Honda's new Moto-3 customer race bike

[Crasherfromwayback]

47 HP from a 250cc single cyl four stroke. I'm impressed. Makes me wish they'd make a sick 80hp 450 moto crosser!

http://www.superbikeplanet.com/2011/Jun/110602rydernotes.htm

[merv]

Makes me wish they'd make a sick 80hp 450 moto crosser!

http://www.superbikeplanet.com/2011/Jun/110602rydernotes.htm

Then it would be way way way way faster than any old wrinkled rider instead of just way faster like an RM400 :shit:

Love the 250 racer by the way it looks good.

[sil3nt]

I'll take 3.

[SWERVE]

Just placed an order!!!!!!!!! only kidding.............unless lotto comes up 2morrow then i would be. STUNNING.

[yod]

Sweet, just needs a touring screen, pack rack, panniers, should be awesome for the Four Points!

[tigertim20]

47 HP from a 250cc single cyl four stroke. I'm impressed. Makes me wish they'd make a sick 80hp 450 moto crosser!

http://www.superbikeplanet.com/2011/Jun/110602rydernotes.htm

hmm, wonder if I could get away with saying its a 125 custom built bucket? . . .:innocent:

[James Deuce]

Shitty, overly complicated, expensive four-stroke rubbish.

[F5 Dave]

Without a doubt. They were getting over 50hp from the factory 125s & this shitter is twice the capacity & will still blow its innards over the track whilst making a sick lawnmower noise. That's like Honda admitting that poxy 4 strokes aren't even 1/2 as good as the real racebikes they are replacing.

Fuck you Honda. I don't accept your vision of the future.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Fuck you Honda. I don't accept your vision of the future.

Whilst I REALLY miss the two smokers (the 250's especially), the four strokes are here to stay.

[jellywrestler]

Shitty, overly complicated, expensive four-stroke rubbish.
Really, what about this two stroke then?

[Crasherfromwayback]

Really, what about this two stroke then?

14 speed gearbox anyone?

[F5 Dave]

nothing complicated about the engine, uber simple actually. The gearbox is simple too, just replication as the rules didn't dictate 6 gears.

[dangerous]

47 HP from a 250cc single cyl four stroke. I'm impressed. Makes me wish they'd make a sick 80hp 450 moto crosser!

http://www.superbikeplanet.com/2011/Jun/110602rydernotes.htm

and just released for the road, also a single http://www.honda-motorcycles.co.nz/BikeModel/407/cbr250r

[eelracing]

Really, what about this two stroke then?

That's partly the reason Suzuki gearbox's are so good today.


nothing complicated about the engine, uber simple actually. The gearbox is simple too, just replication as the rules didn't dictate 6 gears.

Ironic really when the original rules stipulating 6 gears was to simplify and keep costs down.Only for the powers to be replacing simplicity and power (two strokes all up) for 4 strokes with more moving parts,more weight and sluggish power.Which ultimately,like MotoGP will equal more cost.



and just released for the road, also a single http://www.honda-motorcycles.co.nz/BikeModel/407/cbr250r

Soon to be followed by an automatic gear box.

[eelracing]

Fuck you Honda. I don't accept your vision of the future.


Could'nt of put it better myself.

[tigertim20]

Could'nt of put it better myself.

plus two.
there goes my hopes of an 800cc + 2 stroke supersports/superbike
Cunts.

[James Deuce]

Soon to be followed by an automatic gear box.

And pink leathers plus a white hanky for signalling.

[bogan]

Fuck you Honda. I don't accept your vision of the future.

Agreed, but their vision of the late 80's and early 90s was a glorious one. I guess the industry demands change, so once perfection is within reach, too much change spoils it.

[James Deuce]

Agreed, but their vision of the late 80's and early 90s was a glorious one. I guess the industry demands change, so once perfection is within reach, too much change spoils it.

That wasn't Honda's vision. They were forced into competing with a filthy 2-stroke because their oval-pistoned monocoque NR500 was uncompetitive and unreliable. Honda have always had an almost pathological loathing of 2-stroke engines. They brought all their corporate might to bear to get rid of them and then pretty much failed to follow through once Rossi quit racing for them.

