| Author | Message | ||
     Smoke |
first one i found on google and all the time i care to invest in the discussion. minds are already made up it appears to me. i'm going to watch as much motorcycle roadracing as i can and as many different types as possible. have fun, tim | ||
| Gaesati |
Dredging back into the swamp of my memory I seem to recall that superbike was a US invention originally. Created so that people could race hotted up versions of street bikes without the cost of full scale race bikes. | ||
| Gregtonn |
Trojan, It would seem that your idea of good racing is glitz, glamor and a few highly paid riders on specialized factory machinery not available to anyone else. That is not true competition. It is like saying a Hollywood production is based on a "true story". So is it the truth or is it a story? So is WSB competitive racing or is a sham produced by the factories and their riders with the rest of the field as extras to fill out the background? G | ||
| Gaesati |
I think, and I may be wrong, that it was a Steve McLaughlin who created the concept of Superbike racing in the US and then marketed the concept to Europe. | ||
| Trojan |
Some choose to see nothing but the negative; that is unfortunate; it's incredibly bitter sounding and horribly unfair. I agree about the "World Series". But please, I don't pretend to speak for the entirety of America. It would be nice if we could stick to discussing racing and leave the personal commentary out of it. Hi Blake, I certainly did not mean anything to be personally insulting, and if it came across like that then I apologise sincerely. I am also not at all bitter about the DMG/AMA siuation, as I have nothing to be bitter about. If DMG suddenly produced the best series in the world then great, if they don't it won't affect me at all because I don't have to watch it. My comments are purely as an outside impartial observer and I try to have no brand or national loyalty colouring my perception of racing in general, so just say it like see it. >>> The big difference is that BSB sat down with the manufacturers and teams to discuss the way forward rather than trying to impose a solution and a set of rules on everyone without their input. You'll be pleased to know that DMG did the very same, on multiple occasions. Question: Why not too long ago did ALL the Japanese manufacturers walk away from WSBK, and what has been the result? If that is the case, why are the manufacturers now leaving DMG/AMA because they have not been included in planning and discussions regarding the rules and running of the series? Why did they get together to plan a breakaway series, which only stopped because DMG eventually relented and included a superbike class? There is a difference between sitting around a table at the planning stage and coming up with a series that everyone is happy with or having the organisers turn up at your office and tell you what the rules will be next year, and if you don't like it feel free to leave. BSB is also extremely transparent in its running and decision making process, which it certainly appears that DMG has not been. There have been some very contentious decisions made at BSB this year due to accidents resulting in riders being banned, but this has been done with a minimum of fuss and bother and with full consultation with the teams and riders involved. It would seem that your idea of good racing is glitz, glamor and a few highly paid riders on specialized factory machinery not available to anyone else. That is not true competition. It is like saying a Hollywood production is based on a "true story". So is it the truth or is it a story? So is WSB competitive racing or is a sham produced by the factories and their riders with the rest of the field as extras to fill out the background? No I am not saying that at all. There is room for everything from MZ250 club racing right up to the MotoGP and WSBK level of glitz and glamour. Like every sport there is a top level that competitors aspire to, whether that be NFL football, Olympic athletics, Nascar motor racing or motorcycling. Every one of these is accompanied by glitz and glamour because it is a massive spectacle and spectator 'experience', because vast amounts of money are ploughed into the upper echelons of sport, and because it is the pinnacle of achievement in the chosen sport. This upper level is also the 'shop window' for manufacturers and racing in general, and where the investment is made in terms of rider talent and technical innovation. Without the top level of racing there would be little or no interest from manufacturers in developing the latest sports bikes that the majority of riders want or aspire to buy. Ducati don't sell many 1198R or even 1098 models on the back of their racing, but they do sell thousands of 'lesser' models through the marketing and association with racing. People may aspire to a 1098 but will buy a Monster or Hypermotard if that is what they can afford. Would I rather watch the top 5 riders in the world riding the best motorcycles that can be built with no expense spared than 40 relatively unknown riders on restricted production bikes? Yes I would on TV and for atmosphere at the circuit. I also enjoy watching club racing too but in a different way and it is a completely different viewing experience. What I would not like is having either taken away on the whim of an organiser because of their internal politics that's for sure. WSBK racing is certainly not a sham by any means. It is the zenith of production based racing and is open to any team that has the means and the desire to compete. It isn't just factory teams at the front either. Leon Haslam, Shane Byrne, Johnny Rea, Carlos Checa and many others all ride 'privateer' non factory bikes and seem to do pretty well with them too  | ||
