If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by T3 on May 26, 2008, 3:56 pm
http://www.cyclenews.com/ShowStory.asp?HeadlineID=12328
http://roadracingworld.com/news/article/?article=32533
I haven't had the time to digest all this as yet, but glaring at me
right off is the homo list, but (among others) 1125r's and Superdukes?
Hmm, might be a little tough going for the 4's...
|
|
Posted by Bruce Hartweg on May 26, 2008, 4:24 pm
T3 wrote:
> http://www.cyclenews.com/ShowStory.asp?HeadlineID=12328
> http://roadracingworld.com/news/article/?article=32533
>
> I haven't had the time to digest all this as yet, but glaring at me
> right off is the homo list, but (among others) 1125r's and Superdukes?
> Hmm, might be a little tough going for the 4's...
>
Why? Buells have been in FX with absolutely no results whatsoever.
Of course, now the the official hamstringing has begun, they'll
do better, and the open hole to screw winners and reward losers
is in there so DMG can crank the knob of machine winners anyway
they want.
The purse looks pretty good, (except of course the big goose egg
for literbike). And most of the rules seem ok to me. I just really
hate the dyno aspect and lame HP restrictions.
Oh well, time will tell.
Bruce
|
|
Posted by sturd on May 27, 2008, 8:28 pm
Bruce Hartweg asks:
> if a $100 new homologated crank gives the power boost to your limit, why
> bother with outlawing the $2000 crank if someone want to use it (knowing
> that they will have to cut or restrict somewhere else to keep from getting
> too much power)
Because tuning will still be important. Power characteristics of an
engine
tuned to make 140 HP max could be an interesting game. If the special
crank extends max power down a few hundred RPM from peak, might
be an advantage.
Making a 140HP from 0 to 14,000 RPM engine would mean no shifting for
instance. Wonder when we'll have batteries that'll go 45 minutes or
so?
Go fast. Take chances.
Mike S.
|
|
Posted by T3 on May 28, 2008, 10:40 am
> Bruce Hartweg asks:
>
>> if a $100 new homologated crank gives the power boost to your limit, why
>> bother with outlawing the $2000 crank if someone want to use it (knowing
>> that they will have to cut or restrict somewhere else to keep from getting
>> too much power)
>
> Because tuning will still be important. Power characteristics of an
> engine
> tuned to make 140 HP max could be an interesting game. If the special
> crank extends max power down a few hundred RPM from peak, might
> be an advantage.
Tuning versus squeezing every last pony out of an engine will be key to
winning and the big twins lend themselves to that in spades. They also
will prolly be cheaper to run too...
|
|
Posted by Will Hartung on May 26, 2008, 8:05 pm
T3 wrote:
> http://www.cyclenews.com/ShowStory.asp?HeadlineID=12328
> http://roadracingworld.com/news/article/?article=32533
>
> I haven't had the time to digest all this as yet, but glaring at me
> right off is the homo list, but (among others) 1125r's and Superdukes?
> Hmm, might be a little tough going for the 4's...
>
Yea, the power/weight knob can be tweaked individually, and there seems
to be no "rules" as to when or how the knob may or may not be tweaked.
With this knob, DMG can make the results however "balanced" they want.
"Suzuki won again, tweak the knob again" or "BMW isn't showing well,
tweak their knob". If DMG wants a "Euro Bike" class, they can tune the
Japanese down until they're tractors. The real problem is that this rule
can change from week to week, so you never quite know what each week may
bring.
They may well be doing this already in Moto-ST, I don't know, and I
don't know how often they turn the knob if they do. But it's a big
hammer that they can wield.
It's interesting that they require the manufacturers to put up
contingency programs (dunno how novel that is in the racing industry),
but they don't specify (here) how big those contingency programs need to
be, or whether they need to be identical across manufacturers.
Also interesting the the registered entrant gets the prize money, but I
assume any rider compensation a) either considers that in their contract
(you keep what you win), or b) mandates the rider hand the purse over to
the team/take a cut in their contracted pay. Who knows, I may just be
reading to much in to that line, could easily be that way today and I
wouldn't know.
Finally, the real question is what tire they're going to use. 140 HP
don't matter a whole lot if the tires won't hold. So we'll see on that
as well.
How different are these rules from, say, SStock or SSport. Seems there's
limitations on suspension here, but not the engine (they don't care
about the engine as it's HP regulated). Of course that all depends on
what other after market bit makers get homulgated. If Ohlins high end
parts aren't on the list, guess it doesn't really matter.
So, essentially, what they done is create a framework where they can
make each race running under a different legislative environment through
the use of the HP/Weight knob, and potential adding and removing
equipment from the homulgation list.
That should be quite a potential headache for the crew chiefs each
weekend, along with the alluded to loss of testing time that has been
mentioned before.
So, get the list, run what ya brung and see what happens each weekend.
Now we can safely safe, we may not know who's going to win each weekend,
but DMG can say readily who WON'T win if they turn the knobs enough.
Regards,
Will Hartung
|
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 > last >>
| Similar Threads | Posted | | SBk rules again. | May 23, 2007, 8:13 am |
| Re: SBk rules again. | May 24, 2007, 10:23 am |
| Re: SBk rules again. | May 24, 2007, 10:26 am |
| WSB 2008 rules | June 5, 2007, 2:48 pm |
| AMA Superbike rules | June 14, 2007, 1:48 pm |
| More stupid rules | May 21, 2008, 11:04 am |
| The new rules, part II | May 30, 2008, 12:13 am |
| AMA Pro Racing Rules | October 27, 2008, 8:23 am |
| BSB rules for 2009 | October 28, 2008, 11:37 am |
| AMA 2009 SB rules announced | July 11, 2007, 5:58 pm |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap