MotoGP 2014

[Crasherfromwayback]

Yep 16 it is.the bridgestones aren't holding them back,

What makes you say that? If that's true...how come some of the old 800cc lap records have only just been broken?

[BMWST?]

What makes you say that? If that's true...how come some of the old 800cc lap records have only just been broken?

Because the record setting 800 were on bridgestones too and more horsepower and more weight dont make a superior package?!

[Crasherfromwayback]

Because the record setting 800 were on bridgestones too and more horsepower and more weight dont make a superior package?!

Can't agree sorry. Don't for a min think these new 1000's aren't faster and superior to the 800's.

[BMWST?]

Can't agree sorry. Don't for a min think these new 1000's aren't faster and superior to the 800's.

So you sayin the tyres are holding them back?
I will agree to a point.i think that the 1000s are pushing the tyres to the limit,and within the current regime the tyrrs are the best that ANYONE could provide.
I back beleif up by betting now that given that constraints dont change too much that race lap times wont be broken by the new suppliers.

[Crasherfromwayback]

So you sayin the tyres are holding them back?
I will agree to a point.i think that the 1000s are pushing the tyres to the limit,and within the current regime the tyrrs are the best that ANYONE could provide.
I back beleif up by betting now that given that constraints dont change too much that race lap times wont be broken by the new suppliers.

I think they're certainly part of the problem Yes. Restricting fuel doesn't help either. When you have two or more brands of tyres...the competition makes each of them do their best to improve the product so as to win and then crow about it. When you have one brand simply supplying them all...what incentive is there for improvement?

[BMWST?]

I think they're certainly part of the problem Yes. Restricting fuel doesn't help either. When you have two or more brands of tyres...the competition makes each of them do their best to improve the product so as to win and then crow about it. When you have one brand simply supplying them all...what incentive is there for improvement?

Agreed,but it is cost sffective.who is going to cover the cost of two suppliers, when there was.only one?
the basic costs are easily doubled,but the opportunity to "sell" is halved
I firmly beleive that bridgestone are supplying the best tyres they can,and they are very good tyres indeed.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Agreed,but it is cost sffective.who is going to cover the cost of two suppliers, when there was.only one?
the basic costs are easily doubled,but the opportunity to "sell" is halved

The whole *cost* thing in Moto GP irks me. They make rules upon rules to make it cheaper...whilst all the time making it more expensive to compete. I mean for starters...it'd be a shitload cheaper to just throw engines at the bikes than try to make an engine so good it lasts x amount of hours for the fucking stoopid 5 engine per season rule. Also...limiting the amount of fuel carried! It costs more to get the bike to be so fuel eeficient etc etc...fuck me...this is (well was) Moto GP racing!

As Drew has said...give us (them) certain parameters to play with...but then leave them to it! The whole max bore size etc sucks fucking balls. WTF is this??? Proddie racing? That's Superbikes FFS. So goes for the electronics. The manufacturers want it...fine...hone it in Superbike racing seeing as they're the bikes you're gonna sell with it. Get it the fuck out of GP racing! Not like we haven't seen some fucking huge highsides with it is it? Rules smules...

So come Sunday...I'm going for...

MM

Rossi (a fucking master round Jerez)

Pedro

Lorenzo

[trustme]

The whole *cost* thing in Moto GP irks me. They make rules upon rules to make it cheaper...whilst all the time making it more expensive to compete. I mean for starters...it'd be a shitload cheaper to just throw engines at the bikes than try to make an engine so good it lasts x amount of hours for the fucking stoopid 5 engine per season rule. Also...limiting the amount of fuel carried! It costs more to get the bike to be so fuel eeficient etc etc...fuck me...this is (well was) Moto GP racing!

As Drew has said...give us (them) certain parameters to play with...but then leave them to it! The whole max bore size etc sucks fucking balls. WTF is this??? Proddie racing? That's Superbikes FFS. So goes for the electronics. The manufacturers want it...fine...hone it in Superbike racing seeing as they're the bikes you're gonna sell with it. Get it the fuck out of GP racing! Not like we haven't seen some fucking huge highsides with it is it? Rules smules...

So come Sunday...I'm going for...

