Control tyre for NZSBK

[R1madness]

with all the talk about control tyres in MotoGP i think its time it was thought about for racing here in NZ. I dont sell tyures so it doesn't bother me which brand but what do others think?

[kickingzebra]

Bad for competition, which is bad for pricing. I wouldn't mind seeing tyre rules (useage) tightened though, so we have to pick appropriate compounds to go the distance.

[t3mp0r4ry nzr]

I think most racers main concern is fronting with the folding stuff in order to buy enough NEW tyres to race on in the first place, secondary consideration is given to the brand specific advantages. So the advantage of everyone running on the one brand tyre may actually be outweighed by uncompetitive prcing by the importer. HOWEVER, different story if MNZ secured a container of DUNLOPS for example and passed on the tyres for cost and made these control tyres. However, the sinic in me says that this wont happen cos its too much work on behalf of MNZ for no return when there are other ways of reducing the cost of superbike racing that is as easy as amending rules in MNZ rulebook.

[scott411]

I think most racers main concern is fronting with the folding stuff in order to buy enough NEW tyres to race on in the first place, secondary consideration is given to the brand specific advantages. So the advantage of everyone running on the one brand tyre may actually be outweighed by uncompetitive prcing by the importer. HOWEVER, different story if MNZ secured a container of DUNLOPS for example and passed on the tyres for cost and made these control tyres. However, the sinic in me says that this wont happen cos its too much work on behalf of MNZ for no return when there are other ways of reducing the cost of superbike racing that is as easy as amending rules in MNZ rulebook.


this would cost a fair bit to do, you would have to prepay for the tyres before they left somewhere,

and i do not think MNZ job is to be a tyre importer,

control tyre in a small market would be a hard thing to do, but it would have its advantages,

[Brutus]

International GP racing should be left to prototype and development that can pass onto the consumer. domestic racing can make its own rules. If $ is factor gaining participants, perhaps "control" tyres are the future.

[Robert Taylor]

I think most racers main concern is fronting with the folding stuff in order to buy enough NEW tyres to race on in the first place, secondary consideration is given to the brand specific advantages. So the advantage of everyone running on the one brand tyre may actually be outweighed by uncompetitive prcing by the importer. HOWEVER, different story if MNZ secured a container of DUNLOPS for example and passed on the tyres for cost and made these control tyres. However, the sinic in me says that this wont happen cos its too much work on behalf of MNZ for no return when there are other ways of reducing the cost of superbike racing that is as easy as amending rules in MNZ rulebook.

Any tyre distributor needs a fair and reasonable commercial return, like any distributor of any product. Be it for life essentials or discretionary spending. Frankly ( in my opinion ) NZ is too small for control tyres ( even by putting out to tender each season ) as I could clearly see that if you failed with your tender you would be less inclined to support the sport in other ways. The sport needs as much industry support as possible. It is getting that and many dont realise just how much there is, per capita.
Keeping the engines much closer to stock with the allowance of a race exhaust system and a tunable ECU would far and away be the best way of reducing costs. Everything else should be left well alone for very solid reasons, including rider safety.

[R1madness]

interesting comments. interesting votes too.
I wonder if we banned replacement ECUs would there be any point in expensive engine mods. Cant remap ignition or fueling not much point in bumping compression or changing cam phasing/lift/duration? what say you all?

[k14]

interesting comments. interesting votes too.
I wonder if we banned replacement ECUs would there be any point in expensive engine mods. Cant remap ignition or fueling not much point in bumping compression or changing cam phasing/lift/duration? what say you all?
Aren't some stock ecu's still programmable anyway?

[Robert Taylor]

interesting comments. interesting votes too.
I wonder if we banned replacement ECUs would there be any point in expensive engine mods. Cant remap ignition or fueling not much point in bumping compression or changing cam phasing/lift/duration? what say you all?

A lot of these bikes out of the box dont fuel cleanly. Add a race pipe and the problem is often worse. A race pipe is justified because among other reasons crash damage costs are often significantly less than oem. Engines that dont fuel smoothly can have abrupt power delivery, not desirable especially on a slippery track.
I think we also have to be mindful that we dont ''dumb down'' the two elite classes excessively. Such classes will NEVER be affordable to all and sundry not matter how ruthless you are in exorcising costs.

