WSBK » 1200cc weight change, WSBK winter test ban

World Superbike announces rule amendments

Sort Comments: Oldest | Newest

Sick Cylinder - Unregistered

October 28, 2011 12:26 PM

Easy - In 2010 Max was on top of his game, but in 2011 Max threw the title away with his daft behaviour at some of the early rounds and then had the misfortune to suffer a freak accident and injury to his foot.

Tetley - Unregistered

October 28, 2011 1:30 PM

Extra weight affects acceleration, therefore it affects the speed at which the bike reaches the next corner. Therefore extra weight IS a speed handicap . Bikes used to have top gear ratios set to reach max revs at the end of the longest straight, so relative top speeds depend on where they are measured , and at what speed the areodynamics have their sweet spot.

rca - Unregistered

October 28, 2011 1:39 PM

@ sick cylinder so it could be that carlos was on top of HIS game this many of his rivals said a thoroughly well deserved championship.sad how the fans on here cannot recognise what their idols do!

jimmy - Unregistered

October 28, 2011 4:19 PM

I don't get these constant changes. Isn't there any mathematical model, how to equalize the bikes fairly? Or take pre-season some riders who have experience with more brands, let them test all bikes, then compare their times and equalize it (like in FIA GT1).


October 28, 2011 5:13 PM

Best thread I've read for ages.
It's not the v-twin formula that gives an advantage or else we'd have seen KTM fielding a team 2 years ago!
As percentage correctly states, all engines do is convert energy from fuel into kinetic energy. It comes down to the volume of gas you can combust- engine displacement, valve size, piston speed etc etc...
It's far from a simple equation.
And we've not even looked at gyroscopics from the crank. 1200cc = heavier crank, harder to turn?

I think the 1200 twin is a great match for the il4 1000, it's just that King Carlos was the class of his field.

wsbk_is_the_real - Unregistered

October 28, 2011 6:20 PM

Its good to hear. I hope air restriction is still there. Now ducs unfair advantage will be reduced abit. But I still believe keep the weight same and reduce twins cc limit to 1100cc but still a welcome move. I dont agree CC was so dominant. Ducs conrnering speed due to 200cc extra is much more than 4cylndrs.

Even Yamaha Europe manager said "Our R1 is no.1 4 cylndr bike in wsbk 2011". That shows he too believes in ducs unfair advantage. Lets c how well ducs perform in front of the legendary FIREBLADES.


October 28, 2011 10:12 PM

re: "As long as the air restrictors are gone, this seems fair."

50mm restrictors are still there. they've never been touched. so far only weight has been adjusted. the V12's had been given a weight break, now it's been taken back. which is not surprising. there was no way althea/checa were going to be allowed to start 2012 without some kind of re-adjustment to weight. the japanese had been on the phone from mid-season.


October 28, 2011 10:57 PM

There is a mathematical model but it is a variable based on rpm and 2 cyc power delivery behaves drastically different from a 4 cyc.

Throw into the mix different tracks, chassis set up, temperature, and on and on and on.

So this formula get's reduced to 'how did Ducati do this year' and then amend it.

@ other posters
It's impossible to have a single formula be equitble to both the 2 vs 4 cyc bikes over the course of a race season

Don't point at all other racers about poor tire management. How many races did Checa work through some of the field and follow the front runners and then start to pass at will?

Checa and the Duc were a formidable pair this season.

My stance has alwyas been that the fundamental issue here is that a motorcycle class should have a common engine configuration and cc limit. We are kidding ourselves if we believe that s formula will ever consistently level the field.

Mad Phil - Unregistered

October 28, 2011 11:01 PM

@Jon,i believe the longer crank of the transverse 4s have a far greater gyroscopic effect than the short v-twin crank,hence why the 4's run a relatively nervous fast turning chassis(compared to the duke)to compensate for the crank.

Page 3 of 5
« 1 2 3 4 5  »

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.