The class rules are the same for this bike in supersport and superbike.IT cant be both can it?
yeah, it can run it ss and sb just like the inline 4's.....just has to have dot's for ss. ( and follow the other ss rules)
Supersport rule : Twin cylinder, liquid cooled up to 850cc
Superbike rule: Twin cylinder,4 valve per cylinder up to 850cc
The 848 is a twin cylinder,4 valve,liquid cooled bike, how can the max cc be the same in both classes? The 1098 is not legal for heavyweight supersport but is for heavyweight superbike. So i would think the 848 is not legal for middleweight supersport. MY superbike R6
doesnt put out 134hp with 70lbs torque but thats the stats for a 848 stock.Could someone explain how the same cc for superbike is th same for supersport, thanks.
Why wouldn't the displacement be the same in both classes? Been a long time since a simple overbore was the norm for Superbikes.
Quote from: Graham on February 21, 2009, 07:51:57 PM
Supersport rule : Twin cylinder, liquid cooled up to 850cc
Superbike rule: Twin cylinder,4 valve per cylinder up to 850cc
The 848 is a twin cylinder,4 valve,liquid cooled bike, how can the max cc be the same in both classes? The 1098 is not legal for heavyweight supersport but is for heavyweight superbike. So i would think the 848 is not legal for middleweight supersport. MY superbike R6
doesnt put out 134hp with 70lbs torque but thats the stats for a 848 stock.Could someone explain how the same cc for superbike is th same for supersport, thanks.
since when do OEM claimed hp numbers equal real world rear wheel numbers? And you should have built it better if your "superbike" doesnt make 130 hp. The majority of the good SS bikes I have seen run on the dyno are knocking on the 130 door. Im so tired of all the complaining about the ducatis. If they are so freaking fast, go buy one! How many national championships did they win in the 600 and 1000 classes last year?
wasnt complaining, just asked the question about the same cc for supersport and superbike,still looking for that answer?IF anything i should of asked why the 848 coudnt increase its cc for super bike like the 1098 can for superbike.The r6 coudnt ever get 70lbs of torque,pretty important on the race track.I can get the 135hp just not that torque number.So relax, if you dont have the answer am looking for dont post if it upsets you,its just a question.
Quote from: Graham on February 21, 2009, 10:03:23 PM
wasnt complaining, just asked the question about the same cc for supersport and superbike,still looking for that answer?IF anything i should of asked why the 848 coudnt increase its cc for super bike like the 1098 can for superbike.The r6 coudnt ever get 70lbs of torque,pretty important on the race track.I can get the 135hp just not that torque number.So relax, if you dont have the answer am looking for dont post if it upsets you,its just a question.
Fair enough, ill calm down. :biggrin: My guess is that the wording in the rule book is specifically for the 848. Not just for any twin under 850 or whatever. They know the 848 is already on the border of outclassing some of the bikes, and they know if they gave it 925 cc or something it would start getting a little silly if the right people with big checkbooks decided to go racing. So they most likely decided to keep the controversy down just let the thing in both classes with stock displacement.
Is it displacement that makes a motor Superbike? I would venture to say no but more the change to higher compression pistons even at the same displacement as stock.
My Ducati 800ss produces 86 rwhp with some 60 ft/lbs of torque. It still won't keep up with an R6.
I have also found that my Ducati and my FZR600 is a pretty equal match. Ducati at 805cc and high compression pistons as compared to the FZR with 630cc and high compression pistons. Go figure.
Mark
I just wanted to no why the 848 has the same cc for supersport and superbike? The 1098 can increase its cc for heavywieght superbike but the 1098 is not legal for heavywieght supersport.Both of these bikes are similar to each other.Not saying cc is what makes a superbike.Remember iam not complaning, I just found this to be odd.Dont answer this with a another question, I am not looking to debate this its simple question.99% of the time i get beat by another rider not always the bike, I have lots of room for improvement, i just found the above question to be a little odd.Nobody else thinks so?
Quote from: benprobst on February 21, 2009, 08:45:29 PM
The majority of the good SS bikes I have seen run on the dyno are knocking on the 130 door.
I always hear these numbers thrown around. At RA in 07 (before the grid fiasco that overheated and killed my motor) my zx6 was making 117hp on a dynojet. Compared to other 600s, my bike was so fast I felt like I was cheating. Granted, it was not tuned for peak power, and was big from 9k to redline.
I heard a lot of talk about Brian Hall's motors that season too. Speculation was that his stuff was making well over 130. But I saw his bikes on the dyno, and they were the same as mine.
Either the dyno I use is really consevative, or others are optimistic, or maybe things like this just get exagerated...
Graham - no it is not odd. It all depends on how much of a displacement advantage the sanctioning body feels is right for that type of bike. Personally I agree with the CCS rule as I think the amount of stuff you can do to an 848 under Superbike rules will make it faster than the same modifications to a 600 - hence the 600's getting a bit more of a displacement advantage in SB vs SS.
Thanks mongo for clearing that up.I heard the 848 was going to be a strong bike and if it starts dominating 600ss, i would think ccs would look in to it. What about the 1098? Its not legal for supersport but is for superbike. They did give the inline four an extra 45cc this year and all other engines\configurations are unlimited displacement besides the 1098 has a cap at 1150cc for superbike.Why give the 1098 extra cc for superbike?The 1098 only really has one competitor the suzuki 750.Does the sanctioning body really think 825 cc suzuki could beat a 1098 superbike to the point the 1098 needed in extra 52 cc? And they do not state anything about the specific 1098... meaning 1098,1098s,or the 1098R.WE all no the 1098 R is about 10lbs lighter, 10 more hp and about 10lb of torque more than the 1098 or 1098s model stock.I would bet on any 1098 would tear up the suzuki.Thanks for your help mongo for answering my original question,the rest of this really has no point, but your thoughts are welcomed,lol.
Graham, my guess is the 848's 135hp is at the crank, not the wheel. Yamaha's 08 R6 is listed at 130hp at the crank.
Just a thought, sence ccs has pissed off alot of people in the middle weight class, heavyweight class, and the 1000s class with the ducati 1098r lets let the 748 and the 749 ducati run in lightweight that way everyone is mad,lol.
I can't imagine anyone actually fast on a 600 having issues with an 848. Same thing for a 1098 against a 1000cc four.
Quote from: JBraun on February 22, 2009, 01:53:55 PM
I always hear these numbers thrown around. At RA in 07 (before the grid fiasco that overheated and killed my motor) my zx6 was making 117hp on a dynojet. Compared to other 600s, my bike was so fast I felt like I was cheating. Granted, it was not tuned for peak power, and was big from 9k to redline.
I heard a lot of talk about Brian Hall's motors that season too. Speculation was that his stuff was making well over 130. But I saw his bikes on the dyno, and they were the same as mine.
Either the dyno I use is really consevative, or others are optimistic, or maybe things like this just get exagerated...
+1. My 2mm over sb r6 was never near 130 and it was sick fast.
A lot of the guys asking questions or whining about DUcs are because of some very well prepped Ducati's down here in CCS FL. I have to give to Ducati Miami and Motocourse.....they are building some really fast bikes and have fast riders on them. These Ducs are heads and shoulders above the Ducs Ive raced against in Wera or Northern CCS regions. Very fast, good looking bikes........just proffesional stuff. Impressive
Yup - its more the rider than the bike. Put a very good rider on a very well prepared bike of any make and he will make the majority of club level competition look like they are standing still.
