| Author |
Message |
    
Crusty
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 10:06 pm: | 
|
This is my last post on this subject. If AMA Pro Racing let Buell build what ever they wanted and let them race in whatever category they chose, you'd still bitch. You are incapable of acknowledging anything but negative about the AMA.
The fact is that AMA Pro Racing is the premier motorcycle race sanctioning body in this country. Formula USA is for amateurs and sportsmen.(the minor leagues) Overall, AMAPR does a very good job.
Incidentally, the organization is for American MOTORCYCLISTS, not American motorcycles; I am proud to be a member. |
José_quiñones
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 12, 2003 - 07:19 am: |
|
quote:My commment wrt AMAPR that you choose not to comprehend was...
"AMAPR is apparently unable to devise a single set of class rules that would promote parity among different configurations of engines. I wonder why."
FUSA has a plethora of classes where they have devised fair and equitable rules to promote parity among the WIDEST variety of engine configurations.
That comment was made wrt to the proposed AMA 505cc Dirt Track rules after Crusty wrote I've seen the Blast at a National. It doesn't have enough to do the job.,go back and read what you wrote.
Notice he did not mention whose national it was, AMA or FUSA.
But you took it and ran with it, and took a cheap shot at the AMA.
Turns out these proposed rules are a copy of the existing FUSA singles rules, so if you are going to condemm the AMA for being biased, you should apply the same standard to the FUSA rules, because they are the SAME.
But you still insist on praising the FUSA Dirt Track rules.....
But you won't even admit you fell for it so it's not worth the bother anymore.
|
Blake
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 09:32 pm: |
|
Nope, not praising FUSA dirt track rules. I think they suck too. But the plethora of FUSA class rules don't... as opposed to those of AMAPR. No spin, no cheap shot, just plain and simple facts.
Crusty,
I call 'em like I see 'em. The ONLY thing AMAPR has going for it is that it is indeed beholding to the legacy of America's premiere motorcycle racing organization; I've never disputed that. It's AMAPR's management's integrity that is in question.
I think if you read back through my comments in this thread, you will see where I give credit and kudos to the management of AMAPR where they are due. Again, I simply call the situation as I see it. Do you ever actually read the RRW links that get posted here? The RRW guys are people who participate heavily in AMAPR road racing series and they are slamming AMAPR's lying executive management at every turn. They call it like they see it. I truly wish AMAPR would turn the situation around. I wish they would let all 100HP class sportbikes participate in Supersport. I wish they would cease orchestrating the technical rules to make it hard or impossible for those not running Japanese IL4 machines to remain competitive. I wish they would let everyone race. Ain't happening. They are only after money. Competition, safety, integrity all take a second seat. They have no business representing themselves as part of the AMA. They have no business representing America. Kinda like how I feel that Bill Clinton had no business representing/leading America after lying straight to the faces of all its citizens. You can disagree if you like. We have three Buells racing just in the CMRA this year. I bet next year that number expands. How many Buells racing in AMAPR Superbike Series this year? Answer... ZERO! Why not let them race? Why not let Ducati race its 749RS in Supersport?
One answer... you know what it is.
Later,
Blake (toomuchworkmakesmegrumpy) |
Crusty
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 06:12 am: |
|
Why doesn't Nascar let Honda civics race in Winston Cup? |
José_quiñones
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 07:16 am: |
|
The A in AMA PRO Racing is for AMERICAN, not AFFIRMATIVE ACTION.
Putting unrestricted twins against restricted 600 fours in the same class is AFFIRMATIVE ACTION.
Putting unrestricted twins against unrestricted 600 fours is AMA Formula Extreme, coming soon to an AMA event near you, if you decide to attend.
You'll still complain about it.
edited by josé_quiñones on August 14, 2003 |
Reepicheep
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 06:09 pm: |
|
Putting unrestricted four strokes against restricted two strokes is AFFIRMATIVE ACTION...
Displacement is the only criteria by which competitive bikes should be classed, err... except, umm, for when it isn't, I mean. Sort of.
And before you go off on "no two strokes are sold as street bikes", don't kid yourself that the bikes they are racing are sold as street bikes either. C'mon! This is supposed to be a professional level racing organization, why on earth limit them to streetbike configurations?
|
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 08:19 pm: |
|
Same old rhetoric. I don't complain. I point out the lack of integrity and bias of AMAPR. They fix it, why would I complain? I suppose conversely I could say that AMAPR could tie you up and let their friends bugger you with the explanation that it will be good for them so you shouldn't mind... after all they are the managing executives of the premiere motorcycle racing organization in America. Enjoy. |
Blake
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 08:23 pm: |
|
But I would normally never say something like that... at least not until, as a way to deflect a logical point, someone starts reporting what I would or would not do in some contrived situation. |
José_quiñones
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 10:31 pm: |
|
quote:I see a lot of changes, I see a lot of listening. I see a lot of thinking. They're making mistakes, like every race organization always does, but they're certainly not the arbitrary organization that they used to be.
quote:I think the way it is in Europe(World Superbike), the 1000cc four-cylinders are too restricted. Maybe they should wait and see how it works and tweak it a little each race, like they do in NASCAR. If Ford wins three races in a row, at the next race their spoiler plate is an inch lower. NASCAR is very successful. I know it's not the same but maybe there's something to learn there. But this is all easy for me to say from the sidelines
Guess who?
|
José_quiñones
| | Posted on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 02:43 pm: |
|
A couple of more, the first for you Bill
quote:One of the things that made Superbike the dominant (class) and blew away Formula One... was it was a parade of Yamaha TZ750s....So the AMA was looking around, the Superbike class was slower back then, but it had Ducatis and Moto Guzzis and Kawasakis and Suzukis and Hondas and Yamahas. Everything was out there. THey saw a lot of interest in spectators....But the idea was to put on a show for spectators. Everybody was running the same thing, except for Kenny (Roberts) had the same thing plus a little more. But the rest of us were all pretty even....but it was a boring show for most of the spectators. 'Where's my bike?"
quote:The new Formula Xtreme class seems to make more sense, especially with all the different brands and models and the 250's. It could be a really exciting class.
I agree with all four quotes, this guy makes sense, but there are things we still disagree about.
edited by josé_quiñones on August 15, 2003 |
Reepicheep
| | Posted on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 07:10 pm: |
|
Darnit Jose', stop agreeing with me!
I agree... the collection of indistuinguishable inline four litre class Japanese superbikes are going to make the class booring. Just like the field full of TZ750's did. Even within the class of japanese inline four litre bikes, I think it will just become a GXSR-1000 spec class. Yaaaawwwwnnnnn.
So if they can "adjust displacement limits" to make sure the inline fours can compete with the two strokes, all in the interest of a variety of platforms racing, then why on earth are they now placing impossible theoretical limits on twins?
Formula Extreme could be really cool, but I worry that it will degrade to a situation where a bike that can't do 180mph down a long straight can't be competitive, reducing a road race to a drag race, which I also think is dull, and totally unrelated to what makes an interesting sport oriented street bike.
|
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 07:23 pm: |
|
You could pick and choose a few quotes from my posts here and present a similar case. |
Sportsman
| | Posted on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 12:56 am: |
|
No slam intended Blake, but those quotes are from the Bueller that matters most. |
Blake
| | Posted on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 03:02 am: |
|
Willie G. said that?
More on the wonderful management at AMAPR...
http://venus.13x.com/roadracingworld/scripts/NewsInsert.asp?insert=7010
And how we love those Japanese racebikes that are just like the ones in your local dealer's showroom...
http://venus.13x.com/roadracingworld/scripts/NewsInsert.asp?insert=7005
Good on AMAPR if they revise the rules to allow only stock throttles/injectors. Funny how Honda go the jump on that one. Kinda like how they got the jump on the four stroke Moto GP scene too. Kinda makes you wonder. |
José_quiñones
| | Posted on Monday, August 18, 2003 - 07:53 am: |
|
First link: Good rule, bad way to implement it. If it was up to me I would not allow Superbike riders in Supersport either.
The second link clearly shows that Jason Pridmore's Attack Suzuki is not a factory bike. Yoshimura Suzuki is meeting the letter of the rule, but clearly not the intent, but the AMA will address that next year as mentioned.
