I looked around for a bullitin about these two subjects and didnt see any so correct me if im repeating some one else but...
1. Whats up with the BMW's 1200 and Ducati's 992 being allowed in lightweight? They have these explanations for how things are supposed to equal out but as you can see from the 8 second lead that Ducati had on the TZ 250 which is a way faster bike than a SV how is that fair? I'm curious what other lightweight riders input is on this subject?
2. Also I'm new to the sport and CCS but if we all get together and sign a petition to change the rules for griding by some kind of point or qualify system would you guys be in support of that? Ideas on how to do it? We would also need some one who has the knowledge and experiance to help us to write the new rules covering all the details?
1. Aircooled motors dont make as much as watercooled motors of the same size so they get tossed into smaller watercooled equivelent classes. Also some riders can ride a "slow" bike faster than hell. Bigger displacement doesnt mean it makes more power. A 1480cc TC HD motor makes a whopping 55-60 HP and a SV650 motor makes 70hp on a motor HALF the HD's size. Air cooled motors and pushrod motors (aka Buells) have disadvantages against water cooled mills.
2. This has been hashed out year after year after year. Isnt gonna change without some MAJOR structure changes. Entries are typed into the computer by ONE person, one at a time. Getting grids up before the first race can get hectic as it is right now. And if something goes haywire it just gets worse. So trying to grid everyone up by points isnt as simple as some think. What about combined region events? What about 'visitors' from other regions? Kinda tosses a monkey wrench into it doesnt it? And forget qualifying during practice. For one its a serious safety issue and how would you know if they qualified for a SS race on slicks or if the bike they used for 'qualifying' is even for the right class? We could do qualifying heats but what classes are gonna be cut? Would you be willing to pay $200+ per race to make up for the the lost classes? Hell they had to cut something just to do a 15 min qualifying session for EX ULGP on sundays. Practices got shortened. NO matter what they do, someones always gonna bitch.
As long as power:weight is held within a reasonable range for the machines in a given class, things are going to be somewhat fair (how about a Buell XB 1200R competing in Ultra LW??). That said, ever look at the chassis and suspension on a TZ250 compared to an SV?? Or even an F2 (TB legal)?
Point is, even when power:weight are kept pretty comparable, chassis setups vary a lot, with the SV mostly being at a pretty big disadvantage, at least in stock trim.
And then, as SD pointed out, there is the rider. For the most part, especially in the amateurs, and on the smaller tracks, bikes are not fast - riders are. My $0.02.
Quote from: tshort on October 26, 2006, 12:08:47 PM
As long as power:weight is held within a reasonable range for the machines in a given class, things are going to be somewhat fair (how about a Buell XB 1200R competing in Ultra LW??). That said, ever look at the chassis and suspension on a TZ250 compared to an SV?? Or even an F2 (TB legal)?
Point is, even when power:weight are kept pretty comparable, chassis setups vary a lot, with the SV mostly being at a pretty big disadvantage, at least in stock trim.
And then, as SD pointed out, there is the rider. For the most part, especially in the amateurs, and on the smaller tracks, bikes are not fast - riders are. My $0.02.
The Duc is too strong to be in supersport. In SB, TB, GP, and GTL I don't think it matters.
According to ducatti's web site the Duc weighs 415 wet and makes 85.5hp, So you probably have a bike weighing 390 in race trim
03 and up SV is roughly 375 wet and a good running SV will make 75hp
SS power to weight,
DUC 390/85.5= 4.561 pounds per HP
SV 370/75 = 4.93 pounds per HP
I am sure that the duc with a full SS treatment would probable be more like
390/89 = 4.38 pounds per HP
Tha is my .02
Duc
Quote from: imafrogg420 on October 26, 2006, 12:24:41 AM
I looked around for a bullitin about these two subjects and didnt see any so correct me if im repeating some one else but...
1. Whats up with the BMW's 1200 and Ducati's 992 being allowed in lightweight? They have these explanations for how things are supposed to equal out but as you can see from the 8 second lead that Ducati had on the TZ 250 which is a way faster bike than a SV how is that fair? I'm curious what other lightweight riders input is on this subject?
2. Also I'm new to the sport and CCS but if we all get together and sign a petition to change the rules for griding by some kind of point or qualify system would you guys be in support of that? Ideas on how to do it? We would also need some one who has the knowledge and experiance to help us to write the new rules covering all the details?
You Lightweight guys are a bunch of beyotches! :D You just need to ride the crap out of your SV or get a Beemer or a Duc! The Lightweight classes are motorcycles that do not fit into A. Ultra Light Weight B. Middleweight. What do you suggest they do? Make another separate Lightweight class for the 'weird' motorcycles? I hate to bring N8! INTO this conversation but he wrings that BMW's neck to get that sucker going. I guess thats the way youse gots to ride those SV's. :blahblah: :cheers:
Seen the latest sport rider? The BMW vs SV1000 shootout? Thats right BMW 1200 vs SV1000..not 650, the BMW made 112hp at the wheel and the sv1000 made 111hp at the rear wheel. The BMW was 5 lbs heavier and had a 2inch longer wheel base. None of us at Daytona had a shot in LWSS in competing for the # 1 spot. You cant make a legal SS SV650 do 2:02's. I have a built SS SV650 that puts out 78HP on race fuel.
Another thing, the BMW was classed in the SST class for Moto ST competeing against the SV1000.
I believe that the BMW should be limited to Thunderbike and Super Twins. Perhaps allow that sucker into LWSB and GT Lights under total SS rules, including DOT Tires. The Ducatis should also be in Thunderbike. Gixxerblade..people are not whining, they are simply trying to make the rules fair.
First let me say that I just dropped $5500 on my first SV.
That said, 8 years ago a bike came on the scene that turned LW class upside down. It make 20 more HP than the leading LW bikes at that time, the Honda Hawk and the FZR400. This bike came out and won everything, then the sanctioning body applied some special rules against this bike to somewhat level the playing field and eventually moved the Hawk and FZR400 to ULW. That bike was the SV, the point is that unlike most other forms of motor racing where there are specs for every vehicle to make it the same as every other vehicle, the motorcycle group just keeps getting faster and faster. The SV has had a pretty good run and now the options are getting faster. There will probably be some rule adjustments to the BMWs and Ducs but lets face it, unless you want to ride vintage, the class structure is a moving target, with every new model year the bike of choice will have to revisited. Bring on the BMWs and the Ducs, if they are really that great then in 5 years we'll see a class of them instead of the current class of SVs.
In the mean time I'm going to go out and continue to have the same fun I've been having racing on the track, even midpack I can find someone to race with and have a great time with.
Quote from: Woofentino Pugrossi on October 26, 2006, 01:59:37 AM
2. This has been hashed out year after year after year. Isnt gonna change without some MAJOR structure changes. Entries are typed into the computer by ONE person, one at a time. Getting grids up before the first race can get hectic as it is right now. And if something goes haywire it just gets worse. So trying to grid everyone up by points isnt as simple as some think. What about combined region events?
We gridded by points in the Southwest region (RoadRaceSW an affiliate) this year and it worked out great. Frist race was gridded by pre-entry, then all the other races were gridded by points.
oh crap, not this again...
Hawk and I are on the same page.
Why is it that SV = LW bike and anything that can beat an SV is not a LW bike?
For Ducatis the 749 and 1000 SS are very different - you just cant group them as the same. 749 is close to a MW (down a few HP), they did OK in FX but not great. The 1000 SS is 20-25 HP down from a MW bike even fully built so it doesn't fit there. Architecture and design is more like a vintage bike than a modern bike anyway (2 valve head, air cooled). With the air-cooled engine its just not possible to flow the amount of air and make the amount of power needed to keep up in the MW class anyway.
How do you explain the Ducati 999 winning against the Suzuki GSXR1000's at daytona if its all about the bike? There is no way the winning Ducati had more power than the 1000 I4s!
I'm not going to get into the argument on the 1200cc boxer - I'd think that the wide cases, shaft drive, long wheelbase and substantial weight of the BMW would negate any potential power advantage but then again I've never riden one.
While Moto-ST created 3 twins classes - the SV class stomped the "higher" spec class that included the air cooled Ducati 1000's. That tells me that the Ducati 1000's are still nowhere near as developed as the SVs so there shouldn't be so much whining from the SV camp.
More classes - what are you F'n kidding? Do you want to run 2 lap sprint races to make room for all the additional classes people want?
If the Ducati's and the BMW's are so dominant go out and buy one. I personally believe it is much more the rider than the bike, but, if it makes you feel better then blame the bike all you want...
Hey George..I said it and I'll say it again.
BMW1200 = 112HP rear wheel
SV1000= 111HP rear wheel
BMW is 5lbs heavier
BMW has a 2inch longer wheel base
Both bikes STOCK with no modifications
This all done on the same dyno by sport rider magazine in an article that is SV1000 vs BMW 1200 (the same BMW that is ridden in LWSS)
The damn bike is a Thunderbike and/or Super Twin
Its NOT LW guys whining.
Quote from: sv814 on October 26, 2006, 05:00:11 PM
Hey George..I said it and I'll say it again.
BMW1200 = 112HP rear wheel
SV1000= 111HP rear wheel
BMW is 5lbs heavier
BMW has a 2inch longer wheel base
Both bikes STOCK with no modifications
This all done on the same dyno by sport rider magazine in an article that is SV1000 vs BMW 1200 (the same BMW that is ridden in LWSS)
The damn bike is a Thunderbike and/or Super Twin
Its NOT LW guys whining.
I raced a BMW for a few weekends.( When I say race I mean from an actual grid against other bikes. It was not at a trackday.) By weight it is a HW machine. By all other counts it is a LW machine by the standards of CCS.
The R12S @ 112RWHp!? That's an interesting dyno. I'd like to see. If you can't beat that thing with an SV650 stick with NESBA another year or two to pick up some more speed. No offense.
Then pick up the latest sport rider. You cant argue numbers George and I think my finishes speak for themselves plus 5 WERA Championships over the last 2 years, 3rd at the ROC in LWSS. I run mid 21's at Summit, low 37's at VIR, 02's at Beaver Run and was doing 2:11's at Daytona for the first time. The BMW was doing 202's. I do this on a legal SS SV650 with 77.8 max rear wheel Horse Power on VP U4. I think I have the corner speed George. Rules are meant to change, thats why there is a rules committee. The BMW has developed into a HW Machine and there is no arguing numbers, on the same dyno, conducted by an independant person. Maybe with you riding the BMW I could beat the BMW, maybe you should have stuck with trackdays for another couple years to pick up some more speed. No offense
Quote from: dryheat on October 26, 2006, 04:39:29 PM
We gridded by points in the Southwest region (RoadRaceSW an affiliate) this year and it worked out great. Frist race was gridded by pre-entry, then all the other races were gridded by points.
How many regions race in your area? We have 2 sometimes 3 at the same event.
You could still grid by points. The #1's from each region up front, followed by 2, 3 etc...it works elsewhere and you dont have to worry about pre-register if for some reason you cant.
Quote from: sv814 on October 26, 2006, 06:27:34 PM
I run mid 21's at Summit, low 37's at VIR, 02's at Beaver Run and was doing 2:11's at Daytona for the first time. The BMW was doing 202's. I do this on a legal SS SV650 with 77.8 max rear wheel Horse Power on VP U4. I think I have the corner speed George.
No, seriously, on an old R1100GS I was beating SV650s, and being beaten by some too. 70rwhp from the old girl. So the 1200 has magically picked up 42 RW Hp from 100ccs? George is not the one debating you here on this topic-my name is Todd. Secondly, I'm not quite sure what you are getting at with comparing your runs at Daytona v. the BMW- isn't it the rider that makes the machine?
I understand your grievance with the NEW BMWs being in LW, but the LW description does not simply apply to displacement #s or the bikes' weights.
I see guys on SV 650s giving the Beemer guys fits on MW tracks...? Make an appeal to Kevin. He may see it your way. The R12S is only a threat with a small handful of riders at the helm. The other opinion to consider is that the R12S can only make a season worth of racing with a FULL backing for parts and service; the gearbox and driveshaft/rear-end is a serious weak spot. See what Kevin says...
Quote from: imafrogg420 on October 26, 2006, 12:24:41 AM
2. Also I'm new to the sport and CCS but if we all get together and sign a petition to change the rules for griding by some kind of point or qualify system would you guys be in support of that? Ideas on how to do it? We would also need some one who has the knowledge and experiance to help us to write the new rules covering all the details?
That opportunity closed in early October.
All you have to do is write it in a fashion that rules are written in the rule book.
But a petition to get a democratic change isn't necessarily going to get a rule changed or added. It needs some kind of support either for safety, finances, or attracting/maintaining entries.
Sean,
I was very careful in my words and I didn't disagree with you - I clearly said I wasn't going to get into the argument on the BMW issue. I can see the numbers ou posted and give them some consideration; however, I also think that there are issues beyond just the HP & weight.
Here are my thoughts on the BMW: Just how important is set-up on a racebike? 2 inches of Longer wheel base is going to be a lot harder to turn - think about how much thought and consideration effort goes into a couple of mm changes in fork height on your SV? That is going to have a lot less change than 2 additoinal inches of wheel base. How about the impact of the shaft drive - I think that creates a pretty substantial torque stearing issue that would probably create problems at race pace - also, changing gearing to optimize for the track has to be a bear... I would not want to race the BMW even if it proves to have the most potential on the grid. If one does show up next to me next year - I will enjoy racing against it - if they win, I will take my hat off and congratulate them for riding a good race.
I think part of the issue spuring all this debate is that the CCS LW class had gotten pretty diverse - LW class is really the only category that has any competition from "odd-ball" types of bikes. Rather than one single design being the clear norm (think 600 cc I4 in middleweight) this category effectively performance indexes in some older, legacy designs and now that people are taking these bikes to the track and sometimes winning the SV riders are complaining. If Suzuki updates the SV and it becomes the hands down winner again, can owners of Buels, Ducati's and BMW's complain the the SV shouldn't be in the LW class?
Evolution of bikes within the longstanding rules of the class is an interesting question. If the rules stay static but certain bikes get better is that fair? If the rules constantly change to ensure that a single manufacturer's product is always at an advantage how is this any more fair?
Just thinking out loud, but could it be that part of the "problem" actually is that Suzuki hasn't updated the SV to the extent that other manufactures have improved their product? The 1st and 2nd generation of the SV weren't all that much different (and the 2nd generation seems to have more crank issues as they went to a cheaper design for this part). In this same period of time Ducati, Buell and BMW have each substantially improved their product based on old designs and are still in line with the EXISTING rules for the class - nothing has changed in the rules to give them an advantage.
Think about it guys. Read the rule book - if you absolutely need to win and there is a better bike available, buy it and race it. If you have a bike and it is made substantially uncompentive by a new bike that is legal for the class rules - you have to make a decison. Racing isn't cheap in itself. Winning consistently is exponentially more expensive than just being on the grid. Figure out where you want to be and take the appropriate action.
I have said it before and I'll say it again - if you want a spec. SV class go to WERA. If you want a diverse LW grid with an interesting mix of bikes and manufacturers, race CCS LW class. After this I think I'm going to give up on logic here...
George
Quote from: George_Linhart on October 27, 2006, 03:17:19 PM
Here are my thoughts on the BMW: Just how important is set-up on a racebike? 2 inches of Longer wheel base is going to be a lot harder to turn - think about how much thought and consideration effort goes into a couple of mm changes in fork height on your SV? That is going to have a lot less change than 2 additoinal inches of wheel base. How about the impact of the shaft drive - I think that creates a pretty substantial torque stearing issue that would probably create problems at race pace - also, changing gearing to optimize for the track has to be a bear... I would not want to race the BMW even if it proves to have the most potential on the grid. If one does show up next to me next year - I will enjoy racing against it - if they win, I will take my hat off and congratulate them for riding a good race.
George
I think, probably, and if's tell me you've never witnessed one of the -new- BMW's for yourself. "If" one shows up in your race(at a fast track that rewards hp) with a rider of similar ability to you, sucks your paint off down the straight, you may change your opinion.
Brad said it. And Sport Rider liked the handeling of the BMW better as well.
You are right, I wasn't at Daytona but I have been told about the dominance of the BMW. I don't, however, think the BMW's would fair as well at BHF, Autobahn or Gingerman wher the MW region does most of its racing. Mid Atlantic region with VIR and Summit Point might be in a bit of a different position though.
I really don't think I'll change my mind. I really believe that diversity is a good thing and that the evolution of bike & rider just improves the sport. The Buells coming in with available contingency was great. Ducati improving the 900SS was awesome. BMW injecting new technology into the boxer line is seems to be causing an interesting stir. Time for Suzuki to step it up and improve their product and for Honda to resurect the Hawk! Maybe it would be interesting if Yamaha developed a FZR450 -550 (as a resurection fo the Fizzer 400) for the Lightweigh SB class...
As long as the overall rule structure doesn't change drastically I'm happy to see bikes change and evolve with winners rising to the top and losers falling to the back of the pack. I don't want to see the sport stagnate with one brand or one design for each field and no development.
George
I have a tendency to agree with George.
If the BMW is not a LW bike, is it then a middleweight bike?
The SV certainly wasn't a middleweight bike when it entered a class that had FZR400's, three valve per cylinder Honda Hawk's, and EX500's.
If Suzuki builds an SV800, will it be a middleweight bike or will it be a lightweight bike?
What BMW are we talking about??? Can't imagine one being competitive unless the rider is stellar!!
Do you guys read the Sport Rider. It was just compared to and beat the SV1000 with the exception it was 5 lbs heavier, 2 inch longer wheel base, it made 112hp and the sv1000 made 111hp. They even liked the handeling of the BMW better. How the hell can you argue with that? In the beginning the BMW might have been a LW, but it has evolved into a Heavy Weight Twin (Super Twin, Thunderbike)
Quote from: sv814 on October 27, 2006, 10:19:29 PM
Do you guys read the Sport Rider. It was just compared to and beat the SV1000 with the exception it was 5 lbs heavier, 2 inch longer wheel base, it made 112hp and the sv1000 made 111hp. They even liked the handeling of the BMW better. How the hell can you argue with that? In the beginning the BMW might have been a LW, but it has evolved into a Heavy Weight Twin (Super Twin, Thunderbike)
So if Sport Rider says so, its the gospel? Sorry Sport Rider is a hack of a magazine. I know someone else who thinks anything printed by SP, CW or Motorcyclist is absolute. Sad thing is he got pissed when his Gix1K made 10hp less than the hp printed by SR.
Quote from: sv814 on October 27, 2006, 10:19:29 PM
Do you guys read the Sport Rider. It was just compared to and beat the SV1000 with the exception it was 5 lbs heavier, 2 inch longer wheel base, it made 112hp and the sv1000 made 111hp. They even liked the handeling of the BMW better. How the hell can you argue with that? In the beginning the BMW might have been a LW, but it has evolved into a Heavy Weight Twin (Super Twin, Thunderbike)
Occasionaly I read Sport Rider. However, I have ridden and raced BMWs for over ten years, with over 100K total miles on BMWs, and here is a fact I am trying to share with you on BMW HP #s; BMW states their HP #s from the crank. In a shaft drive system %24-28 of that Hp will be lost between the crank and the rear wheel, whether it be a Guzzi, BMW, or a Kawi. Concours. If I remember correctly the R12S is stated from BMW to have 125HP. Get out your calculator and multiply 125 X .25= 31.25 125-31.25=93.75RWHp
Now, take a look at the basis of a magazine; a business that needs to make money with it's advertisers. BMW is throwing A LOT of money around to get a new gen. of riders. The SV and 12S may very well be 1 Hp apart, but it ain't the Hp anyway. It's the rider in charge of the Hp. Write your idea off to Kevin Elliot yet? The window for new regs. closed on Oct. 1st, I believe, but you could still try.
Quote from: SVR6#231 on October 27, 2006, 07:56:49 PM
What BMW are we talking about??? Can't imagine one being competitive unless the rider is stellar!!
http://www.natekern.com/media.htm
Nate's fast. It's a lightweight bike. The cost of admission on the BMW is high, so you're not going to see a whole lot around unless BMW starts offering a contingency program.
FACT-- Nate's STOCK, except for pipe and VP(this has been stressed many times by him and crew) made 101hp on a Factory Pro dyno at the Barber ASRA round. Dynojet dynos read about 15% higher..That means that SV814's 75hp SV is going to read about 63.5hp on the same dyno on the same day...The BMW stands at a 35-40hp advantage!!
Nate is a great rider no doubt, that has already been established many times over..My question is, why does everyone go out of there way to make it sound like that is the only reason he gets the results he does..
In another post, Nate has said he will probably race 600 and up classes next year. Maybe its because someone at CCS has determined the current machine is too far above the class structure performance wise?? Maybe its because someone at BMW has realized that beating up on $5000 POS SV650's isn't fitting for its premier $15k sport machine??
Quote from: Woofentino Pugrossi on October 27, 2006, 11:38:19 PM
So if Sport Rider says so, its the gospel? Sorry Sport Rider is a hack of a magazine. I know someone else who thinks anything printed by SP, CW or Motorcyclist is absolute. Sad thing is he got pissed when his Gix1K made 10hp less than the hp printed by SR.
They did a freakin comparison man. Same damn dyno. Its like talking to a wall. Come on out and race against one. Nate is a great rider, how is it then in practice Frank Shockley blew my doors off on the banking at Daytona on the BMW? Franks a good rider, but it doesnt take much to pin the throttle on the Daytona banking...fairly easy I gotta say. Must be a Horse Power Advantage, but according to you all its not. Geez man. The damn thing compared to a SV1000...ONE THOUSAND. What class does the 1000 race in? SUPERTWINS. I agree with Brads reply. And he is absolutely correct on the ASRA dyno vs a Dyno jet. My bike actually made 66.5 HP on the Dyno Jet dyno early in the year. I then tweaked it and got it up to 77.8 on the Dyno Jet. Dave...you REALLY think its a LW Bike when it compares to a SV1000? Go race the SS BMW on a SS SV650 at Daytona. I didnt see any SS SV's near a 202 lap time and I really dont think they could go that fast. I think the fastest SV 650 lap time I saw was from Kraget in MOTO ST at a low 209
I did 2:06's on a 1969 CB750 in 2002 at Daytona. Li'l 18 inch wheels and all.
600's are pretty close in lap times to 1000's, but the 600's have not been bumped to Heavyweight.
And Frank Shockley is a very, very good rider yet.
It doesn't take much to put the throttle, but it does take something to get it out of the chicane or the infield to really make the banking, and any straight, matter.
I'm not against diversity in the class. Comparing this to when the SV came along and whipped up on the FZR and Hawk is not the same. The SV is a current model bike with factory contingency, when the SV first came along the Hawks and FZRs were already out of production for over 10 years. Basically we are debating this here for out own satisfaction as CCS is going to what they think will bring them the most money in entries bottom line. I think it would be fair to limit the lightweight classes to 1100cc air cooled twins and the 1200cc bikes could still run in supertwins and thunderbike. A 30+ horsepower advantage is just too much no matter how you slice it.
When will the rules be posted so we know what bikes will be legal for what classes next year?
To me, a big part of what makes running LW classes make sense is cost. It SHOULD cost less to run LW than MW, which should cost less than HW, etc.
I like seeing lots of different bike out there too, but if we get to the point where one needs to buy a $10 to $12k or more bike (Buell, Ducati, BMW, etc) and throw another 5k into prepping it, then why race LW when MW would potentially cost less?
CCS needs a (relatively) low cost starter class for people to cut their teeth in. In this regard, perhaps a spec class would be the way to go.
Tires. With the best part of the tire lasting 8 to 12 laps...Middlewight costs go up quick. Ride a 1000 four and they go up more.
As for cost...
Racing will always get more expensive. GSXR750's were $4200 retail in 1987.
An actual spec class...
If you have some sponsorship, often it doesn't apply in a spec class; you have to buy and use the product that is specified rather than using something you recognize and can get a good deal on.
Quote from: eh427 on October 29, 2006, 09:54:19 AM
When will the rules be posted so we know what bikes will be legal for what classes next year?
Kind of depends on what needs to be talked about. If things go well, we might see them at the end to the middle of November.
Sean,
Even if we take what Sports Rider says for gospel, why use the SV1000 as a yardstick of a HW twin? Compared against a 999 or an RC51 neither the SV1000 nor the BMW look like a HW Twin to me. The SV1000 was never built as a race track weapon anyway stock its know to handle like a turd (so anybody reporting that doesnt really surprise me) and the engine wasn't tuned for the power that a 1000 cc Liquid cooled V-twin is capable of producing.
I know you like the WERA class structure with their spec. SV class. I also respect that you are one hell of a rider. However, if you like WERA class sturcture so much, plase race with them to your heart's content and fully enjoy their rules when you are racing with them. However, respect that CCS has a different rule structure (I would argue its not better, not worse, just different). The BMW has evolved significantly and remains legal under the existing CCS rules and your beloved Suzuki has been left to languish with no really significant upgrades since its introduction. Arguing that it is a current "class" machine paying contingency really ignores that it still is an un-improved design with the factory not giving it much attention because they have not had to give it any attention. Maybe the SV's getting spanked will encurage Suzuki to do something with their LW offering (like they were forced to with the GSXR when Yamaha and Honda stepped up their MW offerings)?
Frankly, if you want to go to Daytona under CCS rules and win perhaps you might just seriously need to consider riding something else. This said, don't worry, I don't see the BMW giving your SV any challenge at tracks like Summit Shenandoah course. Please, open your mind to the concept to the total package and all the different tracks you will see over the year rather than just what has an advantage at Daytona...
In the end, I still don't see why is it fair to alter the rule structure to give your "old" bike an advantage over a newer bike that fits within the existing rule structure? Convince me with some argument of logic other than 1) becasue sport rider says so; and, 2) because you got beat at Daytona and don't like it.
George
Quote from: George_Linhart on October 29, 2006, 01:59:19 PM
In the end, I still don't see why is it fair to alter the rule structure to give your "old" bike an advantage over a newer bike that fits within the existing rule structure? Convince me with some argument of logic other than 1) becasue sport rider says so; and, 2) because you got beat at Daytona and don't like it.
George
Perfectly illustrated.
Quote from: George_Linhart on October 29, 2006, 01:59:19 PM
Convince me with some argument of logic other than 1) becasue sport rider says so; and, 2) because you got beat at Daytona and don't like it.
George
Sometimes a bike comes along that outclasses the current rules structure. Do you think the Triumph 675 should be a lightweight bike. Well the old rules allowed it until Triumph produced it and the rules were changed to keep the class structure reasonable. Now BMW has done the same with the 1200. I don't think Sean wants the rules changed because he got beat at Daytona. We have seen how fast that BMW 1200 is all year in the MidAtlantic region. The only track I could stay close to it was Shenandoah a very tight track and it was still power wheelying out of every corner, does your DUC or an SV do that? This is my first year racing lightweight bikes, coming from the bigger stuff I was amazed at how much difference a little extra HP makes on smaller bikes, but add 30 hp and it is no longer a lightweight. Why should the BMW be removed from Lightweight? The same reason the Triumph 675 was removed.
I think the 675 is a bit different. It never raced as a lightweight.
In 1989, we saw how fast the FZR600 was, but it wasn't bumped to a heavyweight class because it so outclassed every other bike out there...600 Katana's, 600 Hurricanes, 600 Ninja's. It kept up with GSXR750's very well.
FZR400's were additionally very impressive when they were brought in finally to the US in 1988. EX500's and RZ350's struggled.
Honda Hawks vs SV650s? Should the SV650 been put into a class with Middleweights?
My mistake the Triumph was removed from Thunderbike not lightweight. The rules for lightweight were changed in 2005 for air cooled twins raising the limit from 1000cc to 1210cc, previously only pushrod air cooled twins were allowed 1200cc. At the time there were no bikes that large. I don't think the 89 FZR 600 had 35 more horsepower than the current class standard the Hurricane at the time. How many people on here commenting have actually raced against the 1200 BMW with a decent rider on board. I have. If Ducati bumps their air cooled twins to 1100-1200 as rumored, they are going to dominate if they have a contingency program.
Quote from: George_Linhart on October 29, 2006, 01:59:19 PM
Sean,
Even if we take what Sports Rider says for gospel, why use the SV1000 as a yardstick of a HW twin? Compared against a 999 or an RC51 neither the SV1000 nor the BMW look like a HW Twin to me. The SV1000 was never built as a race track weapon anyway stock its know to handle like a turd (so anybody reporting that doesnt really surprise me) and the engine wasn't tuned for the power that a 1000 cc Liquid cooled V-twin is capable of producing.
I know you like the WERA class structure with their spec. SV class. I also respect that you are one hell of a rider. However, if you like WERA class sturcture so much, plase race with them to your heart's content and fully enjoy their rules when you are racing with them. However, respect that CCS has a different rule structure (I would argue its not better, not worse, just different). The BMW has evolved significantly and remains legal under the existing CCS rules and your beloved Suzuki has been left to languish with no really significant upgrades since its introduction. Arguing that it is a current "class" machine paying contingency really ignores that it still is an un-improved design with the factory not giving it much attention because they have not had to give it any attention. Maybe the SV's getting spanked will encurage Suzuki to do something with their LW offering (like they were forced to with the GSXR when Yamaha and Honda stepped up their MW offerings)?
Frankly, if you want to go to Daytona under CCS rules and win perhaps you might just seriously need to consider riding something else. This said, don't worry, I don't see the BMW giving your SV any challenge at tracks like Summit Shenandoah course. Please, open your mind to the concept to the total package and all the different tracks you will see over the year rather than just what has an advantage at Daytona...
In the end, I still don't see why is it fair to alter the rule structure to give your "old" bike an advantage over a newer bike that fits within the existing rule structure? Convince me with some argument of logic other than 1) becasue sport rider says so; and, 2) because you got beat at Daytona and don't like it.
George
You are right George. I am so upset that I got beat at Daytona..whatever man. I went down there KNOWING that the best I could do was 2nd, unless Nate had a mechanical. We are not looking at changing rules because I am upset. Read what Arnie stated, the BMW was power wheelieing out of the turns at Summit Shanendoah. BMW has outclassed the LW bike and now made their machine into somthing more, a class up perhaps. There is no changing your mind man. I'd like to see your reaction and Dave's reaction if you had raced against this thing ALL year in the mid atlantic. And obviously you HAVE NOT seen the bike in action by your comments above. You have not witnessed it like we have. And a stock SV1000 can be quite effective against a stock RC51. I think the Vesrah SV's are in the range of 140hp or so. But the SV1000 is not a supertwin? And its not because SPORT RIDER "says so" They did a damn comparision between two bikes, same dyno, weighed the bikes and listed the specs. The06SV1000 is 111bhp and 417lbs, the RC is 122bhp and 439lbs. So I will continue to ride my "old" bike next year in CCS and the WERA "Spec SV class". By the way, the only spec SV class is at the Suzuki Cup. Oh, and I just sold a 20003 SS SV1000 that made 118hp and handled great. But I wouldnt have thought about racing that in LW, because I KNOW the power difference between that and a SS SV650 and it just wouldnt be fair. How do I know all these things, guess it comes from having to race a Spec SV class and also from riding both the "non HW SV1000" and the "old" SV650. If your ever around, introduce yourself and we'll have a beer!!
I was tasked with racing a CB400F against vintage Yamaha GP bikes.
35HP difference? No, but it was 15 to 25...the CB400F I was on had 51HP. However, to make it even harder, the CB400F weighed more.
So, yes, I have been in the situation.
FZR having 35HP more than the other bikes? No, it was probably around 15 easy, but the package was different too.
So, the real question is: Did you guys develop and send in a proposal to CCS?
We sure did. Awhile back. Guess we will wait and see what happens.
Sean/Arnie,
No issues guys- you are each better riders than me and I respect your right to hold the opinion you do. However, I am enjoying getting you guys all wound up :biggrin:.
In all seriousness, I am just trying to flush out the debate and force a serious defense of the self serving "pro-SV" position - its easy to say its unfair, its more difficult to defend the position clearly in a non-emotional manner. On one basis your point is very valid - the new BMW is in an entirely different world of power output vs. every other LW legal SS bike on the grid. I will even concede that there "might" be an issue with the 4 valve heads with unlimited displacement on a V-twin in LW (can we perhaps least agree that 2 valve air cooled with unlimited displacement is cool and that maybe - just maybe - some refinement of the rules should be considered for 4 valve designs). This said, I'm just not entirely convinced that this is all that much different from the class shake up that was caused by the SV with its 4 valve liquid cooled design leapfrogging the class on rules designed around the Honda Hawk with 3 valve heads (Arnies point on the rule change last year is the one area that provides some room for the argument).
Two points on the difference in our opinions:
First, I'm not used to winning races and I just dont take winning so seriously (focusing on winning makes taking anything but first place so much less fun). Its a pure hobby to me which I just do for fun - I want to talk some trash in the pits and then go out on the track and do as well as I can; but, I don't get upset placing back in 5th, 8th or even 26th as long as I have have a safe race and have somebody (anybody) to dice with when the green flag flies.
Second, I really don't expect to see anyone running the BMW in the Mid-West region, and even if they did, the tracks here just won't give it much (if any) advantage. Our class nemisis is a certain older (dare I say diminutive) but incredibly fast rider of a very slick SV 650 (cough - key - cough). I don't see this dynamic of the Mid West LW class changing anytime soon.
Actually, we have met and ridden together at a few tracks before - I lived in NJ for for a while and I did 2 season with NESBA and 1 racing with CCS in the Mid-Atlantic region. I am hoping to be able to make it back to VIR at some point if my schedule allows (I'll pass on riding slippery point or the new Shennendoa course of cement walls). If I make it to the area I'm pretty sure I won't be able to keep up with either of you but would love to join you on the grid. How about this - if you guys have a chance - come out to Road America, if you have never been there you have no idea what you are missing (but - those damn BMW's will fly by all of us on the long straights of Elkhart, WI). I would love to take you up on the offer of having a beer and furthering the debate if either of the above can happen. Maybe we should stick to less controversial subjects like politics, religion, motor oil or which racers are faster CCS vs WERA. On second thought, perhaps thats a bad idea - maybe we should just agree that we like pie!
Peace,
George
Now we are talking. It's all a hobby to me also, if it wasnt, I would be racing a pro series I guess. I do like to win. My goal is always a top 3. Me and Arnie have chased the BMW all year. I was able to beat it twice, once when Nate had a mechanical and tossed it in T-5 at Summit and once at VIR when he didnt report to tech..(I was good with that, that was $500 from Suzuki :) Nate is a great guy, I have talked to him several times, always gives me the thumbs up or shakes my hand before and after a race. I think we just get really frustrated chasing a machine that is really totally out of its class. We might be out at Road America, Arnie and I might run the Team Challenge series in 2007. As for the WERA vs. CCS. There is a mix, no organization is faster than the other, many riders do both. I race whatever organization just because I love the sport. You can become fast, you have to become determined, yet have fun. If you loose the fun, then it aint worth it.
Doesn't Ed have the Thunderbike lap record at Road America? In a race he won in front of Estok, Bilansky and Kern
I would guess RA could be considered a HP track :biggrin:
Sorry, just stirring the pot, this has nothing to do with me...
Quote from: JBraun on November 07, 2006, 07:33:34 PM
Doesn't Ed have the Thunderbike lap record at Road America? In a race he won in front of Estok, Bilansky and Kern
I would guess RA could be considered a HP track :biggrin:
Sorry, just stirring the pot, this has nothing to do with me...
Ed has the ASRA thunderbike track record at RA. ASRA thunderbike is a hp to weight controlled class and has no bearing on the CCS classes
Guy - not exactly true.
I believe the BMW's and Buels run the same configuration in all the LW classes as well as Thunderbike while Ed had to add weight in order to be legal for the ASRA Thunderbike class otherwise he would be over the power/weight ratio allowance. Given this, it is a relatively good yardstick that even at a HP track the SV is not totally disadvantaged. Lets not even get into the new Ed Key titanium wonder weapon. Are we going to be seeing the titanium marvel on the Mid West grids for GT Lights and LWGP next year? What the heck does that thing weigh - 250 lbs?
George
Quote from: George_Linhart on November 08, 2006, 05:56:53 PM
Guy - not exactly true.
I believe the BMW's and Buels run the same configuration in all the LW classes as well as Thunderbike while Ed had to add weight in order to be legal for the ASRA Thunderbike class otherwise he would be over the power/weight ratio allowance. Given this, it is a relatively good yardstick that even at a HP track the SV is not totally disadvantaged. Lets not even get into the new Ed Key titanium wonder weapon. Are we going to be seeing the titanium marvel on the Mid West grids for GT Lights and LWGP next year? What the heck does that thing weigh - 250 lbs?
George
Your right it does have some bearing. Don't get all fired up George, I was just trying to state the facts. I do not see the SV at any disadvantage in SB trim. Your assumptioin is incorrect about the ASRA Tbike trim. I have first hand information that some of the Buels do change their mapping on thier bikes, others have an A and B bikes that are up to 12hp different from one another. I think this thread need foucuss on SS or SB, it seems to be a mix. You are right it is a yard stick, I think the CCS races are a better one for the bikes, ASRA is a better yardstick for rider's ability.
Quote from: George_Linhart on November 08, 2006, 05:56:53 PM
I believe the BMW's and Buells run the same configuration in all the LW classes as well as Thunderbike.
Ah, but here's the rub. Most of the top running Buells in ASRA Thunderbike are in fact not LW class legal. Why? Most are larger than 1200cc in displacement, which is allowed in ASRA and CCS Thunderbike (and SuperTwins), but not in any LW class.
Ed's bike, which is legal for CCS LW SB, LW GP, GT Lights, Thunderbike and SuperTwins has to add weight in ASRA trim to make the power-to-weight restrictions. Therefore, Ed's bike is actually more potent in CCS LW-legal tune, where the top ASRA Buells cannot compete.
Still think the SVs are at a disadvantage? Clearly not in the Midwest region, at least not in the hands of an excellent veteran rider with decades of tuning and development knowledge...
I have to agree with those who feel the BMW should be re-indexed out of LtwSS. I find those, like Super-D who feel that the rules should not be modified to preserve SV competiveness to have missed the point. The rules should be changed if it will benefit the sport. Unfortunately, there are many factors to consider. Regarding parity, (forget Sport-Rider if you don't trust it,) the Beemer made about 112 on the MOTO-ST official dyno. Anybody who has been re-passed at Daytona or Road America by a rider who rides the the infield poorly can attest to this type of disparity. Given that the CCS National championships are decided at Daytona, I feel the rules should provide more reasonable parity. To those who say," just buy the Beemer," I don't think that's a good idea for several reasons. First, Suzuki has done a lot more for racing than BMW, who despite running a full-page color ad celebrating the MOTO-ST victory, pays no contingency. The SV is good for the sport because it is relatively cheap, pays contingency, has developed a solid aftermarket armoury, etc. . Of course I would like to see Suzuki make more improvements with the bike than they have, but this is also a blessing for racing.( But it should not go un-noticed that Kawasaki released the their new 650 in response to the success of the SV.) . The rapid pace of developement with 600's and 1000's makes their respective classes much more expensive in which to remain competitive. My larger point is that the rules should be changed if it is good for the sport all- things- considered. It is good for the sport that the CCS class structure is written in a way that lets one rider with one bike ride in many different classes albeit at different levels of competiveness. By the way, back in '86 I raced a 500 interceptor against the first 600's. Back then we were all fantasizing about a future where these Lightweight bikes could make 100 horses and handle like a dream. Better watch out for what you wish for 'cause here it is. Now if Super-Dave's advice against changing the rules had been followed a bit longer than he has been racing, 600's would be classified as lightweight bikes. That's silly. I can appreciate that the Beemer doesn't fall easily in the distinctions - Lightweight/Middleweight etc.. Perhaps it should be allowed in Thunderbike. I just do not think it is good for the sport to allow it in LtwSS. By the way I'm coming back racing in '07 with my SV and probably a Ducati SS1000. I want the Duc for the GST class in MOTO-ST. I'm very curious about how the Duc will compare to the SV. After all, Brian Lacey, a very fine lightweight racer refers to his big air-cooled Duc as a "cheater-bike," not because his bike is not legal, but rather because it IS.
CCS DID change the rules for 2007 to eliminate the new BMW 1200 from LWSS by limiting 4 valve air cooled motors to 1100cc.
Thanks Arnie. By the way I checked my download of post-race dyno/weight checks for MOTO-ST at Daytona. The BMW was 107.85 HP/417 lbs.; EMGO's SV1000 109.13 HP/425 lbs.. The top SV650 was 72.15 HP/397lbs. And the top Duc in the middle class was 85.85 HP/ 406 lbs.. I have changed my opinion. At 108 rear wheel horsepower it seems clear that the BWM1200 should clearly be classified as a middleweight bike. And BMW should be encouraged to develope it some more by shedding some weight and quickening its handling. At 108 HP they neither need nor deserve such a severe handicap advantage offered for older engine technology. They could do it if they wanted. Perhaps they just don't want to have to compete with the Japanese in the international middleweight arms race!
Should SV1000's be middleweight bikes?
No, the SV1000 and the BMW should be Supertwins. Cmon Dave, the BMW is not a LW and the SV1000 is not a Middle Weight. They are both TWINS with HP that is well above the LW TWINS which should classify them both in Supertwins
It's a valid question. With power as it is...
The SV1000 is a heavyweight bike that is also eligible for Supertwins.
CCS has no lightweight twins...that went away along time ago.
Thunderbike is something really different though. The F2 is a good example. There were plenty of 105 to 108 HP F2's in endurance racing in mild superbike formats in the early 90's...yet some say that the F2 is a lightweight bike.
MotoST doesn't classify the BMW as a lightweight.
If we want to talk ASRA, do you want the BMW to have a different power to weight ratio like the F2?
Quote from: p3afoster61 on November 27, 2006, 09:16:21 PM
I have to agree with those who feel the BMW should be re-indexed out of LtwSS. I find those, like Super-D who feel that the rules should not be modified to preserve SV competiveness to have missed the point. The rules should be changed if it will benefit the sport....
I feel the rules should provide more reasonable parity. To those who say," just buy the Beemer," I don't think that's a good idea for several reasons. First, Suzuki has done a lot more for racing than BMW, who despite running a full-page color ad celebrating the MOTO-ST victory, pays no contingency. The SV is good for the sport because it is relatively cheap, pays contingency, has developed a solid aftermarket armoury, etc. . Of course I would like to see Suzuki make more improvements with the bike than they have, but this is also a blessing for racing...
My larger point is that the rules should be changed if it is good for the sport all- things- considered. It is good for the sport that the CCS class structure is written in a way that lets one rider with one bike ride in many different classes albeit at different levels of competiveness.
By the way, back in '86 I raced a 500 interceptor against the first 600's. Back then we were all fantasizing about a future where these Lightweight bikes could make 100 horses and handle like a dream. Better watch out for what you wish for 'cause here it is. Now if Super-Dave's advice against changing the rules had been followed a bit longer than he has been racing, 600's would be classified as lightweight bikes. That's silly.
Ok, now "the 600's" came out before 1986. The FJ600 was available prior to that, and it was a middleweight bike. The 500 interceptor was liquid cooled, so it was a middleweight bike too. 600 Ninjas were liquid cooled. That started some of the changes that lead to where things are now. The only 600's that I know of that were classified as lightweight, as you ascribe to what you assume to be my philosophy, were, and still are, single cylinder machines.
