MotoGP » ECU compromise for MotoGP 2014, Moto2 combined weight

Standard ECU compulsory from 2014 - manufacturers to keep their own electronics software, but face four-litre fuel penalty...

Sort Comments: Oldest | Newest

True Fan - Unregistered

November 10, 2012 9:21 PM


Dani has a marginal acceleration advantage off the start line, but through the race, it is less pronounced. I agree, where the weight goes is vital, but it helps enormously how much weight you can move to the inside when cornering. Ballast tends to be an immovable bolt on option. It is too hard and dangerous to wear it on leathers, where it would even up the effect. It can be positioned low on the bike, but it isn't the same as being able to hang off the inside. The only advantage left to the small guys will be less drag.

I agree with the combined weight for Moto3, and maybe a weight adjustment for Moto2, but not an absolute, so that light weight riders carry a penalty weight perhaps, but not one for one difference. Harleys were invented for fat people.

Wineman - Unregistered

November 10, 2012 9:41 PM

It has finally arrived! A fighting chance for normal sized humans to get relief from the outdated sporting regs. Perhaps the MotoGP class will adopt something is similar as well and drop the TC. Pedrosa, Stoner, Lorenzo, Marquez will finally have their ADVANTAGE taken away (i do beleive they are still great). Great racing to come with Spies and Rossi on the podium again. I'll be watching for sure.

panic man - Unregistered

November 10, 2012 11:17 PM

just a thought are these regs getting more inline with F1
i.e. engine limit, fuel limit, total combined weight limit and qualifying knock out.
Must admit in last two years (belive me i dont like saying this) F1 has become interesting again (to an extent) and Moto GP hmm well challanged to keep the spark. The main difference for me at the moment is on two wheels you can be yourself (say what you think) F1 (you are a politcian i.e. need to be word perfect, i thought it was great last weekend f1 starts let slip but ohhh no cant have that language live)
Sorry for comparision but think there is a link some where and i worry.


November 10, 2012 11:48 PM

this is actually a better compromise than i expected , the trick now is to leave it this way and not change or add more every year.
the 5 engine limit will be no problem and can be managed easy , stoner only used 4 engines this year missing only 1 race ( rea used his bike ).
combined rider/weight for moto2 will just make that series even better than it is now .

Miffy - Unregistered

November 11, 2012 1:50 AM

I want Traction control and any for of ABS if they have it gone, they never needed it in the past so why make it easy for them? They got rid of it in F1 and it has done wonders.

I also want them to have to pit to change tyres so they have to use both hard and soft compounds in a race. Maybe get Pirelli to make the tyres so they are made to go off so the people who look after their tyres better can do longer stints.

F1 has really turned it around, it used to be so boring but now it is amazing. Where as Moto GP is just boring now, the gap between bikes is too great, I mean in F1 now like 1 second covers the top 12 cars in a lot of races during Quali. It's not uncommon for a front runner to make a mistake and then be right now in 13th place. However looking at Moto GP you have Yamaha and Ducati and no one else can touch them.

Moto GP needs to change, it needs to be a cheaper sport and they need to bring rider skill into it rather than it being electronic based.

jjthekid46 - Unregistered

November 11, 2012 2:13 AM

@ MattyMKO745 : Because i have eyes unlike you. Guess your just a clueless Redding fanboy. How many champs do you know that have won titles after 1 solitary win , over a 5 seasons stretch ? Isn't rocket science to work it out....


November 11, 2012 4:17 AM

Oh my f-ing god you complete and utter buffoons. Unbelievably, they've managed to create and even worse and needlessly complex scenario than before through "compromise".

'hey, why does that guy have a better top speed than that other guy towards the end everytime?'

'hmm? oh, he has simpler software so his bike carries more fuel and...' WTF?!?!?!


gpfan - Unregistered

November 11, 2012 6:00 AM

Regarding the combined weight.

I think MotoGp needs it.

Everyone who says the small guys have disadvantages, well not as much nowadays. Launch and traction control, and engine braking has definitely made it easier. Many people claim that lighter riders are at a disadvantage for acceleration at lower speeds, but the average speeds indicate there is a VERY limited amount of time at low speed.

Under braking, I think I'd prefer to have a bike with a low mounted ballast. Rather than having high mounted shifting weight (body) being thrown forward.

There is an argument for being able to lean you're weight while cornering, but wake up, there is a reason why ever rider strives to be as light as possible. The advantages of being lighter OBVIOUSLY outweigh the advantages of being heavier.

At least with this rule, you're able to find your ideal comprise. You can either add a bit of muscle, or ballast to find the optimal combo.

You can't deny that MotoGp's rider weight trend point

gpfan - Unregistered

November 11, 2012 6:18 AM


You can't deny that MotoGp's rider weight trend point to lighter being more advantageous. If it weren't riders wouldn't be so focused on being as light as possible, and the little guys would add a bit of muscle. You don't see Dani looking for ballast for braking or low speed acceleration, because it doesn't outweigh the advantage of being light. He'd perfer the ability of third row holeshots, and pure straightaway passes before the braking zone. As would any rider, hence the trend of smaller is better.

With a fuel limit, and bikes leaning it's mixture out at the end of a race, it doesn't take a scientist to tell you that more weight requires more fuel. Lighter riders literally have more power.

With MotoGp being as 1-lined as it is, due to the near perfect ability the electronics gives, straightaway passing is the most effective way to pass. Again, it doesn't take a scientist to point out a lighter rider has superior acceleration and speed, especially with proper elect

Page 5 of 7
« 1 2 3 4 5 6 7  »

Join the conversation - Add your comment

Please login or register before adding your comments.

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.

© 1999 - 2016 Crash Media Group

The total or partial reproduction of text, photographs or illustrations is not permitted in any form.