| Author | Message | ||
     Blake |
Dave, Like Steve mentions, what happens when any parts are needed, or specifications, or ... Just being able to purchase one engine is not much good other than as a technological spy project. It's not going to do any competing team much good at all. | ||
| Trojan |
Like Steve mentions, what happens when any parts are needed, or specifications, or ... The reasoning behind the rule is that teams won't spend a fortune on develoment if they have to give the engine up for a fixed fee, and the theory is that other CRT teams would claim the engine for their own use. In reality I think we will see factory teams using the claiming rule if a CRT teasm starts to look anywhere near competitive, and just because they can  I remember back when BSA/Triumph were the dominant force in F750 racing in th early 1970's. John Cooper won the Ontario 200 on a very special factory BSA, which was fitted with more than a few unobtanium parts. The factory were shocked when the bike was promptly claimed by an AMA privateer, particularly as they were not aware of the claiming rule in AMA racing! The claimant was taken into the pit garage for 'discussions', and by the time they finished he walked out happy with a new BSA Rocket racer, but a totally different bike to the one he claimed! Coopers factory BSA went back to the factory still in one piece and none the worse for its experience  If they wanted to ensure some sort of parity in MotoGP then the claiming rule shoudl apply to the electonics systems and software rather than to the engine. It should also apply to factory teams. | ||
| Jaimec |
Wherever there are rules, someone will find loopholes. Happens in racing as much as it happens in business and politics, unfortunately. It's why lawyers make so much money. | ||
| Blake |
>>> theory is that other CRT teams would claim the engine for their own use. But as described above, that theory just doesn't play out. It wouldn't work well for software either. Without the folks who know how it works, it's just not as valuable as you might think. Without a rule to require complete and thorough user's manuals, specifications and the like, none of it is going to make any difference in the racing. No team is going to invest a season just trying to learn the ins and outs of new engine technology or ECM programing. | ||
| Blake |
I also don't see the reality of the big factory teams not spending money. Their goal is to win; thus they will spend the money to do so, no matter the claiming rule. Teams looking to get ahead by claiming rule are always going to be playing catch-up. They won't have the best riders anyway, so even if they could get a claimed engine working in their machine and/or the ECM programming, they are still not contending for wins. Like Slaughter note, the claiming rules are nothing new, and they've not shown to produce the results desired. Let the factories race and spend as they like. | ||
| Trojan |
But as described above, that theory just doesn't play out. It wouldn't work well for software either. Without the folks who know how it works, it's just not as valuable as you might think. Without a rule to require complete and thorough user's manuals, specifications and the like, none of it is going to make any difference in the racing. No team is going to invest a season just trying to learn the ins and outs of new engine technology or ECM programing. You have to remember that the CRT engines will be heavily based on production bike engines, so there will only be maybe 3 or 4 engine types in use (Aprilia RSV, BMW S1000RR, Kawasaki ZX10 and HOnda CBR1000RR so far). Anyone claiming an engine would do so knowing that they would be able to use the motor aqnd software themselves otherwise, it would be pretty pointless doing so unless purely out of spite or gamesmanship. Every team now has plenty of software engineers who can programme engine management systems, and most will use the same Marelli system anyway. I also don't see the reality of the big factory teams not spending money. The reality is that even the big factories don't have unlimited budgets any longer, and even title sponsors don't pay the full cost of running a factory race team (unless you happen to be Ducati). Honda sales were down by 55.5% between May and September this year worldwide, and even they can't spend money they don't have on racing for ever. Once satellite teams stop propping up the factories race costs with exhorbitant lease costs they will not be able to run at the level they are now. This will prompt them either to scale back their racing programmes significantly or pull out altogether as Suzuki, Kawasaki, Aprilia and KTM have already done. HRC have already cut back by 30% since 2010 and further cust are almost inevitable next year. Yamaha have had no title sponsor for a year and are even more vulnerable to the boardroom cutting racing expenditure. I can see factory 'supported' CRT teams in future or even a much less expensive factory team based on a CRT bike, but the days of the mega expensive factory only prototypes are pretty much numbered. | ||
| Jaimec |
Wait... isn't this EXACTLY what Colin Edwards wanted for 2012??? http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/sport/sportresul ts/MotoGP/2011/December/dec0611-tech-3-to-build-mo togp-chassis/ | ||
| Jaimec |
It's pretty simple, actually. When you're a friendly, approachable bloke like Colin Edwards, everyone IS friendly towards you. When you're an arrogant, whining little snot, don't be surprised if people aren't exactly opening their arms in welcome: http://www.superbikeplanet.com/2011/Dec/111206ston erv8.htm | ||
| Jaimec |
News is slowly leaking out that the Austin MotoGP will go on after all. Looks like Ecclestone finally settled with the facility and construction will continue. | ||
| Bads1 |
Yep it is. Speed actually had the news yesterday. http://roadracingworld.com/news/article/?article=4 6837 | ||
| Blake |
We'll just have to see won't we. I don't see the big factories giving up their dominance in MotoGP no matter what. It's not that they have unlimited funds Matt. It's that they have a lot more than the others, AND they view the series as a major marketing investment as well as racing competition that they want very much to win. No other teams have that strong an impetus. What you state about claiming rules engines is no different a case than its ever been wherever its been applied. The factories still dominate. But we'll see if socialist racing takes off in the top class of motorcycle road racing. It sure does work for NASCAR. | ||
| Trojan |
But we'll see if socialist racing takes off in the top class of motorcycle road racing. What is socialist about it? MotoGP will die completely without major revamps of the rules. What would you prefer to happen? I have heard the same arguments on F1 forums and in various other motorsports where rules have been applied to save money. Everyone seems to think that the lack of factory involvement or spec ECU's etc will kill the series when the evidence points to exactly the opposite. Moto2 is more popular with fans and teams than 250 was in its last few years. F1 has more spectators and TV viewers now than ever before and has much better racing too. Even Nascar haas dragged itself from Southern Good Old Boys back yard racing to a major event attracting international following over recentyears (although it does nothing for me). AND they view the series as a major marketing investment as well as racing competition that they want very much to win. The factories have changed their tune this week, and now suddenly seem able to offer satellite bikes at much more affordable lease fees when faced with the prospect of losing their grip on the series. They have become too powerful and are just too cynical, so I hope they have their wings firmly clipped by future rules IRTA (the teams association) seem much more in line with Dorna's plans than the factories do, and Tech 3 are starting work on their own chassis for use in 2013 (although they hope Yamaha will continue to support them with provision of R1 engines), and this is the way the sport need to develop rather than relying on just 3 factories to keep it going. No other teams have that strong an impetus EVERY team at the top level of any motorsport has the same impetus and ambition. They all want to win. | ||
| Jaimec |
I'm surprised Blake keeps making this same argument (and I'd have to quote Inigo Montoya on his overuse of the word "Socialist:" "I don't think that word means what you think it means") over and over since "Socialist Rules" (his words) SAVED racing in this country... | ||
| Davegess |
Blake, MotoGp is about as "socialist" as Obama. You conservatives are just a bit annoying on this whole socialism thing. | ||
| 46champ |
Obama isn't Socialist that's news to me. | ||
| Kenm123t |
Lets get right to the point OBAMA and Co are EVIL INC Evil always come in a pretty package if it lets its real face show no one could be deceived | ||
| Blake |
I just disagree with you Matt. It's seems incredibly naive to believe that "EVERY team at the top level of any motorsport has the same impetus and ambition." The factory teams have a LOT more impetus to perform well; just look at what happened to Dovisioso. It is entirely unlikely that MotoGP would die if left to pure prototype racing. That is the false premise. History says otherwise. | ||
| Blake |
If not "socialist racing" then "nanny state racing". | ||
| Davegess |
unlikely that MotoGP would die Well the guys who own it sure think it will. Much as I hate it all major sports are at least as much about selling the product as they are about the purity of competition. The single most important thing to the folks that run MotoGP is making money. To do that you need large TV audiences and racetracks willing to pay big fees for the privilege of holding the race. For there purpose ENTERTAINMENT is the number one thing they are selling. There are not nearly enough folks interested in seeing the coolest technology to make massive amounts of money. The personality of the riders and excitement sells tickets. The latest carbon fiber high pressure direct injection GPS enabled seat pad does not. Look no farther that NASCAR to see what everyone wants to be. | ||
| Fast1075 |
I picked up a copy of "Motor Cyclist" last night. There is a short article about the KTM Moto 3 engine and some information about costs. Also, the article said that Moto 3 will have an engine claiming rule. There is something I think should be done by the organizers that I have yet to see. In (for example) NHRA dragracing, during events there are often short segments where they explain some of the technical information about the machinery. The same thing is done in NASCAR. At least for me, it helps me identify with the sport. Speaking of Nascar, for all it's weaknesses and problems, even IT is taking steps into the modern age with the introduction of fuel injection for 2012. | ||
| Jaimec |
When will they allow overhead cams?? | ||
| Trojan |
It is entirely unlikely that MotoGP would die if left to pure prototype racing. That is the false premise. History says otherwise. History changes by the day. There has never been the same pressure to cut costs in MotoGP as there is now, and combined with the bleak world economic situation there certainly isn't enough money even in the factories to continue down the 'pure prototype' path. Over the years the factories have made sure that they have priced everyone else out of the competition and have enjoyed a monopoly of supply in terms of bikes and engines. They have effectively written the rules to suit themselves and now that is having the disastrous effect that some predicted a while ago. Now they cannot afford to field big factory teams and satellite teams can't afford to pay the huge lease costs asked by the factories (although now it seems that they can lower these considerably when faced with losing control of the series!). Either the series changes quickly and effectivley or the owners will start to find that it isn't making money. They don't own the series because they love bikes, but because they love profit. When this goes you can be sure they won't hang around for long The personality of the riders and excitement sells tickets. The latest carbon fiber high pressure direct injection GPS enabled seat pad does not. Very very true. Look at what fans wear to races. You see plenty of 'rider replica' T shirts and caps but I've yet to see anyone wearing a homage to pneumatic valves or desmodronic operation. | ||
| Jaimec |
True dat! | ||
| Blake |
>>> Well the guys who own it sure think it will (die if left as a prototype racing series). I've not seen any statement by them asserting that conclusion. They seem to say only that they want to make the grids bigger with more also-ran satellite teams. These are the same people that thought changing to 800cc was a good idea. Talk about cost prohibitive. What is more costly, to leave the engine specification alone, or to repeatedly change it, requiring teams to repeatedly develop new racing machines? Common sense is not so common it seems. | ||
| Blake |
Dave, I think your premise that folks don't care about seeing the high tech is sorely mistaken. I'd also challenge the idea that the NASCAR model is the only or even the most successful one. but even if it is the most successful model, if the issue is lower cost for non-factory teams, you might want to check the magnitudes of NASCAR team budgets. Prepare to be shocked. Can anyone produce the facts concerning television viewership and revenue over the past couple decades? I have no idea if it has decreased, stagnated or risen. If viewership has remained strong but TV ad revenue has declined in the past few years, then that is not a reflection of fan base decline, just economic challenges. More than anything, losing the participation of the Aprilia, Kawasaki, and Suzuki factories is likely much more of a factor in loss of fan base than anything else. I keep hearing two different arguments in favor of eliminating prototype racing. One is to foster closer competition. The other is to reduce costs for satellite teams. Then we learn