Should they have scrapped the 500s ???

[f2001]

Whats the point of GP-1 or "MotoGP" , the 500s were already established as the best Motorcycle racing championship... and it wasn't f'ed up like MotoGP will be, with 500s and 1000s on the same grid, its like BTCC

Stay with 500s I say, 200 raw bhp and with the excitment from Aoki on the v-twin, its a blast of a championship !

ur views ???

[moto1]

The fact is, the major manufacturers just aren't making any money out of two-strokes. How many two strokes are on the street today?
How many will be on the streets next year? They continue to push money into two-stroke development but get NOTHING back! It's very bad business sense.

[Winther]

Two strokers are used on Scooters.........
Well and small bikes.
4 strokes are very dominant and way more common on larger bikes.
More moving parts to dabble around with for the engineers on the 4 strokers, the 2 stroker is more easy to tune and etc etc we all know the debate.

[Redneck]

Not only are 2-strokes not a majority of world wide business, but the starting grids on the 500cc grid have been anemic for years. The World Superbike series has often been a much better show too. They had to do something or they would fade away. I think they waited far too long to make the decision anyway.

[racer69]

Even though they don't admit it, the primary reason for Dorna changing the ruleswas because of the threat World Superbikes was proposing.

6 major manufacturers compared to 3 or 4, national championships which allowed competitive wild cards, and it wasn't as popular with the fans as SBK in Britain and Italy. The only thing it had going for it was that it had all the history and prestige, plus they were 2 strokes, making them unique.

All they needed was the slightest mention of 4 strokes from manufacturers and they thought that they could get rid of World Superbikes,which they basically almost have done, with the loss in the last 2 seasons from Yamaha, Suzuki and Kawasaki.

Also, the change has allowed Ducati to enter, and Ducati is the bike equivalent to Ferrari.

As for this 2 strokes aren't sold on the road stuff, how many 3 litre V10 cars are sold on the street. 500cc is just like F1, a place for manufacturers to compete in almost unhibited ways.

Also, everyone knows the 500cc name, who will remember from the general public that MotoGP is the name of the premier category and of the whole package.

[f2001]

right so this is what the 2002 grid will be then...

Nasro Azzuro Honda - Honda RC211V
Valentino Rossi

Red Bull Yamaha WCM - Yamaha YZM-1 / Yamaha YZF500
Noriyuki Haga
Gary McCoy

Team Proton KR 3 - Modenas V3
TBA

Kanemoto HRC - Honda NSR500
Jurgen Vd Goorberg
Dajiro Katho (TBA)

Telefonica Suzuki - Suzuki RCV500
Kenny Roberts
Sete Gibernau

Marlboro Yamaha - Yamaha YZM-1 / Yamaha YZF500
Max Biaggi
Carlos Checa

Aprilia Racing - Aprilia RSV500
Jerramy McWilliams
Tetsuya Harada

Ducati Course - Ducati V2
TBA

Tech 3 Yamaha - Yamaha YZR500
Shinji Nakano
Oliver Jaques

Antin 3 Yamaha - Yamaha YZR500
Norick Abe

West Honda Pons - Honda NSR500
Alex Barros
Loris Caparossi

Not that good of a grid...

[Winther]

What about Repsol??

[Redneck]

Originally posted by racer69
how many 3 litre V10 cars are sold on the street.

We only have 6 litre V10's.

[f2001]

repsol honda will be no more... plans are ukawa and criville will be in Nastro Azzuro as that will be the works HRC team

[Winther]

Then what is this rumour abot Alex joining up with Aprillia??
Anyone who got any reliable sources of info on this??

[ChrisUSA]

What "Wins Today Sells Tomorrow" means absolutley nothing in Grand Prix, just as in Formula 1.

The only thing that really matters is lap times.

If a bike appeared that could turn much faster lap times than Rossi's NSR500, that is the bike i would want representing the best of motorcycling(Grand Prix).

I hesitate to accept 4strokes with open arms - people just may accept slower lap times because of benefits a 4stroke offers(better emissions, more relevance to street bikes) which are not an advancement to the sport of motorcycle racing (based on an unsubstantiated rumour that Honda would press for a ban of 2strokes whether or not the new 4strokes proved quicker than 2strokes)

Though motorcycle racing is steeped in tradition which i am fond of, if a new form of energy to propel a racing motorcycle comes along that proves lap times far superior to the current 2strokes or 4strokes, then that is the direction I must go in - whether or not i could buy it in a dealership.

As of the present, the 2stroke racing motorcycle has proved itself in an almost Darwinian way - it has demonstrated overwhelmingly superiority in its particular niche, beaten all challengers into extinction, and therefore dominates racing - not a hard concept to grasp.

As long as lap times are the main concern in racing, and at present they are, then the relevance to what type of machinery is used on the track vs. the street is moot.

[Redneck]

Originally posted by ChrisUSA
What "Wins Today Sells Tomorrow" means absolutley nothing in Grand Prix, just as in Formula 1.

Why are they any different from any other racing series? Oh... and don't tell Ferrari that.

[Lazy Boy]

Originally posted by ChrisUSA
What "Wins Today Sells Tomorrow" means absolutley nothing in Grand Prix, just as in Formula 1.

The only thing that really matters is lap times.

If a bike appeared that could turn much faster lap times than Rossi's NSR500, that is the bike i would want representing the best of motorcycling(Grand Prix).

Though motorcycle racing is steeped in tradition which i am fond of, if a new form of energy to propel a racing motorcycle comes along that proves lap times far superior to the current 2strokes or 4strokes, then that is the direction I must go in - whether or not i could buy it in a dealership.

