| Author | Message | ||
     Simond |
No point putting a fortune into a CRT engine if the guy in the next garage can buy it from you for peanuts at the end of the race. I take it that there is no claiming rule on the chassis. Perhaps this might encourage some more adventurous development in suspension. | ||
| Blake |
How will they not be able to test new technologies? A one off motor part is not worth much to anyone other than its developer. The main reason factories sponsor race teams is not for development purposes. It's marketing, HUGE marketing. Street bikes don't have carbon brakes or non-baffled exhausts. No MotoGP V-5 or V-4 Honda sport bike derivative has been produced. Does Ducati sell a V-4 engined machine? Does Suzuki? MotoGP is about racing and factory recognition/marketing. The organizers are making a huge mistake. We have SBK for on the cheap racing also-rans competing against factory teams. For MotoGP, Socialist racing rules suck! Let them race what they want. It's MotoGP. Cowards running the show it seems. No subsidies, just race. | ||
| Jaimec |
http://www.ducati.com/bikes/desmosedici_rr/desmose dici_rr/2008/tech_spec.do
Honda has built the V-Four Interceptor for over twenty years.
I'm guessing "Socialist" is replacing "Liberal" as most overused and misused word in American English lexicon lately. | ||
| Trojan |
It really isn't all that hard to get 150 HP out of one of these CBR600RR engines with its Dual Stage Fuel Injection (PGM-DSFI) taken directly from Honda's MotoGP bike. The stocker turns out just under 110 HP and 45 ft/lbs of torque. They are virtually bullet proof because of the perfection of the basic design. You have pretty much answered your own question here. The motor is pretty bulletproof so is affordable and will last a season without huge expense. WSS teams have more power available to them with their 600cc engines than Moto2 teams do, but their rebuild costs are enormous in comparison. Dorna wanted an AFFORDABLE series that allowed all teams to race against each other on equal engine terms. All you've argued is that all of MotoGP will turn to CRT machines. How will that prevent factory team domination? It won't. The market today is not your father's motorcycle market of the 1960's. You don' understand the Japanese factory mentality then. They are there to win only. Competing just for the sake of it is not in their ethos and they can develop bikes away from competition quite easily. If they cannot have a significant advantage that allows them to win every week then they will withdraw, just as they did in WSB and GP racing in the 1960's and Kawasaki/Suzuki/Aprilia have done in recent years. If the Japanese factories have to run exactly the same ECU/engine package as everyone else they will not have any performance advantage so will think twice before paying riders millions of dollars a year to ride for them with no guarantee of winning races or championships. Dorna have softened their approach this week slightly (although the factories are unlikely to see it that way), and have given the factories a stark choice. 'Reduce the cost of lease bikes to privateer teams by around 65% by 2013 (i.e. reduce the lease cost from 3 million to €1 million!) or have spec ECU and rev limit rules imposed that will negate the use of expensive factory prototype engines altogeher. Frankly I don't see why they deserve such a lifeline at this point, seeing as they have had years to implement a similar strategy and have refused point blank. For MotoGP, Socialist racing rules suck! Let them race what they want. It's MotoGP. Cowards running the show it seems. No subsidies, just race. There is nothing socialist or cowardly about it. Every race series has to have some rules so this is no more socialist than AMA Superbike or current MotoGP rules. In a perfect world of course all the teams would be overflowing with cash and could afford to run pure prototype bikes at huge expense, but it isn't perfect and they can't do it. Either they make substantial savings now or MotoGP will simply cease to exist as a viable championship. Dorna have subsidised the smaller teams for years now, and without their subsidy we would have been watching less than 8 bikes racing in MotoGP for at least 5 years. Without the money from Dorna NONE of the satellite teams would have made the grid at all. Since 2004 (the major period that the factories in the form of the MSMA have been effectively running the show) we have lost 11 teams from MotoGP because of the costs involved and lack of sponsorship money, despite huge payments from Dorna. It doesn't take Einstein to see that something drastic needs to be done before the series is no longer viable in its current format. | ||
| Jaimec |
I'm looking forward to Colin Edwards' evaluation of the Suter/BMW bike. Hopefully, this one won't set his nuts on fire... | ||
| Blake |
Jaimie, The question posed was "does Ducati sell a V-4 engined machine?" Your answer was a link to a spec sheet from a limited production bike that has not been produced in years. The correct answer to the question is "no." The point was that MotoGP racing is not used for commercial product development any more than F1 is. Some of the technology may eventually trickle down, but the purpose of factory participation is not for product development as was contended. You rebut the statement that "no MotoGP V-5 or V-4 Honda sport bike derivative has been produced" pointing to the Honda VFR. Again, that makes no sense. The VFR precedes four stroke MotoGP racing by more than a decade. Obviously that V-4 was in no way derived from MotoGP. Again, the point is that MotoGP has not been used primarily as a means to develop commercial products. Up till now, it has pure prototype racing for factory bragging rights and market appeal, nothing less. The folks at MotoGP ought to let the factories and anyone else who cares to race whatever prototype machine they like. | ||
| Blake |
Matt, Why would you assume that the factories would not be competing to win with CRT machines? Why do they compete in any racing anywhere then? I don't know of any series today where factories are afforded special rules. They simply invest a lot more time and money into their teams. That is how they gain an advantage. Please explain how that will cease to be the case in MotoGP. It's also disingenuous to limit the discussion to only the Japanese teams, of which there are currently two full factory teams slated for MotoGP in 2012. In other series we see full factory efforts by Ducati, KTM, BMW, and Aprilia in addition to those by the Japanese factories. In tight times factories choose only the racing series they feel most confident in being able to compete for the championship. That is no revelation. It's just silly to think that any tech rules are going to put an end to a factory team dominating a series. Never happened, never will. | ||
| Blake |
I see cowardice in the rules making of MotoGP and Moto2/3 as well as socialistic type pandering to prop up the least successful by limiting those who are most successful. Maybe in Moto2/3 that has its place. In the world's pinnacle series of prototype motorcycle road racing it sure seems cowardly; the racing is giving way to fear of loss of participation. Either it is an elite series or it isn't. If what you say is true, that MotoGP was being run over by factory Honda, then that too is cowardice. They should have had the gut to tell Honda to take a leap back then and stuck with 1000cc machines. Cowardice ruled the day then too it seems. It no longer will be if the current trend continues as stated. They are transforming what was an incredibly technically exciting, state-of-the-art prototype factory racing series and turning it into not much more than another superbike or formula class. Close racing, close racing, close racing... Not what the premiere prototype series ought to be about. It ought to be about the fastest, best, most incredible prototype racing machines on the planet. It ought not to be about trying to make the series affordable and more competitive for all. Just my opinion. | ||
| Jaimec |
The only reason Ducati races a V4 is because they know there's no way a V-Twin of the same displacement would be competitive. Fours have less reciprocating weight, more valve area and can reach higher redlines than twins. HOWEVER, the Desmosedici V-Four is essentially two water-cooled V-Twins siamesed together, so what they learn in MotoGP is directly applicable to their street bikes. Don't believe me, look at the Panigale... that thing is essentially a MotoGP bike with a MotoGP engine cut in half. Even has the same "frameless" design they developed in MotoGP. Of course, now the MotoGP factory team is looking into a more traditional aluminum perimeter frame because that frameless design only works if your name is "Casey Stoner" but the technology was developed in MotoGP, NOT Superbike. | ||
| Blake |
You're grasping at straws. The frames are not the same Jamie. Nor can you take the four cylinder and apply it to the two. You are talking about a 3:1 difference in cylinder displacement between the two. >>> what they learn in MotoGP is directly applicable to their street bikes That just isn't true. I won't disagree that some tech from MotoGP might benefit street bikes. My only point in all this was that the claim, that factories primarily participate in MotoGP for developing commercial products, is false. | ||
| Rocketsprink |
"It ought to be about the fastest, best, most incredible prototype racing machines on the planet. It ought not to be about trying to make the series affordable and more competitive for all." Well, seeing how the grids have shrunk over the years and now with Suzuki dropping out, that thought process has gone bye-bye. | ||
| Jaimec |
Of course the frames are different... THEY DON'T HAVE FRAMES! Haven't you been paying attention? I've stated in the past, however, that if the point of MotoGP is to develop technology that will filter down to the street, then get rid of the technologies that will NEVER be applicable to a street bike. Number 1 example: Carbon/Carbon brakes. Those things only work at INSANE speeds. Force the MotoGP bikes to use steel brakes and you'll see lap times go up, I'm sure. I also said they should eliminate GPS-based traction control as it would never have street use but guess what? One of the options for the Panigale happens to be GPS-based traction control! What I'm guessing though, is that it would be more useful for a track day rider than someone who rides primarily on the street. Also, by putting it in the production bike, I'm betting Ducati is hoping it'll be allowed in Superbike, too. | ||
| Trojan |
I don't know of any series today where factories are afforded special rules. Yes you do. It is called MotoGP. The MSMA is a body that represents ONLY the major manufacturers involved in MotoGP, and they have had carte blanche in writing the technical rules for the last few years (at least since the 4 strokes were introduced). This gives the factory teasm an absolute monopoly over the rules structure and hence over their domination of the series. Do you remember a small British team called WCM? They wanted to race their bike which had a very heavily modified Yamaha R1 engine in it, but were effectively banned by the MSMA before they could even develop the idea. Do you think they did this in the interest of sporting fairness, or to protect their monopoly of engine supply to satellite teams? MotoGP manufacturers have been asked for years to supply engines to teams so that they can build their own frames. They haven't done it. They have been asked to lease last years bikes to teams at reduced prices. They haven't done it. They have been asked to look at a change in rules to allow more cost effective racing - they haven't done it (in fact they have increased lease prices substantially). MotoGP is in a parlous state simply because the factories have had the rules to themselves for too long, and have done nothing to rectify what has been obvioulsy a downhill slide for too long. Now they should have the rulebook taken off them and should comply with what they are told to do. I see cowardice in the rules making of MotoGP and Moto2/3 as well as socialistic type pandering to prop up the least successful by limiting those who are most successful. What? socialistic pandering? Blake, if the series continues to carry on as it is there will be NO racing in MotoGP by 2014. How is that benificial to anyone? If the factory association cannot make rules to suit the majority of teams then they should not be allowed the privilige of making the rules at all. In other series we see full factory efforts by Ducati, KTM, BMW, and Aprilia in addition to those by the Japanese factories. Do you not see why? WSB is directly related to street bike sales, so the manufacturers involved have taken the decision that marketing will be stronger running in WSb than MotoGP. They also know that as 'smaller' manufacturers they cannot hope to fight against HOnda/Yamaha in the MSMA in order to get MotoGP rules straightened out. Maybe if the CRT idea workd we will see more manufacturer involvement in MotoGP in engine supply from Aprilia, BMW and others. | ||
| Trojan |
I'm looking forward to Colin Edwards' evaluation of the Suter/BMW bike. Hopefully, this one won't set his nuts on fire... Colin tested yesterday at Jerez amongst a mixed bag of Moto2, CRT, Factory Ducati (with test riders and Checa doing laps on the GP12) and one WSB team (BMW). Unsurprisinly the only factory MotoGP bike present, ridden by Carlos Checa was fastest on the day but still some way off the lap record. Good news: Colin was fastest of the CRT runners (although the others were hardly leading edge teams) but was still 1 second slower than the fastest of the Moto2 runners (Scott Redding). Leon Haslam on the factory BMW WSB bike was 1 tenth slower than Redding, which just goes to show how far the Moto2 bikes have come in terms of chassis performance since they were introduced. Edwards BMW engined Suter was 1 second slower than the factory BMW of Haslam, but faster than Melendri on the WSB bike. Obviously there is a big caveat in that this is only testing and times are very unofficial. We don't know what each team was actually doing in terms of evaluation (so times may be misleading), but it is interesting to compare various different format race bikes on track together for a change. 1 Carlos Checa Ducati GP12 MotoGP 1:41.0 2 Scott Redding Kalex Moto2 1:42.8 1.8 1.8 3 Leon Haslam BMW S1000RR SBK 1:42.9 1.9 0.1 4 Pol Espargaró Kalex Moto2 1:43.3 2.3 0.4 5 Tito Rabat Kalex Moto2 1:43.8 2.8 0.5 6 Mika Kallio Kalex Moto2 1:43.8 2.8 0.0 7 Gino Rea Moriwaki Moto2 1:43.8 2.8 0.0 8 Colin Edwards Suter-BMW MotoGP 1:43.9 2.9 0.1 9 Bradley Smith Tech3 Moto2 1:44.0 3.0 0.1 10 Toni Elías Suter Moto2 1:44.2 3.2 0.2 11 Iván Silva FTR-Kawasaki MotoGP 1:44.6 3.6 0.4 12 Axel Pons Kalex Moto2 1:44.7 3.7 0.1 13 Nico Terol Suter Moto2 1:44.9 3.9 0.2 14 Yuki Takahashi Suter Moto2 1:44.9 3.9 0.0 15 Alex De Angelis Suter Moto2 1:44.9 3.9 0.0 16 Marco Melandri BMW S1000RR SBK 1:44.9 3.9 0.0 17 Yonny Hernández FTR-Kawasaki MotoGP 1:45.2 4.2 0.3 18 Xavier Simeon Tech3 Moto2 1:45.2 4.2 0.0 Testing continues today and tomorrow (Friday) (Message edited by trojan on November 24, 2011) | ||
| Jaimec |
The article I read said Ducati didn't release their lap times. Interesting that Colin was the fastest CRT rider, but that he was beaten by riders on the Moto2 bikes. He has a long row to hoe. I wonder if "Fastest CRT Rider" will have the same panache as "Fastest Non-factory Rider" next year... | ||
| Trojan |
The article I read said Ducati didn't release their lap times. Interesting that Colin was the fastest CRT rider, but that he was beaten by riders on the Moto2 bikes. He has a long row to hoe. I wonder if "Fastest CRT Rider" will have the same panache as "Fastest Non-factory Rider" next year... The times I listed were obtained by a Spanish journalist I understand. They could be 'semi official' or they could just be a guy with a basic stopwatch at the side of the track  I think next year will be hard for the CRT teams that enter. Colins time is nearly 4 seconds slower than the last qualifier for the GP at Jerez this year, and he is likely to be at the top of the CRT time sheets. However they will have an extra year of experience and development over the other teams joining in 2013, and that may prove invaluable to them. Just look at the progress that Moto2 has achieved in 2 years. The larger and more experienced CRT teams such as Aspar should be able to make a lot of progress over the winter, and that will filter across to the other teams using similar Suter/BMW combinations pretty quickly. I think 2013 should see times much closer together once the factory specials are eitehr outlawed or hobbled to some extent, and hopefully the CRT teams will be able to fight fairly, if not for wins then at least good mid pack points. If this doesn't happen and the few factory bikes continue to dominate then the rule changes are a waste of time and the series may be doomed after all | ||
| Blake |
Rocco, I think the idea of MotoGP as premiere prototype series comprised of the fastest bikes was dumped some time ago with the decision to switch to 800cc. The progress towards not much more than a glorified SBK class has been steady ever since. Who would have thought that MotoGP would adopt the NASCAR model of tech rules. The idea that a change to tech rules will allow the non-factory teams to become consistent challengers for race wins just doesn't make any sense to me. The major factory teams will still have by far the deepest pockets, the most resources, the top racers, the most experience, the best sponsorship, and the corporate mandate for success. What non-factory team is going to challenge the likes of factory Honda, Yamaha, Ducati and their world champion teams/racers? I just don't see it. What I see is a series that will be further eroded in quality in the name of quantity. If MotoGP wants more revenue, they should run two races each like most other successful word class moto racing series. Why they don't is inexplicable to me. The increased television revenue would surely be significant. Adding a Saturday afternoon race would also be a boon to the track attendance. If they want more parity, then simply assign added ballast to repeat race winners, or grid the starts in reverse order based on championship points. The endless monkeying with tech rules just seems confusing for fans and incredibly foolish for what is supposed to be the premiere prototype racing class in the world. Limiting fuel to the point of risking not finishing a race? Really? In MGP? It wasn't too long ago Dorna were disqualifying a team for not being prototype enough. Rules for rules sake. Dumb then, dumb now. Just my opinion. I don't care about Moto2/3. I won't be near as interested in MGP if it turns into a similar socialist class of motorcycle farm racing where all machines are made to be equal.  Just my own personal opinion. Dorna should muster the courage to return MGP to the glory of all-out factory racing. Allowing 500cc 4-stroke turbocharged machines would be a great start. Allowing twin and tri-cylinder machines more equitable minimum weights would be another. Why not? | ||
| Jaimec |
Bring back the rotaries! | ||
| Trojan |
If they want more parity, then simply assign added ballast to repeat race winners, or grid the starts in reverse order based on championship points. Now THAT would be socialist racing. The idea that a change to tech rules will allow the non-factory teams to become consistent challengers for race wins just doesn't make any sense to me. The major factory teams will still have by far the deepest pockets, the most resources, the top racers, the most experience, the best sponsorship, and the corporate mandate for success. All of which will mean nothing if the CRT rules are extended and enforced correctly. Why would a factory spend millions developing a 'special' engine when another team can 'claim' it for $25K. If the rules are the same for everyone then ability to pay the most will become a lot less of a factor, except in the ability to hire better riders. However, there will always be exceptional young riders coming up who will spring surprises riding for privateer teams. Marc Marquez, Stefan Bradl and Maverick Vinales all spring to mind as riders who could win MotoGP races if the bikes were more equal and teams could concentrate on running races instead of raising millions to pay for leaased bikes (although I realise that as you don't follow Moto2/125/Moto3 these riders will surprise you as if arriving from outer space when they arrive in MotoGP!). Just my own personal opinion. Dorna should muster the courage to return MGP to the glory of all-out factory racing. Allowing 500cc 4-stroke turbocharged machines would be a great start. Allowing twin and tri-cylinder machines more equitable minimum weights would be another. Why not? Because nobody could afford to do it. Not even the few factories left in GP racing. We only have 3 factories racing in MotoGP now. If Ducati don't produce the goods in 2012 then that may be 2 by the end of next year. Yamaha can't afford to run with no title sponsor for much longer either, so who is going to bail them out when they say they can't afford to do MotoGP any longer? Who is going to want to develop a turbocharged racer with no benefit other than racing in MotoGP? And why would they want to? Your vision may work in theory, but in the real world it would kill motoGP faster than it is currently trying to strangle itself to death. F1 has shown this year that a certain amount of cost saving and massaging of tech rules works. In spite of purists moaning before the season started that it would kill the series it has been the best F1 season for years and viewing figures are through the roof. | ||
| Trojan |
Day 2 test times from Jerez show a big improvements by all of the CRT teams (Edwards improved by 1.3 seconds over yesterday). He was apparently pleased with the bike and says it is at around 65%, with the remaining 35% development being down to electronics. If he is riding at 70% (as his dad proclaimed) then the bike should be reasonably competitive next year  However it was put into context by Randy De Puniet, who was fastest of all CRT(?) bikes on a WSB spec Aprilia RSV4 fitted with Bridgestone GP tyres and carbon brakes, running out of the Aspar garage. His time is getting closer to the back end of the factory lease bikes, so maybe they will be more competitive than has been thought. Whether Aprilia will be allowed to run what is only a slightly modifed RSV4 in MotoGP remains to be seen......Some say they are just gathering information for a different CRT project, while others are less inclined to believe them Just shows that the Aprilia was designed as a pure race bike first and foremost though. No times from the Ducati or BMW teams though. Day 2 unofficial lap times: MotoGP: Randy de Puniet (Aspar Racing Aprilia) 1,41.5 Colin Edwards (NGM Forward Racing) 1.42.6 Iv¨¢n Silva (BQR-FTR Kawasaki) 1.44.3 Yonni Hern¨¢ndez (BQR-FTR Kawasaki) 1.44.4 Moto2: 01 Scott Redding MarcVDS Kalex 1¡ä42.9 02 Pol Espargaro Pons Kalex 1¡ä43.0 03 Esteve Rabat Pons Kalex 1¡ä43.3 04 Mika Kallio MarcVDS Kalex 1¡ä43.5 05 Bradley Smith Tech3 1¡ä43.6 06 Gino Rea Gresini Moriwaki 1¡ä43.8 07 Alex De Angelis Forward Suter 1¡ä43.9 08 Yuki Takahashi Forward Suter 1¡ä44.2 09 Axel Pons Pons Kalex 1¡ä44.7 10 Toni Elias Aspar Suter 1¡ä44.7 11 Nico Terol Aspar Suter 1¡ä44.9 12 Xavier Simeon Tech3 1¡¯45.0 | ||
| Jaimec |
Really? Two words: "Tony Elias." Nuff said. | ||
| Trojan |