AMA Superbike and Superstock bikes are as close to stock as the rules require, which is closer to showroom stock than any other racing series except maybe Canada, and are unlike the old Pro Thunder or new FX rules, which have no such requirement. So Buell is free to race whatever they want with no requirement to make it commercially available to anybody, racers or street riders.
Not Wilie G, take another guess, Blake..... |
José_quiñones
| | Posted on Monday, August 18, 2003 - 07:40 pm: |
|
quote:...I'm hoping they'll allow Buell into FX. That'll pretty much shut me up about the whole deal, as long as the tech rules are equitable.
quote:04-2RR. Formula Xtreme
1. Engine Displacements: The displacement range for multi-cylinder four-stroke motorcycles is reduced to 450cc-600cc. The range for twin-cylinder four-stroke motorcycles is 595cc-750cc. 1000cc-1350cc air-cooled twins are permitted. Single-cylinder motorcycles are ineligible. Two-stroke motorcycles are also ineligible. All eligible motorcycles must be homologated.
2. Engine Modifications: Allowable engine modifications for all Formula Xtreme motorcycles are the same as the 2004 multi-cylinder Superbike rules with the following exceptions:
Engine modifications to 1000cc-1350cc air-cooled twins are unrestricted.
Stock throttle-body assemblies and air boxes are required on all motorcycles except 1000cc-1350cc air-cooled twins.
3. Chassis/Frame Modifications: Allowable chassis/frame modifications for all Formula Xtreme motorcycles are the same as the 2004 Superbike rules with the following exceptions:
Chassis/frame modifications on 1000cc-1350cc air-cooled twins are unrestricted.
OEM swingarms must be utilized with limited modifications (gusseting, stand brackets, etc.). 1000cc-1350cc air-cooled twins are unrestricted.
4. Bodywork: Fairings, seats, fenders and side panels may be modified or changed to any aftermarket or custom type as long as "fluid retention" regulations and general equipment standards are adhered to. Stock fuel tanks with limited modifications (fuel filler, fuel valves, etc.) are required on all motorcycles except 1000cc-1350cc air-cooled twins.
5. Weight: Minimum weight limit (TBD) applies to all motorcycles.
6. Entry Restrictions: Motorcycles entered in Supersport may not be entered in Formula Xtreme.
edited by josé_quiñones on August 18, 2003 |
Blake
| | Posted on Monday, August 18, 2003 - 09:11 pm: |
|
What's that JQ? 
So you think that going from 750cc IL4's versus 1000cc twins to 1000cc IL4's with a few minor limitations on engine mods brings parity to the IL4 versus twin cylinder superbikes? I very much doubt it. We'll see though. Like I said above,,, It's awfully strange how Honda so often gets the jump on the rules changes. I'm not familiar enough with the Superbikes to comment, but on the surface, I don't see a big enough effort to bring parity to the twin cylinder superbikes.
Kudos to AMAPR for bringing Buell and Ducati back into the mix via FX.
What about Supersport? Ducati 749 still excluded? Buell XB12R excluded? Why?
Buells in FX allowed bigger than stock engines but not the same consideration given to Blast based racers in dirt track? Why? Why not allow the Blast based machines to be competitive?
Sorry, AMAPR is a long way away from getting the pass go card in my mind. You see it differently. Fine by me. Like you say... "Go FUSA!!"  |
José_quiñones
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 07:03 am: |
|
How predictable, Blake complains about the AMA again...
 |
José_quiñones
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 07:06 am: |
|
You still don'w want to guess who said those things above, Blake? Or you know who it is, and it's killing you inside that the agrees with me and you don't want to admit it?
It must really burn you up to be so wrong about so many things.......
Which is it?
edited by josé_quiñones on August 19, 2003 |
Reepicheep
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 09:07 am: |
|
Jose'... There is a question you didn't answer as well. Do you think the superstock rules (1000cc limit for both inline fours and twins) are fair? What kind of chance do you think an aircooled pushrod 1000cc twin has against a water cooled overhead cam 1000cc inline four?
That was the original issue we all have a beef with. It makes no sense, unless your goals are to create a inline four spec class. If they want to do that, it's their business, but they should then call it what it really is, and I don't know why the US racing body would go out of their way to make sure the only US built sport bike can't participate.
