| Author | Message | ||
     José_quiñones |
The AMA FX rules don't allow those things either. Nobody has announced a Factory or a privateer 748 or 749 in FX to date. Honda likes getting creative. The FX rules let them get to the minimum weight of 350 pounds, the Supersport rules don't let them do that. They can use the carbon fiber fairings and other things to lower the weight more than they can in Supersport. They can also put a full Superbike spec suspension and tires, so their riders will be able to push the bike harder than in SS. | ||
| Benm2 |
Check out http://www.amasuperbike.com/newind.htm There's some pictures there of Duhamel's FX bike, for those interested. Getting actual rev limits for GP bikes would be easy, especially for factory teams with money trees in the backyard. A little sound analysis on the exhaust tone should give a decent indication of engine RPM. How they get the engine to stay assembled at those speeds is likely more closely guarded, though. Thus far, not hearing much on a Buell FX effort. Anyone from Hal's, Hoban Brothers, Kosco etc. running an effort? | ||
| José_quiñones |
Last I heard, Yes. | ||
| Blake |
José, If you think HRC chooses the classes in which they race based upon how much fun it is or based upon what they like to do wrt the machine, you are being ridiculously naive. Why did they dump WSB the very year after which they had won the championship? It's all about politics and marketing strategy and they are masters at it. I sure as heck hope we see a Buell team announce their intentions wrt FX soon. Why not let the XB12R and 749R race in SS? | ||
| Featheredfiend |
"Why not let the XB12R and 749R race in SS?" The 748 hasn't seen any upgrade since its' introduction. Now the 749R. Why race an instant antique against the yearly improved 600's? feathered | ||
| José_quiñones |
749r YES, XB12R held to the same rules as the other bikes, yes. XB1350 Pro Thunder unrestricted Buell against restricted 600's and 750's? That's AMA FX, you should be happy with that. | ||
| Grndskpr |
If you think HRC chooses the classes in which they race based upon how much fun it is or based upon what they like to do wrt the machine, you are being ridiculously naive Actually he said this Honda likes getting creative Fun and creative are 2 different things, Honda has at least once every decade brought out something creative, Honda, every once in a while likes to prove that they can do what ever they want when ever they want, IE the Rune, RC 45, the oval piston 8 valve bike(cant remember was the RVF 800???) anyway Honda does have a precident for being creative, and i believe this class will allow them to do that, and if they want they could dominate, especially this first year, but again we will see later Roger | ||
| José_quiñones |
As he said..... The rules let them do things they can not do in SS, so they feel they have a better chance there than in Supersport. But Yamaha (with Rich Oliver, maybe), Suzuki and possibly Kawasaki will have Factory backed FX machines so I'm sure they don't think it will be easy. It's funny, Blake, you want Buell to race in SS, against the full factory teams. Now the AMA has created a class that Buell can race in, the factories have decided to get involved there also, but you think that "stinks" Make up your mind. | ||
| Blake |
JQ, Honda is dumping SS to compete in FX. I really have no criticism of AMAPR wrt their FX rules or Honda's actions. You are confusing my ire with Honda/HRC with my criticism of AMAPR. They are two totally different things. So you see, there is nothing conflicting in my views for which I need to make up my mind. Logic, it's a great thing. I simply want AMAPR to allow all comparably performing machines to race head-to-head; I want them to lose the bias for the Japanese IL4's in SS. Allow the 749 into SS. Allow an XB12RR if there were one. They don't and according to some reliable insider sources they aren't likely to do so any time soon. Kudos to AMAPR for the FX class. But shame on them for restricting competition in favor of a select group of manufacturers in SS. That is unAmerican and it violates the charter of the AMA, without whom, AMAPR would not exist. Oh yeah, the fact that this is America and otherwise competitive configurations of machines are excluded from competing in one of the American Motorcyclists' Association's premiere road racing classes definitely STINKS! As to Honda, I don't appreciate them dumping the SS class and taking their top SS rider to compete in FX instead. It is disrespectful of the integrity of American racing. They did the same underhanded thing to WSB last year. It's not against the rules, but