[dangerous]

Or maybe Honda are the only Jap bike manufacturers with the balls to try something different... hassle the NR but look were it lead to, the RVF, via the RC's
The V5 rc211v other Jap bikes still run inline 4's, boreing, gota have a few cock ups to learn from, eg: the upside down V4 NS

[James Deuce]

Or maybe Honda are the only Jap bike manufacturers with the balls to try something different... hassle the NR but look were it lead to, the RVF, via the RC's
The V5 rc211v other Jap bikes still run inline 4's, boreing, gota have a few cock ups to learn from, eg: the upside down V4 NS

NO. Soichiro Honda hated 2-strokes and did everything he could to prevent Honda from developing 2-stroke engines, hence the fantastic multi-cylinder, multi-gear small capacity 4-strokes of the '60s. That became a corporate culture. Modern MotoGP is purely the result of Honda lobbying combined with a fortuitous convergence with tree-hugging global-warming nazis preventing direct injection 2-stroke petrol and diesel technology from becoming the IC engine of choice.

[bogan]

the fantastic multi-cylinder, multi-gear small capacity 4-strokes of the '60s

They were glorious too! Pity this one seems to have none of that engineering flair, oh well, plenty of their old bikes to choose from :yes: Pity bout the racing though, rules should be limited to here's your fuel, off ya go!

[James Deuce]

Pity bout the racing though, rules should be limited to here's your fuel, off ya go!

Yes, yes, yes! Even better would be you get a certain number of kilojoules to use over a race distance. Then the motive technology would vary too.

[dangerous]

NO. Soichiro Honda hated 2-strokes and did everything he could to prevent Honda from developing 2-stroke engines, hence the fantastic multi-cylinder, multi-gear small capacity 4-strokes of the '60s. That became a corporate culture. Modern MotoGP is purely the result of Honda lobbying combined with a fortuitous convergence with tree-hugging global-warming nazis preventing direct injection 2-stroke petrol and diesel technology from becoming the IC engine of choice.
little OTT man, those "multi-cylinder, multi-gear small capacity 4-strokes of the '60s" kicked some serious stroker arse, anyone can put an engine togeather that has only 3 moving parts... try a dohc 5cyl 125, be like me trying to find it for a piss... ya'd need twezers and a farking big magno glass :facepalm:

[bogan]

Yes, yes, yes! Even better would be you get a certain number of kilojoules to use over a race distance. Then the motive technology would vary too.

Exactly, and be consumer applicable, of course the higher efficiency electrics may kick some ass :innocent: What you really want if it was focused on helpful tech for consumers, would be a buyback scheme at the end of a season, to stop all the loaded companies dominating through Ti bits. And tbh, I think the level of performance out of todays machine would still make the races a good watch.

[tigertim20]

That wasn't Honda's vision. They were forced into competing with a filthy 2-stroke because their oval-pistoned monocoque NR500 was uncompetitive and unreliable. Honda have always had an almost pathological loathing of 2-stroke engines. They brought all their corporate might to bear to get rid of them and then pretty much failed to follow through once Rossi quit racing for them.
plus one!!..........

[James Deuce]

little OTT man, those "multi-cylinder, multi-gear small capacity 4-strokes of the '60s" kicked some serious stroker arse, anyone can put an engine togeather that has only 3 moving parts... try a 5cyl 125, be like me trying to find it for a piss... ya'd need twezers and a farking big magno glass :facepalm:

How is it OTT? And exactly what 2 strokes were they competing with? Predominantly eastern European machines running on a shoe string and still managing to win championships. Honda's utter loathing for 2-strokes is well documented.

From Yoshiro Harada, head of Frame Design in 1956:

"As we went on, it gradually became more concrete," Harada recalled. "The Old Man would get to the Engineering Design Room early in the morning and call out, 'Hey, last night I thought of this,' and everyone in the room would come over to see what was up. Then he would get even more excited and start spluttering as he explained. After a while he would get impatient, and then he would squat down and start sketching his idea on the floor with chalk. While he was drawing, he would be thinking ahead, so he'd use his hand to rub out what he had drawn and start sketching again. His audience would keep on increasing. The Old Man would be in the center of this circle of people, just like a sidewalk performer," he continued, laughing. "The employees who surrounded him, though, would all be quivering with tension as they listened to the Old Man. 'The engine will be a 4-stroke!' and, of course, this had long since been decided. That wasn't Mr. Fujisawa's request. The Old Man had come to really hate 2-stroke engines then. He just despised them. In the New Year season of 1957, we started development, beginning with the engine."

[dangerous]

Hey I dont doubt for a second strokers wernt liked, but whats wrong with trying something different, nothing lost, nothing gained... the little Honda diesels compeated against eg: off the top of my head, Suzuki 50cc twins, Yamaha 125 V4s both strokers.

[crazy man]

l like it! which it had more cylinders !!

[slowpoke]

Hmmmph! If it doesn't sound any good then I don't want anything to do with it and abso-fuckin-lootely won't be buying it. Which means ya can stick ya diesels and ya leccy bikes up ya green hessian jumper.

It's not all Honda's doing that MotoGP went four stroke. There was virtually no application of 2 stroke performance technology in the real world so what was the point? Now we have stillborn MotoGP prototypes as production bikes (RSV4), long bang cranks direct from championship winning bikes (M1/R1) etc etc. Sounds farkin' good to me.

Haha, before you lambast 4 strokes as being expensive, the lease only price of a factory Aprilia RSA250 was over the 1 million Euro mark, never mind the running costs.
http://sportrider.automotive.com/132482/146-1004-motogp-moto2-machines/index.html
http://www.sablogzone.com/bikezone/?tag=aprilia-rsa-250
So the Aprilia RSA125's which make up 95% of the grid (so much for competition amongst manufacturers) do not represent a cheap option. On the other hand with Moto3 rules like this:
"Moto3 engines will be limited to a maximum bore of 81mm while oval pistons will be prohibited. Engines will be restricted to 14000rpm. Valves will be limited to a maximum of four, and they may not be actuated by pneumatic or hydraulic systems. Variable valve timing and variable valve opening systems are also banned.
Engine costs will also be limited with a cap of 12,000 euro per unit, including any upgrades."
I can guarantee we'll see more than one manufacturer involved and it won't cost the sizeable part of a small country's GDP to compete.

So with new sporting 2 strokes few and far between small capacity 4 stroke innovation can only be a good thing in the tiddler class. This reverse cylinder stuff is becoming old hat offroad and now on the track.......so how long before a reverse cylinder Superbike pops up? Maybe soon a CBR1000RR won't be a rumoured V4 but a reverse cylinder IL4 instead?

Bottom line? All of a sudden the small GP class has become relevant again.

[merv]

So unless any of you that are swearing about this are not riding scooters on the road what are you riding that's such a fantastic two stroke on the road? Or is it only the race track you are interested in? I am sure that more than 90% on this forum would ride 4 strokes most of the time.

I sold my last 2 stroke in 1973 and never missed the days of clouds of smoke after too much town riding when you tried to open it up.

To me I can't see it is that exciting watching a single cylinder 125cc two stroke race on the track and therefore can't see that this new racer will be any less exciting. We aren't seeing the glory years of the 60's repeated with multicylinder, zillion gear gearboxes or anything because the powers that be have rules that won't allow it any more.

[Crasherfromwayback]

To me I can't see it is that exciting watching a single cylinder 125cc two stroke race on the track and therefore can't see that this new racer will be any less exciting. We aren't seeing the glory years of the 60's repeated with multicylinder, zillion gear gearboxes or anything because the powers that be have rules that won't allow it any more.

I was (am) anti the moto 2 bikes, as the 250's were fantastic and true GP bikes, plus the racing was always awesome, and they were often nearly as fast as the big boys. But I'm thinking the new 250 four strokes will be as fast if not faster than the 125's, and I've never really followed them anyway. And it seems a pretty cheap way to go GP racing to me, so I'm all for it (them).

[merv]

Yeah well I think the important thing to the average punter is brand rivalry and to have had Moto 2 settle on Honda engines was a bit silly because competition between Suter or Moriwaki or whoever no-name doesn't mean a lot to me in my every day life.

Is the problem that Honda are the only bike company with the resources to do such a thing?

[Mental Trousers]

The 2 stroke crowd are still alive and well :weird: :Pokey: right here (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/forumdisplay.php/31-Scooters) :Pokey: :weird:

hahaha (gotta make fun of someone around here)

It would be interesting to see some Direct Injection 2 strokes mixing it up, although they'd be more expensive than the 4 strokes they'd be up against.

The main problem with high horsepower engines is getting that power to the ground and that's been one of the major technical reasons for moving to 4 strokes - they're inherently safer because they give the tyres more time to grip.

Honda don't supply the engines, Geo Tech do (although I think the Honda engine was chosen as a base and then an engine builder was chosen afterwards). However, the engine department is meant to be opened up to other manufacturers sometime (not sure when). I believe the reasoning was that this would allow teams and the Moto2 organisation to sort teething problems without the added hassle of developing engines as well. Which is fair enough as there are teams who haven't stuck with a single chassis for an entire season so far.

[eelracing]

It's not all Honda's doing that MotoGP went four stroke. There was virtually no application of 2 stroke performance technology in the real world so what was the point? Now we have stillborn MotoGP prototypes as production bikes (RSV4), long bang cranks direct from championship winning bikes (M1/R1) etc etc. Sounds farkin' good to me.

Haha, before you lambast 4 strokes as being expensive, the lease only price of a factory Aprilia RSA250 was over the 1 million Euro mark, never mind the running costs.

So the Aprilia RSA125's which make up 95% of the grid
I can guarantee we'll see more than one manufacturer involved and it won't cost the sizeable part of a small country's GDP to compete.


Bottom line? All of a sudden the small GP class has become relevant again.

That RSV4 you speak of was payed for by the leasing of the Aprilia 250 (the best 250 out there considering the Japs pulled out)with the promise to enter MotoGP.When Aprilia reneged and went Superbike racing with it instead Dorna had a hissy and brought forward Moto2 by a year in a big "fuck you" to Aprilia.

Relevant??? relevant to what exactly?racing? or what some latte drinking fop want's to pull up on outside the cafe?

No,GP racing should have nothing to do with selling motorbikes on Monday.
It should be about racing the best and fastest available technology...now if Honda and Yamaha etc wanna race 250cc motorbikes then all good but howabout letting some other schmoes enter a private 250 two stroke to compete against them then.
Oh no you can't have that eh?

Kim Newcombe was'nt trying to sell any Konig roadbikes last I heard

[Crasherfromwayback]

You tell 'em!

[lukemillar]

I was (am) anti the moto 2 bikes, as the 250's were fantastic and true GP bikes, plus the racing was always awesome, and they were often nearly as fast as the big boys. But I'm thinking the new 250 four strokes will be as fast if not faster than the 125's, and I've never really followed them anyway. And it seems a pretty cheap way to go GP racing to me, so I'm all for it (them).

Moto2 racing has been awesome. Live in the now man!

[Crasherfromwayback]

Moto2 racing has been awesome. Live in the now man!

No different to 250 racing in the day man...just slower!

[BMWST?]

Could'nt of put it better myself.

you need to put a[ in front of cfwb quote

[BMWST?]

Moto2 racing has been awesome. Live in the now man!

moto2 is a fail imo, the racing is good but i find it difficult to identify with any one rider,cos there are no "brands" involved.I find i dont care who wins

[gatch]

GP has gotten gay.

Single cyl 4 strokes, with no fancy valve trains and restricted rpm.

Sounds like uber expensive bucket racing to me.

They could have at least made it a v twin. So it doesn't sound so fuckin homo.

[Crasherfromwayback]

moto2 is a fail imo, the racing is good but i find it difficult to identify with any one rider,cos there are no "brands" involved.I find i dont care who wins

It's no different to me than 600 Supersport racing. And that's NOT what GP racing should be about.

[tigertim20]

Slowpoke raised a fair point, why wasnt the tech from the 2 strokes being used in production? Yamaha at least saw fit to put the crossplane into the r1 from 09 onwards, something totally new, and direct from the concept/moto gp bikes.

Now I love 2 strokes, Ive had several of them, but whats the point of them being raced in a class like that,, if they arent going to use that info and experience to develop some for us mere mortals to get our hands on out here in the real world, then whats the point of having them at all.

On the flip side, there is evidence that the four stroke concepts are making their way into rpoduction for us to buy at the stealership, so WHY the fuck couldnt thy do it with the 2 strokes when they had them? perhaps that is the more pertinent question.

Id been hanging out for the release of a big engined stroker sportsbike. guess it aint happening:violin:

[lukemillar]

moto2 is a fail imo, the racing is good but i find it difficult to identify with any one rider,cos there are no "brands" involved.I find i dont care who wins

The 'brands' are the riders not the machines. End of the day, I guess it depends what you enjoy about racing, but for me, having 40+ bikes on a grid where the depth of a teams pockets won't dictate who will be up the pointy end = some of the best racing from the GP paddock over the past 2 years.

