| Author |
Message |
    
Reepicheep
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 06:01 pm: | 
|
Doh! Just looked up the operational details of desmo's. Oops. All this time I thought they were gear driven valves, which made a lot of sense to me. I was confused... it is true they have no return springs, but they are not driven by gears.
OK then, so why are there not gear driven valve trains? Or why not have another mini crank shaft up above the heads connected to the valves? Seems like either approach would give a higher max RPM. Am I missing something here?
Or is it just that the valvetrain for an OHC engine is never the bottleneck, and that they are "good enough", while the connecting rod and piston are generally the max RPM bottlenecks on the system...
(ducking as I am getting way off topic, but leaving it here as it is sort of kind of relelvant to the thread if you squint hard enough)... |
Blake
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 06:43 pm: |
|
Buells have gear driven valvetrains. The cams are just not in/over the heads. Buells use pushrods instead of cam drive chains/belts. 
OHC engines must transfer power from the crankshaft to the heads somehow in order to turn the overhead camshafts. Gears would be way too complex or big and clunky to cover such a large span. For the same reason Buell uses a chain instead of gears on the primary drive. The span is too long to allow efficient transfer of power via gears. A chain or belt is quite efficient. They just stretch and can flap around which can be bad. |
S320002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 07:09 pm: |
|
Blake,
Just so you know. Several bikes over the years have used gears to drive OHCs. The most recent one I can remember was one of the Honda VFRs. I'm not sure if any of the current crop of bikes are using gear driven OHCs.
Ducati at one time used an OHC gear driven system referred to as a bevel drive.
Greg |
Jprovo
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 07:50 pm: |
|
Q. Why not let them (Buell & Ducati) race?
A. Buell can race in Superstock and Superbike. Ducati can race in Superstock, Suerbike, and FX. Ducati would probably be competitive in FX with a 25% displacement advantage over the fours.
Q. Why not let Buell Race competitively?
A. They can, Buell is being given a chance to race with an 80% displacement advantage (35% in 2004) in Superstock over 750cc water-cooled fours. 80% sounds pretty fair to me, but I don’t see anyone out there taking advantage of it. 35% does not sound fair, but who said that the rules had to be fair?
Q. Why not let them (Buell & Ducati) race in Supersport? (The real question)
A1. AMA Pro-Racing is appeasing it’s Japanese Benefactors. (possible)
A2. AMA Pro-Racing is too lazy to create a rule structure that would allow all manufacturers to compete. (I wouldn’t want change class structure just to let in every manufacturer that had a remote chance to win.)
A3. AMA Pro-Racing is afraid that if they let Buell in that they might win. (not likely)
A4. AMA Pro-Racing is afraid that if they let Buell in that they might be accused of giving favoritism to Buell. (likely)
A5. AMA Pro-Racing has a personal grudge against Erik Buell after what he said in Roadracing World. (likely)
James |
Anonymous
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 08:35 pm: |
|
One quick comment: The RR-1000 was absolutely built to meet the AMA rules for racing, which required 50 street legal vehicles be built. In fact Buell had to buy the last three engines from dealers to make the 50 because Harley-Davidson only had 47.
Buell won the AMA National Championship in the class the first year they could, and the class rules were immediately changed to 200 for the following year by the AMA. The reason why? Ducati riders complained to the AMA. Never mind that the prior year(s) had been won by Ducatis, and of course they won the years after the Buell was banned as well.
Fact.
|
Psychobueller
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 08:37 pm: |
|
The Honda RC51 uses gear driven cams. |
Dynarider
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 08:57 pm: |
|
For the same reason Buell uses a chain instead of gears on the primary drive. The span is too long to allow efficient transfer of power via gears.
I believe someone did develop a gear drive system which would fit inside the primary & worked fine. Why it never made it to market, or if it has I dont know who sells it is a mystery. Anyone else recall seeing this, it has been a few yrs since I saw it. |
Anonymous
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 09:13 pm: |
|
Jssport,
Don't make statements about areas on which you have minimal knowledge. The pictures of tires are from an H2R, which no one used because they were slow, unreliable, and peaky as all hell (the reason for the tire wear). Dale's tire wear issue was not common, any more than the tire explosions at Road Atlanta in the most recent Superbike race.
It is absolutely not true that the riders wanted the class changed to 500s. TZ750s were readily available for under $10,000 (hell, many for under $5000 well used), parts were cheap and available, and the bikes were dead reliable. You could actually make money as an AMA Expert privateer, without some big bucks sponsor like Hooters, etc. I know, because I did it.
The only freakin' 500's available in the US were the RS500 Honda for $35,000, with insanely expensive and unavailable parts, or a used RG500 that you would have to import from Europe and import spare parts as well.
So the AMA Formula One field was made up of TZ750s, a few RS500s, maybe one RG500, and works Honda 1000cc four strokes when the Buell RW750 came out.
The AMA stated they eliminated the class and switched to Superbikes because "sufficient quantity of competitive vehicles were not available". Now THAT was BS.
They eliminated the class because of pressure from the other Japanese companies who were pissed that Yamaha was winning everything. What they should have done was make more rules tweaks to help make the alternative bikes more competitive so many privateers could have afforded to continue racing.
The results of their changes? 1) The huge field of world riders that used to come to Daytona went away. 2) The large field of US riders shrank (Dale Singleton liked the new rules so much he retired, BTW). 3) Some privateers won for a couple of years (but didn't make money anymore because the equipment was so unreliable and expensive), and 4) finally the factories arrived, with a few rides for a select group of riders (many non-American).
Trust me, the riders weren't thrilled.
|
S320002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 09:13 pm: |
|
Anon,
Guess it's my turn to eat crow on the RR1000 statement. My apologies to all for not having the facts straight.
Dyna,
I remember seeing something like that too. Don't know if it ever made it to market.
Greg
(Message edited by S320002 on May 28, 2003, %time) |
Blake
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 09:49 pm: |
|
Anonymous Historian,
That is some extremely interesting history; thanks for sharing it. Dang, you must be old. Can you still even throw a leg over a track bike?
Greg,
Thanks for the clarification. Can't believe I forgot about the infamous bevel drive. I had no idea Honda was using a gear drive.
Jprovo,
You think a 1350cc Buell can reliably make 150 rwhp? Cause that is what the superstock gixxers are putting down. Last I heard the Pro Thunder Buells were squeezing out no more than 130RWHP. So it's no wonder we don't see any Buells racing in Superstock this year. That and the fact that they have no future in 2004. Glad they all went over to FUSA instead.
Buell race in Superbike??? With what? 
"Who said the rules had to be fair?" How about AMAPR. Did you miss the quote about the AMAPR rules creating a level playing field for all competitors?
Your answers re the Supersport class and Buell... I see 1, 4, and 5 as possibly honest answers to the question, though none of them are valid or fair justifications to exclude Buell from AMAPR SS. Thanks for having the balls and thoughtfullness to offer actual answers. What about Ducati? You cannot leave them out. When you consider the Ducati 749RS as well as the Buell, your answers #4 and #5 are no longer viable. That leaves the one single honest answer, #1.
Go FUSA!!! |
S320002
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 10:13 pm: |
|
Blake,
I believe Honda dropped the VFR gear driven cams a year or two ago.
Greg |
Davegess
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 - 11:15 pm: |
|
My apolgies for the mistaken info on the lightweight twins rule change. i remember it being a displacement change, even recall dreaming about droping an XR750 motor in the chassis. Oh well too many drugs |
Jprovo
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 12:27 am: |
|
Blake,
You mean this qoute?
To AMA Pro Racing Competitors:
Let me welcome you to the 2003 edition of the rulebook for the AMA Pro Racing Chevy Trucks U. S. Superbike Championship.
For more than 75 years, AMA Pro Racing has been providing racers and specta-tors alike with the highest level of motorcycle competition in the United States. Our history stretches from the board tracks of the '20s to the standing-room-only stadiums of the 21st century. From racing heroes like Cannonball Baker and Jim Davis to Nicky Hayden, Ricky Carmichael, and Chris Carr.
Throughout our history, athletes like Joe Leonard and Jeremy McGrath, Dick Mann and Kenny Roberts, Scott Parker and Bob Hannah, Jay Springsteen and Wayne Rainey have thrilled fans with their exceptional talent and drive to be the best.
Our goal is to create the opportunities that allow these stars to shine, from the traditional dirt ovals of flat- track racing and the high-speed asphalt tracks of road racing to the demanding jumps and whoops of motocross.
In this book, you'll find rules designed to create a level playing field for all com-petitors, so that the best and brightest can continue to rise to the top, as they have for more than three- quarters of a century.
Sincerely,
Merrill (Mickey Mouse) Vanderslice
Director of Competition (Blake wouldn't call it that)
AMA Pro Racing
I think that the quote refers to the racers themselves and not the machines, re-read the context and I think that you'll agree.
Re Superbike: I was merely pointing out the classes that Buells are allowed to compete in, I wasn't claiming that they could be competivtive.
Re Superstock: I was hoping that a 1350cc Buell could compete with a 636cc Kawasaki that seems to be doing fine against 750cc Suzukis.
With regards to Ducati, I think that it is more than oversight that it is not in supersport, maybe they were shanghaied?
Q1: You seem to think that Buell belongs in supersport, why?
My observations: Buell can't (or won't) compete with a 80-100% displacement advantage over four cylinder superstock machines. You claim that current supersport bikes make 130hp, and that Pro-Thunder Buells create 130hp.
Q2: Should 1350cc pro-thunder Buells be allowed in supersport?
Q3: If you could make a racing class that would contain mainstream sportbikes, and Buell motorcycles, what would the rules be?
James |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 02:39 am: |
|
James,
I'm waiting for a true Supersport class. The fact that the factory SS machines are putting out 30% or more than a stock bike is ridiculous. That isn't what the class is about, at all. I'm just asking why exclude bikes like the Ducatis. If Buell releases an XB12RR that makes comparable power to the SS IL4's, why not let it race among them? I don't have nay delusions that a stock XB9R will be able to win in SS as it now exists. But to get a feel for what another race sanctioning body feels is fair for displacement limits on Supersport machines, let's look at FUSA's rules for middleweight supersport...
quote:6.1 SuperSport - SuperSport motorcycles are production machines sold by
manufacturers and their dealers for street use in North America via normal
commercial channels. All machines must have unaltered VIN numbers. Proof
of compliance rests with the competitor entering the machine. Machines are
basically stock with aftermarket exhausts, jet kits and DOT-legal race
compund tires.
SUPERSPORT (Amateur & Expert Divisions)
Single cylinder, Unlimited displacement
Two stroke, liquid cooled, up to 515cc
Two stroke, air cooled, Unlimited displacement
Twin cylinder, liquid cooled, up to 800cc
Twin cylinder, air cooled, Unlimited displacement
Three cylinder, up to 980cc
Four cylinder, liquid cooled, up to 640cc
Four cylinder, air cooled, 2 valve, up to 775cc
Or more in line with what AMAPR allows for their SS class (head planing and such) look at the FUSA Sportbike class displacement limits...
quote:6.2 SPORTBIKE - Acceptable motorcycles are 4-stroke production machines,
sold by the manufacturers and their dealers for street use in North America via
normal commercial channels. All machines must have unaltered VIN numbers.
These motorcycles must meet the following requirements in addition to the
applicable requirements in Section 5. SportBikes are open to engine
modifications, but weight is restricted to a minimum or 365 pounds and DOT-approved
tires must be fitted.
6.2.14 Displacement limits are absolute and are set as follows:
SPORTBIKE (Expert and Amateur)
Single cylinder, unlimited displacement
Twin cylinder, liquid cooled, up to 800cc
Twin cylinder, air cooled, unlimited displacement
Three cylinder, liquid cooled, up to 980cc
Four cylinder, liquid cooled, up to 640cc
Four cylinder, air cooled, up to 775cc
The AMAPR formula is okay if only they would be more equitable in allowing other configurations of engine to join the fray. I'd say give the air cooled pushrod two valve engines 200% of the IL4 displacement and if Buell builds 'em, let 'em race. |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 02:47 am: |
|
"I think that the quote refers to the racers themselves and not the machines, re-read the context and I think that you'll agree."
Then what are they talking about when they say the rules are "designed to create a level playing field for all com-petitors"? If that is not talking about the machines I don't know what it is talking about. The racers? No, I don't think so. They are talking about the machines. Actually they are talking about the entire rulebook. The entire rulebook is pretty much dedicated to defining the allowable machinery and acceptable modifications for each class. |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 02:51 am: |
|
I think I see what you mean...
"Competitors"=racers
but
"level playing field"=machines
so we are both right, just not on the same frequency. |
José_quiñones
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 07:34 am: |
|
quote:I'd say give the air cooled pushrod two valve engines 200% of the IL4 displacement and if Buell builds 'em, let 'em race.
In Formula Extreme, not Supersport. The moment a particular bike deviates from the stock displacement, it does not belong in a Stock displacement based classs.
You admitted it yourself Blake, it would be "wrong" for a 1336cc Pro Thunder Spec Buell to race in Supersport.
The AMA has given Buell plenty of rule breaks and changes to help to keep them competitive in Pro Thunder, and placed them in the class (Superstock) that EB requested when he was given a choice between the old versions of Formula Extreme and Superstock.
The rules for these classes have now changed.
The AMA kept the air cooled bikes in Superstock.
Why? Because that's the last thing they had heard Erik request from them before he blew a rocker box gasket over the Boxer Cup on November 1 2002.
Erik did back down a bit in his subsequent comments on November 8.
The AMA issued a press release on November 18 2002 saying that that Erik owes them an apology for those November 1 2002 comments.
The 30 day comment period for the proposed 2004 rule changes expired last week.
If Buell wanted to move air cooled bikes from Superstock to Formula Extreme where they really belong, he had his chance.
If Buell really wants to race in the AMA, I hope he did what he had to do, apologize in writing and request the rule change.
If he did not, Buell racing will sink or swim with Formula USA. It's up to us to go to the races. I'll be a three of them.
|
Grndskpr
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 08:35 am: |
|
Buell race in Superbike??? With what?
A VRod powered, XB based frame, and 2 front rotors, just dreaming |
Reepicheep
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 09:07 am: |
|
/newurl{http://venus.13x.com/roadracingworld/scripts/NewsInsert.asp?insert=4662, that second link Jose posted with quotes from Erik} has some real gems in there if you re-read it after following our discussion here.
At least two times that I saw, and probably more, a big part of the frustration Erik is communicating is how it makes it hard to "plan". He does not say if this is the "unnoficial factory efforts", or the normal production plans, but it is clear that AMA Pro Racing rules *did* play a big part in what Buell plans. Don't know if they will anymore, I wouldn't trust 'em, but who knows.
The upshot of this is that if the AMA would allow a "stock" XB12R or XB9R to race with the "stock" 600 inline fours, I think you would see a factory XB12, or maybe a factory XB9RR, in very short order.
IMHO. And reading that second interview with Erik, I don't think he owes any more apology to AMAPR, in fact I think the AMAPR ought to step up and admit they have totally screwed up in keeping with their stated mission statement. Why on earth would "simplicity of class rules" outweigh "even field for many competitors", especially when the "complicated" rules can still be simply summarized in a page of text (see Blakes FUSA rules post above).
Any prize for whoever sneaks in the last post
|
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 04:47 pm: |
|
JQ,
More rhetoric? Still avoiding the question? Okay, I enjoy our debating so I'll continue on as you wish.
In Formula Extreme, not Supersport. The moment a particular bike deviates from the stock displacement, it does not belong in a Stock displacement based classs.
Exactly. But AMAPR will not let them race if they are not 600cc machines. Why not let them race? There's that damn question again.
You admitted it yourself Blake, it would be "wrong" for a 1336cc Pro Thunder Spec Buell to race in Supersport.
Yep. What about an XB12RR that meets all homologation requirements? Why not let it race in AMAPR SS? (That damn question again.)
The AMA has given Buell plenty of rule breaks and changes to help to keep them competitive in Pro Thunder
How is it a "break" to enact rules to maintain parity among a racing class? It is pretty obvious that Ducati got the BIG rules break when they were allowed 800cc displacement and a minimum weight the Buells could not reach. Is it a rules "break" for MotoGP bikes with fewer cylinders to get lower weight limits? If the rules don't cause the birth of an overdog, they are in no way "breaks" for the beneficiary. They are simply fair and equitable. Was PT a closely contested series or not? Did Buell win the championship despite their best efforts? Must have been pretty damn fair rules then eh? Should the Ducati 748 ever been allowed in the class? Maybe not. The originator of the idea for the series thought not. He also disagreed with letting the 900cc tiples into it too. The Duc 900SS (now 1000ss) would have been a much better fit. Along with Guzzi's and BMW's and other comparable sport bikes. There's that word again, "comparable." Admittedly the new XB bikes would have become overdogs. So then, adjust the rules to maintain parity.
, and placed them in the class (Superstock) that EB requested when he was given a choice between the old versions of Formula Extreme and Superstock.
That is correct albeit misleading. What kind of choice is it when you are offered a gun to the head or a rope around your neck? The rope might break, you might be able to hold out until rescued, so you take the rope. Cause you've seen the rope before and it could possibly be broken, especially if you can manage to gain a few pounds before the hanging. So you set about building yourself up trying to gain the weight to defeat the hangman's noose and finally the big day comes. But then you are f#%ked, cause on your way to the hangman you see he is tearing down the old rope and using a new one that is much stronger. You are a dead man no matter what you do. You were conned, you were lied to, you are f#%ked.
The rules for these classes have now changed. The AMA kept the air cooled bikes in Superstock. Why? Because that's the last thing they had heard Erik request from them before he blew a rocker box gasket over the Boxer Cup on November 1 2002.
Yeah, they left the air cooled bikes in Superstock at the same uncompetitive 1,350cc displacement but allowed the OHC 4-valve 4-cyl bikes a 33.3% increase to 1,000cc's. Yeah, AMAPR executive management are fair minded honest guys of impeccable integrity. NOT!!! AMAPR gave Buell the rope to hang themselves then at the last minute swapped it out for a high voltage copper cable dipped in arsenic. Assholes.
Erik did back down a bit in his subsequent comments on November 8.
Not really. He just explained in a more diplomatic tone why he was so emotional and pissed off about the whole deal. He didn't back down from any of his points.
quote:...I still don’t understand what happened with the situation at Daytona. I don’t think it’s right, I don’t know why, and I don’t understand it.
I also feel it’s unfortunate there are so many sport motorcycles and brands out there that don’t have a class to run in. I think that’s too bad. I don’t know, maybe improvements will come out of a bad deal here. I guess that’s the way it is.
In the words of one of my favorite Blues singers, a guy named Tommy Castro, he’s got a song that says, ‘I’m just a man, I ain’t no Superman.’ Well, maybe that’s me. It got to me that day, but I think we need to work through why there’s so much emotion around this stuff. I hoped to work with AMA in the future, but somebody’s got to figure out and get some kind of understanding of the mission statement of that kind of thing because I’ve kind of lost it.
That’s what I was basing it on. When they would say, ‘Here is what we want to do, and here’s what we want to do,’ and like the 600s, ‘We don’t want to have anyone in with them.’ And we would say, ‘In Europe, the Ducati 748s run with them, and they can’t even beat them. Why would they go against the 750s?’ And their answer was, ‘Well, you know, it would confuse the class. We want it to be simpler. And we already have enough brands in there, and we have somewhere for these other bikes to run.’
