Moto GP Rev Limit

[Chupa]

I hear the 'Big Four' (or should that be the Gang of Four) led by Mr H and Mr Y, are pressing for a rev limit of 19,000 for Moto GP machines. They cite safety, reliability and cost issues. A representative was quoted as saying that Ducati didn't want the 800cc limit either but they competed and won.

[derby]

ducati would prefer no 19k limit:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/65269

stoner put in his two cents:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/65314

[tufty]

No spec tire, but a spec rev limit....smells of dirty pool.

[derby]

Originally Posted by tufty

No spec tire, but a spec rev limit....smells of dirty pool.

kinda like a spec 800cc displacement limit... oh wait!

i don't think a uniform rev limit is that big of a deal. they imposed one in formula 1 (19k, in fact) after motors started turning over 21k.

what i DO think is amusing is stoner's comments read "nobody gives me enough credit for winning the championship with talent alone... but don't take my magic bike away".

[22931]

I don't think a rev limit will reduce costs or if it does it would be nominal in the grand total of expenses.

I also find it hard to believe that limiting the revs would make it safer, maybe if they were 2 strokes.

[ducpainter]

Originally Posted by derby

kinda like a spec 800cc displacement limit... oh wait!

i don't think a uniform rev limit is that big of a deal. they imposed one in formula 1 (19k, in fact) after motors started turning over 21k.

what i DO think is amusing is stoner's comments read "nobody gives me enough credit for winning the championship with talent alone... but don't take my magic bike away".

but it does kind of take away from the idea of 'the pinnacle' of moto racing with technological restrictions being imposed.

[tufty]

Originally Posted by derby

kinda like a spec 800cc displacement limit... oh wait!

i don't think a uniform rev limit is that big of a deal. they imposed one in formula 1 (19k, in fact) after motors started turning over 21k.

what i DO think is amusing is stoner's comments read "nobody gives me enough credit for winning the championship with talent alone... but don't take my magic bike away".

I maybe wrong here, but weren't you the one who was condeming spec tires because this is supposed to be an "experimental prototype series"?

[derby]

Originally Posted by tufty

I maybe wrong here, but weren't you the one who was condeming spec tires because this is supposed to be an "experimental prototype series"?

among other things... but i don't think that a rev limit would be in the same category as a spec tire.

one popular argument against the spec tire was the potential loss of trickle down technology caused by the lack of competition.

one could argue the unlikelihood of consumer machines revving over 19k and an imposed rev limit would focus development on improving performance in less-stratospheric rev range, where trickle down would be relevant.

[darylbowden]

I think it's a lame idea. I know that F1 did it, but I'm against restrictions on GP racing altogether. IN fact, the only "rule" I would want is no traction control. And I would like that rule applied across all series (AMA, WSBK, GP, etc).

[gm2]

Originally Posted by derby

one could argue the unlikelihood of consumer machines revving over 19k and an imposed rev limit would focus development on improving performance in less-stratospheric rev range, where trickle down would be relevant.

however the effect (or not) of trickle down tech to consumer bikes isn't why MotoGP exists.

i'm glad they didn't go to a spec tire but i can understand the argument for it. if it had gone that way, fine, i get it.

but a rev limit flies in the face of the spirit of GP. unfortunately there is already precedence from F1, which is why the japanese would even try this one. they're still running scared and their giant egos still can't get out of the way.

if you want to control 'safety, reliability and cost issues'... run real works machines in WSBK.