Europe v. America | FerrariChat

Europe v. America

Discussion in 'Motorcycles & Boats' started by 2000YELLOW360, Jul 12, 2014.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. 2000YELLOW360

    2000YELLOW360 F1 World Champ

    Jun 5, 2001
    19,800
    Full Name:
    Art
    Both Nicky and Collin are at the end of their careers, so I wouldn't expect much from them. Josh Nerrin isn't showing much qualified 30th. There isn't really anyone who has shown enough talent to get into motogp as I look at the current crop. There was a time when we dominated that series. Given that a competitive ride in Moto2 costs 1M, I understand why we don't have anyone there. Rainey is trying to put together a USA Moto2 series. Hope it works.
    Anyone have any suggestions?

    Art
     
  2. 1974gt4

    1974gt4 Formula 3
    Owner

    Sep 19, 2009
    1,496
    in my garage...
    Full Name:
    Dr. Italiani
    ….create a true Grand National Championship like the old days…dirt track and road racing, one series.

    Get those clowns out of AMA and create racers…create 'feeder classes', and DON'T keep changing the classes/specs year to year.

    The manufacturers don't like moving targets.

    Any one else?
     
  3. tundraphile

    tundraphile F1 Veteran

    May 16, 2007
    5,083
    Missouri
    Hopefully the rumors of Dorna taking over US roadracing promotion will happen and the DMG era can end.

    With that said, sportbike sales are a fraction of what they were just a few years ago and I don't ever see AMA being what it was in its heyday of the 90's. The Daytona 200 has devolved from one of the premier events in the world into a glorified club race with even the best in the series electing not to race it. This year there is what, six rounds with zero on basic cable?

    Rainey is a smart and experienced guy that no doubt sees the Spanish CEV model. It is no coincidence that most of the top riders today are Spanish or came through that series.
     
  4. rdefabri

    rdefabri Three Time F1 World Champ

    Jun 4, 2008
    33,571
    NJ
    Full Name:
    Rich
    I agree with this - not only bad for manufacturers, it's not really helpful for the more engaged fan.

    Personally, I don't like the new MotoGP specs and the different classes that allow Ducati to "compete". Not that it wasn't necessary - I honestly would stop watching MotoGP if Ducati weren't there. I guess my issue is that Ducati CAN compete, no need to bend the rules for them, but from a business perspective, it's necessary.

    Consider the actions NHRA took with Pro Stock Bike - a class that has little meaning or interest to the hardcore fan, but something they wanted to continue to support, so now Vance and Hines / HD have been very strong, almost dominant.

    The comment made about sportbike sales dwindling are also HUGE.
     
  5. tundraphile

    tundraphile F1 Veteran

    May 16, 2007
    5,083
    Missouri
    The Open class was created out of the CRT class, Ducati surprised many by electing to go that route (it was an option for everyone BTW) and then the rules were altered to create a third class to punish them IMO.

    One incorrect assumption was regarding the spec ECU that Open teams have to use with the stock software package, made by Magnetti-Marelli, a longtime partner of Ducati. The assumption was that the stock software would be crude and vastly inferior to the custom programming that Factory teams can do with their rule package. But in reality it appears Ducati helped M-M develop this software and it is very sophisticated. All Open teams can use it and it is almost as good as anything Yamaha or Honda can dream up in-house.

    The Factory rules are Honda's game. Their bike gets the best fuel mileage, appears to have the best engine longevity, and the seamless gearbox helps the bike get that last tenth or two per lap.

    Before the deadline to decide for teams on Open or Factory (before the Ducati Open-Factory band-aid rule was created), I had written elsewhere that it was Yamaha that should have pulled a fast one on Honda and elected to go Open alongside Ducati and the rest of the field except the four Hondas. Maybe then Lorenzo or Rossi could have won a race with an extra tire compound, 12 engines, and most importantly 4L of extra fuel. as it sits now Marquez may very well run the table and win every race this season, a remarkable feat.

    You need only look at Aleix Espargaro at NGM Forward that uses last year's M1 with Open rules to see the speed the Yamaha has with a little more fuel. His orange bullet can match the pace of Lorenzo/Rossi in qualifying and is close throughout the race.
     
  6. tundraphile

    tundraphile F1 Veteran

    May 16, 2007
    5,083
    Missouri
    BTW saw today that Hayden has to miss Indy and Brno due to his recent (second) wrist surgery. Leon Camier will fill in for him for those two rounds.

    Hayden has a contract for next year with Aspar, but you have to wonder about that wrist. That body part has probably ended more racing careers than any other, IMO.
     
  7. 2000YELLOW360

    2000YELLOW360 F1 World Champ

    Jun 5, 2001
    19,800
    Full Name:
    Art
    They couldn't run open. A win or good finishes puts them at a disadvantage with the new rules. The soft tire isn't usable in the race 99% of the time. Marquez will win the championship this year because the Honda has more HP. Yamaha handles better but is down 10-15 HP.

    Art
     
  8. tundraphile

    tundraphile F1 Veteran

    May 16, 2007
    5,083
    Missouri
    The third class created for Ducati based off good finishes was done after the deadline to decide initially on Open or Factory. IMO it was done to appease Yamaha and Honda that were Factory rules. Had Yamaha jumped with Ducati it would have been two manufacturers against Honda for further rule changes.

    I'm not sure having fuel reduced from 24L to some internediate volume really has hindered Ducati so far, IIRC they said their initial tanks were designed for 21L. Having extra engines and being able to develop throughout the year would definitely be an advantage.

    It will be a moot point anyway by 2016 as everyone should be back undef a single set of rules for software.
     

Share This Page