Those FX rules look pretty good. |
Crusty
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 01:50 pm: |
|
One rider wins a race. Everybody else loses. Do you think that's fair? |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 07:52 pm: |
|
JQ,
Do you really need me to print some other quotes from the same source. Like I said, you can find quotes from me here that would put AMAPR in a good light. That is known as "calling it like you see it." Not all is rosy, not all is shit. But when it comes to the actual individuals, the executive management of AMAPR who create and enforce the class rules, you pretty much get the latter, in my opinion of course.
Who is the predictable one? You've done nothing but defend a crew of liars. I don't get it. |
José_quiñones
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 07:01 am: |
|
Well, see this source was initially very cozy with the AMA, then he went through a very bad experience with them and spoke very negatively about them. Since that instance, he has gradually tempered his statements to the point that in his latest interview in the September Road Racingworld he seems to be giving them credit for the things that are going on.
I have not quoted anything out of context, right Sportsman?
He makes some other interesting quotes about the rationale behind the 1987 AMA Superbike rules (750cc fours vs 1000cc twins) which clearly show that he knew twins would have a significant advantage and pushed his employer to go in that direction.
I'm sure he's thrilled his bikes are now allowed in Formula Extreme, where "it makes more sense"
Daytona 2004 will kick ass.
edited by josé_quiñones on August 20, 2003 |
José_quiñones
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 07:09 am: |
|
Bill,
Superstock has traditionally been the "feeder" series for Superbike, so they have always been similar rules wise. Previously they were on DOT tires, now they are allowed slicks, a good move.
There are Four manufactures of 1000cc fours, one for triples and at least Two for 1000 twins and air cooled twins. It only makes sense that there will be more IL4's in that class, they perform better, are cheaper to run, and offer more contingencies than the twin or triple teams.
That's just the way it is, for better or worse.
I would expect anybody wanting to race an aircooled twin to naturally go to the FX class, because they are allowed plenty of "allowances" to help them be competitive.
The only thing that suprised me about FX is that they dropped the two strokes, I guess they did not get enough commitment from two stroke teams for next year. FUSA Superbike allows them also, but very few actually race in that class.
edited by josé_quiñones on August 20, 2003 |
Sportsman
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 04:16 pm: |
|
From what they said on the CCS board, Yamaha has let all the 2 stroke engineers go and will only produce the TZ for 1 more year.
Your quotes are correct, RRW was strange this month, was almost like a Buell magazine. Finally Eric is getting some overdue credit for his accomplishments.
Oh yeah, nobody ever thought for a moment a XB9R would run with a GSXR1000. I thought where Buell belonged was the whole debate. FX seems to be the place for them. FX will be kind of Supersport vs. Thunderbike. Should be intresting, but the jap riders ain't happy. |
Blake
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 07:29 pm: |
|
JQ,
Yep, he calls them like he sees them, good when there's good, and poo when there's poo.
Supersport and Superbikes rules are similar???
Sportsman,
The FX bikes will be no where near what a Supersport is "supposed" to be. Arien is expecting to field their Honda CBR600RR's putting down between 140 and 150 rwhp. If that holds true, and I believe it will, the Pro-Thunder spec Buells will still have come catching up to do on the longer/higher-speed tracks.
Why aren't the Jap riders happy? Their exclusive club being invaded by other brands?
Actually, this thread began over AMAPR's biased class rules for Superbike as much as their lack of concern for those wishing to race a Buell or Ducati in Superstock versus liter IL4's. |
José_quiñones
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 09:23 pm: |
|
Find where I said Supersport.
It's ERION, not ARIEN.
This thread was about your personal jihad against the AMA, and my first reply pretty much summed up the situation and the facts have turned out the way I predicted they would.
|
Sportsman
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 09:49 pm: |
|
150 hp in 600 Supersport? If that were accurate no privateers would bother trying to run with the factory. I'll admit I don't know sh** but I 150 seems a bit much. |
Imonabuss
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 10:00 pm: |
|
He's saying 150HP in their 600s for Formula Extreme. Of course, the factory "stock" 600s only have the 100 HP that you can buy off the showroom floor, yessirree, Bob... |
José_quiñones
| | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 10:45 am: |
|
Won't happen, you're both wrong about that too. Read the rules.... |
|
AMA Pro Racing Seeks to Please Japanese Benefactors 
»
Archive through August 21, 2003