As of the present, the 2stroke racing motorcycle has proved itself in an almost Darwinian way - it has demonstrated overwhelmingly superiority in its particular niche, beaten all challengers into extinction, and therefore dominates racing - not a hard concept to grasp.

As long as lap times are the main concern in racing, and at present they are, then the relevance to what type of machinery is used on the track vs. the street is moot.

I don't really understand your statement Chris... Lap times have never been the only concern... if that was true than there would never have been a 500cc limit... or a minimum weight... and turbocharging and/or supercharging would have been allowed.
And this new 4 stroke addition would not have so many rules attached to it as it does.

F1 cars are F1 cars ... and bikes are bikes... the 2 are NOT the same... and there is no where near the amount of money in motorcycle racing as there is in F1 cars... so the people who build and fund the racers have to have more justification for the money they might or might not spend... they want a return on their money... and since a large part of the funding comes from the 4 or 6 major motorcycle manufacturers... and they don't sell 2 strokes... some of them (Honda in particular) have pushed for this for a while.

Add to that WSB cutting its throat by having rules that favored Ducati for several years which virtually forced the Japs to build Ducati copies or quit... so it became easier for them to accept a "new" series that may give them a chance to race bikes similar to what they sell... WSB didn't want them.

So here we are... now with WSB altering the rules (too late?) to let the 4 cyl 750s up their displacement to 820(?)... and even allowing 1000cc 4 cyl production bikes with limited mods.

We have 2 series that are now oddly more similar than ever.

And the 2 strokes will likely have restrictions placed on them if they prove to still be superior.

But will they?
Very interesting question it appears now.

Early tests said the 4 strokes chewed tires up so fast they wouldn't have a chance.
Some later tests show otherwise.

There is no turning back now... and no manufacturer will race both 2 strokes and 4 strokes in the same class... that is too expensive... so look for Yamaha and Honda to drop the 2 strokes soon.

[Gerrit]

Two-strokes will stay for a very simple reason: cost. The amount of money required for four-stroke racing is so much more that private teams won't be able to afford it. To give an idea, Witteveen stated that Aprilia's 2000 WSB effort, using production-based four-strokes, was costing more than Aprilia's 125, 250 and 500 efforts put together. King kenny held talks with sauber about the possibility of using the sauber engines, but this would have cost him more in engines alone than his TOTAL budget as team manager of the Marlboro Yamaha squad. And for this one has only engines. Add to this the cost of riders, mechanics, travel and accommodation, and of course such minor detalis such as developing frames, suspension, tyres, etc etc and it all becomes prohibitive. Goto, the man who designed the sauber engine, estimates that a two-man team requires no less than 40 engines over a season: two per GP, plus eight for test sessions. Compare that to the number of engines required using NSRs: six for a two-man team.
Forget private teams, what about the factories? Take Ducati. Their annual net profit is, according to their own figures, $ 10 million. But developing the new GP bike will cost them $ 30 million initially, plus another 10 million annually to actually race it. How long do YOU think Ducati will be able to afford this?
Sponsors will cough up the cash, it is said. That's funny. Everybody has been complaining about the difficulty of finding sponsors when racing NSRs or YZRs. Even a highly respected team boss like Erv Kanemoto found it extremely difficult to find the necessary money. Racing four-strokes will require three to perhaps even seven times the money that two-strokes do. Why should sponsors suddenly want to cough up those sums? I have not heard even ONE sensible explanation why they should. And if the results of the negotiations between Repsol and HRC, and later Aprilia are any indication, they won't.
Kevin Cameron, "Cycle World's" tech editor, spoke to several people at daytona about this. The general feeling was that the whole idea will collapse within three to four years.
In the end, only Honda and possibly Yamaha can afford this long-term.

[Gerrit]

Two-strokes will stay for a very simple reason: cost. The amount of money required for four-stroke racing is so much more that private teams won't be able to afford it. To give an idea, Witteveen stated that Aprilia's 2000 WSB effort, using production-based four-strokes, was costing more than Aprilia's 125, 250 and 500 efforts put together. King Kenny held talks with Sauber about the possibility of using the Sauber engines, but this would have cost him more in engines alone than his TOTAL budget as team manager of the Marlboro Yamaha squad. And for this one has only engines. Add to this the cost of riders, mechanics, travel and accommodation, and of course such minor detalis such as developing frames, suspension, tyres, etc etc and it all becomes prohibitive. Goto, the man who designed the Sauber engine, estimates that a two-man team requires no less than 40 engines over a season: two per GP, plus eight for test sessions. Compare that to the number of engines required using NSRs: six for a two-man team.
Forget private teams, what about the factories? Take Ducati. Their annual net profit is, according to their own figures, $ 10 million. But developing the new GP bike will cost them $ 30 million initially, plus another 10 million annually to actually race it. How long do YOU think Ducati will be able to afford this?
Sponsors will cough up the cash, it is said. That's funny. Everybody has been complaining about the difficulty of finding sponsors when racing NSRs or YZRs. Even a highly respected team boss like Erv Kanemoto found it extremely difficult to find the necessary money. Racing four-strokes will require three to perhaps even seven times the money that two-strokes do. Why should sponsors suddenly want to cough up those sums? I have not heard even ONE sensible explanation why they should. And if the results of the negotiations between Repsol and HRC, and later Aprilia are any indication, they won't.
Kevin Cameron, "Cycle World's" tech editor, spoke to several people at Daytona about this. The general feeling was that the whole idea will collapse within three to four years.
In the end, only Honda and possibly Yamaha can afford this long-term.