[James Deuce]

Slowpoke raised a fair point, why wasnt the tech from the 2 strokes being used in production? Yamaha at least saw fit to put the crossplane into the r1 from 09 onwards, something totally new, and direct from the concept/moto gp bikes.

Now I love 2 strokes, Ive had several of them, but whats the point of them being raced in a class like that,, if they arent going to use that info and experience to develop some for us mere mortals to get our hands on out here in the real world, then whats the point of having them at all.

On the flip side, there is evidence that the four stroke concepts are making their way into rpoduction for us to buy at the stealership, so WHY the fuck couldnt thy do it with the 2 strokes when they had them? perhaps that is the more pertinent question.

Id been hanging out for the release of a big engined stroker sportsbike. guess it aint happening:violin:


GP racing isn't there to improve the road breed, it's a technology showcase for the manufacturers. Superbike and Supersport is there to improve the road breed.

GP racing is not some sort of proddy class but it will turn into that when the claiming rule bikes turn up next year.

Motive power shouldn't be relevant at all and the cc limits were arbitrary but a necessary class divider.

The 4-stroke "revolution" is driven by Honda and to a lesser extent the desire to "appeal" to the environ-mentals. I think the environ-mentals would be horrified to know that a big chunk of the world's produce gets shipped and trucked by clean, incredibly powerful, direct-injection two-stroke engines.

Then add in an organising body that doesn't give one flying fuck for motorcycles and looks over at Superbike to see exciting racing and big fields and wants that, so it changes prototype racing into some pointless pseudo-proddy cul-de-sac in a series of increasingly desperate knee-jerk reactions. Bit like Formula 1 which just looks like British Formula 3 from the early '90s on fast forward.

Organisers don't want innovation, they want money and ratings in that order. Spectacle comes a very distant third when you prioritise those two ahead of competition, but always bear in mind that in prototype racing, cars or bikes, the rule is for boring processional racing as innovative technologies leapfrog the competition and then rules are changed to exclude huge advantages and then the new rules are exploited by some genius and so on. Sometimes you get a confluence of technologies that provide epic racing for a few years at a time. What's happened in present-day racing in the top levels of motorsport is draconian regulation that gives the haves a huge advantage and the have-nots an insurmountable mountain to climb, leaving little scope for dramatic changes of fortune for innovative teams.

[James Deuce]

The 'brands' are the riders not the machines. End of the day, I guess it depends what you enjoy about racing, but for me, having 40+ bikes on a grid where the depth of a teams pockets won't dictate who will be up the pointy end = some of the best racing from the GP paddock over the past 2 years.

It's Supersport racing populated by MotoGP has-beens you mean. The only reason it's gone four-stroke is so that the Tristans and Christians with huge amounts of cash can be competitive. Riding a two-stroke at the limit, even a 125, takes talent of a different order than a National level four-stroke race series. Prototype chassis with sealed customer engines is a cop out to the power of a big purse.

[tigertim20]

GP racing isn't there to improve the road breed, it's a technology showcase for the manufacturers. Superbike and Supersport is there to improve the road breed.

GP racing is not some sort of proddy class but it will turn into that when the claiming rule bikes turn up next year.

There are already plenty of examples of technology filtering through from GP bikes, to road bikes, especially so the litre sportsbikes, but that technology also filters down to other bikes as well. The superbikes get the tech a few years after the GP bikes, and so does the end customer, so how can you say that it has nothing to do with improving the road breed?
Motive power shouldn't be relevant at all and the cc limits were arbitrary but a necessary class divider.

The 4-stroke "revolution" is driven by Honda and to a lesser extent the desire to "appeal" to the environ-mentals. I think the environ-mentals would be horrified to know that a big chunk of the world's produce gets shipped and trucked by clean, incredibly powerful, direct-injection two-stroke engines.

Then add in an organising body that doesn't give one flying fuck for motorcycles and looks over at Superbike to see exciting racing and big fields and wants that, so it changes prototype racing into some pointless pseudo-proddy cul-de-sac in a series of increasingly desperate knee-jerk reactions. Bit like Formula 1 which just looks like British Formula 3 from the early '90s on fast forward.