Some of us don't have time to ride and race nearly as much as others and some of us also don't have the outright tallent. It doesn't matter how much money I every throw at my bike, I will never be able to consistently race with the really fast guys. Some people just don't have the talent but always want to blame it on the bike...
I just like to make 3-5 race weekends a season and meet up with old friends and do my best to keep up the pace and ride safely. Anytime I finish all my races and bring the bike and myself home in 1 peice it has been a succesful race weekend - doesn't matter what order I finished.
George
Quote from: George_Linhart on February 22, 2009, 09:35:52 PM
Yup - its more the rider than the bike. Put a very good rider on a very well prepared bike of any make and he will make the majority of club level competition look like they are standing still.
Some of us don't have time to ride and race nearly as much as others and some of us also don't have the outright tallent. It doesn't matter how much money I every throw at my bike, I will never be able to consistently race with the really fast guys. Some people just don't have the talent but always want to blame it on the bike...
I just like to make 3-5 race weekends a season and meet up with old friends and do my best to keep up the pace and ride safely. Anytime I finish all my races and bring the bike and myself home in 1 peice it has been a succesful race weekend - doesn't matter what order I finished.
George
This is the best post yet on this topic. Well put.
Quote from: superbike2001 on February 24, 2009, 02:52:31 PM
This is the best post yet on this topic. Well put.
I agree.......and so does everyone else who posted in this thread.
Quote from: Graham on February 21, 2009, 07:51:57 PM
Supersport rule : Twin cylinder, liquid cooled up to 850cc
Superbike rule: Twin cylinder,4 valve per cylinder up to 850cc
The 848 is a twin cylinder,4 valve,liquid cooled bike, how can the max cc be the same in both classes? The 1098 is not legal for heavyweight supersport but is for heavyweight superbike. So i would think the 848 is not legal for middleweight supersport. MY superbike R6
doesnt put out 134hp with 70lbs torque but thats the stats for a 848 stock.Could someone explain how the same cc for superbike is th same for supersport, thanks.
I'm curious too, how the 1098 is a heavyweight bike? The 999 yes, but 1098, how?
Quote from: Mongo on February 22, 2009, 08:01:56 PM
I can't imagine anyone actually fast on a 600 having issues with an 848. Same thing for a 1098 against a 1000cc four.
I completely agree.
I rode a stock 848 and finished mid-pack c superbike once. Right behind Rodney Vest & Alistair Douglas at RRR.
The stock 848 will trip over itself trying to catch a middleweight bike in a straight away, catch it in a corner and repeat.
IMO a stock 848 is a good fit for middleweight. We ran the same bike at RA and couldn't hold a candle to ANY 600 on the back straight and had to make up the time on the brakes to hold position... I don't think the 848's have the ass in a straight line. Crank HP maybe, but not giddy up and go.
The sick part is, I rode better on my 1000ds than I ever did on the 848. At JGP, RRR and RA, by almost 1/2 second.
In superstock trim the 848 was a huge clunky disappointment and a complete waste of $$ IMO.
Okay - the 1098 is heavier than the 999 - why wouldn't it be a HW bike? Am I missing something?
Quote from: Mongo on February 25, 2009, 06:35:11 AM
Okay - the 1098 is heavier than the 999 - why wouldn't it be a HW bike? Am I missing something?
Are you sure about that Sean? I could have sworn that was thie biggest deal when the 1098 came out. In RRW it was the lightest bike in the big bike shootout a year or so ago, and that was always the Ducatis of old downfall - weight. I thought I remeber reading the 1098 was something like 25 lbs lighter than the 999. Could be wrong though, ill go look for the RRW.
Quote from: Mongo on February 25, 2009, 06:35:11 AM
Okay - the 1098 is heavier than the 999 - why wouldn't it be a HW bike? Am I missing something?
Nope, my bad. I was thinking of the 1098r, not the base model. Don't think that's allowed in Heavyweight.
i read that the 1098 was 410 lb, 1098 S 387lb, 1098 R 367lb and the susuki 750 2009 was 437lb.I personaly dont have any issues with any thing,I really only wanted to no why the 848 had the same cc for supersport and superbike.With the posts it seems the 848 is a dog in supersport trim and way to much in the superbike trim,so it is what it is.But the 1098 in heavyweight might be a little much.It might not be a problem anywhere else but like Dwire stated the Florida region there tough and have great riders riding them,and like i said before 99% of the time i get beat by a better rider.Now on the other hand if it rains its on!!!!!!!!Seems am faster in the wet then in the dry, :banghead:well not faster i finish better in the rain.IT most be those MICHELIN rains,love them!!!!!!!!!!
600 riders need not worry about those dog slow 848's. Those overweight over priced Ducati's don't stand a chance. Maybe they should be LW class legal? That would be more like it.
George hope to see you a few times this season. I saw your bike at DI a couple weeks ago. Why so many 600 riders complain about our slow Ducati's is puzzling? The 850 displacement doesn't make them faster than most 600's. Ducati says the 848 makes 134 hp at the crank us
Sorry by heavier I meant larger displacement not the actual weight of the bike... Isn't heavyweight the upper limit? If so why shouldn't a bigger bike (displacement wise) be allowed?
I see the results from Daytona are in. Ducati 848's placed in two whole CCS races... Class killers indeed!!! :whine:
Quote from: Mongo on March 01, 2009, 01:33:57 PM
Sorry by heavier I meant larger displacement not the actual weight of the bike... Isn't heavyweight the upper limit? If so why shouldn't a bigger bike (displacement wise) be allowed?
No, Sean, HW is the class between MW and Unlimited. It's essentially a second MW class, as there are a very few 750's racing it.
-mark
Quote from: 123user on March 01, 2009, 09:19:37 PM
I see the results from Daytona are in. Ducati 848's placed in two whole CCS races... Class killers indeed!!! :whine:
you also did not notice that just about the only one that was there won the ASRA superbike race. Puerta is an amasing young rider, but that was THE FASTEST mid wt bike at the event. Eric wood's exact words to me were "greg, his bike makes your bike look slow".. and my superbike drafted behind but not past Shane Narbone's 750 and some of the best 600s.
Not taking anything from the talent, but before people only look at the total podiums of the bike keep in mind there are few of these bikes out there. I think Puerta also won another race, not just the Pro Superbike event.
Im racing either way, I just wanna see the bitch fest continue :biggrin:
Was Puertas bike SS or SBK?
Purely out of curiosity, is this Puerta guy a bit lighter than you Greg? I'm wondering if power to weight ratio might have added some advantage to the equation?
Ahhhhh - so HW is more like our B/750 class stuff. Cool thanks.
Quote from: GSXR RACER MIKE on March 02, 2009, 04:52:12 PM
Purely out of curiosity, is this Puerta guy a bit lighter than you Greg? I'm wondering if power to weight ratio might have added some advantage to the equation?
nope. He is actually pretty tall (to me) and at least 155lb. Im 5'6" and 165.
Can we at least have minimum weights for bike and rider? or is that too much to ask from club racing? (just a150lb minimum rider weight minus gear? How about 540lbs total after the races for a mw anything?) These ancient rules are ridiculous. How hard is it to weigh a bike and rider after a race, every other sanctioning body from RC cars to saturday night stock car racing does. Mongo or Eric Kelcher, could you shed some light on this? Thanks Ducati for building modern bikes that cost a fortune, and thanks to the sanctioning bodies for staying with rules that were made in the stone age. A guy who weighs 60lbs more than a lightweight guy is trying to turn on a front tire that is trying to change direction with 10% more weight on it than a lighter guy, twisting the throttle more isnt the answer, making the rules fair is. Why should the 75% of the riders who weigh more than 150lbs that ride against guys who have an obvious advantage when we could just go play golf, fish or drink, alienation is the norm from this sport, thats why its hard to find guys who were riding a few years ago, still riding.
Greg and Brad, congrats on your results at Daytona! hope to see all you guys at PBIR!
Why would we need minimum weights? I can guarantee I'd find fatter peeps on the same bike who are faster which means you can go faster too and it's not your weight holding you back.
What gets me is the continued hatred of the older desmo motors. My 1999 996 weighs 437 pounds, and has 112 ponies in stock form, which is destroyed by the new stuff out there, yet I continue to see words like "No Desmodromic valving" in the class break-downs! The Buells are allowed in LW stuff now, and have very similar specs to my Duc, but I can only run HW classes? WTF?
An 848-134 HP at 370 lbs
A GSXR 600- 125 HP at 432 lbs
A 1098- 160 HP at 380 lbs
A CBR 600RR- 118 HP at 410 lbs
What I have a problem with is that those of us riding older bikes are at a huge disadvantage as compared to newer, lighter bikes, who run in the same classes.
I understand that CCS, WERA, et al wants to fill their grids, but I truly believe that bikes should be sorted by power to weight ratios, instead of the outdated rules we are subject to, and the bikes that are allowed to go down in class for some reason. And I think that is the only way to shut everyone up, including myself.
Factory specs are easy enough to find. Why not sort by this, rather than the convoluted system we have now? $$$$$$$- that's why.
The factory specs are crap... everybody knows it. CCS only has 3 supersport classes and has ump-teen superbike/gp style classes. I believe that the rules are pretty fair if you consider what you're allowed to build. You can't have a superstock-mentality when looking at the rules.
CCS has been successful because they don't over-scrutinize everyone's machine. Especially for club-racing, imposing clear power/weight ratios is nuts. If you want to pay $300/entry so that CCS can buy 4 dynos and drag them all over the country, then you're in the minority.
My regards to Mongo, but there's already an racing organization out there with too much emphasis on legislating fairness (followed by costly engine teardowns). It's called WERA, and I choose not to run their series because of it.
I agree with you, that the reality of instituting it would be laughable at best, but I still think there is more emphasis on the superbike/GP than there should be.
I suppose there will always be bitching about classes, but a little leeway should then be granted to those of us who have no desire (or $$$) to go building the fastest, lightest bikes on the track, and run close-to-stock machines. Or, at a bare minimum, if they choose to make dispensation for certain machines, then they should also look into doing similar for older bikes, too.
I sounds pretty jerky to say, but if you're not interested in building your machine to its potential, then you're not really "in it to win it". Like I said, the perception a fairness is really WERA's thing... whether it really exists or not, I can't say. A club racer that doesn't have the bucks has to win on talent... for the experts, I don't really think it matters because the cream will rise to top. If you're an amateur...well... you're opinion doesn't really count, unless you plan on being an amateur forever.
The superbike/gp classes bring in sponsorship to CCS, 'cause really, how much crap are you gonna buy for a superstock machine? It also creates more variety on the grids. If it gives wealthy, no talent guys a little help... I'm ok with that.
If an attempt to level the playing field were implemented, every whining, crying, big-ego'd chump would come out of the woodwork to try to bend the rules to their advantage (ala, AMA). I think that CCS has a good class structure formula
Mongo, of course there are plenty of big guys who can smoke me and every other club racer, --------Im going to leve their names out of this, its my argument. These guys are much larger than 200lbs and both have shown me numerous times how im not riding to my potential. Heck if everyone had to carry the weight these guys do, these guys would win everything, they are that good, but they get beat by guys who weigh alot less than them, and its very discouraging to watch. Its not about me, its about fair and relevant rules that make it equal on paper for almost everyone. I like the idea of there also being a formula to allow modifications to older bikes to keep them competitive. SCCA has a rulebook that has each particular car that is homogolated for a particular class, and it specifies a minimum weight for that car (and driver), brake size, carburetor size, wheel size etc. SCCA does not have drivers lobbying at the track to bend the rules either, they have a meeting at the end of the season for lobbying and they address each request individually. I dont think its too hard to do, and I think there would be more participation because riders would at least feel things are more equal with the machines. They could then strive to ride better to win if that is their goal. We dont have to have a complete reformulation of the rules, just bring them up to date. We could then run, say a 1098s in f40, or 1000ds in lighteight, 848s in mw, they could be adjusted to be more in line with the other bikes performance if they were PROVED to be dominant.
It is very difficult to race against bikes that have a relavent hp or torque advantage. When I ride in Heavy weight, and I am on a 600, and faster than a guy on a 750, It makes for some tough passing because its harder to make up the difference. That is too bad, because I am bumping up a class, and if you dont want to deal with it, dont ride in hw with a mw bike right? Well when it happens in the mw class and there is a bike that has a hp/t advantage, it is just hard to deal with mentally, you ask why am I killing myself to get by this guy who is pulling me 3 bike lenths down each straight, after I just drove up his tailpipe coming off the corner?
One more thing, if the cream really does rise to the top, then having a minimum weight will not hurt the really superfast best riders who weigh around 120lbs, right?
:pop: How about if you weigh over 200 you get to use slicks, if you are over 225 you get magnesium wheels, etc. :thumb: Fat guys then would get some equalizers! LOL
It is always painful to see the desmo valve engines excluded. There is no reason for this anymore. I feel for the 996 riders, no relief while a Buell rider runs two classes down with 20% more displacement?
Why can't an 848 run in Thunderbike? If it meets all of the requirements and restrictions?
I've already lobbied for a "fat guy class"... but no takers. As one of the fat guy's I can tell that some rules just ain't right for me... but that doesn't mean they aren't right overall.
I think that the desmodromic bikes are placed fairly... they are clearly superior in design. A 996 can be making 130hp with off the shelf parts... 140-150 hp with the right builder. And Ducati reliablility has improved dramatically in the last 10 years.
Hell I'm a fatter than you guys fat guy and even if I raced I still just don't see why it should be a factor in like 95% of the classes out there. Maybe if you're talking 125's or the like but that's about it.
Nope shouldn't be a factor at all. Some guys are small and fast... I'm able to get boxes off the top shelf without a step-stool. @250lbs geared up, I weigh more than bikes I've raced. However, I don't sit around, piss and moan about my parents giving me bad genes. So, small guys with more ego than talent shouldn't bitch about some bike reportedly having an extra 5 HP.
Quote from: hamurobby on March 10, 2009, 12:37:28 AM
Can we at least have minimum weights for bike and rider? or is that too much to ask from club racing? (just a150lb minimum rider weight minus gear? How about 540lbs total after the races for a mw anything?) These ancient rules are ridiculous.
I'm glad somebody finally came up with this idea. I'm a bigger man. For years I've tried to make myself go faster. Spent thousands on schools to do it. Still get my butt kicked by way larger men all the time.
Sometimes I think if I was just smaller, I could go faster. But, I've been wrong in my thinking. I don't need to make myself reach my full potential. No, that isn't the answer. I have to slow them little bastards down by throwing weight on them.
Robby, why stop at 150lbs? Let's make the fattest bastard on the grid the minimum weight. That would be fair. Why stop with motorcycles?
I want to be a jockey. Handicap that. I'm 220. I want to pole vault. Weigh those fuckers down. I want to fight the champ. Blind fold that prick. I'll foot race Carl Lewis. Think his back will break with the piano on it? Everyone one has to date fat chicks cause I do.
Or we can let the best do what they do.
Quote from: Over-ReActor on March 10, 2009, 10:10:14 PMI want to be a jockey. Handicap that. I'm 220. I want to pole vault. Weigh those fuckers down. I want to fight the champ. Blind fold that prick. I'll foot race Carl Lewis. Think his back will break with the piano on it? Everyone one has to date fat chicks cause I do. Or we can let the best do what they do.
This reminds me of a soccer league in my county that doesn't keep score, so the kids dont have to experience defeat. Everyone is a winner!!! At least that's what they tell the kids, in my opinion those are the kids that go and shoot up innocent people when they get turned for a job.
Point is, I am a fat guy too, I like the idea of working out hard to go faster. Striving for excellence (if you can call winning a club race that), is why its fun. Why is it fair that a guy that spent 10k on a new bike is going to be on the same playing field as a guy who spent 2k on a dinosaur. To be competitive is something that should be achieved, not to be handed
+1 on the fat guy league!!!! Where do I sign up?? It should be sponsored by E.B.C. or Brembo, since we use so much of their products.
ILOVE THE IDEA OF HAVING A 200LB MINIMUM WEIGHT FOR THE RIDER IN CLUB RACING! That would mean it would be equal for almost all the riders, except the exceptionally large, and then the difference wouldnt be too bad to deal with. It wasnt my idea, it was my understanding that DMG was going to implement this very rule, but some body thought up the idea that a person coming off the track would need a bottle of water or two, so it wouldnt work. I cant believe that, GIVE everyone two bottles of water if they want, what is that 2lbs maybe? I know with the usgpru 125s they weigh the bike and rider, 300lb minimum, PeeWee doesnt care, he still wins. yes the pro level riders will still win club races, but having some equalizer somewhere just seems right for the average guy ridng at 190lbs. We make up over 50% of the grids, why dont we have a say in this, we do PAY to race. The smaller guys WILL NOT MIND adding weight to their bikes, because they dont believe its a factor so it wont matter to them right? :thumb: Its not hard to add weight to a bike, and you can put it where you want, its a heck of alot harder to remove weight from one, I know, I spent a whole winter last year figuring out every ounce to take off a gsxr (about 38lbs using the stock parts) When I started riding, I weighed 195 or so, and I have dieted and exercised down to 165. (im 175 now) So I have lost almost 70lbs total. Believe me, Im ALOT faster down the straights than with 70lbs. and the turning and drive grip have improved as well. That is almost a 15% weight reduction, im not any faster by skill, but I am faster because of the weight loss. when a guy (Toseland) who races wsb, then looses ten lbs of muscle to go ride motogp, you know there is alot of speed in less weight. Or maybe they are all crazy, and Pedrosa really is all that. Hey the same guys will still be out front, but I think there will be some surprises to be had. I still point to every other form of motorized competitions sanctioning body has minimum weights,
I guess they are all stupid and dont know what they are doing. In nascar, they add 50lbs of weight to a car that is starting to show an edge, and that usually puts them back in the pack.
Power to weight ratio's (P/W R) are being implemented all across the world to allow people who aren't 120 lbs a chance to compete. Extremely talented larger framed and heavier racers have been overlooked by many professional racing teams of many different types for a very long time, power to weight ratio racing helps to level the playing field by not giving the smaller framed racers a distinct advantage just because they weigh less (the Danika Patrick factor).
What better example of weight and Horsepower than horse racing? Look at Jockey's, does anyone really believe they would have a chance or even be given the opportunity to compete professionally for a major team if they were 6'-4" tall, 220 lbs, muscular, and in great shape?
A heavier rider who can hang with or beat lighter ones on the same type of bike is a better rider. Heavier riders have several very obvious handicaps when it comes to racing: slower acceleration, lower top speeds, longer braking distances, higher corner loads on the tires at the same speeds as lighter riders, accelerated tire wear, etc. Put all those different weight same riders in a level playing field using Power to Weight ratio's and that heavier rider would show just how good he really is by probably running away from the other riders he use to have trouble just hanging with.
I like what hamurobby said "The smaller guys WILL NOT MIND adding weight to their bikes, because they dont believe its a factor so it wont matter to them right?". I've challenged non-believers in P/W R to add weight to their bikes and go turn the same lap times, for some reason I have yet to meet a person who was even willing to try and prove me wrong.
But even after all that I'm a realist and also understand that P/W R racing isn't very practical due to cheaters and having to check all the bikes and riders.
Quote from: Over-ReActor on March 10, 2009, 10:10:14 PM
I want to be a jockey. Handicap that. I'm 220. I want to pole vault. Weigh those fuckers down. I want to fight the champ. Blind fold that prick. I'll foot race Carl Lewis. Think his back will break with the piano on it? Everyone one has to date fat chicks cause I do.
Or we can let the best do what they do.
I actually see more skinny guys climbing on top of fat chicks. Instead of implementing weight/power restrictions, how about this. At the race conclusing, all riders will be held at pit out. The marshall will lead them over to a tug-o-war pit with the losing half of the grid vs the winning half. If the winning half wins the tug-o-war, the results will stick. If the losing half wins the tug-o-war, the results will reverse.
That's fair right? Its like this, skinny guys with talent will finish first while fat nerds will be lucky to finish at all. All of this is crap... leveling the playing field turns it into something other than racing... It becomes like NASCRAP... a made up soap opera where somehow 50 year old men can be competitive at the professional level.
OK, while we're imposing something as ridiculous as minimum rider weights for bike racing, lets include some others on the ballot using the same logic:
-Since I'm short, I don't think anyone 6' or taller should get to jump in basketball!!! Because their physical attributes lend them better to the sport they have an unfair advantage! How daft!
-Since I don't weigh as much as a linebacker, I think everyone in football should have a maximum weight!
-Strap sandbags to the leaner baseball players, they can run faster -- way too unfair!
-Lance Armstrong is too lean and fit, and missing a family jewel. handicap him for "equality" as well.
Among several dozen other idiotic examples one could come up with following the same line of thought
Maybe you ARE better off playing golf.
QuoteSometimes I think if I was just smaller, I could go faster. But, I've been wrong in my thinking. I don't need to make myself reach my full potential. No, that isn't the answer. I have to slow them little bastards down by throwing weight on them.
Robby, why stop at 150lbs? Let's make the fattest bastard on the grid the minimum weight. That would be fair. Why stop with motorcycles?
I want to be a jockey. Handicap that. I'm 220. I want to pole vault. Weigh those fuckers down. I want to fight the champ. Blind fold that prick. I'll foot race Carl Lewis. Think his back will break with the piano on it? Everyone one has to date fat chicks cause I do.
Or we can let the best do what they do.
Well said. I am short and want to play basketball so all the tall guys should play on their knees so I can be competitive. The guys winning expert races train hard, stay in shape, and spend big money to make sure they have the most competitive package because they are very serious about winning and being a champion.
I can't believe how many of you guys want to change the rules so that you can be competitive with these guys just so you don't have to get your fat ass in shape or keep racing with your old bike. Unbelievable.
First of all , no one said minimum rider weights, its total weight for bike and rider combined, just like they do now in the usgpru, so no its not rediculous, in fact its the norm for motorized racing around the world. Motorcycle racing isnt the same as field sports, your analogys holds no water. You might as well have said we dont need any rules to govern the sport.
As far as nascrap, they are mighty successful in filling grids with uber expensive race teams BECAUSE of the rules that make it more about driver skill than machine prep or giving someone an advantage by the grace of God other than driving tallent. and their races are alot more exciting than most mc events. WE NEED MORE PARTICIPATION AND CLOSER RACING ESPECIALLY AT THE CLUB LEVEL. Are you all really going to quit because you have to add weight to your bike to meet a minimum weight? As far as having to govern a weight rule, are you kidding? hell there are more superbike engines out there in ss than we could tear down! It takes one minute to roll a bike on and off the scales, and you only have to weigh the top three, novice and expert would take 5 minutes total to check. It takes a hell of a lot longer to look at a damn air filter in tech!!!!! Im sure they would make the scales available all weekend to check to see if you have enough weight strapped to your bike. If anyone here is afraid of a big old man smoking your ass on the race track because you had to strap 40lbs on your bike, maybe you need to go buy a horse.
You are sounding like the winers, not us old fat guys.
It is not a matter of being worried about getting "smoked". It is how you want to make your fat old self competitive with guys who are very serious about racing when you are not. Handicaping fast guys with top notch equipment so you can keep up with them. Are you serious? You call that good racing? If you think so you just do not get it.
Quote from: hamurobby on March 11, 2009, 11:21:32 AM
As far as nascrap, they are mighty successful in filling grids with uber expensive race teams BECAUSE of the rules that make it more about driver skill than machine prep or giving someone an advantage by the grace of God other than driving tallent. and their races are alot more exciting than most mc events.
Stock car racing is expensive because of all the rules. It takes millions in research dollars to find another 5HP or to reduce aerodynamic drag. As the teams are willing to spend more and more to find the 1% advantage, tech inspection becomes more expensive to catch them. And if you haven't figured it out yet NASCAR makes new rules when their "pet" teams have lost an advantage to a smart upstart. Its not racing, its a show. The truth is that there's lots of young dirt track talent out there, but they don't have the right last name or (GASP!!) they're not from south of the ol' Mason-Dixon
If your assumption is that increased media visibility is always good... then we are totally on different wave lengths. Club racing is, and should be run-what-you-brung. I just don't understand the interest in mandated weight/power. In CCS and WERA, racers still win on talent. In contrast I can see that many of you whiners would rather win on protest. If you're big and convinced that's why you can't win then you're totally delusional.
I sounds like there's going to be a run on extra large helmets this year. If we did equalize the grids, I forsee the entries eventually decreasing... when all these big ego's really find out that it's their talent level, not their weight/power there will be a lot of hurt feelings.
some are under the assumption that Hamurobby is a 240lb fat ass that sits around bitchin about rules. In fact, he is around 168lbs, faster than 90% of the people in this thread and spends most of his time working on his bikes. He has been both heavy and light and tells me there is a considerable advantage to being lighter. He has won races at JGP with AMA liscensed guys finishing behind him.
I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH EVERYTHING HE SAYS.....but a lot of you assume he is much different than he is. He is a racer.
Just wanted to clarify that. CARRY ON......
I'm off to do my 30 mile cycle ride.
I don't care if he's Matt Mladin. More rules = more problems. I think we can all agree that this banter is not about fat dudes vs. small dudes. Its about some fantasy that if bike+rider weight were mandated that miraculouly some guys would start winning. As Rev. Sharpton would say: "That is a falsity"
If you're fat and it bugs you (and it should) don't eat, and exercise. But don't do it just because you think you'll start winning. Over the years I've come to the realization that the guy in 1st place is really good, and he's probably not riding at 100%. If you go faster, he'll go faster. So, it doesn't really matter, it just makes more work for the officials.
Wow, I just wanted to know why the 848 had the same cc for supersport and for superbike.That was answered.All this other stuff sounds crazy to me.I just want supersport to be supersport....do what ever you want in superbike.I get beat buy small guys and big guys and sometimes i beat them, am 5'11 155lbs in pretty good shape have decent bikes but lack a little talent compared to some others....but i love racing and give it my best everytime,win or lose!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"If you're fat and it bugs you (and it should) don't eat, and exercise. But don't do it just because you think you'll start winning" Well I DID, and It worked for me, Im 6'1"+ and have dieted and exercised and won expert mw races, rain or shine. I cant beat Jensen or Jeff Wood, but I can and have beat lots of talent, and it had to do with loosing weight. I have proven it, and you are merely speculating how things would be. I know there is better talent than me, the above guys, Josh Day,
Josh Herrin, Geoff May, I have rode with them around JGP and they can do things I will never be able to do with a motorcycle, but what the hell does that have to do with ALL of us paying to ride on the weekends and having fun. If you think you are going somewhere in this sport, think again. We are all PLAYING, seriously, and when I play a game like this, I like the rules to be fair. Sorry you dont agree. If the guy is really good in first place, I have found if you can put presure on him and show him a wheel every lap, he will make a mistake and loose, even if its for money in an expert solo 20, I have proven that as well. So your argument has no validity, and more work for the officials? They love their job, and trust me, reading two scales and adding the weights together, is not going to ruin their weekend. Why do we have ANY RULES? for what? the best riders always win, so why bother with lw mw hw ulimited, gp, sb, ss, f40, Whats the point? we should just practice, line everyone up and have a 10 lap shootout and go home, or maybe we could do it twice and then go home, because if another rule is too much, then we already have way too many rules.
I never said we needed more media coverage like nascar. I guess that was a way to dissimilate the point I was making, and make me look like I want to make club racing some sort of national series, I really dont know where you got that from pointing out how weight is so important to them, and how their rule structure actually make it more about the driver. Dont take what I say out of context and run with it. You can tell everyone that physics dont apply to motorcycles, and you will be full of shit. I guess when Europe goes completely to weight rules, we will think its a great idea. If every guy who feels there is disparity of the rules regarding weight would speak up , and not be afraid of the old Napoleon guard naysayers who call big guys winers, we could have a more level PLAYGROUND, for us weekend pretenders who wish we were going to somehow make a living at this, instead of just spending a fortune.
All im saying is...put your money where your mouth is, put weight on the smaller racers bike, and lets see how much skill you DONT have, if you say no to it, you are admitting there is an obvious advantage to being lighter, because all it would really take is about an hour of work to add the weight, throw two scales on the ground and find out. I would gladly add the weight to my bike if we could get the weight rule implemented. I have asked this question to many expert racers in the past two years, I have noticed the lighter the rider, the less interested they are in this idea, The heavier the rider, the more interested they are in this. The guys who are around 155lbs, dont really care one way or another.
If you subtract the weight I have removed from my bike(s), from my bodyweight, its like I weigh 130lbs, trust me, weight, or the lack thereof, is a huge advantage. There is no gain for me in this, in fact, it will cost me all the hard work I have done to lighten my bikes and myself, and I hope somehow the rule makers will see that it is the right thing to do, because no one should have to do what I have had to, to just become compeditive because of a lack of a simple rule.
Its just plain wrong.
Quote from: hamurobby on March 11, 2009, 11:21:32 AM
First of all , no one said minimum rider weights, its total weight for bike and rider combined, just like they do now in the usgpru, so no its not rediculous, in fact its the norm for motorized racing around the world.
As far as the USGPRU rules,
250 class is bike weight only, ISTR 220 lbs or so.
125 class is bike and rider, 300 lbs or a maximum of 25 lbs of ballast. That is once you add 25lbs, you then do not have to weigh 300 lbs.
Robby,
Let me get this straight. At 168 you're one of the heavy guys complaining about the light guys? That's funny to me.
I'll go along with your minimum weight theory. I know lighter is better. I don't like your rider+bike weight limit though. I'll be spending a fortune on my bike to get down to weight while your spending on go fast parts and tires.
I want you to have to strap a 75lb backpack on you. Struggle tossing that around. See how tired that makes you.
Seriously, why can't there be an over 250lb rider+gear class? Sounds better than the over 40 class. Think about it. A lot of new people would fit my proposed class. People that will never give it a try at racing cause they have no chance. In over 40 you end up racing a guy with tons of experience.
This isn't like softball where you aren't able to play anymore cause you're slow and broke down. Your knees hurt and you are slow. You can be fast as hell at 40 on a bike. You can also be fat at 25. We (fat people) need a fat bastard class. I would race all the time.
Leave the other non-handicap classes alone.
I somewhat joking, mostly not.
Over-reactor, I would love to see the rider-gear part of the weight equation be 200lbs, but I really dont see a 120lb guy putting 80lbs of lead on his bike, thats just not right either. Somewhere in between (say 170?) is a happy medium. If you read carefully the last paragraph of my last chapter I just wrote, Im not screaming about this for me, but for guys like you.
I say I was 190lbs before the rediculous diet/exercise program I went on, but I really was over 200lbs, so I know what its like to race heavy and now light. I also removed over 35lbs off my gsxr's,and they are unbelievably nimble and easy to ride. Its like I weigh 135lbs instead of 168lbs because of the weight I removed from the bike, as well as the weight from me. Before : bike 387lbs, rider (wthout gear) , 200lbs = 587lbs. after bike and rider diet, bike 349lbs, rider 165lbs = 514lbs = BIG DIFFERENCE IN PERFORMANCE with a 15% weight reduction. ( Im still the same old slow rider at 42 years old, same motors, and same 06 gsxrs, same amount of effort, the faster speed is just there. ) Weight makes a big difference in performance, period. I SPENT NOTHING BUT TIME (okay, $100 drill press, $80 grinder) lightening stock parts and removing unnecessary items from my bike, Sanding the gel coat off my bodywork, zip ties hold everything on the bike, drilling every bolt and grinding piles of metal shavings. so the cost is less tv time, less family time etc. (ask these guys from the fla region, they have seen my bikes and shook their heads in disbelief) I have spent countless hours riding my mountain bike and eating grapenuts and beef jerky. I had to laugh when some pro novice guys were responding to my post telling me I havent dedicated myself enough and if I did, I would be faster if I would do a little work on myself and the bike. I have lots of friends who race who are larger guys, and I hate to see them struggle with these issues, they do not all have the time or the real desire to make racing a lifestyle like I have, and I dont think they (or you) should have to make life all about racing, just to be fairly compeditive in CLUB racing events. All im asking for is the same rule the rest of the motorized racing comunity the world over has, a minimum weight. Its not me crying about 1098s, thats my personal wining peeve (im not scared of them, I can beat them, but its just not right either), this is my BIG beef with mc racing, (weight) and always has been.
Robby,
You wrote so long, you cramped my brain.
I also removed all the same heavy shit from my bike. So all things being equal, you are still 168 and I'm 220. Put lead on your back.
I don't care what you real racers do. I want a recreational fat guy class. Over 40 is to hard.
NO WAY, Im just going to eat again. I know rattling my can wont change things, but maybe one day the FIM will change, and it will trickle down. It would be good even for the smaller guys, A little muscle mass is a good thing.
I think a big guy class is a great idea, and it will go over huge. the largest problem I see, is fitting it into the tight ass schedule.
Robby - it is funny, you want the rules to set right at your weight so others are compromised to give you "equality." You also want to disqualify other bikes because you think they are superior to yours in terms of power and torque. Basically, legislate "fairness" aroumd you at the expense of others.
I can see how this is great for you - but what about everybody else?
Tell you what, if you want this then you should start your own race series and see how many people show up. I'll continue to race CCS as I actualy like the rulesof the series.
George
ASRA Thunderbike is limited with rider, gear and bike. New rules this year. Ay Daytona they weighed us with full gear minus helmet and gloves. There is your class jump in it and race.
Everybody here understands that weight is an issue. My point is that this is club racing... we're racing for $5 dollar trophies. If somebody wants to lose weight, they have an incentive... leveling the playing field = fatter racers = bigger leathers = more cows = more methane = global warming!
I'd love a fat guy class: I propose a minimum weight of 220lbs, but we all have to ride hyosung 250's. We could call it "The Turd on Turd Challenge" It would be the last race of the day... on lap three it would be red flagged, and we'd all have to come in and eat a dozen hot wings, then we'd restart for 5 more laps... at the conclusion everyone would have to chug 5 beers... this would be the opportunity for slower riders to catch up!
This whole dialog is nonsense. If you're fat and you think its slowing you down... lose weight, just don't be hurt when you find out that you're still slow. I'm fat and slow, but there are people out there that are fat and fast, there are also people out there that are thin and slow.
Oh, and one other thing. NASCAR still sucks, DMG is still crooked, and I still think that the RC30 is the coolest bike ever made!
I jumped into this thread right here without reading from the beginning - And then went back to the first page... WOW.....
I like the RC30 too - Actually I lean more toward the RC45 - But that's just cause I had a chance to ride one....
Figured I would contribute to the nonsense.
Yup! the whole thread went backwards. The RC-45 was the evolution of the RC30... back when ELF was cool.
Technically, the NR750 would be the coolest, but it was produced in such small numbers. On the other hand, the Norton Manx pretty much rocks too!
Now here's a topic, should the NR750 be allowed in HWSS?
:pop:
I love this stuff!
Sounds like you better start bulking up Becka! Or else you'll have to wear a 150lb backpack to measure up to me!
Can't I just add a passenger?
You could just spend a couple of semesters in Rolla... that works for all the other girls!
Quote from: 123user on March 12, 2009, 02:25:10 PM
You could just spend a couple of semesters in Rolla... that works for all the other girls!
That's just wrong. True, but wrong.
Can I interest you in my "Big Butts of Rolla" calender? Pictures compiled over 16 semesters
This thread is going downhill fast!
Thank God its ending!
MMMMMMKKKKKKKKKayyyyyyy,so the 848 is fine for supersport and the 848 could be a little to much with the extra cc added for superbike, thanks I got it :thumb: Happy racing everyone. :cheers:
So when does the the over 40 fat guy class startthen? Count me in.
Quote from: Ducati23 on March 13, 2009, 04:53:02 PM
So when does the the over 40 fat guy class startthen? Count me in.
I want in on an 848.
I'm in for the fat guy class but 220 is still 10lbs too light for me. We'll need a 230 class too.
I just remembered something. I once had Tray Batey pass me on the inside at road Atlanta. He was old. I was old. I'm heavy. He wasn't exactly light. The thing is, he had a passenger on the back of his bike. I thought I was flying at the time (note: at the time.). How humiliating? Old pros suck to race against. I want to race fat noobies. Any fat race experts that never raced, wanna give it a try?
I knew this board was fun, it just needed a spark or two, and 5 gallons of mr-9.
OR, arent you building a 1000?
Does anyone know if a 1098 engine will fit into an 848 chassis? :biggrin:
Hey Robby, seems Hacking feels your pain!!
Although, he got suspended for his outburst. =)~
Quote from: hamurobby on March 22, 2009, 10:55:20 AM
OR, arent you building a 1000?
I guess that was addressed to me? The proper abreviation is ORA, thank you very much. I actually hate that name and am rather quite embarrassed by it at times, but some people enjoy it so WTF.
I already have the 1000. It's an 07. Jeff Selbert is looking at it right now. I don't enjoy riding it that much. I don't like my balls shriveling to the size of peas all the time. I want a slower bike that I can enjoy riding more to it's potential. Think slower/more relaxing.
I love motorcycling worth a passion. I get enjoyment watching and rooting for others. I tried to go fast, but never will. Just want to have fun in a fat league on slow bikes. Think getting older/scareder. :)
Quote from: Been-Jammin on March 23, 2009, 10:13:49 AM
Hey Robby, seems Hacking feels your pain!!
Although, he got suspended for his outburst. =)~
Hey Ben! I hope your healing up okay?
Tell that wining biotch Hacking to just ride harder, loose some weight, or just stfu....Im guessing thats the only answers he will get from everyone ::)
Quote from: Over-ReActor on March 24, 2009, 10:02:09 PM
I guess that was addressed to me? The proper abreviation is ORA, thank you very much. I actually hate that name and am rather quite embarrassed by it at times, but some people enjoy it so WTF.
I already have the 1000. It's an 07. Jeff Selbert is looking at it right now. I don't enjoy riding it that much. I don't like my balls shriveling to the size of peas all the time. I want a slower bike that I can enjoy riding more to it's potential. Think slower/more relaxing.
I love motorcycling worth a passion. I get enjoyment watching and rooting for others. I tried to go fast, but never will. Just want to have fun in a fat league on slow bikes. Think getting older/scareder. :)
Yes the qustion was to you. I am with you on the fun factor, it just sucks that being big, means guys have to ride unlimited bikes to be compeditive (we race, not do track days). What say we start a petition to CCS for a big guy class ( 210+ w/gear?), and maybe an hw/unlimited f40, to go with lw and a mw? There is certainly no shortage of big guys and guys over 40 who want to just have fun racing with/against each other for a plastic trophy, and are willing to spend the money to come out and ride. I was talking to someone this past weekend at pbir who just started racing recently, who is over 40 and has a 1000. He has a handfull of friends who have 1000s and want to race, but there is no class they feel they can really ride in and have fun, so they watch racing and do trackdays, most of them would fit in the big guy class as well.
Quote from: hamurobby on March 25, 2009, 12:21:26 AM
Yes the qustion was to you. I am with you on the fun factor, it just sucks that being big, means guys have to ride unlimited bikes to be compeditive (we race, not do track days). What say we start a petition to CCS for a big guy class ( 210+ w/gear?), and maybe an hw/unlimited f40, to go with lw and a mw? There is certainly no shortage of big guys and guys over 40 who want to just have fun racing with/against each other for a plastic trophy, and are willing to spend the money to come out and ride. I was talking to someone this past weekend at pbir who just started racing recently, who is over 40 and has a 1000. He has a handfull of friends who have 1000s and want to race, but there is no class they feel they can really ride in and have fun, so they watch racing and do trackdays, most of them would fit in the big guy class as well.
Your looking for a 210 with gear class? Thats not a fat guy class, thats a normal sized guy with light gear class. Min. 230 no gear and your not allowed to win without precursing your win with multiple excuses as to why you didnt win but it doesnt matter cause you just do it for fun (inhale) but still youre probably going to quit because its no fun to not win because your too fat and your bike isnt fast enough but it doesnt matter because i do it for fun not to win, did i mention im fat and i cant biuid a competitive bike?
Quote from: hamurobby on March 24, 2009, 11:42:42 PM
Hey Ben! I hope your healing up okay?
Tell that wining biotch Hacking to just ride harder, loose some weight, or just stfu....Im guessing thats the only answers he will get from everyone ::)
Yeah, doing OK, for someone that broke the same collarbone twice in two weeks. Can't believe that I had surgery again Friday. I have spare parts now and a 28 staple itching scar! Eeek. Had enough of the broken bones thing for a while. Look me up if you're ever in Daytona!
Quote from: benprobst on March 25, 2009, 12:41:55 AM
Your looking for a 210 with gear class? Thats not a fat guy class, thats a normal sized guy with light gear class. Min. 230 no gear and your not allowed to win without precursing your win with multiple excuses as to why you didnt win but it doesnt matter cause you just do it for fun (inhale) but still youre probably going to quit because its no fun to not win because your too fat and your bike isnt fast enough but it doesnt matter because i do it for fun not to win, did i mention im fat and i cant biuid a competitive bike?
LOL - this is probably one of the funiest things I have read in a while.
Beer to you ben!
Quote from: George_Linhart on March 25, 2009, 02:50:01 PM
LOL - this is probably one of the funiest things I have read in a while.
Beer to you ben!
Figured a guys like you would appreciate it. :biggrin: Now, about Buells in LWSS..........
:lmao:
Quote from: benprobst on March 25, 2009, 12:41:55 AM
Your looking for a 210 with gear class? Thats not a fat guy class, thats a normal sized guy with light gear class. Min. 230 no gear and your not allowed to win without precursing your win with multiple excuses as to why you didnt win but it doesnt matter cause you just do it for fun (inhale) but still youre probably going to quit because its no fun to not win because your too fat and your bike isnt fast enough but it doesnt matter because i do it for fun not to win, did i mention im fat and i cant biuid a competitive bike?
what are you waiting for? the ice to melt in Alaska? havent you raced ccs yet this year? :lmao:
Hey in 20 years you will be glad we got this class going.
Is this thread about to end?
What about passenger racing? Screw sidecars. Let's have a passenger class. That would be fun. 5 laps on the front. 5 laps on the back. Call it the prison buddy cellmate class.
min 230 ,250 with gear we could calculate the cc's of the bike by the number of cylinders ad in the weight of the rider and his age passed forty and have the ultra light fat guy forty class or ULFGF may be we can ad in the number of screws in the maximum of one ex ray and put the whole thing on a sliding scale . i can go back to my cheese cake diet .we might need a body fat index also. I can see Henry now with the calculator and the grain scale after the race. kelcher might want in on this . [just kidding] skinny guy 230 on ex 500 and fat guy 300 on gsxr 1500 I think they call this AHRMA
An 848 set the CCS LAP RECORD at JGP this weekend with a 1:15.9, guess they might not be slow turds after all? ::)
"Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!"
Animal house.
Quote from: hamurobby on April 06, 2009, 10:46:31 AM
An 848 set the CCS LAP RECORD at JGP this weekend with a 1:15.9, guess they might not be slow turds after all? ::)
"Over? Did you say "over"? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no!"
Animal house.
What in the hell is a CCS lap record? A lap record is a lap record. Are you saying a ducati 848 went faster last weekend than any 600 or 1000 has ever gone at Jennings? If thats not the case than it isnt a lap record. If it is than who was riding it?
Maybe the class lap record?
I think they keep track of the ASRA and CCS lap records seperate for each track. So you could have two lap records, one for a CCS race and one for a ASRA race at each track.
I mentioned Power to Weight Ratio (PWR) earlier in this topic and how a heavier rider is actually a better rider than a lighter rider going the same pace with the same PWR, doing some re-reading I see that ruffled some feathers so I'll explain further.
For Sportbike racing PWR is very real, weight in itself is a huge factor here. Tires can provide up to 'X' amount of straight line and lateral traction, the more weight you add the sooner you reach that traction point (whether braking or turning). As an example if you have a 125 lb rider on a 400 lb bike they will reach the limit of traction at a certain amount of force (again this is whether braking or turning), put a 225 lb rider on that same bike and that person will reach the limit of traction at a lower speed because of the added weight - the physics alone are undeniable. So if you have a heavier rider cornering at the same pace as a lighter rider the heavier rider is riding closer to the limit of traction than the lighter rider, there's no magic that I know of that's going to allow a heavier rider at the limit of traction to achieve the same cornering speeds as a lighter rider at the limit of traction (that would require a tire that could handle more lateral force).
Braking is another big issue here, the more weight your trying to slow down the more force required to do it in the same distance, if your close to the limit of braking traction you have to brake earlier if you have more weight to slow down. So again, if you have a heavier rider who's hanging with a lighter one in the braking zone the heavier rider is riding closer to the limit of traction than the lighter rider.
Acceleration is another HUGE factor with extra weight, even when already moving. For those that don't know, 1 MPH is 1.466 feet per second and an average motorcycle is 6.7 feet long. If someone is going 1 MPH faster than someone else they will pass them at a rate of 1 bike length apx every 4-1/2 seconds. If someone passes you at a rate of 1 bike length per second their only going 4.57 MPH faster than you - yet it would seem like their really flying. This also means that if someones acceleration curve is 1 MPH faster than someone elses they will pull away at the same rate of 1.466 feet per second during acceleration. The more weight you have the longer it takes the same amount of Hp to accelerate that weight from the same starting speed, again this is undeniable physics, if someone somehow figures out a way to accelerate more weight (with the same Hp at the same rate of acceleration) their going to end up extremely wealthy.
Adding Power into the equation starts to really show advantages that some people have, and disadvantages for others. Take the combined bike / rider weight and divide it by their Rear Wheel Hp (RWHp), this gives you their pounds per Hp. As an example, if you use the numbers I gave above (400 bike and 125 and 225 lb riders) and let's say a RWHp of 115, you can see the drastic difference in PWR between those riders - the 125 lb rider would be at 4.57 lbs per Hp, the 225 lb rider would be at 5.44 lbs per Hp. To equalize out the PWR the 225 lb rider would have to have 137 RWHp, even with the extra 22 Hp this wouldn't give the heavier rider an advantage, it would make him equal to the lighter riders 4.57 lbs per Hp and they should be dead even in a drag race down a straight.
Equal PWR racing would be much more about ability than who has a higher PWR, but as I showed above even if a lighter and heavier rider had the same PWR the heavier rider would still be at a disadvantage under braking and cornering loads - which as I said before would make the heavier rider the better rider if he's keeping up or beating the lighter one due to the heavier rider being closer to the limits of traction. :thumb:
I'd love to see some proof of an 848 doing a 15.9 too... Seems to me it would need another few hundred cc's in that motor to pull it off.
The 15.9 was done by Tomas Puerta, he was battling with Matt Lynn when he pulled that time. The kid is an awesome rider!
Is it really an 848? I haven't really paid attention to the times at Jennings for a while but that seems too fast for even a 1k in Superstock trim.
It was totally legit....assuming his bike is legal under the valve covers....and it probably is. Kid can ride. Matt Lynn won that race on the next lap.
It was the fastest lap at a CCS sanctioned event at JGP. I wanted a shot at it (on my pump gas, SS 1k), but rain on the warm up lap......
Mongo, don't Tray and those guys do like 15.5 on 1k's at JGP at the Wera Nationals?
I was the tech inspector at JGP this round, and no one so much as uttered a question of the legality of Puerta's 848 to me. Puerta is built like Rossi, kind of looks like Rossi, maybe he is his cousin? ::) :biggrin:
GSXR Mike, that is a beautiful scientific explaination of what I have been bitching and whining about. 8)
looked at the bulletin board and it had Geoff may and scusa or however you spell it (the mv agusta rider) as overall record holders although a can't remember which one was faster.thought it was in the 14s been going to jennings for years and these records always seem to fall at some kind of test and not an actual race.i remember when the buell had the record. wonder whose timers there using at these tests . jennings is more of a 600 track with no superlong straight tomas's bike buzzed like 848 not a 1098 since Mr Boy has a 848 that makes 147 I would not just assume tomas was cheating
Quote from: benprobst on April 06, 2009, 03:13:37 PM
What in the hell is a CCS lap record? A lap record is a lap record. Are you saying a ducati 848 went faster last weekend than any 600 or 1000 has ever gone at Jennings? If thats not the case than it isnt a lap record. If it is than who was riding it?
There are such things as American, World, Olympic, collage, high school records and so forth. 250cc records. 600cc records. LP records. 45 records. Mostlyly DVD and CD now.
Quote from: Ducmarc on April 08, 2009, 09:50:32 PM
looked at the bulletin board and it had Geoff may and scusa or however you spell it (the mv agusta rider) as overall record holders although a can't remember which one was faster.thought it was in the 14s been going to jennings for years and these records always seem to fall at some kind of test and not an actual race.i remember when the buell had the record. wonder whose timers there using at these tests . jennings is more of a 600 track with no superlong straight tomas's bike buzzed like 848 not a 1098 since Mr Boy has a 848 that makes 147 I would not just assume tomas was cheating
G May did a 1:14.51 with his 1000 gsxr at a pivate test, Scassa (wsb rider) did a 1:14.81 at his test on his Agusta. Jennifer Reese (our starter in Fla ccs) timed them and it matched their lap timers.
NO ONE said Puerta is cheating! Heck, he lost the race by almost a bike lengh to ama pro rider Matt Lynn on his Kawasaaki 600. kawasaki was paying money in that race, so I guess Matt was trying pretty hard to win. He repassed Puerta on the last lap. Matt has been to jgp before, he was on the MV Agusta super bike team with Scassa.
If an 848 can make 147hp, how much hp can a 1098s make? :biggrin:
Holy crap this thread continues... :pop:
Glad to see the 848 setting records. Chris Boy has been building some really nice bikes.
As a matter of fact, if I had the opportunity, I would be honored to race one. :cheers:
Congrats to Tomas!
mr boy has his r model at 195 rwhp it has the best of everything though it would make some wsbk bikes look bad but he needs a young rider to ride it (even though he won't admit it)
That's his 1098 Marc
Quote from: Ducmarc on April 20, 2009, 05:07:54 PM
mr boy has his r model at 195 rwhp it has the best of everything though it would make some wsbk bikes look bad but he needs a young rider to ride it (even though he won't admit it)
Only 25 hp short of the WSB!! Sheesh where do they find it???
cams and heads like everything else although Chris picked up a lot with the electronics package he runs so it maybe those non availabe parts that gives factory's the edge plus full time R&D guys helps