| Author | Message | ||
     Trojan |
Desmosedici in mass production? Development in 2011, racing in 2012? too expensive, although a cheaper V4 may be on the horizon? If they remove restrictors then V twins should run the same cc and weight as the 4 cyl bikes. Surely that is the only way forward? | ||
| Vagelis46 |
If they remove restrictors there is going to be 2cyl&1200cc against 4cyl&1000cc . I think this is the way forward for some interesting racing. At this moment (with restrictors) it is not fair. Even with no restrictors 2cyl&1200cc engines make less absolute hp than 4cyl&1000cc engines . Just check any dyno of a street 1198 vs an IL4. The Dukes have a better power delivery , while giving away maximum hp . Each configuration have its strong and weak points , so I think that basically they are even . So why have these restrictors in WSBK ??? Are BMW and the Jap factories so desperate to beat Ducati , they need something like +30hp to make it ??? I hear some rumours that Ducati have a V2 1200cc ready , with something like a 70degrees engine, less wheelbase and a longer swingarm . Maybe they need to clear the showrooms from the remaining 1198 models , so that next year they introduce and race the new model . But in any case , Ducati should have respected their fan base , and compete in 2011 WSBK , which is their racing origin , even with rules that do not favour them. Then let the unbiased racing fans have their opinion and give FIM the chance of making things right. So far what Ducati is saying for their WSBK future is just 100% PR crap . Surely they are starting to sound like H-D. Maybe they are more interested now for marketing they new VR #46 line on Ducati clothes  | ||
| Trojan |
I think to be fair to all the rules need to be very simple. 1000cc any engine configuration (provided it is production based) and no restrictors. That makes it perfectly clear to anyone who wants to compete exactly where the goal posts are. If Ducati (or anyone else) wants to build a V Twin to race then they have nobody to blame but themselves if it doesn't make as much power as an IL4 engine or is uncompetitive. Power isn't everything, and most of the IL4 teams in WSB are taking power away now rather than tryng to find more. Yamaha made the mistake this year of adding 1-bhp to the R1 and have taken all season to get back to where they left off last year with less power and more electronics. | ||
| Vagelis46 |
I do not agree with Capacity (cc) as the limiting factor. I would say it is better for everybody to race engines with more or less the same hp. Of course I would not stretch it as much as AMA Sportbike class rules that have 2cyl&1125cc racing 4cyl&600cc. What if someone adds a compressor to a 2cyl 1000cc engine. It is still a 1000cc engine so should it be raced against 4cyl&1000cc atmospheric engines ??? Would this be fair ?? I do not agree with the Jap approach to the rules . What about Supersport rules ??? What about the great bike Triumph have produced and now they are succesfully racing in WSS ???? Should it be banned for having an extra 75cc over the Jap bikes ??? Should it be restricted ??? It is obvious to anyone that is watching a supersport race , even for the first time, that the Triumps are slower than the IL4s but they handle noticably better . So an extra 75cc and -1cyl is not making more power , but in fact less power. It is the same with 2cyl&1200cc , they make less power but they handle better . Should all race bikes be the same and requiring identical styles ?? Racing is there to help engineers test and develop new technologies. Different approaches and theories-configurations should be able to compete under the same conditions . That is that makes it more interesting . | ||
| Reepicheep |
Why limit CC's but not limit RPM? | ||
| Vagelis46 |
Limiting rpm is not fair for multicylinder engines , I guess. | ||
| Fresnobuell |
I do not agree with Capacity (cc) as the limiting factor. I would say it is better for everybody to race engines with more or less the same hp. Of course I would not stretch it as much as AMA Sportbike class rules that have 2cyl&1125cc racing 4cyl&600cc. You forget the AMA was attempting to level the playing field by allowing the Buell to have more power in the stock motor to combat the big $$$ Japanese factory teams. The Buell ran damn close to a stock motor with a pipe and tune. As we know, the Japanese teams maxed out the 600cc engine potential. The difference in HP was not as much as people want to believe and the 10ish HP advantage the Buell had was very well counteracted by the extra weight it had to carry. AMA DSB is killing the "displacement" class racing theory. I love the fact there are 2, 4 and sometimes 3 cylinder bikes in the same class. The differences between the bikes making for more interesting racing and strategies. | ||
| Bads1 |
As we know, the Japanese teams maxed out the 600cc engine potential. No they didn't and not even close. 600 used to be used in FX and were pumping 140 plus. These 600's are not. | ||
| Imonabuss |