Organisers don't want innovation, they want money and ratings in that order. Spectacle comes a very distant third when you prioritise those two ahead of competition, but always bear in mind that in prototype racing, cars or bikes, the rule is for boring processional racing as innovative technologies leapfrog the competition and then rules are changed to exclude huge advantages and then the new rules are exploited by some genius and so on. Sometimes you get a confluence of technologies that provide epic racing for a few years at a time. What's happened in present-day racing in the top levels of motorsport is draconian regulation that gives the haves a huge advantage and the have-nots an insurmountable mountain to climb, leaving little scope for dramatic changes of fortune for innovative teams.
seems to me that past of that last paragraph is contradictory. surely more people will watch, which will generate more income, when the racing is closer, and surely the axing of certain technologies that provide advantages assists in making the racing a little closer?
Cerainly some teams will have deep enough pockets that they can still pull an advantage, like the difference between direct factory supported, and sattelite teams, but the effort is there to close the gap up.
Id have thought that a spectacle, money making, and ratings were mutually inclusive terms whn it comes to motorsport, make a better spectacle, more people will watch, rider profiles will be increased = more money.

Am I missing something?

[James Deuce]

Am I missing something?

Yes. They've been proven to mutually exclusive. F1 being the prime example.

What examples are you talking about re. technology given that the technologies you are not doubt thinking of are common to both Superbike and MotoGP and appeared in both classes around the same time? You'll find that the road bikes comparable systems have more in common with the Superbike implementation than the MotoGP implementation.

I personally think that MotoGP is on the verge of being irrelevant, something that reducing grids and TV ratings would tend to back up, as well as the sharp decline in available sponsorship funds dating back prior to the GFC. The Flamminis are doing it right. Dorna are not.

[slowpoke]

Yes. They've been proven to mutually exclusive. F1 being the prime example.

What examples are you talking about re. technology given that the technologies you are not doubt thinking of are common to both Superbike and MotoGP and appeared in both classes around the same time? You'll find that the road bikes comparable systems have more in common with the Superbike implementation than the MotoGP implementation.

I personally think that MotoGP is on the verge of being irrelevant, something that reducing grids and TV ratings would tend to back up, as well as the sharp decline in available sponsorship funds dating back prior to the GFC. The Flamminis are doing it right. Dorna are not.

You need to head over to Europe Jim. Out here in the colonies we may enjoy the erroneous impression of "production" bikes/WSB being in the same ballpark as MotoGP but in Europe MotoGP is absolutely king and WSB is a poor bastard child in comparison. The Flammini's may be doing it right, and Dorna are worried about market share but they are still streets ahead in the quality of brand stakes.

(Come to think of it I'm not sure how bikes with under seat fuel tanks, gear driven cams, fabricated swing arms, data processing/telemetry that NASA would have loved a few years back, magnesium, titanium or unobtainium every thing yada yada qualify as "production" bikes. If you bought a an Aprilia RSV4 and stripped off all the bits that aren't used in a WSB machine I don't think you'd have a hell of a lot left. But that's a different issue......)

Haha, it takes a clever bloke but somehow you've managed to exaggerate and understate at the same time. MotoGP rejects populating Moto2? Er, who would that be? The grand total of 2 last year (Elias and Ant West) and lemme see, 2 again this year (Kallio and West) in a field of what, 35 bikes?. Not much of a population.

Nope, last year the cream was Elias, Simon, Iannone, Luthi, Corsi, Talmasci, pretty much the same guys who shone in their GP250 days. Kinda knocks on the head your idea of "Tristan and Christian with huge amounts of cash" being competitive too eh? As usual the cream rises to the top and the mainland European racing scene provides unrivalled competition to blood/improve young talent. On the other hand it's provided a platform where any engineering team can make a name for themselves if they're good enough, something that could not be said about the previous 2 stroke platform. No manufacturer could step in and hope to compete against the might of Piaggio (Aprilia/Derbi) Honda or KTM, and no rider had a hope in hell unless they had one of the few factory bikes...privateers where doomed before they began. The "power of the big purse" you speak of was the GP250 era not the Moto2 bikes.

Come to think of it even if they could why would any engineering team want to get involved in development of bikes and technology that had no realistic marketable application outside of the Grand Prix scene? Nup, I reckon the engineering on display now is a far greater and more interesting drawcard than the one or two manufacturers who displayed their wares in the past. Kalex, Moriwaki, Suter, Bimota, Harris etc involvement is a huge improvement over the 90% Aprilia's vs the occasional Honda or KTM.....all of which were dead end engineering exercises.

And calling a Moto2 bike a supersport machine? How is a field of similarly powered protypes any worse than a field of 90% identical Aprilia's? Under the old regime it was a race between the half a dozen factory bikes with the also rans battling over the scraps. It was a glorified version of our old 250 proddy racing. All of a sudden we've got a clean sheet of paper for the egg heads and an equal chance for every team if they're clever enough. And riders who used to turn up and ride a bike that had been developed down to a microscopic level now have to come up with some genuine development skills/feedback.

And how does changing from 4 stroke to 2 stroke all of a sudden make the racing any less skillful? There may be slightly different skills involved but there is no lessening of the talent required to come out on top. With development a key requirement now it's probably widened the array of talents the riders must display if they are going to go forward. And the requirement for riders to be built like a racing sardine is no longer quite so paramount.

Arguing that 2 strokes are better than 4 strokes is like arguing apples are better than oranges: pointless, 'cos they are simply different. But, arguing that the pure engineering has gone out of Moto2 in comparison to 250GP is a furphy when the clean sheet development opportunities available to the many teams involved in Moto2 are boundless in comparison to the miniscule incremental improvements contemplated by the comparatively tiny number of engineers in 1 or 2 manufacturers involved in manufacturing 250GP bikes. Personally, I love the fact that any big brained motorcycling Stephen Hawking-type could build a wacky racer to the Moto2 rules and do well, 2 years ago that scenario was simply impossible.

[eelracing]

Priceless Slowpoke,your a funny guy.You don't write press releases for Dorna do you?Because you can sure polish a turd.

Basically the proof is in the pudding,ie your mate Elias currently languishing in the basement section of the MotoGP grid.Thats got to be a case of having your scalpel blunted if ever I saw it.
So please don't talk up moto2 as some techno breakthrough or somesuch pshycobabble, it is what it is...a lukewarmed production engine in an oversized 250gp chassis.Nothing clever about that.Nor a 250cc 4 stroke single with it's balls cut off in a 125gp chassis.
As for comparing apples with oranges I think a better comparison would be donkeys with thoroughbreds.

[RobGassit]

Maybe more chances to get a Kiwi started over there in the sport of chequebooks though? :yes:

[wharfy]

Priceless Slowpoke,your a funny guy.You don't write press releases for Dorna do you?Because you can sure polish a turd.

Basically the proof is in the pudding,.

"The proof of the pudding is in the eating" :)


Well I like to watch moto2,

[slowpoke]

Priceless Slowpoke,your a funny guy.You don't write press releases for Dorna do you?Because you can sure polish a turd.

Basically the proof is in the pudding,ie your mate Elias currently languishing in the basement section of the MotoGP grid.Thats got to be a case of having your scalpel blunted if ever I saw it.
So please don't talk up moto2 as some techno breakthrough or somesuch pshycobabble, it is what it is...a lukewarmed production engine in an oversized 250gp chassis.Nothing clever about that.Nor a 250cc 4 stroke single with it's balls cut off in a 125gp chassis.
As for comparing apples with oranges I think a better comparison would be donkeys with thoroughbreds.

Duuuuude, how the fuck can you go from a 1 cylinder wide 2 stroke to a 4 cylinder wide 4 stroke and call it "just an oversized 250GP chassis"? Fuck me, thats worse than calling a GSXR600 an oversided RGV250........chalk and cheese brutha. Best you go and have a read about some of the varying frame/packaging solutions in Moto2 rather than endlessly perving on a field of Aprilia's only separated by a Resene calalogue.

Elias has definitely been a disappointment this year, but I reckon that just shows how much of a team sport bike racing at that level is. I seem to remember he handed Valentino his arse a few years back, (on a privateer bike too) and has 17 GP wins to his credit in all classes. He's no mug scoring several MotoGP podiums as well, and was right in the hunt for a GP250 world championship until the last race of the season a few years back. If he's the munter you seem to think he is what does that say about the more recent GP250 graduates and the benefits/skill gained from riding a GP bike? Now that they have to set up a bike from scratch rather than relying on umpteen years of data with the same machine it's not so easy eh?

Hey, I liked the GP250's too, and would love to ride one, but the lack of manufacturers was a disappointing aspect that was detracting from the spectacle. Fact is they are gone, aren't coming back, and the racing that is just as fast to the naked eye is closer than ever.

So which frame below is most like your "oversized 250GP frame" (alloy beam)? The composite cast alloy/chromoly tube Bimota.......or the alloy oval tube RSV? Good luck seeing a similarity there..............
240102240101

[RobGassit]

[QUOTE=slowpoke;1130079845]
((Elias has definitely been a disappointment this year, but I reckon that just shows how much of a team sport bike racing at that level is. I seem to remember he handed Valentino his arse a few years back, (on a privateer bike too) and has 17 GP wins to his credit in all classes. He's no mug scoring several MotoGP podiums as well, and was right in the hunt for a GP250 world championship until the last race of the season a few years back. ))


Couldn't agree more with this post. Elias is a master and is awesome to watch, specially mid corner. May need to change his style to get the feel back he obviously hasn't found yet.
I love the 2 strokes too but what can you do? Moto3 will loosen up the factory monopoly of chosen riders.Having said that though, after seeing Criville riding the new 250 in Spain, I was bloody underwhelmed. Sounded like a Hyosung.:facepalm:

[nudemetalz]

Shitty, overly complicated, expensive four-stroke rubbish.

Weren't you doing an NZ-250 four stroke single 250 cafe racer, Jim? ;)

[Brian d marge]

Come to think of it even if they could why would any engineering team want to get involved in development of bikes and technology that had no realistic marketable application outside of the Grand Prix scene?

A.

I can answer this bit, because the market is bigger and SOME parts of motorcycle racing have wider applications. Data management , design so for example , data logging the companies that provide data logging also have contributed to keeping your greenhouse at the right temp
I notice F1 really at the front of "engineering " and working with other disciplines such as airlines and government agencies ....
Also 7 million Italians watched the motogp last week .... thats a lot of exposure ....

Stephen


and that honda ....lets hope the A kit is a goer !!

[Ivan]

The 'brands' are the riders not the machines. End of the day, I guess it depends what you enjoy about racing, but for me, having 40+ bikes on a grid where the depth of a teams pockets won't dictate who will be up the pointy end = some of the best racing from the GP paddock over the past 2 years.

Fully agree I love the fact at one round a rider might be in 1st next round hes down in 31st, and someone new is there,

its fabulous racing ok they might be slower than the 250's but the racing is more entertaining than watching Aspar racing 1 2 3 4 5 like 250s were

[Crasherfromwayback]

its fabulous racing ok they might be slower than the 250's but the racing is more entertaining than watching Aspar racing 1 2 3 4 5 like 250s were

Weird. I found watching Aoyama on his HONDA dicing with Simoncelli and his APRILLIA incredibly exciting. Some of the best racing I've seen in years. Then they canned it.

[Ivan]

Weird. I found watching Aoyama on his HONDA dicing with Simoncelli and his APRILLIA incredibly exciting. Some of the best racing I've seen in years. Then they canned it.

Yes Aoyama was there I should have said that he did bloody well consdering the bike he is riding is realisticly 8 years old!

But I got bored of a large group running away as they had more dollers,

at least Moto2 has closed that up and you can still see some fairly large groups dicing it up, ok the best guys are going to run off into the distance but thats because they are the fastest out there,

[Crasherfromwayback]

Yes Aoyama was there I should have said that he did bloody well consdering the bike he is riding is realisticly 8 years old!

But I got bored of a large group running away as they had more dollers,

at least Moto2 has closed that up and you can still see some fairly large groups dicing it up, ok the best guys are going to run off into the distance but thats because they are the fastest out there,

I know what you're saying, and we all like close racing. It's just that to me, they're simply noisy 600SS bikes, and Im don't go to GP's to see that. I'd go to a World Supers meet.

[rachprice]

Yes Aoyama was there I should have said that he did bloody well consdering the bike he is riding is realisticly 8 years old!

But I got bored of a large group running away as they had more dollers,

at least Moto2 has closed that up and you can still see some fairly large groups dicing it up, ok the best guys are going to run off into the distance but thats because they are the fastest out there,

Well I dont know if it was only because they had a lot of money what about the boys from 250 in motogp now, they seem to be doing really well....maybe they were just a hell of a lot better than the rest?

[Ivan]

So what about Aoyama??? its hes on a bike that isnt as competive as the rest as hes on a bike without the same budget as them,

Yes Stoner and that are top level riders I also said that in my post that the fast guys will clear off,


But the 250 class was about money and there was some teams with a shit load more money than others, at least moto2 has capped that and they cant do that