to talk about. |