The rules were NOT changed to preserve the competitiveness of the 500 Interceptor inspite of Honda's stature in the motorcycling community and it's contingency.
When liquid cooled 600 fours with four valves per cylinder were introduced, the class structure wasn't bumped to accomodate the FZ600.
When the NT650 Hawk was introduced with three valves per cylinder, it wasn't bumped up.
I believe the availability of bikes preserved the sport.
Invariably, the transformation of technology and its availability will transform the classes.
If the classes set up to "preserve conpetitiveness", your VF500 would still be in middleweight and everything else would have been bumped up to unlimited, but I guess heavyweight might have the 600 Hurricane and the 600 Katana. :):
Dave, I don't think that they should have protected the VF500F. That's not my point. I was just illustrating that I've been on the disadvantaged side of the equation. My main point is that the rules should be adjusted according to whats best for the sport, and that there are a lot of factors to consider, such as parity, encouraging manufacturers to improve, aftermarket availability, cost, and contingency support just to name a few.
And by the way, why not let SV1000 run in MWSS? Perhaps classes should simply be Horsepower/weight for SS Superbike, etc.
Quote from: p3afoster61 on November 29, 2006, 07:33:12 PMMy main point is that the rules should be adjusted according to whats best for the sport, and that there are a lot of factors to consider, such as parity, encouraging manufacturers to improve, aftermarket availability, cost, and contingency support just to name a few.
Ok, if you did that, how could you execute it at the club level.
As it is, the AMA can't to that at it's level.
In October of 2005, Graves Yamaha had their new 2006 model year R6 that they began testing with their riders. In January of 2006, those same models began showing up in dealers. My dealer didn't get their first one, which I got, until March.
Do you restrict riders from running a bike?
Parity...this is club racing. The difference in riders is great. And a whole lot never, ever figure out anything about how to make a bike handle. They might know how to buy a Power Commander, but that doesn't produce parity.
Quote from: p3afoster61 on November 29, 2006, 07:37:13 PM
And by the way, why not let SV1000 run in MWSS? Perhaps classes should simply be Horsepower/weight for SS Superbike, etc.
Well, based on the formula for superbike, 1000cc twin...you can make quite a bit of power from some big V-twins.
Horsepower/weight...who's gonna pay for the dyno? How would you get 150 bikes through a dyno before and after events in a day?
Personally, I think, in general, the classes work...other than there are too many. Yeah, occasionally, a manufacturer will build something that's a ringer. The FZR600 was clearly faster than any other 600 in 1989, but it's clearly a middleweight bike. It fit the mold.
David, there should be a Middleweight twins class.
Let the BMW, SV1000 & the dangerous 749 in there. God knows the 749 is too fast for Thunderbike, but the lighter and more powerful Buell XB-R's are legal? Why? :jerkoff:
No way, Tom.
:lmao:
Too many classes as it is.
.
Quote from: Ducati23 on November 29, 2006, 08:00:39 PM
David, there should be a Middleweight twins class.
Let the BMW, SV1000 & the dangerous 749 in there. God knows the 749 is too fast for Thunderbike, but the lighter and more powerful Buell XB-R's are legal? Why? :jerkoff:
I don't think a Buell XB 12r, is more powerfull and lighter than a Duc 749 in stock trim. And if you are referring to the XB rr it has been removed from Thunderbike for 07. I agree with Dave, too many classes already.
Quote from: p3afoster61 on November 28, 2006, 12:03:11 PM
Thanks Arnie. By the way I checked my download of post-race dyno/weight checks for MOTO-ST at Daytona. The BMW was 107.85 HP/417 lbs.; EMGO's SV1000 109.13 HP/425 lbs.. The top SV650 was 72.15 HP/397lbs. And the top Duc in the middle class was 85.85 HP/ 406 lbs..
I won't weigh in on what this means for the BMW, ... but the air cooled 2-valve Duc is definitely a LW bike - 85.85 HP/ 406 lbs. Wait until you guys see mine next year ....
I will say that the it must be nice riding easy to turn telepathic like racebikes... I know I have been there. I chose the BMW for the challenge. I will never be an AMA champion, dont have the budget to run as a privateer, but I will say that running the Beemer in any class in CCS is a challenge if you want to run up front.
The weight is not the issue on the BMW. Its the wheelbase. Regardless how much success or eposure I have brought the bike BMW does not make changes overnight and wont on my account. at 58.5 inches, you try ridng one fast enough to finish up front. Easy bike to ride, that is why they are GREAT on the street, but hard to go VERY fast on.
LWSS no, but a real rider on an SV (Dave Yaakov) would check out on all of us, well until I took the Freddie Spencer 3 day Pro school...lol
I highly recommend FSRS. The best money I ever spent on 2 wheels. Changed my whole comprehension on racing. WIth Nick Ienatch and Jeff Haney, your not behind some local yokle fast guy that cannot articulate and that you are only a smidge off anyways any race weekend, like other schools instructors.
The way the crank is in the BMW (ride one if you dont beleive, any dealr has one as a demo) right hand turns are ok the bike torque steers to the right when on the gas. Left hand turns the bike wnats to stand up and go right but you are trying ot power out and go left under load... ride it, you will see. If you want to go fast on it you have to have good habits. Forces you to become a better rider if you wnat to even glimpse the lead pack.
Nobody bitched when I ran the K1200R Power Cup bike. Won two Unlimited Superbike races on it at 63 inch wheelbase and a duo lever front suspension that DOES NOT ALLOW ANY WHEELBASE SHORTENING what so ever. Literally, the inch longer than a Hyabusa K1200R's contact patches never even get a mm closer under braking, try turning one of those. Its not becasue of a 200cc advantage and a naked bike with drag bars... is it?!
BMW just builds the text book definition of "dont judge a book by its cover". There is a really trick Boxer and 3 cyl. coming... Hopefully then I will have a shot at the AMA.
N8!
Ive been on track w/N8 albiet in Amateur group in 2x wavers - some of the body contortion positions ive seen him in like the spine parrallel to the ground hanging 10- wow! looks a lil freaky but he sure does what he deems necessary to get the BMW's around us! Not just anybody can circulate the track like that- he's the current Reg Pridmore in my book-John in NJ