Yeah, Fresno, but the reaction to what the AMA tried has been wildly controversial, definitely more negative than good. It is also vehenmently opposed by the FIM. That sucks, because the racing is spectacular, but it is yet to be seen if AMA and DSB producing the great racing can overwhelm the negative gossip (greatly funded by the Japanese.) Trojan, I agree with Vagelis completely, and pray WSBK doesn't go to cc based. If you limit a class with cc's, then companies will simply build engines with the most cylinders that are allowed. If you say maximum four cylinders, then that is the only config that can win with any consistency. There is no question that more cylinders make more power, all other things being equal. I think it is the greatest stifling of innovation and diversity that could ever be in racing. If you don't limit cylinders you will have 6 cylinder, 8 cylinder and other wildly expensive products with no relation to reality that only the wealthiest of companies can field. | ||
| Blake |
Dana, How do you know what HP the top IL4 600cc machines are making this year? I recall years ago, 2002ish, seeing Tommy Hayden's ZX6R Supersport machine dyno at 125 SAE RWHP. | ||
| Fresnobuell |
o they didn't and not even close. 600 used to be used in FX and were pumping 140 plus. These 600's are not. Sorry, maxed out per the class regulations. Good enough? | ||
| Fresnobuell |
but the reaction to what the AMA tried has been wildly controversial, Absolutely idiotic when looking at the final product. It just shows you the level of sophistication of the most race fans. Not very.} | ||
| 46champ |
It didn't seem that most people were complaining about the fact that the twins have more displacement than the fours in DSB it was that the Buell had so much more. No one seems to complain about the Ducati 848 running and winning. There is a reasonable amount of extra displacement that most people will accept. Fact is if the twins were aloud 850cc instead of 750cc in world supersport Ducati would have a factory team next year. I'd lay money on that | ||
| Bads1 |
I recall years ago, 2002ish, seeing Tommy Hayden's ZX6R Supersport machine dyno at 125 SAE RWHP Blake please show me where that SuperSport spec bike was putting those numbers to the tire.... esspecially in 02. Fresno I can agree with you response.... to class regulation. | ||
| Elvis |
The 1200 cc for twins and 1000 cc for 4's seems to work very well. Unfortunately, if Ducati is out of the picture and no longer using their political weight to push twins, it could make it difficult for other twins. It would be a real tragedy to those of us who like to have some choices if the rules shift back to basically making 4 cylinder bikes the only competitive configuration. | ||
| Blake |
Dana, That information was presented a cable show documentary. Discovery channel maybe. I had recorded it. I could freeze frame the shot of the dyno screen. It was clear as day, 125 SAE RWHP, and I've mentioned it here in discussions before. You'll have to take my word for it. They showed the bike coming out of the crate, being torn completely down, cam timing altered, race chip and exhaust and other bits going in, dyno tuning... big fat full screen shot of the final dyno run, 125 SAE RWHP. Why so incredulous? The bikes are hitting 170+MPH at Daytona. You need HP to do that. | ||
| Trojan |
I think it is the greatest stifling of innovation and diversity that could ever be in racing. If you don't limit cylinders you will have 6 cylinder, 8 cylinder and other wildly expensive products with no relation to reality that only the wealthiest of companies can field. I disagree for one very big reason. This is production based racing, so factories would have to build sufficient exotic roadbikes in order to homologate them for WSB. Ducati have shown that this isn't possible with their Desmosedici adn I can't see any of the other factories developing 6,8 or 10 cylinder machines for the road just to win at WSB. What is more likely to happen is that factories will make production bikes with 4 cylinder engines that are closer to MotoGP machines than road bikes. This is the route that Aprilia are taking now and Kawasaki will follow suit with the new ZX10. And if a company wants to build a 6 cylinder sports bike then great, why not? This is adding to diversity not stifling it surely? Racing should be about who has the fastest bike, not who can fiddle the rules by getting extra capacity to suit the engine they already have, leaving the fans unsure of exactly what is legal and what isn't. Make it a straight 1000cc, no cylinder limits but production based with a homologation of 5000 units. That will stop exotic materials and homologation specials frommost factories. WSB/BSB/AMA shouldn't have to make rules to suit a particular engine configuration competitive, but should just make a set of easily followed rules that manufacturers have to stick to. regarding Supersports engine power, I agree with Blake. Most leading WSS engines are now making in excess of 145bhp at the rear wheel no problem. One of the complaints with Moto2 has been that the spec engines are down onpower compared to WSS engines by at least 15bhp maybe more (and they are 130bhp approx). The difference is that a Moto2 engine has to last 3 races whereas a WSS engine gets a rebuild every race. (Message edited by trojan on September 03, 2010) | ||
| Crusty |
Matt; why is it that you propose a straight displacement limit for Superbikes, yet berate the AMA for doing just that in Flat Track? | ||
| Trojan |
