PDA

View Full Version : the 800's, good or not?



Corny
19th July 2007, 19:06
after 9 (it were nine, not?) races in 800CC motogp, I think it's fair to give your opinion about the move..

I prefer the 990s to be honest, the sound of the bikes were better, it looked much more spectaculair (sliding all around, you only see that now a little bit with Stoner) and the electronics were not as important as they are now..
Also, there is a big big difference between horsepowers with the 800s. If you see the difference between f.e. Ducati and Suzuki, there should be time loss for Suzuki there..

That's how I think about it, now let me know what you think of it :D

ChrisS
19th July 2007, 19:39
I also prefer the 990s, as you said they were more spectacular, they were tougher to ride and at the same time more forgiving, I think they made a better show

The Phantom
20th July 2007, 16:21
You'd have to say that the move to 800cc has been an expensive and relatively pointless exercise... looking at what's different:

- cost of building bikes - UP, negative
- rideability of bikes (power) - easier, negative (skill levels diminish)
- handling of bikes - better, negative (if you're not from 250s forget about it)
- spectator appeal - similar, still some good racing
- wow factor - down, negative
- popularity of MotoGP - same, it's attracted no new fans
- sponsor appeal -same
- rider satisfaction - hard to gauge but most riders always want more grunt
- boffin factor - UP : ) the real benefactors are the engineers who get to play
- sales factor - well, I'm sure Ducati is selling more bikes this year!
- relevance factor - hard to call, unless you own a VFR800 : )

It could be argued that simply adding the tyre rule - and putting Stoner on a Duc - might have resulted in much the same season as we're seeing...

The real irony for me is that Honda, struggling mightily to make the RC212V work, was the main instigator of the 800cc rule.

ChrisS
20th July 2007, 18:18
nice breakdown of the main points Phantom, I think you are right at most of them.

I would like to add in sponsor appeal, 800cc as a racing formula may be the same for sponsors but the smaller size of the bikes is a negative.

If you look at the Ducati in GPs where they can ran Marlboro you will see 'rlboro' and 'Marlbo' in either side with the rest of the letters covered by the riders legs, the RC212V is almost a naked bike, leaving very little side space for sponsors.

The Phantom
20th July 2007, 18:47
Right on Chris, I completely missed that, and it's a big one. Probably completely unexpected by Dorna too...

Corny
20th July 2007, 20:01
btw, is it only me, or do you guys also think it's more difficult to overtake with the 800s? I've seen more passingmanouvres last year.. ( in a race I mean)

The Phantom
21st July 2007, 04:43
Most passing seems to happen under brakes with the 800s, unless you are Casey Stoner...

NinjaMaster
22nd July 2007, 04:38
I think there are good and bad aspects to the 800's. On the downside, they aren't as spectacular as the 990's and the riders don't enjoy them the same.
On the plus side, it gave Zook and Kwak a chance to start again and catch up faster than if the 990's remained. Overall, the spectacle hasn't diminished in my opinion with racing as close as ever, just the bike movement isn't as spectacular.
And I still reckon if a talented enough rider comes from Superbikes, they can still be fast on the 800, just like CV.

maxu05
22nd July 2007, 04:48
I am really enjoying the 800's myself, though, I can sede that they are not as brutal as the 990's. I think it's just the same as the switch from 2 stroke to 4 stroke, as the 2 strokes were more brutal than the 4 strokes, and now the 800's are less of a monster than the 990's. What will happen in 5--10 years when they are reduced to 600/500cc ? Will they still be as fast due to the technological advances ?

mx311
24th July 2007, 07:54
after 9 (it were nine, not?) races in 800CC motogp, I think it's fair to give your opinion about the move..
Personally, I don't like the 800's much. The 990's were far better imo and from haven ridden one I can see why the riders loved them so much.

The thing about the 800's as a whole though is that they are ultimately a failure. It didn't lure anyone new to MotoGP and it didn't reduce speeds and reduce the danger level. If anything, the speeds and danger have risen.

The racing is good yes, but then last year wasn't that bad was it? ;)

Gibbsy
24th July 2007, 16:01
Seems a costly and pointless exercise. Especially with the bikes carrying more corner speed.

However the racing is still great :up:

jim mcglinchey
24th July 2007, 19:45
The best thing about the change of formula is that it shook up the whole established order. Previously the races were between Honda and Yam with Duke getting the odd look in... then Rossi would win the championship.

As we now know, Yam and Honda moreso are struggling while Suzuki and Kwak are coming along in leaps and bounds and Ducati are dominant.Its the best thing that could've happened.

