1000cc in 2012

[EvilSteve]

hasn't that been said/the topic of this thread for quite a while now?  yes, under the current proposed plan, there will be both.

I think if you add emphasis to "they are" you may get my meaning. It was more surprise that that option would be the one put forward. It pretty much sets in stone a 2 class GP structure.

[Speeddog]

Depends if there's limits placed on the prototype motors; air restrictors, rpm, etc.

I could see that happening.

[gm2]

I think if you add emphasis to "they are" you may get my meaning. It was more surprise that that option would be the one put forward. It pretty much sets in stone a 2 class GP structure.

gotcha.

regardless, the Flammini brothers sound like they're going to start pounding chests again re production being solely their domain...

http://www.motomatters.com/news/2009/11/17/flammini_on_1000cc_motogp_bikes_we_are_r.html

[derby]

It pretty much sets in stone a 2 class GP structure.

as opposed to now? 

[desmoquattro]

how many stages of nitrous are they allowed in that class and what capacity of injection?

Only as much as the rider can huff before the race.

[OT]

Interesting. So they are planning on continuing prototype motors alongside "production" motors. Seems like a dumb idea to me. There are going to be some slow back markers!

+1

Can't imagine Rossi/Lorenzo having to filter through backmarkers for the last few laps of a championship-deciding race....  

This sort of thing was disturbing enough to watch in (pre-DMG) AMA Superbike - such as Spies and Mladin at Barber in 2007(?)...the race turned on Spies getting past a BM while Mladin got "stuck" for a while....with several laps to go in the race...

Would be an accident waiting to happen

MotoGP keeps talking about money, but I can't see starting a "premier class" race with 30-plus bikes/riders when ten of them might get lapped....

Overall, I just don't see strategic thinking on the part of MotoGP....just a lot of tweaking and in-flight corrections based on what's happened this year, or last.

[EvilSteve]

regardless, the Flammini brothers sound like they're going to start pounding chests again re production being solely their domain...

I guess I'll sit back and enjoy the show. I hope they have some nice flourishes before they concede that they have no right to stop the GP plan and nor should they be worried. SBK isn't going anywhere.

as opposed to now? 

Heh, yeah. Imagine what we have now but riders getting lapped every lap after #8. It's a scale thing.

Overall, I just don't see strategic thinking on the part of MotoGP....just a lot of tweaking and in-flight corrections based on what's happened this year, or last.

That's kind of what I was getting at. I'm not sure what the value is to a company getting into GP to run around at the back. It's certainly possible to come up with a set of rules that would make the racing competitive but if that's achieved by restricting the prototype motors, they're going to lose fans over it. My suggestion (other than the pre-production option which would be my first choice) would be to remove the number of races per motor requirement and to allow the production based (shall we call them povo?) engined bikes more fuel. I guess the could try reducing weight of the povo motorcycles but I think a balance would be very difficult to strike.

[derby]

nice to see a "250 guy" excited for the return of the big bikes:

http://www.crash.net/motogp/news/154764/1/pedrosa_backs_fun_990cc_return.html

[Cider]

Imagine what we have now but riders getting lapped every lap after #8.

I don't know--are WSBK times really that far off GP times?  The backmarker argument assumes that you cannot make a competitive bike using some off-the-shelf parts.  I'm not sure if that has been proved.

BTW, isn't there still a minimum qualifying time requirement?  Like a certain percentage of the pole-sitter time?

[EvilSteve]

It's all BS AFAIC, it was BS when they introduced 800s to slow people down and it's BS now that they're increasing the capacity again to make it "cheaper". Unless they limit the electronic aides or introduce some other limits on the prototype motors in the form of budget caps the factories will always spend loads of cash and anyone running the production based motors will always be slower.

Cider, I was exaggerating (I like doing that) but the point is this: the new regulations are meant to reduce costs by allowing teams to produce engines from some production parts, if slightly out of date prototype motors can't compete, how are production based "cheap" motors meant to be up at that level?

If the difference between a factory prototype motor and a leased prototype is .5 seconds a lap (I'm being generous), can we really expect that factories would want their prototype leased motors to be beaten by the production motors? How do they then justify the investment?

They were talking about this in F1 and I absolutely agree that having two classes of motor within GP is a really bad idea. The whole ROI becomes blurred at that point because if the povo motors are competitive why are factories spending ridiculous amounts of cash on the prototypes and if they're not competitive why would anyone want to race them in order to trundle around at the back of the grid?

[gm2]

i don't think the move to 800s was ever about safety or slowing them down.  i think it was about making the most effective/successful path to GP be via the GP support classes.

[EvilSteve]

They said it was about slowing down top speeds at the time. I'm not talking about actual reasons here, we don't actually know them, I'm talking about what we were told. It's the same deal with F1. Their intended goals always seem contrary to the means they introduce to achieve them.

[gm2]

They said it was about slowing down top speeds at the time. I'm not talking about actual reasons here, we don't actually know them, I'm talking about what we were told. It's the same deal with F1. Their intended goals always seem contrary to the means they introduce to achieve them.

right, agreed.  that is the party line about the move since, what, 2005?  i'm just giving my opinion. 

[EvilSteve]

Oh, fair enough.

I'm not sure what they're aiming for behind the scenes this time but it won't result in cost reduction, that's for sure.

[Cider]

Probably not.  I wonder if they know that and don't care, or if they are just repeating mistakes?