it is totally uncool. I really like Miguel, but I hope HRC falls flat on their face in FX. Roger, I also said... "or based upon what (Honda/HRC)like to do wrt the machine..." Same-same as "creative"? Guess you missed that? Anyway... If you believe JQ about the FX rules, Honda will have no such opportunity to get creative, at least not in the ways you are suggesting, like with super duper new fangled engine technology. No, it's all about marketing for HRC. That is all too obvious. They had little to no interest in FX until now. If the choice were up to Mr. Duhamel, I'm sure he would much rather stay in SS and extend his already impressive races-won record rather than enter FX. edited by blake on December 11, 2003 | ||
| Grndskpr |
Blake said: I am obviously an idiot. I hate to say it, but i am inclined to agree at this point sorry Blake, but those are your words, just a little out of context  later Roger | ||
| Blake |
But I'm a stubborn idiot, damnit. JQ,  Stock Honda CBR600RR  They look significantly different at first glance. Is that an optical illusion?... or am I an idiot and posted a photo of the wrong bike? edited by blake on December 11, 2003 | ||
| Crusty |
Huh? Where do you come up with this crap? Please explain how the SS racing rules violate the charter of the American Motorcyclist Association. | ||
| José_quiñones |
Blake, that picture is of Miguel riding the CBR1000, not the CBR600FX bike | ||
| José_quiñones |
They have had a factory backed Erion 954 for the last few years in that class. Please, do some research before you hit the POST MESSSAGE button. | ||
| M1combat |
Hmmm, it looks pretty much like a cosmetic duplicate to me... | ||
| Blake |
Crusty, Read the charter or even the intro to the 2003 AMAPR rulebook written by their CEO. M1, Sorry, I deleted my post. They are pretty much the same. I'll have to dig up a better example. | ||
| Blake |
JQ, Thanks for the correction. The post has been duly edited and now Roger has more evidence to remind me how much of an idiot I truly am. | ||
| José_quiñones |
Crusty what Blake wants is rules that revolve around uncompetitive low volume selling models built by one manufacturer, as opposed to what the FIM, WSBK, BSB, every other sanctioning body including the AMA and FUSA does and write rules that revolve around the competitive, best selling models built by multiple manufacturers. | ||
| Smitty |
I wonder how much and why AMA spent money on this.  | ||
| Reepicheep |
Crusty, a second opinion on what we would like to see from the AMA is a "saner" set of rules. Right now, their PRIMARY metric for classing bikes is displacement. This is an obvious enough approach, but simplistic. There are a lot of factors that determine what amount of power an engine will displace. Displacement is one, but so is valve train, stroke, maximum RPM, number of cylinders, fuel delivery method, the list goes on and on. Only a fool would compare an XB9 with a GSXR-1000. Rather, the right bike to compare the 9's with is something like the Honda F4i, maybe the SV-650, or other real world friendly 600's. Thats a much closer niche. And the other rub is that many characteristics that make a nice street bike work against you on the track. And that many of the characteristics that make a good track bike work against you on the street. Most of the Japanese repli-racers are making great track bikes that suffer on the street. Buell is making great street bikes that suffer on the track. I think the rub is where things fall. If you really want a dedicated racing class, then why on earth are you screwing around with mickey mouse street legal bikes in the first place? Why even run a 4 stroke, you can get twice the power for a given displacement from a 2 stroke? If you want a fun and exciting racing class built around street bike models, then why get hung up on displacement as your metric? Seems to me like you would look at the bikes the builders are making and that the people are buying, find the niche where they fit best, and adjust the rules to first let them race in that class, and secondly keep the races close. This does not seem to be what the AMAPR is doing. They are classing (last I heard, I don't claim to be an expert) the XB9's (upgraded to a 1350cc engine) against a GSXR-1000... which is just stupid. Only a fool would compare an XB9 (or even an XB12) to a GSXR-1000 as apples to apples. The XB's belong racing with the 600's. Bikes that emphasize handling and "lightness" over raw power. The niche where the XB's fit is with the F4i's, R6's, SV-650's, GSXR-600's, etc. It could have belonged with the SV1000's, if Suzuki had really built an SV1000 (instead of the warmed over TL-1000s they keep trying to foist on us). | ||
| Benm2 |
How do the standard CBR/GSXR/R6/ZX riders suffer on the street? They buy the bikes based on their resemblance to racebikes. If they wanted better street bikes, perhaps they'd buy something else. But, they don't. Saying that Buell's make better streetbikes is irrelevant on the track, for machines that use racing prowess as the measure for success. It does make a convenient excuse for non-competitive machinery, however. If you really want to see Buell racing, strip your own bike (as Blake and others have done) and watch it from between your own legs. I'd like to see a competitive national-class Buell race team in ANY class. The AMA FX rules allow it, no bitching that Honda is attacking the class. Even for pushrod two-valvers, Buell's are not at the leading edge (read piston speed "debate" above, and figure what the shift point would be for an XB9 at 5317FPM). Ben | ||
| S320002 |
"Even for pushrod two-valvers, Buell's are not at the leading edge..." If not Buell then who is? | ||
| Reepicheep |
I owned an old 600cc inline four, but it was a decent naked standard (a yamaha Radian, standard bike with a sportbike 600cc engine). It was a good bike, but even as a standard, the M2 is head and shoulders above it. Why are race bikes lousy street bikes? The seating position of all the repli-racers quickly becomes uncomfortable for anything but a short trip. The power is great up top, but anemic down below, so you spend most of your time on the road rowing the gearbox to have any kind of decent level of performance at the rear wheel. A $15 low side on my M2 (new clutch lever) would easily be a $900 crash on a racer rep because that fairing they need to hit 150 mph at Daytona is easy to break and expensive to replace. Changing the oil on the inline fours is a PITA. Insurance is through the roof. The continual dremelesque buzzing of the inline four really grates at my nerves after about the first hour. I could go on. The inline fours are amazing bikes, I just don't like them as much as I like the Buells for an all around street bike. No big deal. Take any street legal bike into any serious racing class, and they will hand you your ass. If its about "serious racing", then why do we mess with mickey mouse streetbikes in the first place? There is not one on the planet that could stay on the same lap as any seriously worked over race bike. Why then put stupid restrictions on them like stock heads, cases, cranks, pistons, rods, etc. If its serious racing, then why burden them with stock street oriented parts? Is it a serious racing class or not? If it is, why limit them to stock heads designed to be cost effective for mass production and to meet EPA regulations? It's stupid! But if its supposed to be for promoting stock racing classes, then why not make the classes fit the bikes? Classing by power / cubic inch of engine displacement is one metric. How about power produced per gallon of gas burned? How about classing by wheelbase? Why not just class by raw horsepower? So I guess I agree with you Ben, but don't see the point of the middle ground. Build street bikes for the street. Build race bikes to race. For dedicated race bikes, a simple displacement based class might make sense. For racing bikes designed for the street, it seems to be you need to show a little more adaptability in your rules. The Buell, Ducatti, Moto Guzi, Triumph, BMW, and others make some really interesting sport oriented street bikes, that are more or less mathematically eliminated from classes where they clearly belong right out of the box. Why? Just because they solve the power production problem by the manipulation of displacement rather then the manipulation of stroke, valvetrain, or number of pistons? | ||
| Sarodude |
Reep brings up some interesting points WRT bikes / parts and their intent as well as suitability. I'll throw in my bits... I've raced (4 wheels) in classes having ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with production machines. They don't even PRETEND. These were pure race machines. Wanna know what happens in most classes / series like that? The guy sitting on the grandstands or watching on TV doesn't get to root for his favorite brand - usually what he rides / drives. This has different immediate consequences for amateur vs pro racing but the end result is generally the same: Less sponsorships, less contingency prizes, less media coverage... There is a point to structuring race classes based on machines at least RECOGNIZEABLE to the consumer. However, the interarchitechtural (?) debates and issues which ensue may be unavoidable. My personal opinion on this stuff has always been: Don't change the class just so it's easier for you to win. Either get out or get on par. Do not change par. Racing organizations seem destined to deviate from SOMEONE'S ideals SOMEWHERE. Tough nookie. -Saro | ||
