| Author | Message | ||
     Blake |
"Now all of a sudden that stuff (mass centralization) doesn't matter? All if it negated by 25lbs? Buell doesn't advertise bikes with a disclaimer saying..."its all cool unless you weigh 25lbs more than a little fella" " Your confusion is understandable. You are talking about two different issues, the benefits of mass centralization and the benefits of reduced mass. On the track, added weight no matter where, will increase the wear and stress on the tires; they get hotter, they wear faster, they lose grip sooner in a race, a place where tires are pushed to their absolute limits and beyond. That doesn't happen on the street. On the street, the tire wear issue is non-existent. In both cases, track and street, improved mass centralization will allow better handling and flickability. This means that a heavier bike with better mass centralization is better able to turn and run through the twisties with the lighter bikes, but only until the tires go off. On the track, tires and grip rule. (Message edited by blake on August 17, 2009) | ||
| Blake |
It takes "balls to express that opinion" on an internet board?   Well then, "props" to all the trolls and naysayers of the web. False glory is lame, but it can also be hilarious. (Message edited by blake on August 17, 2009) | ||
| Blake |
"He doesn't like the 1125r in a Sportbike class. He's not alone." But if we didn't have Danny Eslick racing the Buell, we'd be hearing nothing but how pathetic the Buell is in Sportbike racing. Having a series where different configuration of bikes with different levels of racing optimization can compete head to head is only a problem if you have been brainwashed by the Japan Inc propaganda that the only true measure of a motorcycle is its HP/cc.  cookie cutter racing It's a shame. Ignorance always is. | ||
| Buellinachinashop |
"It takes "balls to express that opinion" on an internet board?" To go against the grain on a Buell board. Absolutely. So you're a troll for saying anything ant-buell here? Paint me green and call me Smeagel. | ||
| Blake |
What exactly is a "sportbike" class supposed to include if not sportbikes? I think the main disconnect is the supremely ignorant perception by some, even many, that Superbikes are the same as what "folks use to ride to the mall." They are not. They are much closer to MotoGP machines than street bikes. | ||
| Diablobrian |
Blake is spot on about mass and tire wear in racing. Especially in a spec tire class where you can't choose a harder compound to offset the mass and heat. mass x velocity equals force and with equal contact patches it does not take a rocket scientist to see how fast that extra 25lbs becomes a serious issue. At the beginning of the season I was worried it was too much of a handicap, but I was proven wrong by the close racing we've been treated to. | ||
| Blake |
"So you're a troll for saying anything anti-buell here? Paint me green and call me Smeagel." We've known that for a long time. Why would a Buell enthusiast be "anti-Buell"? Offering thoughtful criticism is not being anti-Buell. Failing to give any credit whatsoever to the skills of an exceptional racer while choosing instead to berate him and his efforts as the result of an unfair advantage and as a result that it is "shit racing" is way out of line. I don't care what bike or brand is involved. Danny Eslick has proved himself an exceptional racer in his previous privateer efforts in AMA racing and more so this year in DSB. | ||
| Spatten1 |
"No one who's not put his but on the line at triple digit speeds coming into a turn has any business characterizing the efforts of racers as "shit racing"." Well, actually I have. Won't make a difference here to those that haven't. I like you too Blake, and look forward to riding with you someday. | ||
| Buellinachinashop |
"We've known that for a long time. Why would a Buell enthusiast be "anti-Buell"?" being anti-Buell and saying things that go against the "Buell grain" are two differnt things. I'm a Packers fan, I hate Ted Thompson..I can't be a Packers enthusiast? | ||
| Spatten1 |
The ironic part is I've had to ride the hell out of my XB on the brakes and stuffing people in turns to keep up with 600's at the race track. It was difficult and dangerous because I went past my limits trying to compensate for the lack of power. The difference was that those bikes handled as well as mine, usually better, because I had stock suspension components. It was a big sense of satisfaction to beat them, but not very prudent. I'm not saying I am superfast, but there were always a few guys with more power that I could take. It was very frustrating and unsafe, and I may be projecting that onto the DSB guys. | ||
| Buellinachinashop |
"What exactly is a "sportbike" class supposed to include if not sportbikes?" If the rules are going to be changed, bent and broken to allow bikes the AMA wants to see race, why have the Sportbike Class at all? At what point do you say, "X's bikes, running X cc's are allowed in the Sportbike Class." What is the difference between the Sportbike and Superbike classes? | ||
| Blake |
"I may be projecting" Ya think? You should've been allowed to race your XB in a class in which it was competitive. CCS allows the XB9 in LW class with the SVs. Great racing there. Or in Thunderbike, more great racing against the Ducs and SVs. "but not very prudent" Since when does that word even belong in a description of motorcycle racing? Whether a bike is faster or not, the battle is track wide. Is it any more unfair that one bike has a weight advantage versus HP advantage? Isn't that why they set the weights at different levels in the first place? Having met Danny and seen how incredibly hard he's worked throughout his career, I take great offense at any attack against his skills. All of us in the CMRA have known for a long time about both Ben Spies and Danny Eslick. Ben was lucky enough to score a major factory ride. Danny had no such luck and ended up on inferior machinery. But all of us in the CMRA knew all too well of the young man's skills. He is exceptional. Danny Eslick. 2001 CMRA Singles GP Champion 2001 CMRA LW GP 2nd Place (4 pts back, missed one race) 2002 CMRA Singles GP Champion Danny was 14 years old in 2001. John Ulrich snagged him in 2003 and put him on a Suzuki GSXR600, a bike that didn't win a race in AMA Supersport or Formula Xtreme through 2007 except for one in 2004 when Ben Spies on the factory Suzuki team to eeked out a single victory on it Supersport. Yet Danny finished 3rd in Formula Xtreme in 2005 behind the highly focused factory Honda duo of Duhamel and Zemke. | ||
| Spatten1 |
I never raced the XB, just many track days. The XB is an excellent street bike for me, but the big flywheel effect and lack of powershifting make it tough on the track, for me. It was still very satisfying to have people comment on how well "that thing" handles, and how surprised they were. That is where my Buell pride comes through, smoking guys as the underdog with the "Harley engine". I said pretty clearly above that Danny looked very good, especially when you had Knapp on track for comparison. Seeing how much more Knapp struggled everywhere made Danny look really strong. His ballsy style reminds me of Scott Russell quite a bit. | ||
| Blake |
Even Scott Russel was astounded by Danny's determination at Topeka. Track days are to professional racing like shooting a game of horse is to an NBA basketball game. | ||
| Spatten1 |
You're still jamming it into a turn, right behind/in front of someone at 100 mph with both tires sliding. More than a lot of the opinionated guys here have done. | ||
| Blake |
If the rules are going to be changed, bent and broken to allow bikes the AMA wants to see race, why have the Sportbike Class at all? I dunno. No rules were bent or broken, so your point is lost on me. The rules were made and accepted by all. The initial proposal was for a HP limited class based upon weight. The Japan Inc factories rejected it. They accepted the existing rules. At what point do you say, "X's bikes, running X cc's are allowed in the Sportbike Class." That's what you had before. The series was not a success. It was sold to a group of folks who know about making a successful racing series. They are doing it. The racing has never been better. Never have their been more winners or more racers contesting for the win. If that is not success in a racing class, what is? "What is the difference between the Sportbike and Superbike classes?" A lot. See if you can learn exactly what. The education will be very enlightening to you. Ask Michael Jordan who once tried to purchase a factory Suzuki to run in AMA SBK. Suzuki said, no. | ||
| Spatten1 |
Ask Michael Jordan who once tried to purchase a factory Suzuki to run in AMA SBK. Suzuki said, no. That must have been Yosh putting the screws to Suzuki to protect their franchise. Wouldn't Suzuki want to see as many bikes in the top 10 as possible? How could Suzuki do anything to hurt Yosh's business when Yosh was delivering winners every weekend, and could switch to another factory if they wanted to? | ||
| Fresnobuell |
It is a shit show. It will not last another season. I'll take that wager. Really, that IS one of the lamest things I have heard in a long time. Tell us, what series is offering better racing...anywhere. Truly blinded with your hatred of the format I must say. Too bad. YOUR MISSING SOME GREAT RACING!!!  | ||
| Blake |
That must have been Yosh putting the screws to Suzuki to protect their franchise. Wouldn't Suzuki want to see as many bikes in the top 10 as possible? How could Suzuki do anything to hurt Yosh's business when Yosh was delivering winners every weekend, and could switch to another factory if they wanted to? You're losing the train of discussion. The point was that the bikes are exotica, and much different than the mere slightly modified street bikes that the marketing folks would have you believe. The sportbikes are allowed minor mods, including cylinder head decking and cam timing adjustments along with special race ECM and exhaust. That's about it. They can change the rear shock and the fork internals. Superbikes are allowed head porting and a bunch of other very specialized parts, well not quite as much this year compared to years past in AMA SBK, but you get the point. Factory superbikes are still exotica. The factory 600s are not too far behind in that they are produced with racing as their intended use, but they are at a level where a non-factory liter class twin can be competitive with them. Not so the Superbikes. That is the idea of the AMA Daytona Sportbike class, to allow the Aprilia and the Buell and all the other non-cookie-cutter IL4 600cc Japanese machines to compete in the class. Why don't you gripe about how the IL4 bikes are allowed twice the number of valves and cylinders and throttle bodies and 17K rpm (who knows what they are really turning, 18K rpm wouldn't surprise me)? It is just as pertinent to performance as engine displacement. But which would you rather have for the street? (Message edited by blake on August 17, 2009) | ||
