| Author | Message | ||
     Ft_bstrd |
EVERY time the IL4 boys get beat by a NON-IL4 bike, it's because the competitor's bike has an unfair advantage. Doesn't matter whether it's Buell, Ducati, or Aprilia. It's the attitude that the IL4 motor IS the racing motor and eveyrone else is just crashing their party. | ||
| Spatten1 |
Spies wouldn't know anything about having an unfair advantage would he. He's good but he isn't that much better. Have you watched Spies race this year? He's being compared to some of the greatest American riders of the modern era like Roberts, Rainey, and Spencer, because his success is just as impressive! He is getting poles and wins on tracks he's never seen before against some of the best riders in the world. His bike is a brand new chassis and engine, and he has to dial it in himself. He is also significantly down on power to the Ducatis. He is just riding perfect and patient races. Without his mechanicals and other riders taking him out he would be leading the world championship by a huge margin. He is a very close second to Haga even with all the bad luck he's had this year. Spies is single handedly making life hard for the Ducatis, just like Scott Russell did in the 90's, also with a less powerful bike. He is that good. He is better than that good. He is doing what Roberts and Spencer did when they went to Europe. | ||
| Buelldyno_guy |
We sponsor and tune three AFM riders/bikes. The SV-650 is competive in it's class at under 80 hp at the wheel. The R-6 with the new race only ECM makes 112 SAE hp after tuning. The 1125 makes 126-132 depending on the pipe, so who cares? I do only that the Buell rider wants more power because at Infineon he is 10 sec slower than the SV and 15 sec slower than the R-6. Now at Thunder Hill with it's long straights he would blow then away going down to turn one, but from then on they would rule. Not because their bike is faster, but because the riders are faster. So as we continue to kick this dead dog and if our rider was anybody but Danny, there would not be six wins in the Buell column. Terry-www.jtsperformance.com | ||
| Rick_a |
I don't care who wins or what the engine configuration is, so long as there is close racing. I like this class. For once in a long time, there's twins competitive in a televised American series. One Buell/rider combination is kicking @ss. Oh f'n no. Lots of crying...well, that's how it should be. It used to be only club racing where I'd see really interesting racing. Seeing how all the different machinery works on the track together is half the fun for me. I agree with the anony post and Ft_bstrd in the fullest. (Message edited by Rick_A on August 13, 2009) | ||
| Danger_dave |
>>The big 4 NEVER publish the HP and torque values on their bikes. There is a reason.<< Neither do Harley. Different reason. | ||
| Pkforbes87 |
The Buell is clearly the winner for street comfort. The bars are high, the seat is cushy, it's got good fuel range and wind protection is more than ample, thanks to that flying saucer bolted in front of the tank that Buell calls a fairing. The motor is now nicely fuelled below 6000 rpm, so you can enjoy the torque without getting into the buzzy part of the powerband. "It was far easier to ride on the street than at the race track," reports Jeff. " [The Buell] makes a perfect do-it-all type of bike that is happy as a commuter, trackday ride, or weekend warrior." The R6 has a demanding seating position, peaky powerband and razor-sharp handling that will punish an inexperienced, ham-handed rider. [The R6] is a bike designed by expert riders for expert riders, and for novices to select this bike over an R1 is like recommending an F-15 over an F-16 because it's one number lower. But for an expert rider, in the canyons, the R6 is a tremendous amount of fun, capable of beating the vehicle code into a helpless, mewling mess. It's also got great styling and sounds terrific when the tach climbs towards redline. I don't follow the DSpB series very closely other than to keep track of how Buell teams are doing from time to time, so I don't claim to know jack squat about the series or the fairness of the different models and displacements competing against one another. It is my opinion though, that a potential sportbike customer who decides which brand and model to buy based purely on podium finishes MUST have a deathwish. I don't think that Buell is marketing to the type of rider that would make such an uninformed decision. In order to want to buy a Buell, a rider is going to have to be a little bit different - is that such a bad thing? Buells are different and their owners/riders will (hopefully) always be different too. The new "Ruthless Engineering" marketing campaign will no doubt attract some new customers who are appealed to by the high performance athletic nature of the machines that Buell sells. They are still marketed as being VERY different machines than the big 4 sell though. The DSpB series interests me only because I'm excited to see Buell competing and winning at a level like never before, but podium finishes and championships won't change the way I purchase motorcycles. I'm a novice rider and have to keep in mind that I can't ride like Eslick OR Hacking. And it doesn't matter whether I'm on a Buell or Kawi - I will NEVER ride at that level. Why should I care whether or not those two racers are on bikes of different yet equal technical specs? Neither of their bikes have power where I want it in a streetbike. | ||
| M2nc |
He is also significantly down on power to the Ducatis. He is just riding perfect and patient races. Without his mechanical and other riders taking him out he would be leading the world championship by a huge margin. He is a very close second to Haga even with all the bad luck he's had this year. Spies is single handedly making life hard for the Ducatis, just like Scott Russell did in the 90's, also with a less powerful bike. Not knocking the validity of the statement Mr. Patten, just have to point out a common theme. When the V-twins win, its because of a displacement / horsepower advantage. When the inline-fours win, its the rider. There is no denying that Spies had the equipment when he was racing AMA. A good rider will always work his way up front but here he and Mladin would disappear on the field and then battle between themselves for the win. Boring racing, great machines no doubt, but boring racing. Now like Mladin, he has to battle the field for the win. Mladin and his team mate were much more successful with their old 2008 bike than they are now on the 2009 bikes. He is in the fight, but not winning every race uncontested. No doubt Mladin wants out of racing now that his assured wins are no longer there. It's a bit of the pot and kettle for Spies to be talking about someone having an unfair mechanical advantage, I believe that was the intention of the earlier comment about Spies. In DMG rules insure that anyone can get the same caliber equipment and the riders are settling it out. Look at Fong for instance. A privateer on a 600 who is regularly in the top ten. Yes the Buells have an advantage, but its out there for everyone to see. In the days of Spies and AMA it was covert. Both Spies and Mladin have as much said so. The privateers are suppose to be field fillers, kind of like the Washington Generals against the Globe Trotters. Now DMG has messed up their sandbox and they are not happy. DMG should change the rules for next year. I think they should allow any age rider in Super Sport and call it their 600 class. Then have Sport Bike and allow 600s to run in it. Also allow larger displacement inline fours like 750s or 636s if they like. Then there would be no mistaking the difference. | ||
| Spatten1 |
It's a bit of the pot and kettle for Spies to be talking about someone having an unfair mechanical advantage, Spies isn't complaining at all. He is riding over the power deficit of his bike by leaving the corners harder, just like Hacking and Cardenas are doing in DMG. I read that Spies has to get on the gas 30 meters before the Ducatis do on an average corner. Ducati has won the last 15 of 18 championships in WSBK. It is common knowledge that they have power on the Yamaha this year, but Spies isn't complaining about it, he's just riding better than Haga and Fabrizio. | ||
| Fresnobuell |
he's just riding better than Haga and Fabrizio. Huh, last time I checked, Spies wasn't the championship leader. (Message edited by fresnobuell on August 13, 2009) | ||
| Fresnobuell |
He is that good. He is better than that good. He is doing what Roberts and Spencer did when they went to Europe. Spies is good, but if I was any of those American racers i would be pissed that people are already lumping him in the same category. The kid hasn't completed a full season yet and isn't even the point leader. Let him do something first over there before you proclaim him God. | ||
| Dbird29 |
I can't wait for this weekend's racing on TV. Go Eslick! | ||
| Not_purple_s2 |
You know how when you watch a boxing match they post the height, weight, arm reach, wins, losses, ect. for each fighter I'd love to see that, weight and dyno numbers for every bike on the field, or at least the top riders, aired with the race and other dimensional stats available online. I wonder if it would be that much of a hassle to add a quick dyno run to the pre-race inspections. It'd also be a dead give away if someone had an "unfair advantage". "Whooaa, this R6 just made 20hp more than the others we tested today, lets take a closer look." | ||
| Xl1200r |
Posting dyno numbers will only add fuel to the fire. People will still ignore the weight differences. They will only look at the displacement and peak power, ignoring everything else, including where the bikes make the power. All that matters is lap times - it's something everyone can understand and watch at every race. | ||
| Spatten1 |
Fresno, you need to watch the races, not just look at the points. Spies has won, in undramatic fashion, nearly every race that someone hasn't crashed into him or his bike hasn't broken. Haga is leading him in points. Spies dominates Haga almost every race that his bike is working and nobody takes him out. He is that good, he is an entire level above the rest of the field. Watch the races, you will see what I am writing about. | ||
| Spatten1 |
Power to weight is a useless statistic anyway if you don't add in the rider's weight. Adding average rider weight, or any rider weight, changes the relative ratios when comparing two bikes. The lighter bike will have it's power to weight impaired more than the heavier bike with the same rider weight added. Power to weight means more in a car where the driver's weight is less statistically significant to the overall ratio. It is just not really so useful when comparing motorcycles of different weights (unless you add rider weight). | ||
| Blake |
Scott, >>>You can talk about theory all day and night, there are superior racers getting beaten by a less skilled rider who pulls them on the straights. Period. Your credibility in this debate just flew out the window at about Mach 3. Such ignorant statements are unfortunate and lead to a loss of respect for the opinions of those willing to make them. Period. As to Ben Spies, he is very intelligent and a world-class racer. Unfortunately his logic and analysis is misleading. You don't compare bike lengths lead when one bike has already been acceleration and the other is just exiting the turn. You compare bike lengths at the apex of the turn before the straight, then at the apex of the turn following the straight. And even then if the turns are different speeds, the bike length rule of measure is not accurate. And just because a bike pulls better down the straights doesn't automatically indicate a big power advantage. The possibility also exists that the slower bike's team simply missed the optimum gearing. Maybe they setup for optimum drafting down the longest straight. Well if you do that and you don't end up in a draft, you get passed like you are standing still by a rider with a bike that was also set up for optimum draft passing down the longest straight. The Buell has more power. It also carries around an extra 25 LBs. I'm still waiting for any of the naysayers who seem to think that the Buell only wins on account of greater horsepower to explain all the passes that Danny has made, many for race wins, not in the straights, but in some of the tightest twisty sections of the tracks. The pass on Hacking at Mid-Ohio, the pass on Cardenas at Atlanta. The incredible pass through turn 1 at Topeka where even Scott Russel was astounded at Danny's skill and bravery. I agree, Ben Spies was way out of line. I agree that it appears strange to have an 1125 running against 600's. But the way the rules are written, it has made for some of the best racing in AMA history. It's also generated a untold amount of talk and interest in the issue. I don't believe very many racing fans actually shun AMA Racing on account of the new rules. If they do, then they are simply racing bigots with some queer allegiance to the Japan Inc scheme of things that used to be. Remember, it was Japan Inc that turned down the original proposal of Daytona Sportbike as a HP/LB limited class. They now have ZERO right to complain about the issue. They made the huge mistake of assuming that Buell wouldn't be able to step up to their level of racing. WAY TO GO RICHIE MORRIS AND THE WHOLE GEICO MOTORSPORTS, BRUCE AND SHELLY ROSSMYER RACING TEAM!!! | ||
| Spatten1 |
Blake, I respectfully disagree with your analysis of the DMG racing. I just thought it ironic to see Spies verbalize the same thing I was seeing. Spies and I both get the bike length logic, you just learn to compensate for that when watching, to see relative performance. What I see is Hacking or Cardenas gaining ground at the beginning of a straight and losing ground by the middle of the straight, still under acceleration. Hey, we are seeing different things in the same race. This close racing is frustrating for me rather than interesting, because I believe I see superior riders not getting their due. That's just how I see it, and apparently Spies sees the same thing. Again, I hope Buell kills it in Superbike. | ||
| Bott |
Spatten, the one thing we agree on is hoping Buell kills em in Superbike. There the agreement ends. Seems you are coming off as giving Danny Eslick no due.In your (and MR. Spies) analogies, it is STILL completely unanswered as to why Mr. Eslick is the ONLY consistent winner/top finisher. Your logic would presume Michael Barnes' bike should be winning right along side him. Why is it not? You stated you DO NOT watch the DSB races any longer. Truly your loss, as Danny is riding the BALLS off that thing to earn his victories over all those "superior" riders. You just have to WATCH the kid race to appreciate how truly talented he is.  | ||
| Blake |
Apparently drafting past a competitor indicated a major power advantage to some. The Buell has more power. It also carries around an extra 25 LBs. I'm still waiting for any of the naysayers who seem to think that the Buell only wins on account of greater horsepower to explain all the passes that Danny has made, many for race wins, not in the straights, but in some of the tightest twisty sections of the tracks. The pass on Hacking at Mid-Ohio, the pass on Cardenas at Atlanta. The incredible pass through turn 1 at Topeka where even Scott Russel was astounded at Danny's skill and bravery. Just because a bike pulls better down the straights doesn't automatically indicate a big power advantage. The possibility also exists that the slower bike's team simply missed the optimum gearing. Maybe they setup for optimum drafting down the longest straight. Well if you do that and you don't end up in a draft, you get passed like you are standing still by a rider with a bike that was also set up for optimum draft passing down the longest straight. | ||
| Buellinachinashop |
"it is STILL completely unanswered as to why Mr. Eslick is the ONLY consistent winner/top finisher." A) He's damn good B) He's the best funded Buell rider out there on the best Buell team out there. He's as close to factory sponsored as they come. Higbee, imo, is arguably just as good as Eslick, where's he on the "same" bike? | ||
| Fresnobuell |
Fresno, you need to watch the races, not just look at the points. I haven't missed any of the races. Spies has done well--there is no denying that. Haga has ALSO had some convincing wins. Haga also hasn't been 100% healthy for a long time. I understand that Spies has had lots of DNFs and it certainly would be a different points story if he finished even a couple of those races. Spies is NOT a legend like the other American racers you mention. I think it's utterly ridiculous (and insulting) to place him with that kind of company at this point in time. | ||
| Spatten1 |
I'm still waiting for any of the naysayers who seem to think that the Buell only wins on account of greater horsepower to explain all the passes that Danny has made, many for race wins, not in the straights, but in some of the tightest twisty sections of the tracks. I watched the Hacking pass. It was a great aggressive move. He jammed it in and forced Hacking off his line. It was just this side of too aggressive, which means perfect. HOWEVER, Eslick would not have been in position to make that pass, just a couple of short turns after the straight/kink, without having decimated Hackings superior drive onto the straight. Hacking earned a bigger gap coming onto that straight, and Eslick's right wrist caught him back up, enabling him to be in position to pass Hacking. It was BS to me, I'm glad you are happy about it, nothing wrong with that, just a totally different perspective. Eslick is no Hacking. To me the delusion is believing that Eslick is riding at Hacking's level. | ||
| Slaughter |
Spies is only playing to his audience (Adams) Adams (Stuporbike Cram-it) can (often DOES) turn a "news" article into an editorial. That's why Roadracing World has proven itself to be a LARGE cut above Stuporbike. Adams can't waste any opportunity to get his opinion injected into any interview. Uhlrich is more of a reporter than Adams has ever been. I don't get my news from the National Enquirer... though I have been known to "read" Playboy articles on stereo equipment. Problem with online sources, they can't be used as toilet paper. | ||
| Fresnobuell |
I just thought it ironic to see Spies verbalize the same thing I was seeing. Spies and I both get the bike length logic, you just learn to compensate for that when watching, to see relative performance. so when's the wedding? j/k I think the Buell does have a straight line advantage. I also think that it has some limitations in the corners and it's definitely harder on the tires. Add it all up and it equals some fantastic racing... The casual observer has a has an easy time seeing the Buell power down the straights, but can't see the corner speed differences or the Buell's tires going off. | ||
| Bott |
Eslick is no Hacking. To me the delusion is believing that Eslick is riding at Hacking's level. He isn't riding AT Hacking's level. He is riding ABOVE Hacking's level. And for what it's worth, I think Hacking is a GREAT rider. | ||
| P_squared |
Eslick is no Hacking. To me the delusion is believing that Eslick is riding at Hacking's level. So you believe it's the bike & not the rider, which is apparently the same line of thought being employed by Adams & Spies. Yet Spies' former teammate seems to think it's really the rider & some folks are being a bit hypocritical. http://twitter.com/MatMladin/statuses/2744586980 Who to believe? | ||
| Spatten1 |
so when's the wedding? You rule. Seriously, good one. | ||
| Bads1 |
Eslick is no Hacking. To me the delusion is believing that Eslick is riding at Hacking's level. But Barnes can and has ridden at Hackings level..... were is he. These are you opinions. Eslick is riding well and you can't handle it. Weres Zemke??? He should be kicking ass considering hes one hell of a 600 SuperSport and FX rider. He can and does ride to Hackings level maybe better at times. | ||
| Spatten1 |
Eslick is riding well and you can't handle it. That's right, I'm anti-Eslick and anti-Buell. You got me this time. | ||
| Bads1 |
Sure sounds like like.lol Did you make ground horse yet??? You'd think you did since your beating a dead horse. |