“But some of those things, I’m just confused about. I just wish there was a lot more clarity about what they’re trying to do because it makes it difficult to plan and to tell people what’s going on at a core value. Because there’s a lot of emotional guys out there, a lot of dealers and stuff, who want things to happen, who use some of us in the industry as lightning rods. When you have confusion and misunderstanding, it just adds to their excitement.
He repeated the same exact thing he said in his first interview, just more diplomatically.
I know for a fact that Buell was preparing to build a whole mess of race bikes that could have supported the Superstock class. Just like he had stated to AMAPR when he stepped up and accepted the challenge of having PT killed by AMAPR and being thrown into the Superstock class. Then the announcement comes that the IL4's in Superstock are going to 1,000cc's. What would you do if you were about to build a bunch of 1350cc Buell superstock bikes and you heard that your competition just got a 33% displacement increase? I would bag it. Trick me once, shame on me, trick me twice...  (shoot, it's more like "trick me a dozen times..." Buell has been screwed over so many times by AMA and AMAPR rules makers it just isn't even conceivable that he could trust them for anything.
The AMA issued a press release on November 18, 2002 saying that that Erik owes them an apology for those November 1 2002 comments.
yeah, well you know what... F#%k the rules making management at AMAPR. From what I've seen, they appear to be a bunch of liars on the take. THEY are the ones who need to apologize, NOT Erik Buell! They say one thing and do another to the detriment of Buell and fair competition. They come right out and blatantly admit that they do not want to see any other bikes or brands racing in Supersport, what the hell does that tell you?!
The 30 day comment period for the proposed 2004 rule changes expired last week. If Buell wanted to move air cooled bikes from Superstock to Formula Extreme where they really belong, he had his chance.
The FX bikes will be putting down 150 RWHP, yeah I guess that competing against them is less lopsided than going against 170RWHP 1,000cc Superstock bikes. Why should anyone need to petition for rules changes? It's pretty damn obvious. AMAPR pretty much states their case when they say wrt the Supersport class that...
quote: ‘We don’t want to have anyone in with them (Japanese 600s). ...(including the Ducati 748s) would confuse the class. We want it to be simpler. And we already have enough brands in there, and we have somewhere for these other bikes to run.’
Where can a Ducati 748 run competitively in AMAPR?
If Buell really wants to race in the AMA, I hope he did what he had to do, apologize in writing and request the rule change.
Where are they going to run competitively and with what rules changes? If you won't answer the real question at least answer that question for me JQ. And what exactly does Erik Buell have to apologize for to AMAPR? I think you've got that backwards.
If he did not, Buell racing will sink or swim with Formula USA.
As long as Erik Buell has anything to do with it, Buell racing will NEVER sink.
It's up to us to go to the races. I'll be at three of them.
I'll be racing and attending my local CMRA events. Unfortunately the national series events are out of convenient reach for me.  I hope you'll be cheering for me too.
Bill, You win! (last post before server move) |
Jssport
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 04:58 pm: |
|
Well reguardless of how the AMA-PR group is screwing up Buell owners roadrace plans this year, let's take a look around.
Wouldn't the XB engine work great in the Supertracker format. Generally it's not the HP you can make, but what you can put down on the track. I would think dirt-tracking would be right up the X's alley. |
Crusty
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 05:17 pm: |
|
A Buell made the National at Springfield last September. |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 05:26 pm: |
|
Just to clarify... Did you get that JQ? AMAPR says that they don't want anything but 600cc bikes in Supersport and that they already have enough different brands in that series.
So there's your answer, straight from the mouths of the rules makers themselves. Does that make sense or does it smack of disingenuous double talk?
Is a racing series more interesting with more competitors, more factories, more brands, more diversity? MotoGP thinks so. FIM thinks so. FUSA thinks so. It's pretty much a fact and really is beyond reasonable debate. A more diverse, more hotly competed racing series is more interesting and able to draw more fans and spectators and more sponsors.
So the answer to the question is really not debatable. The answer is that AMAPR will not allow other bikes to race in Supersport because they are happily carrying out the will of Japan Inc..
Do you really think that AMAPR is actually looking out for the good of the fans? Do you think they actually sit down and think to themselves "Let's sabotage all but the Japanese Factory bikes from being competitive the fans will love that"? Get real. It seems to me José, that you simply don't want to see competitive racing among all brands in AMAPR SS. Why not? It almost seems like you harbor some ill will towards Buell. I just cannot figure any other reason why you don't support the idea of allowing the Ducati 749RS or a Buell XB12RR (should it ever come into being) to race against the factory Japanese 600s. What gives? Why not join together and send a letter to AMAPR saying that we would like to see all Supersport class motorcycles be allowed to race in the AMAPR series, that we do NOT enjoy seeing only IL4s dominating Superbike, that we strongly encourage truly fair and equitable displacement limits allowing all configurations of supersport, superstock, FX, and superbikes to race competitively, TOGETHER. That we would like to see America's only sportbike and those of Italy given honest and fair displacement limits allowing them to race competitively in AMAPR's four classes. No special homologation or rules otherwise are requested. It should be upon the onus of the manufacturers to build a streetbike capable of racing within whatever class they so choose, but AMAPR should not exclude them solely on the basis of displacement.
I mean come on, even John Burns is pissed off at the new AMAPR Superbike rules allowing IL4's the same performance modifications as the twins. Did you read his commentary on MO? Here's a sample...
quote:What does racing teach us boys and girls? How about this: The squeaky wheel gets the grease. All the complaining Mat Mladin did for all those years about the unfairness of 750 fours having to compete against liter-size twin-cylinders paid off for the lad, big-time, when the AMA decided dang, maybe poor Mat's right (of course I'm sure they'd deny Mladin's comments had anything to do with it), and decided to let full-on thousand-cc fours into the hen house. World Superbike changed its rules over the off season, too, but that august body handicaps 1000cc fours with 32.5mm intake restrictor plates. In AMA Superbike, Mr. GSX-R gets to keep all four 42mm cake holes wide open. You're not allowed to fool with the stock crankshaft, though. Valves have to be the same material as stock, ie. steel, and cams can have no more lift than stock.
Unfortunately for the competition, steel valves aren't what limits the mighty GSX-R's rpm. The poor long-stroke dear's bores are only 73mm wide. Heck, that's only one mm bigger than the GSX-R750, and only 5mm bigger than the new 636 Kawasaki. With valves not that much bigger (or heavier) than those bikes' either, there's nothing in the big GSX-R's valvetrain to keep it from spinning past 15,000 in stock form, just like
the 636. What does limit the GSX-R is piston speed, since its 59mm stroke isn't all that much shorter than an RC51 Honda's 63.6mm. Connecting rods, according to our sources at Attack Suzuki, are the weak link in the GSX-R, and as the rulebook doesn't address those items, you can be sure those fast factory GSX-R's have the nicest, lightest ones money can buy, pumping lovely 73mm pistons. At that point, it's Hello, 15,000 rpm (plus), and Goodbye, bikes trying to process the same volume of air with a pair of 100mm pistons.
Hey, if Mladin's old 750 was so dang slow, how'd he win the three championships on it? Well, I hate to say I told you so, because I actually managed to hold my tongue for once--and when the GSX-R's didn't dominate Daytona, I thought there was a slight chance I might have been, gasp, wrong. Ensuing events, including watching Mladin's GSX-R1000 leap off the corners at Sears Point, have led me to have renewed faith in my own infallibility.
If you don't have a paid subscription to MO, it is WELL worth the $11.94. |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 05:31 pm: |
|
Maybe it's time Buell and Ducati fans became "The squeaky wheel"! |
Jprovo
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 05:35 pm: |
|
Blake,
I see what you mean. “Level playing field” means that all of the machines in a class are closely matched, and you think that Buell should be allowed to compete in an AMAPR class (preferably supersport). I agree, FUSA probably makes the broadest level playing field with it’s HP limited series, and it’s HP/lb rules. I do not think that Buell makes a motorcycle that fits into any of the AMAPR categories, therefore, they shouldn’t be allowed to race.