| Spatten1 |
Why don't you gripe about how the IL4 bikes are allowed twice the number of valves and cylinders and throttle bodies and 17K rpm (who knows what they are really turning, 18K rpm wouldn't surprise me)? It is just as pertinent to performance as engine displacement. I haven't posted a single gripe about displacment or any other engine spec. Not one. My only gripe is the lopsided PERFORMANCE. Like I said, let the Buells lighten up, even up the horsepower, and you will have a great formula. | ||
| Fresnobuell |
Good to see Roger doing well, until his tires went off and that reportedly crappy front end on his Kawi just pushed the front too much. He and Hacking have been pushing that pile very hard, and Roger has some great talent and a good attitude. Soooo, when the Kawisakis crash, run off or fail to perform they are "piles" and when Eslick does well it's because his bike overwhelms the competition. Has NOTHING to do with the riders? That's pure crap. Even, Mladin has said that's not fair. So answer this question. If Danny only made the podium because he pulled the 600s in on the straight, what the hell happened in Race 1? If it was strictly a HP thing, why didn't Danny do the exact same thing in Race 1 as he did in Race 2? Seems to me that the one thing that would be consistent from Saturday to Sunday is power output. Danny was riding that bike to the ragged edge on Sunday. To me it was an AMAZING race for him, especially after crashing in qualifying, his the average performance in Race 1 and knowing that if he drops the bike, it could mean the championship. Give credit where it's due. Slick is doing things out there that NO ONE else is willing to do. Fearless right now. | ||
| Blake |
"My only gripe is the lopsided PERFORMANCE." The race results don't jive with your characterization. I sure don't see anything "lopsided" about the competition, which is unprecedentedly close. What you seem to be upset about is the fact that some bikes are better in some aspects than their competition. It makes no sense. Then you say you want all the bikes to weigh the same. It sounds like you want a spec racing series. As I said before... You can have it. I rarely watched the old supersport racing. I don't watch 250GP. I don't care for spec racing. If that is what you think makes for the best racing, I cannot disagree more strongly. | ||
| Spatten1 |
Give credit where it's due. Slick is doing things out there that NO ONE else is willing to do. Fearless right now. I can't even respond to that. Waste of bits and bytes. | ||
| Spatten1 |
I rarely watched the old supersport racing. It was very close racing where every inch mattered. | ||
| Fresnobuell |
I can't even respond to that. Waste of bits and bytes. How so? You don't think Danny is riding the hell out of the bike or deserves to be the point leader? Not surprising as you called the most competitive and compelling racing in the world..."shit." Brilliant! Your smug, purist, BS attitude is really getting tiresome. | ||
| Fresnobuell |
So answer this question. If Danny only made the podium because he pulled the 600s in on the straight, what the hell happened in Race 1? If it was strictly a HP thing, why didn't Danny do the exact same thing in Race 1 as he did in Race 2? Seems to me that the one thing that would be consistent from Saturday to Sunday is power output. Spatten, you didn't answer the question. | ||
| Barker |
Eslick can ride the hell out of a bike. Sunday's race: How did he go from mid-pack 2nd? He frig'n rode the hell of the bike. He passed atleast twice in turn 5. Nobody passed like that. It was a tite race lots of movement in the first 10 spots. Not like the boring supabike race. The R1 took off from mat like he had a boat anchor dragging him down. Boring. (Message edited by barker on August 17, 2009) | ||
| Rfischer |
This is smelling like a certain other forum discussion regarding global warming. Hex....er, Spatten is hewing to religious dogma, against which no amount of fact or logic can or will prevail. Give it up. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Like I said, let the Buells lighten up, even up the horsepower Are you going to even up the torque curve as well? So if the peak HP is governed to be exactly the same, the maximum weight is exactly the same, and riders are the same, wouldn't the superior low end torque advantage of the Buell still be seen as an unfair advantage? | ||
| Spatten1 |
Your smug, purist, BS attitude is really getting tiresome. Settle down Francis. |