[R1madness]

sure some bikes dont fuel properly from the factory but since its "production racing" surely that means the best bike will be the one that offers the best combination of handling, power, brakes, and rideability. If exotic race pipes were banned in favor of street legal slip ons the fueling would not be affected too badly and in some cases improved.
I am not sure a full titanium race system costing just under $4000 can be seen as a cost effective replacement...
Yes some stock ecus can be tuned slightly to compinsate for fuels etc but the variance is small. in most cases about 5%.

[codgyoleracer]

You could definitly argue for a control tyre set up in 600's - along with other standardisation / reduced modifiaction of selected parts.
None of the popular mainstream manufacturers build dangerous bikes to ride or race in this day & age, & there are plenty of race series running overseas that prove that point. In my opinion all of them can be raced quite effectivly in near to stock trim.
The real discussion here though is "If" these types of changes were made would it actually bring more people into the sport ?, - Or are these suggested changes simply targeted at keeping the people that we already have in the sport ?
The machine build cost equates to roughly one third of the total operational cost of racing a bike - so reducing the build costs may not actually have the desired effect (at national level at least).
I can see the cost reduction advantages at club level though.
Glen W

[Taz]

There's no option for "whats NZSBK?" or "I couldn't give a fat rats arse"
(p/t) :shutup:

[brads]

Keeping the engines much closer to stock with the allowance of a race exhaust system and a tunable ECU would far and away be the best way of reducing costs. Everything else should be left well alone for very solid reasons, including rider safety.

Well put,thinking back to the late nineties when there was a Open Production class with I think those rules,it worked ok,in fact have a look at the lap times in the AMA superbike class(excluding Mladin & Spies),then look at the Superstock class!.Our tracks here apart from Puke would there really be that much difference in lap times?.Racing would still be close.
The difference between Arrow full system and slip on is 3.9hp or $2000plus for 08 CBR1000RR,thats a few sets of tyres.......................

[Robert Taylor]

sure some bikes dont fuel properly from the factory but since its "production racing" surely that means the best bike will be the one that offers the best combination of handling, power, brakes, and rideability. If exotic race pipes were banned in favor of street legal slip ons the fueling would not be affected too badly and in some cases improved.
I am not sure a full titanium race system costing just under $4000 can be seen as a cost effective replacement...
Yes some stock ecus can be tuned slightly to compinsate for fuels etc but the variance is small. in most cases about 5%.

But how often would you destroy a complete exhaust system? Muffler can replacement / reskinning / repair is relatively inexpensive. if someone has the means to spend 4k on a complete system why ( in some peoples eyes ) victimise / demonise them for doing so?

[johan]

I heard a rumor at the track yesterday, that Pirelli NZ had sold out their wets? I'm not sure if that was correct or not, but it has happen to me at least one time a normal sc1 can't be delivered.
It seems importers have a hard time to supply the demand as it is?

[t3mp0r4ry nzr]

control tyre in a small market would be a hard thing to do, but it would have its advantages,

scotty, what advantages do you think control tyres would give a race class here in NZ?

[The Stranger]

Keeping the engines much closer to stock with the allowance of a race exhaust system and a tunable ECU would far and away be the best way of reducing costs. Everything else should be left well alone for very solid reasons, including rider safety.

Yet another way to reduce cost would be to keep stock suspension.:dodge:

[scott411]

scotty, what advantages do you think control tyres would give a race class here in NZ?

the more i think about it the less i can come up with, origanally i thought that you could spec a harder tyre that would last longer, but this would have other negitive affects as well

maybe spreading the cost over a bit better, although that would hurt some of the top runners, but help the lower guys or up and comers that do not have the better tyre deals,

i voted no by the way, as the logistics are way to hard for limited gains if any,

[t3mp0r4ry nzr]

"The real discussion here though is "If" these types of changes were made would it actually bring more people into the sport ?",Glen W

I think it would. Initial outlay of machine cost is ultimately the deal maker or breaker. This is when the major lump sum investments are made into buying a bike and the aftermarket equipment (as constrained by regulations) neccessary to make the bike a winner (after all, no one wants to ride for 2nd place). This is the time where money is begged, borrowed or stolen to get a bike ready for the season. Reducing set up costs (ie, full system, cams, headwork, dynotime) may reduce this build up cost considerabley and make the class a more attractive prospect.