If Buell wants to compete in Supersport, they should make a potentially competitive bike, and then petition AMA Pro-Racing to let them race it. Too risky? I think not, Buell only needs to make 50 of them for homologation, and they will sell every one (probably before they are even produced). How many Buell owners or potential owners have said "If it only had more horsepower...".
Worst case scenario, the AMA won't let them race. From Buell's perspective, why worry, it's not like the bikes didn't sell, hell they could have a sell price of $25,000 and you’d still sell every one of them. The bikes could still be raced in F-USA, and if you made one or two for magazines to test, you’d have the press eating it up. Buell is an innovative company, I would be surprised if they couldn’t make 50 competitive bikes for 1.25 million in sales, and have some money left over. I know that I’d move from sunny California to Wisconsin to get a chance to work on a project like that.
RE: Ducati. Has Ducati petitioned AMAPR to let them in supersport? Are Ducati racers petitioning to be let in supersport? The 749S fits right into the mix, right out of the box. I would suspect that if enough people who really cared asked to be let in they would be. How many competitors raced a Ducati in supersport in 2000, 2001, 2002? I don’t know, were they even allowed? I have to make the assumption that not too many people want to race them in supersport, otherwise they would be in the class.
Forget the Ducati, and let’s concentrate on Buell. There is a problem with AMAPR, and it’s not likely that anything will change soon. The 250GP bikes are dead, Pro-Thunder is dead, Buell just needs to find a way to compete, and a 75 HP sportbike is not going to cut it. You’ve read my proposed solution, what do you think will solve the problem?
James
|
Jssport
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 07:24 pm: |
|
Anon,...
(who knows more than all is who's expertise is unquestionable by all because he is :anon)
anon says:
"Don't make statements about areas on which you have minimal knowledge. The pictures of tires are from an H2R, which no one used because they were slow, unreliable, and peaky as all hell (the reason for the tire wear). Dale's tire wear issue was not common, any more than the tire explosions at Road Atlanta in the most recent Superbike race. "
Hmm... I guess Yvon Dehamuel, Gary Nixon and Gene Castro were nobody's.
It always amazes me how the people sitting on the sidelines know more than us who were actually racing them, simply amazing !
Once again,... the 750's were cut down to 500cc bikes because of extreme tire wear. FACT
|
Anonymous
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 08:37 pm: |
|
Jssport,
Man, you have your eras totally screwed up. DuHamel and Castro had retired ages before the 500 issue ever came up, and Nixon was damned competitive on a TZ750 riding for Kanemoto. And he liked it a lot better than the H2.
As far as being on the sidelines is concerned, I sure as hell wasn't. I was on the track on these puppies, sliding around fricking Daytona, and I don't remember you. And, if the fastest speed you've gone is 149 on your Harley, you damned sure weren't there! FACT
|
Dynarider
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 08:47 pm: |
|
I detest this damned anon feature. Mr. Anon above may be 100% correct, but without exposing himself its hard to say. |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 08:49 pm: |
|
Jss,
How long were the 750's racing before they were removed from AMA racing due to the supposed tire problem? When were they removed? What coincided with that removal? You need to accept that motorcycles are BIG business. No established company or group of companies wants to see a new innovative competitor coming on the scene to steal their market share or embarrass them on the race track. Why is it so hard to imagine the established companies putting pressure on the AMA to alter rules in their favor, to stop any chance an innovative newcomer might have to turn the series on its head? I believe anony. I think he knows what he is talking about.
Anytime tires have been a problem, the tire manufacturers have stepped up and met the challenge. I don't recall any racing series being so drastically downgraded do to tire problems. |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, May 29, 2003 - 08:56 pm: |
|
Dyna,
Congratulations on another negative post. You are free to start and administer a new discussion forum and say and configure it any way you wish. The rules here are what they are, if you detest them so much, maybe you should leave. |
|
»
Archive through May 29, 2003