Matt; why is it that you propose a straight displacement limit for Superbikes, yet berate the AMA for doing just that in Flat Track? Two completely different sports with different rules and histories etc so no comparison. WSB is based on production bikes whereas Flat track is pretty much a 'prototype series' so anything should go really. IN flat track racing they are imposing a 750cc limit to protect one factory rather than open it up to others, whereas the current WSB rules are exactly the opposite and they have been fiddling with the rules for years in order to protect one company (Ducati). If they want to impose a cc limit in flat track then at least propose one where more than one manufacturer already makes a 750 motor suitable? There are lots of 1000cc road bikes suitable and homologated for WSB so the issue doesn't arise there. In fact campanies such as Aprilia and BMW saw that their current twin cylinder models were either not suitable or not competitive in WSB so designed new bikes from the ground up that did fit into the rules and were competitive. This is what should happen, not having manufacturers dictating the rules structure by trying to get 'allowances' for bikes that would simply not be comptitive if an across the board cc limit was imposed. Bottom line is this. If you build a 1000cc V twin and it isn't competitive in WSb the answer is pretty simple really...build a bike with an engine that is just like BMW and Aprilia have done. If you can't do that then don't race in WSB. | ||
| Blake |
Matt, You don't think Honda would build a 5 or 6 cylinder repli-racer to gain performance edge against the competition? History shouts otherwise. WSBK will lose a LOT of fans if they ditch twin cylinder machines. No twin can equal a four cyl if displacement and all else are equal. In effect such a rule will ditch twin cyl machines. That would be a real shame. | ||
| Fresnobuell |
One of the complaints with Moto2 has been that the spec engines are down onpower compared to WSS engines by at least 15bhp maybe more (and they are 130bhp approx). People can't seem to get past their hangups to enjoy the racing. Does it really matter who's motors make more power? Right now, WSS can't touch Moto2 for racing quality. Sounds like WSS is a more expensive proposition versus Moto2? If so, that's interesting. | ||
| Elvis |
Bottom line is this. If you build a 1000cc V twin and it isn't competitive in WSb the answer is pretty simple really...build a bike with an engine that is just like BMW and Aprilia have done. If you can't do that then don't race in WSB. Why would we want that? If the rules allow 1100 cc triples and 1200 cc twins manufacturers will make high performance twins and triples. Heck, I'd love to see a high performance parallel twin - which could be possible with a 1200 cc limit, but will never happen with a hard and blindly irrational 1000 cc limit across the board. If the rules make 4 cylinder engines the only practical option then that will be the only choice we have. I like triples and I like twins. I hope performance triples and twins are available in the future, but your suggestion would take them away. For what? I'm sure the 6 current major players would like to lock innovation out, but why would we? What does your suggestion do (positive) for us as consumers? | ||
| Trojan |
You don't think Honda would build a 5 or 6 cylinder repli-racer to gain performance edge against the competition? History shouts otherwise. No I don't. Honda have shown the least interest of all the Japanese companies in WSB and tend to leave it to the 'satellite teams' to get on with, albeit with big help from HRC. But if they did build a 5 or 6 cylinder sports bike for homologation to WSB then great  Why not? Far from locking out innovation, a straight 1000cc formula would encourage far more innovation than the current dispacement disparity and 'favourable' rules for bikes that otherwise wouldn't be competitive. I like performance twins and triples too, and am very happy that Triumph are doing well in WSS. However I don't like rules that get changed just to accomodate one factory/team like we have in WSB right now. WSB was designed as a 'privateer' championship originally and it was Ducatis involvement that started the whole 'tech war' in the first place. If rules were simple and crystal clear then teams/factories would know exactly what they have to do year on year in order to compete. By all means limit electronics but don't make special rules just to keep Ducati or another manufacturer propped up with a bike that otherwise wouldn't win. Having a 1000cc formula in WSB wouldn't necessarily stop innovation from manufacturers of twins/triples either, they just wouldn't be able to race in WSB. BMW developed their outstanding HP2 boxer sports bike despite knowing it wouldn't race in WSB didn't they? There are plenty of 'Twins' race series around for those that want to continue racing twins only, but WSB should be exactly what it says ont he tin...World SUPERbikes. | ||
| Trojan |
People can't seem to get past their hangups to enjoy the racing. Does it really matter who's motors make more power? Right now, WSS can't touch Moto2 for racing quality. Sounds like WSS is a more expensive proposition versus Moto2? If so, that's interesting I agree, Moto 2 is the best race series running at world level right now in terms of specator interest and value for money, and it really doesn't matter to me if they are 130 or 150bhp. Nobiody complains that there are no twins,triples, V8's in there do they? It is cheaper for teams to compete in Moto2 than it is to run in front at WSS as well, which is a bonus. It also shows what WSB could be like with a straight 1000cc limit across the board, as it would basically be a super version of moto2 but with 'production based' chassis components. | ||
| V74 |