This as Glen mentions represents approx. 1/3 of total seasons costs. if this stage of costing is reduced by 5-10k then these savings can be spread accross the rest of the season and will contribute merrily to tyres, fuel and accomodation and would im sure, be greatfully welcomed.

in regards to dumbing down a class, please explain how reducing barriers to entry to our superbike class and increasing the participation rate is gona be bad for motorcycle racing in NZ, Mr Taylor?

[Robert Taylor]

I think it would. Initial outlay of machine cost is ultimately the deal maker or breaker. This is when the major lump sum investments are made into buying a bike and the aftermarket equipment (as constrained by regulations) neccessary to make the bike a winner (after all, no one wants to ride for 2nd place). This is the time where money is begged, borrowed or stolen to get a bike ready for the season. Reducing set up costs (ie, full system, cams, headwork, dynotime) may reduce this build up cost considerabley and make the class a more attractive prospect.

This as Glen mentions represents approx. 1/3 of total seasons costs. if this stage of costing is reduced by 5-10k then these savings can be spread accross the rest of the season and will contribute merrily to tyres, fuel and accomodation and would im sure, be greatfully welcomed.

in regards to dumbing down a class, please explain how reducing barriers to entry to our superbike class and increasing the participation rate is gona be bad for motorcycle racing in NZ, Mr Taylor?

I think what is forgotten is that we already have a control class that is growing i.e. Pro Twins. This class still provides exciting racing.
There is room to move a little with the two premier ( elite if you like ) classes as I suggested, to reduce costs. Race exhausts and aftermarket ECUs only. Tyre regulations as they are because at least it gives every tyre distributor a chance in what is a very small and fragmented market. Just about EVERY sport in NZ and other countries is also a business and that in turn means many of those businesses put money back into the sport. I dont knock business like I fear too many of our countrymen do, I embrace it. As long as it carries people along with it.
Those who advocate a return to stock suspension for the elite classes are frankly ( and unapologetically ) ''deficient in coalface knowledge and experience''. A leading figure in MNZ and only 1 out of 4 of the major distributors wish such a return but that is because they have a very very scant understanding of the realities. Thankfully the 3 main distributors ( who collectively put a LOT of money into NZ road racing ) and people within MNZ who have thoroughly done their homework are fully in control of the facts.
Control classes overseas that run stock suspension ( such as R6 cup in Germany ) are fraught with issues, including lots of crashing. Imagine being a 90 kg rider turning up at Teretonga with a stock R6 and burning up the tyres in short order through the sweeper.
Several years ago aftermarket fork kits were banned for 600 and 1000 class bikes, I had no objection to it then as I saw that it was a means of controlling cost. But the rules must remain to be able to rekit the internals so as not to disadvantage brands ( such as currently Kawasakis ZX6R ) that have sealed for life non servicable cartridges. And not to also disadvantage very lightweight or heavyweight riders that are challenged by hydraulic and spring control calibration that does no suit them.
Already there has been much correspondence on this subject. I personally submitted a letter to industry insiders researching the facts and this has now been published on '' Bike Rider '' magazines website www.brm.co.nz . I respectfully suggest that anyone interested should read it.

[k14]

Before I say this I actually voted yes, but in retrospect I may have been a bit premature.

I can't see any reason why we would. There are plenty of other things that could be tweaked to get the field closer than a control tyre. If there was a control tyre bought in I think the same guys would still be winning. In 600's the current tyre rule is totally sufficient, 2 rears and 1 front is totally acceptable for most guys, its just part of the game.

Please correct me if I am wrong but the main cause of a spread field is skill. We only have 2 or 3 guys that are skilled enough (in riding and setup) to run at the pointy end of the superbike and 600 field. There were only a dozen or so guys running in superbike last year and I think to keep it open as a full superbike class let them run whatever they want. There are more gains to make in other areas before something like this is bought in.

The two major bike classes where a control tyre rule was bought in have been WSBK and BSB. In both of these classes there has been the factory teams having very good support from michelin, dunlop et al which was disadvantaging the privateer's. Maybe there are a few tyres that the top guys in superbikes have that are "special" but it is far and away from giving them a big advantage.

First get the grids full, then there may be a chance of control tyre.