| Blake |
Question: Why not too long ago did ALL the Japanese manufacturers walk away from WSBK, and what has been the result? | ||
| Trojan |
Question: Why not too long ago did ALL the Japanese manufacturers walk away from WSBK, and what has been the result? The Japanese factories used the 'single tyre rule' as an excuse to cut back their WSBK activities at a time when they thought the series was on a downward trend. Some of the factories had been looking at getting out for a while and the 750 IL4 vs 1000 twins row rumbled on for a long time, which upset Yamaha Suzuki and Kawasaki to various degrees. The SBK series very nearly collapsed as a result of the manufacturers pulling out. Not as a result fo the factories withdrawal, as they never really left completely, but because sponsors and backers didn't want to be involved without the high profile factory teams and were scared that the crowds would stop attending. In truth though, none of the major manufacturers actually went very far, and all kept their official support and still supplied factory race kits etc for their homologated bikes. Most of the factories kept involved by supporting and being heavily involved with 'privateer' teams such as Ten Kate, Alstare Suzuki and Yamaha Italia, so were never very far from the front line in real terms. Contrast this with teh announcement from Honda US that they have withdrawn not only their team but also all of the support structure for all of the Honda teams in the AMA series. That is a much larger ranging announcement than when they left WSBK. Even now there are no 'official factory teams' in WSBK although Kawasaki will probably be the closest thing to a full on factory effort next year (even though it will still be Paul Bird Racing Team) . The factories have realised that they can have full spec superbikes run by 'third party' privateer teams at much less cost than running a factory team themselves, so that is what they have stuck with. If the team doesn't do very well they can simply take theri bikes to another team just as Kawasaki have done this year, so the manufacturers like the current arrangement very much indeed However, don't for a minute be under the illusion that the bikes you see in WSBK are not full fat factory superbikes though, because they certainly are and always have been | ||
| Jaimec |
Isn't the Yamaha Italia team the "Official Yamaha Factory Team?" | ||
| Trojan |
Isn't the Yamaha Italia team the "Official Yamaha Factory Team?" Yes exactly, that is what I meant. It isn't run by the Yamaha factory but by the Italian Yamaha importers. There was a rumour that next year the 'official Yamaha team' will be run by Stiggy Motorsport instead, so they can pick and choose who runs the 'official' team. The factory Yamaha WSS team was run by Yamaha Germany but has been told it will not exist after this season. | ||
| Blake |
It sure sounds like a biased view of the two series to me Matt. WSBK defied the wishes of the Japanese factories, who then all walked away. The series turned into Ducati Superbike racing. What was the result? The effect was negligible on fan base and the factories came crawling back, tails between their legs. Expect no different from Honda in AMA racing. The chest thumping of the Japanese factories stating that they might create their own series in competition with the AMA was a silly hollow threat. With the power of DMG and their NASCAR connections behind them, there just isn't anyone who is going to supplant them in American motorcycle roadracing. Any track that cooperated with the Japanese factories in such a bid would likely risk losing its NASCAR and other DMG owned races. Why would any track risk that? There might be a few where that might fly, but not near enough for a credible national series. I've yet to hear any word of the other three Japanese factories making any kind of over-dramatic, ego-driven announcement like that from Mr. Blank of American Honda. "Honda US ... have withdrawn not only their team but also all of the support structure for all of the Honda teams in the AMA series." That amounts to what, two teams that were not close to contending for wins let alone championships. So whoopdeedoo. Plus, did Mr. Blank not state that American Honda are only withdrawing from ASBK and DSB, two series where they had very poor showings, routinely getting beat by a number of privateers? If Suzuki or Yamaha pulled out, that might be news. But American Honda? Bye, bye and good riddance Mr. Blank. Take your ego with you and please don't return. That said, I'm pretty sure there is at least one other class in AMA Racing that American Honda may continue to support, and it is arguably one of the most critical for them, the Supersport class. If Corona or Erion wish to continue competitively racing Honda motorcycles, do you really believe that they will get zero support from Honda Racing Corp (HRC), a very strong entity over which Mr. Blank has ZERO authority? So, what was the effect of the mass exodus from WSBK of the Japanese factories, all of whom were upset at the race sanctioning organization's rules making? The series progressed, became stronger, and the Japanese factories returned, tail between their legs. What will be the effect of American Honda's exodus from ASBK and DSB? Probably nothing. We'll hopefully have contending Superbikes in ASBK representing most of the following brands:
But no Honda, boo freaking hoo. What is the downside of Honda leaving again? | ||
| Blake |
"Even now there are no 'official factory teams' in WSBK" What does that mean? Seems like splitting hairs to me. If the factory dumps by far most of their direct support into one particular team, I'd say that is a factory team. But hasn't that been true of the Honda ASBK team for some time now too. They broke away from HRC years ago. Is not the same true for other teams in AMA? Yoshimura Suzuki M4/Emgo/RRW Suzuki Monster Kawasaki Graves Yamaha Corona Honda Erion Honda RMR/Rossmeyer/Geico Buell So what is the point? | ||
| Blake |
I guess my main point it that the gist of comments by some that ASBK and/or AMA road racing in general are doomed, or a joke, or being destroyed by DMG are all ridiculously short-sighted and bereft of any consideration of history or reality. They cling to a few mis-steps and issues that DMG has already addressed. So it all comes across as negative wishful thinking by folks who have a very narrow view of what they think motorcycle roadracing should be. Pretending that there is some kind of HUGE difference between WSBK and ASBK machines is just not being honest in my view. There isn't even that much difference between DOT shod superstock and racing slick shod superbikes... Aaron Yates Yosh Factory Superbike vs Superstock racing best lap times Mid Ohio in 2006 Superstock: Finished 2nd, Best Lap 1:26.2 Superbike: Finished 2nd, Best Lap 1:25.6 VIR in 2005 Superstock: Finished 1st, Best Lap 1:26.6 Superbike2: Finished 2nd, Best Lap 1:25.6 Pike's Peak in 2005 Superstock: Finished 1st, Best Lap 55.4 Superbike: Finished 2nd, Best Lap 55.8 Infineon in 2005 Superstock: Finished 1st, Best Lap 1:37.8 Superbike2: Finished 2nd, Best Lap 1:37.1 From http://www.amadirectlink.com/amrace/proracing/inde x.asp Those are all the races I looked at. I selected them because of Yate's racing a full on Superbike for Yosh and also their Superstock version and also due to his competitive finishes in both races at those particular venues. There just isn't that much difference to speak of between the full on WSBK spec machines versus plain old superstock machines. I doubt that any spectator could ever notice the difference as they fly by at speed from race viewing distance. I sure couldn't. | ||
| Slaughter |
Steve McLaughlin and Hurley Wilvert. The anecdote that Uhlrich published was that he took Wilvert along to make the presentation on Superbike as Hurley was much more universally liked than McLaughlin. Hurley is a cool guy and the ONLY one from that time that I still stay in touch with. (edit: added source) RRW link Hurley raced a TZ750 for us for a season after Kawasaki pulled the plug on AMA F1 (Bob Hansen ran Kawi's US AMA effort - Wilvert, DuHamel, Nixon) (Message edited by slaughter on October 08, 2009) | ||
| Gaesati |
Good to see that there are still some of us dinosaurs around who remember those times. I knew there was someone else besides Mclaughlin. Thanks for the link. | ||
| Slaughter |
 Wilvert passing McLaughlin at Laguna Seca (I got him to autograph this one that I bought on ebay a couple years ago - this is a copy of the image posted by the seller)  | ||
| Slaughter |
Superbike started as a silly class in the context of the F1, it was a "why bother" thing to a lot of us "fans." I mean the first season was won on a freaking TOURING bike (Pridmore's BMW)... yeah, it was pretty freaking special and highly custom. Superbike sure has changed from a decorative addition to the MAIN event to the MAIN event. Oh and Hurley was primarily responsible for starting the new CB350/360 class of racing in AHRMA - he still does race. | ||
| Trojan |
There just isn't that much difference to speak of between the full on WSBK spec machines versus plain old superstock machines. I doubt that any spectator could ever notice the difference as they fly by at speed from race viewing distance. I sure couldn't. Try comparing WSBK times to Superstock times at WSBK meetings this year. At Imola the fastest superbike time in race two was Fabrizio on the Ducati at 1'48.99 (qualifying 1'47.735) whereas the Superstock fastest lap by Simeon on the Ducati was 1'52.56 (qualifying 1'52.06), which is a difference of 3.5 seconds per lap. Hardly 'not that much difference' and most spectators could certainly tell the difference between them. I haven't looked through any other WSBK times from the year but I'm sure that at some circuits the difference may be a little less and at others more, but there is certainly a very noticeable difference. If spectators can't tell the difference why don't we just scrap MotoGP, WSBK, F1 and Nascar and just race tarted up road bikes/cars with loud pipes? Because nobody wants to watch that that's why That is why F1 is huge and F2 car racing is nothing in comparison. Both look pretty much identical and both are single seater race cars, but that is where the similarity ends. If all you have available to watch are emasculated restricted superbikes that is what people will have to watch, but that isn't necessarily what people would choose to watch given the opportunity. (Message edited by trojan on October 09, 2009) | ||