When are you posting photos of you on this Honda?

ChrisS
24th July 2007, 22:00
The best thing about the change of formula is that it shook up the whole established order. Previously the races were between Honda and Yam with Duke getting the odd look in... then Rossi would win the championship.

As we now know, Yam and Honda moreso are struggling while Suzuki and Kwak are coming along in leaps and bounds and Ducati are dominant.Its the best thing that could've happened.

Things aren't that different from last season in terms of where each bike is, much of the deference has to do with the tyres rather than the engine cc. I believe 990cc bikes this season would give similar results with the 800cc

fatman
24th July 2007, 22:51
I think the 800s are pretty exciting to watch but would be hard pressed to say if they were more or less exciting than the 990s.

I think the biggest change to this season has been the new tire rules. I think they are great and have provided a new level of unpredictability.

leopard
25th July 2007, 04:16
If you look at the Ducati in GPs where they can ran Marlboro you will see 'rlboro' and 'Marlbo' in either side with the rest of the letters covered by the riders legs, the RC212V is almost a naked bike, leaving very little side space for sponsors.
Nice you have paid such attention for space for sponsors, they should have resized the font in order to fit for the smaller space. I don't hope any viewer who read Marlboro to be Moralbore :laugh:

neninja
25th July 2007, 13:45
I think the 800cc bikes are fine. They are still early in development terms and the racing will get better as each manafacturer gets more from them.

It's the new tyre rules that's had the biggest impact for 2007. Now Bridgestone have a level playing field with Michelin unable to overnight special race tyres to Rossi, Pedrosa and Hayden it's really shaken things up.

Rossi is complaining about the new rule but Michelin had an unfair advantage during the European rounds previously. I think Michelin have been complacent and can see Repsol Honda on Bridgestones next year if they don't improve rapidly.

Ranger
25th July 2007, 14:20
They are still good, definately. However in acheiving what the FIM set out to do, they are a pointless exercise. It spiced up the order but everything else was pretty much good before (that's just based on my solitary year of watching Motorcycle racing :D ).

I sure hope that the FIM don't make this a habit. Because if it ain't broke, they shouldn't fix it. It often results in disappointment.

leopard
30th July 2007, 09:06
I am really enjoying the 800's myself, though, I can sede that they are not as brutal as the 990's.
which is better, 800 cc or 80 cc ?

ShiftingGears
30th July 2007, 13:46
I'm thinking that MotoGP shouldn't try going down the gauntlet of reducing engine size - history shows it doesnt make the bikes slower over a lap, but less spectacular. However I haven't really noticed it this year. They should give traction control the boot, as that will make the bikes slower(well, the ones who have riders with lesser throttle control ;) ). Traction control has done nothing positive for the specticle of motorsport.

leopard
31st July 2007, 09:01
Making the engine size smaller without having to make it slower wouldn't make the gauntlet to be going down, but for easier rideability that fits for smaller posture of rider like Stoner and Pedrosa.

You must have noticed for an extent of this issue that Stoner has stopped crashing from the last year's bigger bike and on the other hand he could break prolonged domination of Rossi, something you have to admit that this fact will jack up more interest of viewers for more competitive season.

If you didn't support Stoner, it has nothing to do with traction control, but arising question mark about patriotism ;)

osg
31st July 2007, 10:33
I love the 800's personally, we've had some cracking rounds this year. The main thing for me that has me questioning the merit of the category is the apparent "rideability" of the bikes. I listened to MotoGPod the other day and they mentioned that i think it was Roger Lee Hayden saying that he was amazed that you just get to the apex of the corner and just crack the throttle open and the electronics do the rest for you......

Hardly promotes top line ability on the Kawa if it's true. Can you imagine trying to do that on a 500cc in the late 90's?

NinjaMaster
31st July 2007, 14:18
Rossi always complained that the new 4-strokes didn't give the same level "emotion" as the old 2-bangers did. Much easier to ride but 4-stroke was definately the way to go for MotoGP but it brings riders of mid-pack ability closer to the front.

ArmchairBikeFan
31st July 2007, 17:51
Rossi always complained that the new 4-strokes didn't give the same level "emotion" as the old 2-bangers did. Much easier to ride but 4-stroke was definately the way to go for MotoGP but it brings riders of mid-pack ability closer to the front.

