Fontana second race

Has anyone got the time difference between these two?
8. Larry Pegram, Yamaha, -1 lap
11. Jeremy Toye, Yamaha, -1 lap
Jeremy was on a totally stock R1 (on loan to a magazine?) with tape over
the headlights.

Glad to see all 5 factory machines finished...

Just curious, why didn't Suzuki field the second GSXR with an up and
coming rider to replace Yates? I'm sure someone like Marty Craggill
would have leapt at the chance.

 

Some new fangled thing called the Intarweb, dear boy.

 

AMA racing is on Sky Sports in Europe, and I think it's on Motors TV as
well. Unfortunately my cable supplier (NTL) doesn't carry Motors TV and
the Sky Sports channels are an expensive package that is dominated by
Soccer which I have no interest in. I think BSB is live on both as well
so I watch it a week late on BBC for nothing. It's all a pain but
there's only so many £25 per month services I can justify paying for.

Maybe the Dorna-BSB tie-up will mean more coverage for all of us.

 

According to the fastest lap chart, Pegram ran a 1:28.6 vs Toye 1:29.9. But
it's not clear what their average lap times were.

There was quite a disparity on the track by the end of the race, as I'm sure
you could understand.

Yeah, it's good for him, but I don't know how good it is for Superbike
overall.

The second race, yes.

I dunno. I really would have liked to see the second Suzuki out there.
Perhaps that didn't want to "untweak" it from Yates specs just for one event
and have to reset everything (what the heck do I know).

But considering the disaparity at the end between Mladin, Eric, and the
Hondas, I would have liked to see where the seconds GSXR would have been in
the standings to get a better idea if Mats dominance at Fontana was more Mat
or more Machine. Talking to Eric at the end of the race, he mentioned it's a
bit of both. Eric was holding up and making some gains on Mat, but he said
he had some gearing problems that messed him up in traffic. Much like the GP
bikes, the Ducati has the power and speed in the straights, but he can't
seem to carry it through in the corners. It was also definately on top of
the Hondas, they were left behind pretty soundly by Erics bike. And man, did
it sound GOOD echoing off the walls into turn one.

Best "race" of the weekend was the delayed FX race, but it was a 2 horse
show with Miguel and Zemke.

Regards,

Will Hartung
()

 

There are plenty of examples worldwide and in almost every class for one
off rides on factory kit. Usually it's a "friend" of the team but
sometimes it's a big break for a privateer youngster.

Excuse me? This sounds like just so much bollox. If you'd said the team
had a bad day on a new bike that might make sense. I'm comparing your
comments about the BSB first meeting, Honda's good showing and Yamaha's
bad showing. Then there's the put downs you've made of Ten Kate's WSB
Honda. But of course, why would Honda put any effort into a third rate
series. It's not as if it will have any effect on road bikes sales after
all. (He said with tongue firmly in cheek). You don't send your hotshot
rider/employee, three technicians and a senior advisor half way round
the world, use your old WSB team and then have the head of HRC turn up
for the first race if you're not serious. And give them bikes that are
clearly aimed at the Suzuka 8 hours with all the quick change kit
already fitted. Oh, I forgot. That was for that other series in that
tinpot country where it rains all the time that's got great tracks,
great machines and no riders.

Of course it could also be that Miguel's getting old, Ben had a bad day
and Jake is a good rider but not a great rider.

Getting back to being serious, another possibility here is that Honda
have a problem with their clutch. Vermuelen's had real trouble getting
off the line, both Rutter and Kyonari made mistakes under braking that
looked like inconsistent slipper clutch problems. Ben blew one up at
Daytona. Would Fontana have been particularly hard if the engine braking
management had been bad?

Hah, Bloody, Hah.

"They should just use world SS600 rules". Oh, we did that one.

Of course it is. It's always Ducati's fault.

"This is a transition year". "The future of GP2 is tuned 600s" and on
and on. Fact is the AMA have f*cked up and are steadily destroying what
was once a great series.

 

Or is that "If it ain't broke introduce another class that's almost
identical, costs more money and which will attract at least one
manufacturer away." Isn't the relation and problem between Formula
Extreme and 600ss exactly the same problem as between SBK and 1000
Superstock?

The base motorcycle is more expensive but what's the difference in cost
between a competitively tuned Honda CBR600 or R6 and a 749R?

"Keep the class simple and cheap for privateers" But encourage factory
teams and factory riders. Can you really have both? Even if you don't
allow any tuning, the biggest spending teams will still blueprint the
bikes and still spend more on chassis setup. There'll still be a big
gulf between the rich and poor.

Oh good grief.

dean adams says it better than I can.

I've thought about writing this but all I end up with is a formula
remarkably like BSB. And I know that's going to go down like a lead
balloon. WTF, here goes.

- Scrap Daytona from the championship. It doesn't fit any more.

- Use FIM Point scoring.

- Have all the *races* on one day (probably Saturday) with two SBK races
on the same day. That way people can get to the circuit on Friday night
and get home on Sunday. If rain stops play the races can be run on
Sunday while most of the crowd could still be there. And with all the
races on one day, it makes for a solid 4-5 hours of entertainment.