that the factories have agreed to voluntarily chop in half their rental fees for the bikes. Trying to force closer racing is just dumb. The top riders on the factory teams will always be the ones leading. Currently one manufacturer has a clear advantage in equipment and a proven champion riding it. That is what makes top level prototype racing incredibly interesting to many fans. The battle over machine development and innovation may be a longer term saga than any race, but it is incredibly dramatic and engaging. With CRT taking over, will that be lost? Somewhat for sure. I'm for freedom in MotoGP racing. Let the absolute best win by laps if they can. That's the way it has been since the series started. Why anyone imagines that incredibly successful formula needs changing defies logic and common sense. They hit a home run going to four strokes, but then they boofed it badly by going to 800cc. Time will tell, but it may be that WSBK will take over the crown as the premiere series in world-class motorcycle road racing, as MotoGP transitions to not much more than glorified superbikes. Meanwhile, WSBK are looking more and more like prototype racers. | ||
| Blake |
Matt, >>> There has never been the same pressure to cut costs in MotoGP as there is now, From where is that pressure coming? What pressure? >>> combined with the bleak world economic situation there certainly isn't enough money even in the factories to continue down the 'pure prototype' path. Then allow them to race whatever they like. If Suzuki or WCM want to race a GSXR1000 based machine, then let them. Expand the rules. But if Honda or Ducati, or Yamaha want to race prototypes, then let them, don't proibit it. That's just dumb and takes a LOT away from the sport for many fans. If you just want socialist racing, meaning dumbed down by oppressive rules aimed at allowing every average joe team to enter the series, well, I just don't see the appeal. For MotoGP I'd much rather watch machines of the future and the big factories battling for tech supremacy, not dumbed-down NASCAR type machines. With all the derision that NASCAR gets, it's surprising to see it being held up as the example to follow for MotoGP racing. >>> Either the series changes quickly and effectivley or the owners will start to find that it isn't making money. Your opinion. I've not seen the data to support it. Like the decision to switch to 800cc, I see the switch to dumbed-down machines as a vary bad that will result in exactly the opposite of what is intended. I could be wrong. >>> They don't own the series because they love bikes, but because they love profit. When this goes you can be sure they won't hang around for long. I think their decision to once again make sweeping tech rules changes and dumb-down the machinery will hurt profit. Time will tell. I like the return to liter displacements, but one wonders if they had left the 800cc limit intact if Suzuki might have stayed. Obviously, the cost of developing a brand new machine is high. History changes? You mean new history is constantly being made? I assume that's what you meant. | ||
| Blake |
>>> Very very true. Look at what fans wear to races. You see plenty of 'rider replica' T shirts and caps but I've yet to see anyone wearing a homage to pneumatic valves or desmodromic operation. Then you've not looked very closely. I've seen "Desmo" themed T-shirts. That said, I'm not sure that anyone is proposing to eliminate riders from the equation. Even prototype machines still require riders. | ||
| Blake |
Further on that point, you also see a LOT of brand-based support in fan apparel. Aiming to get rid of the factories in favor of a NASCAR model is a huge change for MotoGP; seems like a HUGE risk to me. | ||
| Davegess |
you might want to check the magnitudes of NASCAR team budgets. Prepare to be shocked. I wouldn't be, I never said NASCAR was cheap just sorta low tech. Let the absolute best win by laps if they can. That and the absence of multiple brands will kill the series for sure. Formula One cars are by far the most successful racing series that is still somewhat to very high tech BUT even they are always tweaking the rules to get more passing and more competitive racing. A decade or so ago, before they began to focus on keeping the competitive balance TV ratings were slipping and Bernie (who I hate but have to admit has made the series hugely successful) began the series of changes that have keep them on top. They have managed to increase passing and in race competition while keeping a very high level of technical interest. Of course he started this when there was money to burn so he was far ahead of MotoGP. | ||
| Jaimec |
I've come to the conclusion Blake enjoys being deliberately obtuse. |