Surely that doesn't mean that Casey Stoner has mid-pack ability? :)
I'm not convinced by that argument, maybe the slow guys are closer in time but I don't see them finishing higher than they would otherwise. I mean, who's at the front? Stoner, Rossi, Pedrosa, Melandri (sometimes), not exactly mid-pack types.
The bikes are still crashable if you're a total clown (de Puniet), it's just likely to be a lowside rather than a highside. Power delivery doesn't really influence flying into a corner too quick or making a bone-headed passing move.

The Phantom
1st August 2007, 03:38
I listened to MotoGPod the other day and they mentioned that i think it was Roger Lee Hayden saying that he was amazed that you just get to the apex of the corner and just crack the throttle open and the electronics do the rest for you......

West said a similar thing, he's struggling with his starts as he just can't bring himself to go WOT and let the bike's brain do the work for him.

He also said he was having problems keeping the front wheel down on the straights, to which his mechanics said "You can't hold the throttle fully open on this bike!" :)

NinjaMaster
1st August 2007, 11:43
Surely that doesn't mean that Casey Stoner has mid-pack ability? :)
I'm not convinced by that argument, maybe the slow guys are closer in time but I don't see them finishing higher than they would otherwise. I mean, who's at the front? Stoner, Rossi, Pedrosa, Melandri (sometimes), not exactly mid-pack types.
The bikes are still crashable if you're a total clown (de Puniet), it's just likely to be a lowside rather than a highside. Power delivery doesn't really influence flying into a corner too quick or making a bone-headed passing move.

Not saying Stoner is mid-pack, the best will always be at the front regardless of the configuration. But there's no doubt that the bikes are now far easier to ride, hence journalists can jump on them and glow about how easy and smooth to ride they are. They could never say that about the old snarling 500's.



West said a similar thing, he's struggling with his starts as he just can't bring himself to go WOT and let the bike's brain do the work for him.

He also said he was having problems keeping the front wheel down on the straights, to which his mechanics said "You can't hold the throttle fully open on this bike!" :)

Perhaps West should get his launch control turned off. Stoner did that last year and was the best starter in the field. Nicky has proved that the electronics aren't always an improvement over a riders skill as well.

ShiftingGears
2nd August 2007, 11:00
Making the engine size smaller without having to make it slower wouldn't make the gauntlet to be going down, but for easier rideability that fits for smaller posture of rider like Stoner and Pedrosa.

You must have noticed for an extent of this issue that Stoner has stopped crashing from the last year's bigger bike and on the other hand he could break prolonged domination of Rossi, something you have to admit that this fact will jack up more interest of viewers for more competitive season.

If you didn't support Stoner, it has nothing to do with traction control, but arising question mark about patriotism ;)

My post had nothing to do with questioning drivers of the field, but making a broader comment about TC. It does nothing for motorsport. I also don't think reducing engine size to level the field(as you said) is a good idea at all. I'd like to think of MotoGP as sport, not entertainment. Part of being in a sport is that you build the best machinery and get the riders who can ride it fast. Having said that, I don't believe making it easier for riders is a good idea, the machines and circuits should be there to seperate the men from the boys. There have been years in Motorcycling where riders have been dominant and yet next year, the championship still existed.

ArmchairBikeFan
2nd August 2007, 12:59
The trouble with the 500cc 2-strokes was that they were just too vicious. It's one thing having bikes that are difficult to ride fast, it's another thing having bikes that are dangerous to ride fast.
I mean, look at Garry McCoy. Very, very quick, but every few races he'd get flung over the high side and break something. He was good enough to win races on a 500, but the slightest mistake and he was out of action for months.
I don't really like the idea of traction control, but it has probably reduced injuries and hasn't actually let any slow idiots win races.

leopard
3rd August 2007, 09:00
The apparent difference between circuit of motogp or motorsport in general and gladiator arena, circuit has series of rules where every aspect of the sport and entertaining factor are scrutinized for account of safety of the rider and all personal involved in the series, while gladiator has a very tiny extent on safety and humanize the fighter as long as it was entertaining and drawing more betting on money the better.

It is hardly to understand opinion on making an easier and friendlier bike for the rider is not a good idea. They, the rider, would put every effort as much as possible to be the fastest and won over everyone, therefore speed is the first and the most important thing in view of winning the race for every rider, regardless how hard and how dangerous it would be. Facilitating the rider with safer equipment without having to significantly power it down I would call it a brilliant idea.

TC was programmed in accordance with performance and character of every race, because every race has different character, different whether, different surface and so fort. Hence it was suppose to ease rider handling the bike in more proper manner. I’d rather pull the throttle and the clutch half way softly as effect of that apparatus than have to manually and fully pull it with our power, because it will spend considerable part of our energy and influencing riders’ concentration and their endurance.

:)