WSBK » EXCLUSIVE Scott Smart (WSBK Technical Director) Q&A


“…teams can't dictate what the championship is doing because someone has to make a final decision. That's how other successful championships work.”

Sort Comments: Oldest | Newest

V4Poweeeer

May 01, 2014 11:56 AM

There isn't a better person for the job former racer with a physics degree.

Tom Sykes blew up on twitter recently saying that the bikes basically shouldn't be turned back whatsoever and that the riders should have had a say in the rules but when theres guys like Smart out there helping write the rules there shouldn't be any issues.

TalentFan

May 01, 2014 1:34 PM

Smart by name and by nature. Intelligent ideas and plans as well as a good understanding of the issues.

MotoGP isn't ready for the kinds of organiser control and regulation BSB style that it seems WSBK is. But then WSBK would be in dire straits and real crisis without a return to the values of completion and affordability. Maybe MotoGP would need to near implode as well before it would be forced to see sense.

SS comments about what electronics and super high engine specs really do to stratify a series and exclude new teams from any hope of competing is something MotoGP should take careful note of, cos he is right.

Smart looks to be a real asset to WSBK.

nealio

May 01, 2014 6:03 PM

With directors with brains and common sense, like Mr. Smart, there is a bright future for WSBK. I liked the emphasis he put on balance which is needed in such a political environment as production-based superbikes.

FATE

May 03, 2014 2:07 AM
Last Edited 230 days ago

"The way we have the rules for next is that the slower road bikes will have the ability to get to a similar horsepower to favoured road bikes".

I guess this is to help Honda to keep racing their dinosaur.

Stupid rule IMO. If a manufacturer can't build a decent road bike then let them suck wind.

Or is it to help Buell.

V4Poweeeer

May 03, 2014 5:47 AM

"I guess this is to help Honda to keep racing their dinosaur.Stupid rule IMO. If a manufacturer can't build a decent road bike then let them suck wind.Or is it to help Buell."

No the objective is most likely close fair racing like bsb.

Nothing has been stopping Honda from providing factory support in wsbk in a bid to win the title they just can't be ****d atm.

Thus way we will see less emphasis on factory support and more emphasison the teams which hopefully results in bsb style close racing.

Also if the wsbk spec bikes are feasible for national sbk series to race with and their top riders/teams can wild card on competitive machinery then who's to complain.

Motogp will he reserved for manufacturer competition.

Dorna wamt

Einar

May 04, 2014 12:06 AM

Good interview. I really like this Q&A stuff here on Crash.

But it doesn´t make any sense for me, when Scott says that they need to make the rules in a way that the manufactures can still develop there bikes(product) and then say that the slower race(road)bikes will get more freedom to tune there engine to be more competitive.

If the hole point of going racing for the manufactures is to develop and showcasing there products then I don´t see the point in rewarding them for make a slow production road bike with more freedom to tune the engine in the race bikes to look better on the track and be more competitive than they should really be.

The only point of the rules is that the same goes for everybody, If not then there is no point in it. if a bike is slow. than the manufacturer simply need to make a better base package. And if the road bikes is better then they will sell more of it. Isn´t that the point if the first place. To sell bikes.

Also why the rules for all the domestic a

shamarone

May 04, 2014 1:20 AM

re: "We spent a lot of time trying to find a balance."

back to the drawing board fellas.

re: "Some think the level is too high, others are happy with it.

well there you go, that's your first clue that maybe you HAVEN'T found balance after all.

S1 contends you've erred shy of the solution. if "balance" is really what you seek...? not only would it have factored in price points...? and the general state of the market...? but also factored for INDIVIDUAL MANUFACTURER CAPABILITY.

sure, economy is same for everybody, but BIGRED can homologate 1000 "fancy" bikes standing on their ear, bimota most certainly can NOT. mind, i used Honda as an example, but with an established dealer network, that target's a "bullseye" for any one of the Japanese.

CONT...

shamarone

May 04, 2014 1:21 AM

CONT...

right then, the correct answer was a return to a "percentage of sales" technique. an approach already once employed back in the late 90's/early '00's. we're not talking about something that reinvents the wheel...? we're talking about a homologation number PROPORTIONAL to what a factory's actually capable of PRODUCING.

even if Bimota were to meet the 125...? (which they haven't) what's the point (besides a circle-jerk) when they fail to hit 1000 and their homologation status is rescinded...?

so, riddle me this batman, which factory STRONG ARMED you guys into this ridiculous "one size fits all" number...? i detect shenanigans. you and Alonzo may have not been around when this method was originally used...? but Lavilla sure was.

shamarone

May 04, 2014 1:30 AM
Last Edited 229 days ago

re: "And if the road bikes is better then they will sell more of it. Isn´t that the point if the first place. To sell bikes."

close, the point of homologation is (was) to offer for sale, road going versions that incorporate technology that anybody (in this case a competing team or individual) can put their hands on.

be they racer or "fansumer"...? all's they need is a willingness to come off the dime. anybody lacking that was screwed before they even got out the bed this morning.

Page 1 of 2
1 2  »

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.