- SBK. Limit tuning but fiddle with it to let twins/triples be
competitive. Require stock frames and swingarms with no strengthening.
They could do worse than simply use or at least start with this year's
WSB rules but with open choice of tyres. Add a secondary prize for
privateers so they've got something real to aim for.

- Downgrade Superstock. No SBK riders. No slicks. No tuning apart from
footrest height and exhausts. Target it at young and private riders.

- 600ss. Use World rules but possibly with stock gearboxes for cost
reasons. Exclude SBK riders as allowing one rider to do 3 races in one
day is too much. It also stops the best riders from swamping every race.
The really costly part of building these is getting more compression
without machining the head/cases/pistons. So somewhere in there there's
a set of rules that allow limited tuning that's still relatively easy.
New cams, shaved head and machining reliefs in stock pistons is a whole
lot easier than building up pistons with weld and hoping it all stays
together.

- Formula Extreme. Kill it. It's too confusing and dilutes the other
racing. There might be a place for a Formula Libre perhaps with no
fairings to encourage lunacy like Turbo Bandits. One day maybe an
unlimited 600 formula will make sense, but not today.

- So far we've only got 4 races. Add in a one make Formula for teenagers
like an R6 cup. Add in one novelty race like BMWs, Sportsters or Triumph
Triples or SoS or ? That makes 6 races, three of which are 35-45
minutes. That's a full day.

So now you've got.
- A clear headline race series: SBK.
- A clear secondary race series: 600SS
- An entry step for privateers: 1000 Superstock
- An entry level for the kids with no brains to get noticed: R6 cup
- A full day's racing that is a coherent package that can be sold to TV,
Advertisers, Sponsors.

Go on. Tear it apart.

 

I think you have part of this backwards. 1000SS has bled effort away
from SB. But FX has bled effort away from 600SS. It makes no sense to me
to have pairs of formulae so close to each other. Which is why I
suggested dropping Extreme, and widening the gap between SB and 1000SS.

The big advantage of having consistent rules round the world is that
tuners and factories can share information, parts and whole bikes
between series. That's the main reason for suggesting that the AMA
should play closer to the FIM, WSB and World Endurance. Otherwise each
importer or team has to do all the work themselves. The requirements for
the USA may well be different from the rest of the world. But I don't
believe they are that different. The easy option is to just use World
rules. Going against World rules is what needs justification. So what is
it?

I don't believe this will work.

1000 Superstock has it's place. Just not as the premier part of the
series. I think it should be downgraded. Right now it's too close to SB.

Mistake. I believe people want to see hotrod versions of their road
bikes in the premier class, not just a stock bike with a noisy exhaust.
At least I do.

What, 600s? The premier championship should be bikes that are scarily
fast. That means 1000s. Extreme 1000s? That's what SB already is.

One thing I don't understand in the AMA scheme is the class for 16-17-18
year olds. Maybe I missed it, but where are the next generation going to
come from? That's the purpose of R6 in the UK with an automatic ride in
SB for the winner.

The fundamental problem in all this is that the AMA SB class is looking
really thin. And it has for a couple of years. And as the premier class
it carries the whole of the rest of the program. All the talk about
tweaking the other classes has just avoided the problem. Introducing a
major league class just below this has just diluted the main event.

Then the event weekend needs a secondary class just as MotoGP has 250
and WSB has 600ss (and Supercross has 125s). But the AMA have diluted
that because there's now 3 secondary classes with roughly equal
standing. 600SS, Extreme and 1000SS.

We can't have it every weekend but we want to see 10 people on the grid
covered by a second, frequent lead changes and a dash for the line. All
on bikes that make you go "F*ck me, those things are so F*cking fast.
How do they do that?"

 

But here's the problem. If you force completely stock machines with no
engine tuning and little opportunity to improve the chassis, you end up
with a one make formula. In any given year there will be one machine
that works better at the race track. Over time this encourages the
manufacturers to produce more and more track focussed road bikes that
make less and less sense on the road. Allowing some tuning tends to even
everything up, more manufacturers bikes can be competitive. The problem
changes to allowing just enough tuning for this to happen without costs
running out of control and excluding the less well funded teams. Hence
limited head work and the question mark over alternate gearboxes.

You could argue here that the reason Honda left AMA 600ss and joined FX
was because they could use all the knowledge gained from racing in WSS,
BSB, AAJR 600 while producing a road bike that was aimed at road riders.

What I don't get is why the AMA should take what ought to be the 2nd
supporting formula on the program and aim it at novices and privateers.
When the guys winning were factory riders or soon to be factory riders.
And the winning teams were factory or importer run teams.

Quite. In the rest of the world, "Super" was some sort of trademark, so
for a while there we had Superbike, Supersports, Superstock and
Superside. Ignoring Superside, we have a fairly clear progression.
- Superbike. Unlimited tuning and chassis work
- Supersports. Limited tuning and chassis work. street tyres
- Superstock. No tuning or chassis work, street tyres

The catch in this is the engine layouts. If you accept that this is all
based on road bikes, and that twins and triples should be represented,
you have to start fiddling with what unlimited and limited tuning means.
Which has led us to Supersports 1000 engines in Superbike chassis and
now FX which is Supersports 600 in Superbike chassis. But my feeling is
that Supersports 600 as used in WSS, BSB and AAJR worked. And the stock
chassis and road tyres were good enough. The one really big expense was
the alternate gearbox so if the AMA wanted to keep costs under control
that was the place to do it. Not by eliminating all tuning.

Yet again we're back to the same old chestnut. You see privateers as
penniless backmarkers. I see them as HM Plant-GSE, Frankie Chili,
Renegade, Phase One, Ten Kate, (in WSS and now Superbike), Belgarda,
Monstermob, Hawk Kawasaki. You know, those guys who win championships
and races. Who are in the top 5 week in, week out. Who get the TV
coverage for their sponsors. It must be some cultural background thing.

What is this European Superbike championship of which you speak? Do you
mean the European Superstock championship? Or is this a dig at WSB? No,
I mean WSS.

 

Can somone explain the differences in the scoring systems? I assume there is
some significant structural difference between the two?

Regards,

Will Hartung
()

 

Man, I was sure confused during qualifying. I'm watching what turned out to
be SuperSTOCK, but I thought it was SuperSPORT. Part of the problem was I
was looking at the times on the displays, and I thought they were really
low. But, this was the Group 2 qualifying.

All of the classes are REALLY close on times and neither has a distinct
feel. Save for the 6 SB riders, because they are noticeably faster than
everyone else.

The 600s and 1000s are all running similar lap times, all look the same
(can't tell an R6 from an R1 at a glance), all sound the same. It was a
complete blur, I thought. Never had any idea who was on the track. Doesn't
help that the schedule was a mess and you couldn't hear anything.

Only Eric really stood out, (boy did he, that bike sounded SO nice) though
there was only two bikes that sounded like Mats. (and it was a bit confusing
when Mat was getting ready to lap the second).

The disparity is FX was just too great to make the race as a whole
interesting, though obviously the Hondas were going at it. The potential for
rain made the 1st SB race interesting, and the 2nd was interesting as long
as Eric was maintaining time, but lost its luster when he fell back.

I didn't watch much off the SStock race, we got to the track a little late,
but the 600 race was good. The red flag added to the mix.

But it all comes down to what brings the talent in and what makes it
interesting for the fans. It's not clear to me that watching 5 series whose
poles are seperated by a few seconds on identical looking and sounding bikes
is necessarily a good thing.

Regards,

Will Hartung
()

 

I'd have to go and do the detailed research to compare 600WSS with AMA
FX. A brief look at the AMA regs included,
- Stock airboxes
- Alternate cams but with stock lift
- Stock cranks
- Stock throttle bodies
- Alternate gearboxes but only if kit parts are offered
- Aftermarket valves and springs but with stock materials, size,
position

So far this is identical to WSS, although I think WSS is more open on
alternate gearbox suppliers

- Unlimited mods to stock cylinders, heads and crankcases
- Unlimited choice of pistons and conrods

This is where WSS diverges. I think WSS limits some of this.

So this all looks to me like the current SB 1000-4 regs translated to
600 which is slightly more liberal than current 600 WSS. In SB 1000-4
the crank-rods were a limiting factor which I think has been opened up a
little this year.

It was the Alternate cams but with stock lift limitation that caught my
eye and which led me to the original statement.

 

<HUMOR>
<SARCASM>

All hail SAMENESS. Bow down to SAMENESS. All race bikes should be the SAME.
None should be DIFFERENT. Throw Ducati out on their collective ear for being
DIFFERENT. Never try to innovate in any way that's DIFFERENT from the SAME.

</SARCASM>
</HUMOR>

Seriously, I think it's refreshing to have more than one configuration of
bike, which is one of the reasons I like MotoGP so much. Variety. Hell, I
wish Honda was still making their V4 for Superbike. Yes, it makes rules
making difficult, but the alternative is NASCAR...

-Chris-

 

I appreciate the HUMOR/SARCASM, but the way I read it is that Ducati is
given "special treatment" (through the rule structure) solely so they can
play at all. Basically, rather than making a set of rules and making the
manufacturers come up to the plate to play (like in GP), the committees look
at the manufacturers and design a set of rules that will allow them all to
be competetive.

So, since the committees want to continue to have Ducati in the game, they
"dumb down" the rules to keep them competetive, rather than making a set of
rules that Ducati would let the current Japanese bikes go as best they can,
and perhaps leave Ducati behind until they decided to, perhaps, release a SB
version of their GP bike (like the Honda RC45 was -- a race bike sold in the
most minimal numbers with the most fewest compromises necessary to make it
"production").

I would love to see a mix of machines on the grid. It would be nice if Erics
wasn't the lone twin out in the AMA this year. It would be nice if somehow
the Triumph Triples were competetive and on the SB (or at least the SStock)
grid -- it's good to see them in the SSport series this year.

But, is it fair to hold back the series solely for one manufacturer fielding
one team with one rider? That's not so clear.

Regards,

Will Hartung
()