| Blake |
A valid comparison needs to be for the same racer in the same conditions and with similar race results. Like has been shown for Aaron Yates above. The major factors in lap time differences between SBK and Superstock likely comes down to tires, slicks versus street legal treaded, and traction control (electronics). | ||
| Vagelis46 |
"Try comparing WSBK times to Superstock times at WSBK meetings this year. " Trojan, sometimes you tell half the story, just to prove your point. The greatest difference in lap times between the WSBK and world Superstock bikes, is because of the tires...... | ||
| Blake |
>>> If spectators can't tell the difference why don't we just scrap MotoGP, WSBK, F1 and Nascar and just race tarted up road bikes/cars with loud pipes? The issue of debate was your assertion that ASBK racers will suffer diminished opportunities to compete in WSBK due to the new ASBK tech rules that allow fewer modifications compared to WSBK. By the logic you offer, MotoGP would be the only Moto road racing that people want to watch. Here's the truth: It's more about money. If DMG announced a $10M purse for future Daytona 200 races, we'd see top racers from around the world flocking to get in on the action, and the television networks would be eager to obtain the broadcast rights. When it comes to just about any sporting competition, the greater the prize, the more interest by fans. | ||
| Trojan |
"Try comparing WSBK times to Superstock times at WSBK meetings this year. " Trojan, sometimes you tell half the story, just to prove your point. The greatest difference in lap times between the WSBK and world Superstock bikes, is because of the tires...... Yes it is PART of the difference, and is only part of the difference between Superstock and Superbike specs so is a very important point. The bikes also have different forks, brakes, swingarms, exhausts, ECU, bodywork (Superstock cannot use carbon body parts unless standard), so do we then say 'apart from these huge differences the bikes are exactly the same?' BSB has introduced an 'EVo' class for next year that will run Superstock engines with full superbike chassis and tyres and run with the full on superbikes. As an experiment TAS Suzuki ran a GSXR1000 'EVO' superbike at the last round at Silverstone and it finished 10th in race 2 ridden by this years Superstock champion Alistair Seeley. It finished one place behind the regular Suzuki GSXR1000 Superbike run by the same team and lapped .5 of a second slower than the regular bike on his best lap (race one was nearly 1 second slower but the Evo bike failed to finish). It was nearly 2 seconds slower per lap than the leading (Yamaha) riders in both races however, and in racing terms 2 seconds per lap is a massive margin. It should be remembered though, this was no Superstock bike, but a full on, fully adjustable chassis superbike fitted with a superstock engine, which is a big difference. It remains to be seen if other teams will enter 'Evo' bikes next year and if they can get within the same kind of time difference to their superbike team mates. The biggest point is this. If spectators wanted to watch superstock bikes instead of superbikes they can do that right now, and they have a free choice between the two. If you look at viewing figues, attendance figures and whatever statistics you care to quote, you will see that Superbikes attract a far bigger audience than Superstock racing. As I have said before, given the choice most people want to see the fastest riders on the fastest bikes. Unfortunately we have to watch what the organisers choose to give us and sometimes this doesn't amount to the same thing. | ||
| Vagelis46 |
"As I have said before, given the choice most people want to see the fastest riders on the fastest bikes. " I think the "fastest riders" part of the equation is more important than the "fastest bikes". If in the next WSBK race in 2 weeks time, Spies, Haga, Rea ride EVO bikes, is there going to be much of a difference ?? Is there going to be less interesting if the ride superstock bikes ?? Running costs of racing teams are very important. -10% of Hp in superbikes will not make much of a difference, but -10% in running costs of the teams will make a huge difference. Look at moto2, that we both find extremely interesting. Why ?? Because the running cost will allow many teams to compete. Question : Why Brit journos get injured when they test Buells ?? | ||
| Trojan |
I think the "fastest riders" part of the equation is more important than the "fastest bikes". If in the next WSBK race in 2 weeks time, Spies, Haga, Rea ride EVO bikes, is there going to be much of a difference ?? Is there going to be less interesting if the ride superstock bikes ?? But the fastest rider WANT to ride the fastest bikes, so they are likely to race in the series that is going to allow the fastest bikes to compete. Unless every series downgrades superbikes to a superstock level then riders will want to ride in the fastest and least restrictive series. Believe it or not, race riders really do want to go as fast as possible and I have yet to meet a rider who is happy to run in a restricted series given the choice. I agree that if you put the best riders on slower bikes the race would still be very much the same, but the riders don't want that and nor do the fans. Question : Why Brit journos get injured when they test Buells ?? You won't tempt me to open that can of worms again! | ||
| Vagelis46 |
Can of worms ?? Why ?? Riders go for the money as well. I do not think that Spies, Lorenzo,Stoner would mind racing Rossi in Superstock next year, with the same salary. | ||
| Backcountryme |
+20 Blake. If the purse is high enough you will get the riders. Here is an example of what happens when there is a great payout. http://www.eldoraspeedway.com/million.html That is an article on the Mopar Million. This was a sprint car race that payed $200,000 to win. Over 150 cars showed up and about 20,000 fans showed up. This is at a small dirt track in Ohio. I dare say that the amount of people that follow sprint car racing is less then the amount of people that follow motorcycle racing. As for the speed difference between Superbike and Sportbike, take away the radar guns and data sheets and I doubt anyone could tell that there is any difference in speed on the track. When bikes are running side by side the it would be impossible to tell that there is a 5 to 10 mph difference in top speed. | ||
| Backcountryme |
One more thing, I hear a lot of people sat that the riders will go to another series to ride the fastest bike and such. Remember, the riders are employees for the most part. If they had any say in the matter there would be 80 bikes running in MotoGP. The riders will go where the rides are. If the world switched to 50cc pit bikes Rossi would be on one. | ||
| Trojan |
If the world switched to 50cc pit bikes Rossi would be on one. Only if he had no choice. What I said was that riders would go to the fastest bikes GIVEN THE CHOICE. It may of course come to situation where riders don't have a choice such as when MotoGP changed to 800cc from 990. The majority of riders want the 990's back, but they can't go anywhere else to race them can they? If there are two series running concurrently, one with 'proper superbikes' and one with restricted 'superstock bikes' which one do you think the rider,team and sponsors will try to get into first? What that develops into is a two tier system with the best riders (and best supported riders) in the superbike series and they take all the big money with them. Take a look at the preponderance of British riders in WSBK next year compared to other nationalities. So far we have Toseland, Rea, Crutchlow, Byrne, Haslam confirmed with Camier, Sykes and Laverty very good possibilities for rides. One of the biggest reasons for this is that WSBK teams look to BSB for talented riders on WSB spec superbikes rather than to Germany or Australia or Canada (or the USA these days) on restricted superbikes. The British riders certainly don't have money to take with them like the Spanish and Italian riders seem to, so are there purely for talent, not because they have bought rides. take away the radar guns and data sheets and I doubt anyone could tell that there is any difference in speed on the track. When bikes are running side by side the it would be impossible to tell that there is a 5 to 10 mph difference in top speed. But even I can count a 2 second difference in lap time without a stop watch or data logger. | ||
| Blake |
Nice misdirection. Again... The issue of debate was Matt's assertion that ASBK racers will suffer diminished opportunities to compete in WSBK due to the new ASBK tech rules that allow fewer modifications compared to WSBK. The issue was not whether fans prefer SBK over Superstock. That is a silly straw man misdirection of the discussion. | ||
| Backcountryme |
Yeah, you can count a 2 second difference if there is a gap between bikes. What I am saying is that you cannot tell the top speed or even corner speed difference between a Superbike vs. Superstock race. Not a Superbike gapping a superstock bike. As for riders wanting to ride the fastest bike, that is a no brainer. Yes they want to be on the fastest bike. But the point I was making is that there is not going to be a mass exodus of riders and teams because DMG decides to regulate bike cost and tech. The same teams that ran AMA this year will be running next year. Some riders might change, but that happens every year. Cardenas got the chance to move to Moto2, so he did. It isn't like he was fed up with DMG and just decided to move. A Moto2 team owner decided to give him a shot. The riders are the last people to have a say in what group they run in. That is unless they would rather not race then run for a lesser class. | ||
| Jaimec |
Back on topic: If anyone can win two races in a row with his back against the wall, it's Ben Spies. Last race should be interesting! |
