MotoGP » Colin Edwards eyeing FTR-M1 for 2014?


"We don't know what's going to happen in 2014 engine wise, as it looks like Yamaha might be leasing some engines" – Colin Edwards

Sort Comments: Oldest | Newest

Damien IE - Unregistered

November 16, 2012 11:42 AM

@ steve
@ DM52
@ Nick636

all spot on

Peter Clifford's old WCM when they lost RedBull and YZR500's they built R1 engined bike but were thrown out fo rusing production crancases. Now CRT class using whole production engines !!!
Kenny Roberts KRV was competitive in their own chassis and gave the factory boys a run for their money and the Moriwaki also made sporadic appearances with its V5 project.
CRT class should always have been last years factory bikes leased ala Tech 3 or lease engines in independant chassis. Its just too far apart and mixing WSBK with motoGP at present.
Facotries leasing engines will help bring back some racing and spectacle to the sport but start 2013 not 2014

petrolbonce

November 16, 2012 12:24 PM

The WCM was thrown out on the "prototype" rule which was put there by the FIM to differentiate between MotoGP and WSB.

Both WSB and MotoGP organisers wanted a clear demarcation between the series. As such it was decided that Superbikes must be production based while MotoGP bikes could not be production based.

And BTW it was more than just the cases that made the GPC decide that the WCM Yamaha was not a true prototype.

petrolbonce

November 16, 2012 12:30 PM

@Ed Honda announced the production RCV before the four bike rule was introduced. As yet the GPC have given no indication where the RCV will fit in with the current prototype and CRT regulations.

A FTR Yamaha could enter as a full prototype since the constructor would be FTR. A full factory RCV would obviously count as being a Honda motorcycle and therefore would be counted as one of the four bikes.

The current rules simply don't allow for customer bikes built by MSMA factories. As such either the rules will have to change or Honda will have to stop running satellite bikes for customer RCVs to enter.

Remember the four bike rule was introduced as a sop to those who wanted to keep the rookie rule in order to stop the big factories signing up all the new talent and entering as many bikes as they wanted.

It's been suggested that the production RCV is simply a way of trying to keep CRT manufacturers out of the class.

mrmwink - Unregistered

November 16, 2012 12:43 PM

there seems to be an abudance of people with the impression that Honda / Yamaha make the best chassis in the world, no what they make is a great bike but don't be fooled into believing it can't get any better, if that were the case they would stop development and just use the same bike year after year. Companies like Suter, Kalex, FTR etc all have a massive amount of experience in chassis design, why would a Kapex with an M1 engine not be better than a full factory built bike.

I think the leased engines, at the same spec as factory bikes would certainly give those using them at least a chance, mayb with a view of going fully to F1 / Moto3 route in a few years, anyone disagree Moto3 this years probably created the most exciting races!?

Blah - Unregistered

November 16, 2012 12:48 PM

If he wants to race real Yamahas at the front he should knock on Yamaha's door and tell them he wants full factory bikes for WSBK for 2014.

Better to be there at the front than filling the grid developing turds in Motogp.

What is it that makes these riders with plenty of potential left to disgrace themselves as grid fillers?

Blah - Unregistered

November 16, 2012 12:54 PM

“Mark Taylor from FTR is really switched on and I know he's going to turn my comments into progress rather than just telling me how it is and I'm really excited about that."

Whoaaaa...

Suter's attitude might bite Ducati in the ass unless Audi punches them in the head a couple times.

mrfill

November 16, 2012 1:40 PM

@mrmwink

Spot on. moto3 has been far more exciting than the 125s and far cheaper. Allowing a variety of engines and frames seems a bit more sensible than the moto2 way and prevents the perception of bias to one manufacturer.
In F1, Renault engines have powered the last two champions but they havent been in Renault chassis so I have little doubt that there is somewhere an Adrian Newey type who can design a frame better than a manufacturer.
As most viewers identify the bikes with the engine maker (rather than the frame maker), it also becomes a much cheaper way of getting their name across.

ZeR0 Kun

November 16, 2012 1:48 PM
Last Edited 672 days ago

@ mrmwink

i do agree with you. but as you pointed out that factories does not necessarily build the best chassis, this is also the very reason why they reluctant to lease the engine - the prospect of specialist chassis builders able to beat their engine suppliers will imply the factories themselves are average chassis builders compared to the specialists - something unthinkable for the factories when motoGP suceess can impact their bike sales, where they build everything including the chassis. they can afford lease the engines in moto3 because the impact of moto3 on sales is very small, a fraction to what motoGP success can bring.

factory can offer at least engines that were one or two specifications behind factory equivalents. however to lower down the cost on the engines (and thereby attracting more manufacturers/engine builders), pneumatic valves must be banned. after more than 20 years with no application to the production machines, there is little relevance for this technology t

Page 3 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 - 2014 Crash Media Group

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