[R1madness]

Well put Robert.
I am not demonising anyone for spending money on their racing. I love it. All i am trying to do is see how we can make it more compedative for all. The fast guys will remain fast its not just their bikes that make them that way, but how can we get more riders mixing it in the midfield and closing the gaps? Thats what its all about. As we see the fields depleting due to the fast guys retiring one by one it will be up to the current mid field runners to be the fast guys of the future. But if they leave the sport early due to cost or the feeling they cant compete due to lack of industry support what will we be left with in the future?

[CHOPPA]

I heard a rumor at the track yesterday, that Pirelli NZ had sold out their wets? I'm not sure if that was correct or not, but it has happen to me at least one time a normal sc1 can't be delivered.
It seems importers have a hard time to supply the demand as it is?

Yeah man was in there factory and had to see it first had haha The reason they are a tad short is they want to do a really big order and have as fresh as possible tyres for the nationals....

Good to meet ya on the weekend, sorry i couldnt really help out with wets but i have heaps of sets at home here all in decent condition cheap as

[Robert Taylor]

Before I say this I actually voted yes, but in retrospect I may have been a bit premature.

I can't see any reason why we would. There are plenty of other things that could be tweaked to get the field closer than a control tyre. If there was a control tyre bought in I think the same guys would still be winning. In 600's the current tyre rule is totally sufficient, 2 rears and 1 front is totally acceptable for most guys, its just part of the game.

Please correct me if I am wrong but the main cause of a spread field is skill. We only have 2 or 3 guys that are skilled enough (in riding and setup) to run at the pointy end of the superbike and 600 field. There were only a dozen or so guys running in superbike last year and I think to keep it open as a full superbike class let them run whatever they want. There are more gains to make in other areas before something like this is bought in.

The two major bike classes where a control tyre rule was bought in have been WSBK and BSB. In both of these classes there has been the factory teams having very good support from michelin, dunlop et al which was disadvantaging the privateer's. Maybe there are a few tyres that the top guys in superbikes have that are "special" but it is far and away from giving them a big advantage.

First get the grids full, then there may be a chance of control tyre.

The very top teams also have contracted suspension engineers ( in fact predominantly my good Swedish friends ) whose job it is to get the very best out of the control tyres they have to run. What is often missed by those that propose ''stock suspension'' rules is that there is a very close inter-relation between tyres and suspension / geometry calibration. OEM suspension will screw tyres very very quickly, fact.

[roogazza]

I can't see any reason why we would. There are plenty of other things that could be tweaked to get the field closer than a control tyre.

Please correct me if I am wrong but the main cause of a spread field is skill. We only have 2 or 3 guys that are skilled enough (in riding and setup) to run at the pointy end of the superbike and 600 field.

First get the grids full, then there may be a chance of control tyre.

Totally agree K14, everyone wanting to run before they can walk ! Gaz.

[svs]

i voted no. agree with rt and k14.

but there are a few cases when it will work. That is when a tyre supplier is a major sponsor of the event and the control tyre is supplied at a discounted cost. The prod 400 class back in scotland back in the day had this arrangement. (control tyre and control exhaust). but these tyres were supplied to the racers at a well discounted rate and it made sense for all to get involved rather than just a the few at the pointy end who could get the decent sponsorship deals.

In NZ I don't think any one particular importer would be willing to sponsor a class to that extent - the rest of the market probably wouldn't support the investment required. Ask yourself - if say dunlop or pirelli sponsored the NZSBK series and provided control tyres, would you be inclined to by that brand for tyres for your road bike? if not, then what's in it for the distributor?

as for not being able to get the tyres you want - well we are a small isolated country and it does take significant time for containers to get here. Obviously pirelli can't predict the future and although they will estimate the stock they require, they don't want to fill up a warehouse with unsellable tyres. If you want to ensure your own tyre supply a bit of planning is required. Order and pay for your tyres for the nationals now. you'll be alright.

[slowpoke]

... everyone wanting to run before they can walk ! Gaz.

Yup. I think a lot of people assume that the "factory" (as close as we have) guys are fast because of the support they get.....when it's more the other way 'round: they have the support because they are fast.

There doesn't seem to be a shortage of riders at the Winter Series level, but this doesn't seem to transfer into the National Series. Given that most 600 riders cross enter into Superbike to double their racing time the running costs wouldn't appear to be too unreasonable.

But this is a problem in itself; you are effectively penalised for running a Superbike by only getting half the racing you would on a 600. By "rewarding" people for staying in the lower classes we are limiting their development and thus their ability to challenge the established stars. The Premier class needs to be something that people aspire to, whereas at the moment they actually avoid it 'cos they only get half the track time. Hence there are only a handful of genuine Superbikes in the Superbike field and few people learn the skills necesary to challenge Stroud, Shirriffs, Bugden and Co.

This is a bigger issue than a small reduction in the price of tyres.

[CHOPPA]

It would be good if there was a rule like only 3 sets of tyres for the whole weekend

For nationals i reakon ill need prob 5 sets a week (ill have maybe 2) so thats $10k just for tyres thats not including wets...

[svs]

well there's already the rule that you have to run the same front for both races in SP600.

last year i would do the practice on the tyres i finished the previous meeting, then put on new tyres for qualifying and then change rear between r1 and r2.

this gave me 1 front and 2 rears per weekend, but realistically that wasn't really enough as the tyres were pretty worn by that time and i wished i could have afforded more. esp at Levels when the front got hammered.

still some people were going through a couple of sets midweek, then practice and then the races - it soon ads up - That's why good suspension really helps to save you money.

[quallman1234]

I wouldn't imagine that tyre's are the main deciding factor's in the NZSBK at the moment.
Therefore i wouldn't think that it would make the field tighter.
More the suspension and engine mod's gone into the bike's seem, to be the deciding factor and of course the rider.

The advantage of having a Control Tyre with the NZSBK, is the fact that the tyre manufacture chosen, might actually pay some interest in the NZSBK, considering the amount of tyre's needed.

[wharfy]

It would be good if there was a rule like only 3 sets of tyres for the whole weekend

For nationals i reakon ill need prob 5 sets a week (ill have maybe 2) so thats $10k just for tyres thats not including wets...

Fark good job I'm in no danger of getting kicked out of clubmans anytime soon !!!

[roogazza]

Fark good job I'm in no danger of getting kicked out of clubmans anytime soon !!!

Shssssh , Wharfy, they'll catch on and want us on control tyres next ! G.

ps I think we're the happiest class in road racing , are we not ? :clap:

[cs363]

Well intentioned but misguided and short sighted meddling by MNZ (or more to the point, one individual there who should know better).

Limiting tyres to one brand in the premier class will alienate many wholesalers who not only supply tyres, but other parts and apparel thereby potentially limiting sponsorship opportunities and possibly even raising costs.
We are not talking about big tyre brands as in WSBK etc but in reality small businesses that distribute a brand or two of tyres amongst their other wares.
Banning suspension modifications is just sheer stupidity as there are huge disparities between brands as Robert T has pointed out, this doesn't just affect handling but tyre wear as well.
Not only that but there are issues with varying rider weights and abilities that will be directly affected by having to run stock suspension - simply changing spring weights to suit as has been suggested is a band aid fix at best.
Not only will money spent on suspension and tyres equate to faster lap times (invariably more so than equal or greater amounts spent on engine mods) but greater safety.
It seems MNZ have fallen into the trap of thinking like our present government; 'if it sounds good in theory it must be so' and not going any further down the thought process track....
The suggestion of just limiting these bikes to slip on exhausts rather than full systems is laughable too - are they not aware that slip on's aren't available for some models, only full systems? So presumably the bikes that you can't buy slip-on's for would be limited to stock exhausts??
Not only that but if this is a cost limiting move then MNZ need to get out more and price some OEM exhausts versus aftermarket.
Regardless of any of the arguments for or against control tyres or suspension mods and even performance mods the simple fact remains that the cream will always rise to the top - the same names will still be out front.
If anyone has talent but no $$ then they need to get off their arses and go and get sponsorship -and no, that's not easy but then if it was everyone would be doing it!
On that note too - if you want sponsorship it takes more than sending a pretty picture and a letter to a potential sponsor telling them how expensive it will be to go racing this season, do you think they really give a big fat rats arse?
What they want to hear is what you will do for them to increase their brand exposure. I don't see too many guys on the motorcycle front going to the lengths that many of the car racing fraternity go to to get exposure for their sponsors. (Don't get me wrong, there are notable exceptions - as with every generalisation!)
Racing is hard work and unfortunately a huge percentage of that is working for your sponsors, vastly outnumbering the time spent racing.
Anyway, that's my 2 cents spent for now... :whistle: