Sport Bikes banner

1 - 20 of 55 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
18,634 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I know this was last week, but I've been meaning to ask.....

How do lower fuel limits that contributed to him running out of gas make racing better?
 

·
Habitual line-stepper
Joined
·
11,594 Posts
I know this was last week, but I've been meaning to ask.....

How do lower fuel limits that contributed to him running out of gas make racing better?
Keep in mind, I don't agree with this.



But- the argument is that it helps keep everyone making closer to the same amount of power out of the engines.

So you get 21 liters of fuel. That's a finite amount of energy. THUS- you can only make an engine that is so powerful with that amount of fuel.

So in theory, as engines develop to their peak potential, every manufacturer will have about the same amount of power, and it'll be fair.


The BIGGEST problem that i have with that is that people like pedrosa use WAY less fuel than people like Nicky and Crutchlow and the like. Because they are lighter.

In some cases, the rider/bike combo is 10% lighter than other people. And the fuel limits are the same across the board.

So not only are some guys lighter, but because they ARE, their bikes can be tuned to a more aggressive setting and make more horsepower because they have more fuel to play around with.

And I mean- the ECU takes care of all this. It monitors fuel usage and will adjust the map throughout the race so that you make maximum power without worrying about running out of fuel.

But pedrosa basically has a 10% weight advantage AND a power advantage over other guys because of this.


People will argue "well, he's got it tougher because he's small" "being small is enough of a disadvantage that it doesn't make up for the extra power that he has"

You know what? BULLSHIT. If you are too small or too weak to compete on equal levels, or it gives you a disadvantage- then that sucks. But that's LIFE. You are an athlete. Not everyone can play basketball. No matter how good you are, if you are under 6 feet tall you're never gonna play in the NBA. Period. (yes, I know there are probably a couple guys that are 5'10 or 5'11 playing, but you know what I mean).

Not only does it SUCK at making everyone make equal power, but on more than one occasion it has robbed a podium/victory from a rider. And that's fucking STUPID.

And now they are wanting to ADD a rev limit and spec ECU to the class. If they do, I'm flat out just done watching motoGP. This year I stopped early because the fuel and tire rules are bad enough. Add more rules? Yeah, I'm done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,498 Posts
But pedrosa basically has a 10% weight advantage AND a power advantage over other guys because of this.


People will argue "well, he's got it tougher because he's small" "being small is enough of a disadvantage that it doesn't make up for the extra power that he has"

You know what? BULLSHIT. If you are too small or too weak to compete on equal levels, or it gives you a disadvantage- then that sucks. But that's LIFE. You are an athlete. Not everyone can play basketball. No matter how good you are, if you are under 6 feet tall you're never gonna play in the NBA. Period. (yes, I know there are probably a couple guys that are 5'10 or 5'11 playing, but you know what I mean).

Not only does it SUCK at making everyone make equal power, but on more than one occasion it has robbed a podium/victory from a rider. And that's fucking STUPID.

And now they are wanting to ADD a rev limit and spec ECU to the class. If they do, I'm flat out just done watching motoGP. This year I stopped early because the fuel and tire rules are bad enough. Add more rules? Yeah, I'm done.
Sounds a little hypocritical to me. You say if you're too small, too bad, that's life, but then you complain about the disadvantage other guys have because they're too big. So how about this:

If you're too big or too heavy to compete on equal levels, too bad, that's life. You're an athlete, not everyone can race in MotoGP or minimotos, or go carts, or F1 etc... see what I mean?

Motorsports are about the only sport where smaller is better. Pedrosa has a harder time turning the bike and has less weight to throw around on the bike, so he gets a little acceleration boost. If that is such a HUGE advantage, how come in six seasons of MotoGP he hasn't won a single championship?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Motorcycle.com Free App
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,142 Posts
Sounds a little hypocritical to me. You say if you're too small, too bad, that's life, but then you complain about the disadvantage other guys have because they're too big. So how about this:

If you're too big or too heavy to compete on equal levels, too bad, that's life. You're an athlete, not everyone can race in MotoGP or minimotos, or go carts, or F1 etc... see what I mean?

Motorsports are about the only sport where smaller is better. Pedrosa has a harder time turning the bike and has less weight to throw around on the bike, so he gets a little acceleration boost. If that is such a HUGE advantage, how come in six seasons of MotoGP he hasn't won a single championship?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Motorcycle.com Free App
^^^Was gonna say pretty much the same thing about that stance being hypocritical.
 

·
Habitual line-stepper
Joined
·
11,594 Posts
Sounds a little hypocritical to me. You say if you're too small, too bad, that's life, but then you complain about the disadvantage other guys have because they're too big. So how about this:

If you're too big or too heavy to compete on equal levels, too bad, that's life. You're an athlete, not everyone can race in MotoGP or minimotos, or go carts, or F1 etc... see what I mean?

Motorsports are about the only sport where smaller is better. Pedrosa has a harder time turning the bike and has less weight to throw around on the bike, so he gets a little acceleration boost. If that is such a HUGE advantage, how come in six seasons of MotoGP he hasn't won a single championship?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Motorcycle.com Free App

Because the only reason he's even CLOSE to the front is because he's a midget and his bike makes more power. If he was normal size he wouldn't even be a title contender.


And my stance is only hypocritical because of the current fuel limits. Yes- being smaller has the advantage of having less weight to throw around. But being b***** gives you the extra strength to handle a larger bike, not fatigue as easily, and not get injured in crashes as much.

There's a trade-off. And that's the way it should be. But the fuel limits tilt the scales in one direction. All of a sudden you get being light AND more power on one side, and having an easier time managing the bike AND less power on the other side.

There's always been a balance between being light and heavy, and the fuel limit upsets it.

Really, the best place to be in motorsports is the sweet spot of fairly small, but big enough to handle the bike.

Anyways, people complained to Dani about the advantage he had with the fuel and he just said "You should try being small. It's not an advantage."

But seriously- when you are given the extra boost of power that he is, it suddenly IS an advantage.



So all things being equal, I wouldn't care about small people in racing. But if you make a fuel limit like this, then there has to be a combined rider/bike minimum weight. If there was, then it would reset the balance.


So I don't really view my stance as being hypocritical... they just made the fuel rules 4 or 5 years ago. It's not like these guys had them when they raced outside of motogp... but with basketball being tall is always better.

It would be like playing with baskets at 8 feet in high school and then moving them to 10 feet for college. Being tall (or light) was a decent advantage in high school, but then turns into a HUGE advantage in college.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,142 Posts
Because the only reason he's even CLOSE to the front is because he's a midget and his bike makes more power. If he was normal size he wouldn't even be a title contender.


And my stance is only hypocritical because of the current fuel limits. Yes- being smaller has the advantage of having less weight to throw around. But being b***** gives you the extra strength to handle a larger bike, not fatigue as easily, and not get injured in crashes as much.

There's a trade-off. And that's the way it should be. But the fuel limits tilt the scales in one direction. All of a sudden you get being light AND more power on one side, and having an easier time managing the bike AND less power on the other side.

There's always been a balance between being light and heavy, and the fuel limit upsets it.

Really, the best place to be in motorsports is the sweet spot of fairly small, but big enough to handle the bike.

Anyways, people complained to Dani about the advantage he had with the fuel and he just said "You should try being small. It's not an advantage."

But seriously- when you are given the extra boost of power that he is, it suddenly IS an advantage.



So all things being equal, I wouldn't care about small people in racing. But if you make a fuel limit like this, then there has to be a combined rider/bike minimum weight. If there was, then it would reset the balance.


So I don't really view my stance as being hypocritical... they just made the fuel rules 4 or 5 years ago. It's not like these guys had them when they raced outside of motogp... but with basketball being tall is always better.

It would be like playing with baskets at 8 feet in high school and then moving them to 10 feet for college. Being tall (or light) was a decent advantage in high school, but then turns into a HUGE advantage in college.
So what you're saying is that it's okay for a small rider to have a disadvantage, but it's not okay for a large rider to have a disadvantage??? By the way you've explained your position, that's exactly what you're saying.

I can see your position on this, but let's not paint it something that it isn't.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
I personally think there should be a "total weight" for bikes+riders. Kind of like horse racing where they have to add ballast weights for the extra small jockeys. The rule could be that everyone bike including the rider has to weigh 550 lbs. And I'm just making up that number so don't get over excited about it. That way everyone would be on an even playing field.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,527 Posts
I was going to say they add handicaps to jockeys- I fail to see why they couldn't here.

although I don't fully agree with it- that's part of the whole "racing thing" is bring what ya got.

Handicaps are nice for rider weight but they don't compensate for the horse's weight/proportions (machine) although in bikes it's much easier since they are so close anyway.
 

·
Habitual line-stepper
Joined
·
11,594 Posts
So what you're saying is that it's okay for a small rider to have a disadvantage, but it's not okay for a large rider to have a disadvantage??? By the way you've explained your position, that's exactly what you're saying.

I can see your position on this, but let's not paint it something that it isn't.
When did I say it's ok for a small rider to have a disadvantage? What disadvantage have I suggested?


If you are referring to ballast weight as a disadvantage, I disagree. It can be positioned MUCH lower on the bike than rider weight, and as far fore or aft as they deem necessary. They could even move it based on track conditions (if they wanted more weight in the front to prevent wheelies or to get more traction in the wet).

Thus, it's still an advantage to be lighter.

I'm just talking about leveling the playing fields. OR just getting rid of the fuel limits so the b***** guys don't fucking run out ever again. I'd be fine with either. Really- getting rid of fuel limits would be my first choice. But I'm saying IF they don't want to do that, at least make everyone start from the same spot, then.


As it is, the rules give a CLEAR advantage to lighter riders. Maybe not someone like pedrosa because he's a midget, but maybe someone who is 135lbs vs 165lbs.


You have to remember- Pedrosa weighs in at 105 fucking pounds. Cal crutchlow, for example, weighs 145. A motogp bike weighs 335 pounds.

40 pounds (440 vs 480) is fucking MASSIVE. Dani on his bike is going down the track almost 9% lighter. And there are a couple guys out there heavier than Cal.

How about this- the amount of fuel you get is based on how much you weigh. You can't complain about that. Another way to keep it equal without making the light guy throw around more weight.

Better?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhilB

·
Registered
Joined
·
869 Posts
The problem with fuel limits go further than having (or not) and advantage according to one's weight. It means electronics have to be extremely sophisticated to maintain a winning engine that at the same time only uses 21 litres of fuel (amazing, really), and that is EXPENSIVE.

Then, at the same time, you have a little number of engines they can use in a season (6), so each of those extremely high-strung engines has to last several races and practice sessions. That is also EXPENSIVE.

You end up with a small grid, factories-wise where very few bikes are at a competitive level. :(
 

·
A guy on a scruffy bike
Joined
·
15,367 Posts
Small guys don't play basketball. Big guys don't need to race bikes, as far as I'm concerned.

Just compete and quit complaining.

- John
But if the rules *create* that bias, that's both unfair and stupid.

PhilB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
170 Posts
^^^Forget that Technomancer.

Prototype is not the "Pinnacle of racing" which many people think it is.

The pinnacle of racing is a set of rules and conditions which favors driver skill above all else. Whatever set of rules and conditions that may be.

It is inevitable that physical size will play a role in some way, shape or form with motorcycles, this is true.

The above is, of course, just my opinion.

The way MotoGP is right now it sucks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
62 Posts
.....The pinnacle of racing is a set of rules and conditions which favors driver skill above all else. Whatever set of rules and conditions that may be......
As an engineer, I disagree. I feel that racing (at the prototype level, anyway) should be about R&D first. That is why we can thank MotoGP for many of the advancements in current day sportbikes. Let the lower levels do the spec racing BS.

...The way MotoGP is right now it sucks.
On this I will agree, but I think it is because of all the dumbing down rules that Ezpeleta is pushing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,884 Posts
Prototype is not the "Pinnacle of racing" which many people think it is.

The pinnacle of racing is a set of rules and conditions which favors driver skill above all else. Whatever set of rules and conditions that may be.
Completely disagree. The pinnacle of racing is the best riders on the best bikes. We each came into the world with a set of skills, disadvantages and advantages. We developed some others along the way. That is just the way life is. Winners adapt and overcome.

Spec racing is about the most boring racing that there is. There is simple no interest there for me.
 
1 - 20 of 55 Posts
Top