i totally agree with Elvis, i would love to see KTM and Buell V twins in wskb and a triumph triple,and maybe a norton parallel twin,not possible with capacity restrictions of 1000cc,more variety in bikes than il4,s makes if far more interesting,just look at motogp at the moment, | ||
| Trojan |
I would also like to see KTM, BMW and Buell twins racing in WSB, but not if it means writing specific rules to allow some bikes to have extra capacity, some to be restricted, some to weigh more than others etc. One set of rules for everyone and be damned. if you don't fit don't race. There are plenty of innovative bikes that have been developed without racing in WSB over the years so it shouldn't present a problem to anyone. Norton are building an IL4 engine for MotoGP already, and any suggestion of them racing their 'Commando' engine in WSB would need some serious rule bending to make it competitive (5 laps head start maybe?). Don't get me wrong. I will never buy a IL4 road bike, but I want to watch racing that is run to a single rule book so that the best get to the front, not those with the most influence over the organisers. If that means that everyone runs the same engine configuration then so be it. Nobody seems to mind in MotoGP /Moto2/125GP or WSS do they? | ||
| Elvis |
Matt, What about these rules: 1200 cc twins 1100 cc triples 1000 cc fours Same minimum weight, same modifications allowed for all configurations (with a shift toward more stock and fewer modifications allowed across the board). That's what I'd like to see. I don't think that would give anybody an advantage. If, for some reason, that would give twins a technical advantage (and I don't, for a minute, think it would) Kawasaki, Honda, etc. would be free to develop twins. I don't think we're likely to see twins become the dominant configuration under my proposed rules. I think the rules have been clouded for a long time by Ducati and special allowances made to both help and hinder them. The restrictor plate and the requirement that they remain more stock than other bikes is a result of them producing low-volume, exotic homologation bikes. . . . but nothing is stopping other brands from producing more exotic homologation bikes. I think I agree with you in principle in that the rules need to be simplified without so many exceptions, but I think that can be done and still allow varied displacements for varied configurations. The real issue isn't that a 1200 cc twins limit is unfair, but the special rules built all around Ducati are unfair. (Message edited by elvis on September 03, 2010) | ||
| Vagelis46 |
I just do not understand the fact that some people think that the Dukes are favoured in WSBK. They are not !! Dukes so far had to carry 6kg(13lbs) of extra weight and still have the original 50mm restrictor . How fair is that ?? The great Troy Bayliss got a title in 2008 and other than that they haven't dominated . It took 3 years of racing to finally have equal weight , but they are still underpowered , and recently they have bad results. Are Triumphs legal for WSS ?? Why ?? Because they are British , so Brits do not get annoyed by the extra 75cc , or because they are still not winning , so that Japs think they prove to the world the superiority of the IL4 ?? | ||
| Davegess |
I want to see an energy rule. You get x amount of BTUs to use any way you want. Small scale nuclear reactor generating steam? Go for it. Hydrogen fuel cells? Go for it. Just stipulate two wheels, a weight, length and width requirement and basic safety rules. Of course this should go into the MotoGP thread but.... For WSB I have no trouble with different displacements for different engine configurations. Piston speed and breathing are the two big limiting factors so more cylinders mean more power. I don't want to see just 4 or 5 or 6 I would like to see a variety. | ||
| Trojan |
I just do not understand the fact that some people think that the Dukes are favoured in WSBK. They are not !! Ducati were favoured for many years in WSB, which is why they won so many titles. When the rules were changed to allow 1000cc bikes in so as to get more Japanese road bikes eligible Ducati threatened to leave the series unless they were allowed higher capacity and lower weight limits. Then when the 999 got too expensive and they knew the 1098 was coming they yet again got the rules changed to suit their bikes (and ONLY their bikes). Now they get to a point where no matter what happens the 1198 is no longer going to be competitive next year they decide to take their ball home and not race at all. Good. As for Triumph being legal in WSS, what has that got to do with being British? It may surprise you but WSB is run pretty much entirely by Italians. The current WSS rules were written before Triumph had a competitive bike and before they ever went racing as a factory supported effort (in fact when they were introduced Triumph were making a 4 cylnder 600cc bike). WSS rules actually favoured the Ducati 748/749 for many years too remember? I want to see a race series where the same cc limit applies right across the board. This means that there will never again be an argument that 'they only won because they had more capacity/less weight/less restrictors/etc etc etc. The ony way that will happen is if you have a simple unequivical rule with no exceptions. By the way, Ducati riders have taken 5 of the top 8 places in FP1 today, so are hardly being thrashed under current rules are they? |