| Benm2 |
If NASCAR can achieve 5317FPM, why can't Buell? Small block V-8's can be run reliably at higher RPM's than Buells. Mercedes built a one-off pushrod engine to win Indy. There are obvious ways where Buell could reduce valvetrain mass & increase RPM limits that have been used on NASCAR (and other) engines for some time. All other top-class racing twins use individual throttles per cylinder. Is that for EPA compliance, for instance, on the RC-51, the 999R, or the RSV1000R? Buell is not persuing the "best available technology" for two-valve pushrod racing; by their own admission they build better streetbikes. One of the primary reason to race streetbikes is because the sales to the many support the efforts of the few. What the heck does that mean? It means that pure racebikes can only be sold to pure racers, so the cost of engineering / tooling / manufacturing is spread over far fewer units, so cost goes up. So, for those manufacturers to want use racing to sell product, they need to constantly compete with each other to ensure their share of the market. The reason the 600's are so close in performance is not from an evil plan to dominate the market with similar bikes, but rather everyone is pushing the same edge. Admittedly, race-prep for ANY streetbike still consumes cash. A top-class 600 supersport bike (reported here) makes 130RWHP. Considering that they make 100 hp off the floor, that's a big gain.
So, AMA Superbike or WSB (pre-2003) weren't representative of seriously worked over racebikes? Ben Bostrum (and others) were running lap times similar to the 500GP pure-racing-machines. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your comment, but those machines were based on streetbikes. Buell has been ruled in to the FX rules. Let's see what they bring to the table. Honda's already shown their card. | ||
| Sportsman |
Hate to say it but Buell's table will be empty if Honda is going to field 600 inlines. Ben, you know firsthand how it feels to watch a 600 rider walk away every time you outride him in the corners, get a better drive out and it doesn't matter he's gone on the straight. Look at Daytona FUSA. Thunderbike is serious Buell territory with very serious Buells, but a 92 Honda walked away. | ||
| Reepicheep |
I just mean the limitations on stock heads, pistons, cranks, intakes, ignitions, fuel delivery, valves, fairings, etc.. seem stupid in a "serious racing class". Even if you are running stockers, you will destroy them in less then a season and have to replace them anyway, why limit "serious racers" to mass production parts? All you can hope to accomplish with this is motivating makers to build track ready bikes for sale for street use... which I think is stupid. I see the marketing end of things though, you are right, that explains the "middle ground" of serious racing with a charade of "stock parts". I know better, but don't want to rain on the parade of some 19 year old that bought an R1, and is having a good time playing "boy wonder". I guess I just wish the AMA was about serious motorcycling, in which case the racing classes (and tracks) would look a lot different, and not about a marketing and money machine. But its their business, not mine, I guess I can't blame them. I am obviously not their demographic. | ||
| José_quiñones |
Why single out the AMA? Every sanctioning body in the world other than MotoGP uses production based rules for a simple reason: cost. Even MotoGP has rules outlawing exotic materials for cost reasons. | ||
| Grndskpr |
Even MotoGP has rules outlawing exotic materials for cost reasons. This is of course a very deceptive coment, and you know it, since they also have rules reguarding production engines and motorcycles, the reason why the team using a modified R1 head, got thrown out this past year nice try however later Roger | ||
| Reepicheep |
I single out the AMA because of its grassroots nature. If they are not about streetbikes, then nobody will be. But I give up. I don't have the time or the money to race, I don't have much interest in going to races. I'll just shut up now. My only point I wanted to make from the start of this discussion (that I still stand by) is that using displacement as your primary criteria for classing races is ignorant and cowardly. Professional organizations ought to be able to do better, if they are not going to put some thought into it, then what good are they? |