Really? Two words: "Tony Elias." Elias was unfortunately an anomaly, and was a victim of not being able to gel with either the Bridgestone tyres or his team all season. He had after all already shown in the past that he could run at the front (and win) at MotoGP level when using 'special' Michelin tyres. Unfortunately he was unable to change his riding style to suit the Bridgestones and that was a large part of his undoing. Bradl, Marquez and the other young guns coming up from Moto2 will not suffer the same fate methinks Bradl has already been faster than Elias in his very first test on the bike and can only get quicker. Marquez has elected to spend another year in Moto2 but you can bet he will be fast when he eventually gets to MotoGP. Any rider coming up from 250 or Moto2 would need time to get used to the difference in performance but especially Bridgestone tyres. In th epast the tyres were not too different between 250 and MotoGP, but htese days they are completely different. Look how long it took Simoncelli to get to grips with the MotoGP Honda, and even Lorenzo spent a lot of his first season launching his bike at the scenery. Like it or not, the next generation of MotogP riders is likely to be drawn from Moto2 more than any other format, and one poor season by Elias does not indicate that they will all be as poor. | ||
| Jaimec |
I'm thinking the 1000s will make the bikes easier for Superbike riders, rather than from the smaller classes. Time will tell. | ||
| Trojan |
I'm thinking the 1000s will make the bikes easier for Superbike riders, rather than from the smaller classes. You are right, time will tell. However most GP teams tend recruit from the lower GP orders simply because the riders know the tracks, are used to fully adjustable chassis and because the teams get to see the riders every weekend and know them. Bringing a rider across from Superbikes hasn't been too successful yet (even in 990 days) and only Ben Spies, Troy Bayliss and Chris Vermuelen have won races coming from WSB to MotoGP. Maybe it will change with the 1000's but I don't see them being too different to the 800's in riding style because the electronics and tyres aren't changing. Until the established career pathway changes I think we'll continue to see more riders promoted from the lower classes than switching from WSB/WSS. | ||
| Jaimec |
AMA and BSB have "dumbed down" the electronics, but so far WSBK is still using full electronics. And even though he never raced WSBK, don't forget that former World Champion Nicky Hayden also raced Superbikes before joining the MotoGP circus. He didn't do well in the 800 era, but he did pretty well with the 990s. | ||
| Trojan |
but so far WSBK is still using full electronics. Even WSB hasn't reached the state of the art electronics that MotoGP uses (yet). One of the biggest differences between the two series if you read what the various riders who have switched have said, is the chassis adjustability and the brakes. Cal Crutchlow said that getting used to braking so late was his biggest issue and he is only now getting comfortable with it. Moto2 is now established as the feeder class just as 250GP was before it, and I really don't see a sudden move to recruiting superbike riders (a large proportion of whom are failed/retired GP riders anyway!). | ||
| Jaimec |
I think Josh Hayes demonstrated how quickly a Superbike rider can adjust to a MotoGP bike (if he has a good crew to work with). I also think any Superbike rider coming off an Aprilia RSV4 would know all about a motorcycle with a fully adjustable chassis. Speaking of Aprilia... how can they provide engines AND frames and still be considered a CRT team? Or have they found a loophole into a new way for the factories to dominate? | ||
| Trojan |
Speaking of Aprilia... how can they provide engines AND frames and still be considered a CRT team? Or have they found a loophole into a new way for the factories to dominate? It seems the loophole is big enough to drive a factory team truck through at the moment. I can't understand how they can not only provide complete bikes (which would surely make them the same as leased Honda/Yamaha teams?) but also that they are going to lease these bikes to teams rather than sell them outright. Leasing complete bikes or even engines makes a mockery of the CRT rules because how can you 'claim' an engine from a team who doesn't actually own that engine? The rules will state that any other team can claim an engine from a CRT team on payment of €25K (or whatever amount the decide on). If the team leases the engines from Aprilia at 500K how does that work? Dorna need to man up pretty quickly to stop this back door factory entry before Honda/Yamaha start thinking the same way. Once this happens we'll be back to hyper expensive leased factory bikes all over again and the rules will have to be re-written all over again. | ||
| Davegess |
Not a bad deal for the team, they get to use a 100,000 buck motor and the factory only gets 25,000 for it under the claiming rule. Lots of engines being claimed I would think  | ||
| Slaughter |
Claiming rules have been in place in AMA for decades. I remember about 10 years ago an Erion Honda was claimed and then the new owner/racer could not get any parts (as Honda was the only source for trick goodies) Honda basically cut him off at the knees. I have always thought that Claiming rules when claims were ENCOURAGED would go a long way to keeping costs down. |
