Thursday, April 2, 2009

Just Say No!!!!!!! to the Spec Engine Proposal

For those who don't already know, the MSMA has submitted a proposal to change the rules of the Moto2 class to be a single manufacturer spec engine. This would scuttle our plans to make a custom V4 based machine to compete against the inevitable legions of I4's that will show up. See www.moto2-usa.com for more details.

http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/sport/sportresults/mcn/2009/march/23-29/mar2809-Single-engine-proposal-for-Moto2-class-tabled/?&R=EPI-107180

The MSMA is an industry mouthpiece for the Big4 Japanese manufacturers and as can be seen by their influence on the rules of the MotoGP class are out for their own benefit, not for the benefit of race fans. This spec engine proposal reeks of back room maneuvering, likely by Honda, to force a spec engine of unkown quality and delivery date down the entire Moto2 paddock's throat. If the Flammini's will not let Dorna use production engines then let the paddock come up with a solution, don't legislate a bad one. Besides Cosomoto, Maxsym, Illmor and Yamaha have expressed interest in building engines or customer machines for use in the series. With a spec engine rule this beautiful diversity will be crushed before it has a chance to wow us with exciting racing of machines we can technically distinguish from one another.

The essence of GP racing requires innovation. If in the long run all manufacturers converge on the same solutiuon, no problem. However, give us the freedom to experiment and come up with different solutions and let the stopwatch decide which survives.

Let me kow what you think on this topic. If you have any contacts in the FIM, IRTA, MSMA, Dorna or whoever, ring them up and let them know what a bad idea this is.

Let's keep prototype racing based on protoypes from all, not one!

Thanks,

Chris

5 comments:

  1. Chris,

    I agree entirely with not having a spec engine.

    It seemed like the rules had finally been agreed a few months ago and this clearly stimulated interest around the world. The formula was so close to the successful formulae which brought us grids full of TZ, RS production racers and alternatives from numerous smaller manufacturers through the heyday of privateer GP racing. Aprilia built their experience and racing reputation around the Rotax 125 and 250 engines before developing their own.

    This latest proposal seems to have killed all of that potential at a stroke.

    The constantly moving goal posts are also damaging the credibility of the decision makers. Maxsym committed significant resources to developing their twin cylinder engine to fit earlier iterations of the proposed rules and their continued state of flux is simply wasting people's time and resources.

    I think the rules published earlier in the year should stand. They create lots of affordable freedom to experiment which this latest proposal severely limits.

    Regards
    Steve

    ReplyDelete
  2. Realistically, the single engine proposal is the only way that Dorna has of avoiding the series being canceled. As soon as the first bike with an engine out of a production bike hits a world championship grid, Infront Motor Sport (who own World Superbikes and believe they have a monopoly on production-based racing) will be down on the series with a couple of coach loads of lawyers.

    It's a tragedy, as potentially, this has all the makings of a great class.

    ReplyDelete
  3. David,

    The other way to make it work is to let the class run in Spain for 2009 and 2010 with the rules as-is to allow engine constructors enough time to build race engines and have them adapted to the constructor's frames. Infront's rights are for world level racing, not nationally, so the CEV can run whatever they want as long as it is worked out before they go to the world level.

    Why can't the factories produce a production race engine for under 20k? I can. There are aftermarket suppliers (hint- non-production source) for everything from pistons, conrods, valves, springs, and cams, to transmissions and clutches, so all that is really needed is needed is a crankcase, head and crank. How much effort would it take Honda or any other manufacturer to massage the crankcase CAD for their Super Sport 600 engine and produce sand cast parts from it? Even a casting house could enter the fray with minimal outlay. These would not be production parts but economical race engines. Each manufacturer could do it for a minimal investment and be able to have some inexpensive advertising presence in the new class and not squeeze out the small guys like myself trying to make a name. Likely 90%+ of the paddock would choose that solution, more than enough to have a good customer base without totally eliminating any other suppliers through a spec engine rule. Once the Moto2 series catches on and creates national feeder series throughout Europe and the US the market for these engines will only increase.

    It seems that the spec engine rule is not in anyone's interest but the company that stands to gain the contract. I wonder who that will be.

    ReplyDelete
  4. crazy bike guys love it, heard you guys on motogpod, I cant believe that you guys are going to race a parallel front fork - THATS HUGE. Good luck and sorry about the single engine thing, but i will be backing you no matter what.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yes, the one engine rule sucks, and I am very glad that you have decided to continue down your singular path anyway.
    I would really like to see no rules, except those governing safety. What if the problem was simply to make the fastest possible circuit racer?
    Ex world champ Phil Read reckons the ultimate machine would be a Wankel powered kneeler.

    ReplyDelete