MM

Rossi (a fucking master round Jerez)

Pedro

Lorenzo

If you opened the whole thing up it would be totally a case of cheque book racing, the biggest budget would get the best technology & the titles would go with it, think of MV/Ago in the post Honda pre 2 stroke years. I suspect motogp would soon wither & die
The purest in me agrees with you, the realist disagrees

[Crasherfromwayback]

If you opened the whole thing up it would be totally a case of cheque book racing, the biggest budget would get the best technology & the titles would go with it, think of MV/Ago in the post Honda pre 2 stroke years. I suspect motogp would soon wither & die
The purest in me agrees with you, the realist disagrees

I hear ya mate. But to a certain extent we're still seeing the biggest cheque book (HRC) winning all the time. At least in the 2 stroke era there was only so much you could do with a 500cc 4cyl engine. So I guess what I'm getting at...is can't they look to a similar formular? Make things simpler not more complex.

[BMWST?]

I hear ya mate. But to a certain extent we're still seeing the biggest cheque book (HRC) winning all the time. At least in the 2 stroke era there was only so much you could do with a 500cc 4cyl engine. So I guess what I'm getting at...is can't they look to a similar formular? Make things simpler not more complex.

But the whole idea of prototype racing is that you are pushing the limits of known technologies and developing new ones isnt it?

[merv]

I love seeing Honda make such great GP bikes and it makes me laugh seeing all the people bitching about it and wanting to make things fairer/cheaper for the other brands. As Drew says this is meant to be prototype racing.

Even in the days of Ago I reckon it was great as it gave everyone the challenge to try and beat him and it was quite cool that two Kiwis could come second to him, firstly Ginger Molloy and then Keith Turner, albeit a distant second in the championship. Ago did a few races outside GP and didn't he get beaten by John Cooper once in Pomgolia and by Bryan Hindle in Australia. It was stuff of legends.

I think it all stems back to the FIM losing touch by selling the whole damn thing to a promoter. When the FIM ran the thing themselves back in the old days all sorts of people could turn up and race. Now they even control the number of places each team is allowed as in 2 per factory team etc as its all controlled by money.

[trustme]

The 2 stroke era was no different ,you are simply seeing it through a rose tinted Hubble telescope. Two strokes went through a huge level of development, it really took off with Yamaha in the 70's. Was it any cheaper ?, in relative terms perhaps not , those motors had a very short life span. In truth only 2 1/2 factories [ sorry Suzuki ] could compete throughout that era, sounds much like the current situation

[puddytat]

Another record beckons this weekend.....4 poles & wins in a row anyone?

[merv]

The 2 stroke era was no different ,you are simply seeing it through a rose tinted Hubble telescope. Two strokes went through a huge level of development, it really took off with Yamaha in the 70's. Was it any cheaper ?, in relative terms perhaps not , those motors had a very short life span. In truth only 2 1/2 factories [ sorry Suzuki ] could compete throughout that era, sounds much like the current situation

2 3/4 lol, there was Cagiva as well.

Once Honda went 2 stroke they tried a lot of different things too. They tried the V3, then they were the only ones with a proper V4 with a single crank, then Mick had them do big bang, then screamer again and they tried fuel injection. All at a cost no doubt but I am sure they saw it as paying off in the corporate sense for development, besides always trying to play with the opposition.

[Crasherfromwayback]

But the whole idea of prototype racing is that you are pushing the limits of known technologies and developing new ones isnt it?

I'm all for that mate. Didn't mean I'm not all for a tech war. I'd just like to see things simplified somehow.

The 2 stroke era was no different ,you are simply seeing it through a rose tinted Hubble telescope. Two strokes went through a huge level of development, it really took off with Yamaha in the 70's. Was it any cheaper ?, in relative terms perhaps not , those motors had a very short life span. In truth only 2 1/2 factories [ sorry Suzuki ] could compete throughout that era, sounds much like the current situation

Yes it was mate! Very different! Tuners actually tuned (jetting, diff porting, chambers etc etc)...now they're not even allowed inside the fucking engines! And you know as well as I do running a two stroke engine is chaeper than a four stroke. Look what's happened in the moto-x world! Chucking fresh rings and pistons at the things (with a fresh crank here and there) is a whole lot cheaper than running one of these beasts I'll bet.

Now I know we can't go back to smokers...and whilst I def have rose tinted specs on regarding the old girls...I also love the new 250hp diesels. I just want to see some sort of formular like they had back in the day. I mean...don't you miss the vee five RCV? I sure do! Let them have 1000cc...as many cyls as you want...but run diff weights per amount of cyls used...limit them to 6 gears....then leave them to it! Oh...and leave out the electronic aids. That'll save some money I'm sure.