A new rule in Moto GP that would require the bike/rider combination to meet a minimum weight is gaining momentum with the likes of Valentino Rossi and Marco Simoncelli, two of the bigger riders, pushing it for next year. What do you think?
Dani Pedrosa is one of the smaller riders, and he has nearly 50 pounds’ weight advantage versus the largest riders he competes against. Everyone admits this is an advantage on acceleration out of corners, and with regard to fuel consumption. Nicky Hayden also claims that heavier riders wear out tires more quickly.
Pedrosa counters that his size puts him at a disadvantage when it comes to braking and mid-corner traction.
We think the biggest issue is fuel consumption, which is restricted in Moto GP, of course, and requires larger riders to tune their bikes more conservatively in order to finish races. Give us your thoughts.
Comment and vote Here. Let MotoGP Technical Director Mike Webb herar what the fans have to say.
https://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=58201805768&topic=16136
Adding weight to a smaller guys bike is a double negative for him. shouldn’t the larger guy have more strength? so then you want not only to add weight to the smaller guys bike but you want to throw also poor handling and more troublesome direction changes for him… Does he win every race? no… quit crying and go race.
Racing is great, don’t mess it up with a bunch of non sense rules.
He who crosses the finish line first wins. No Judging. Simple.
JC racing
If you think your weight is a disadvantage, you should seriously consider this ……… lose weight. By proposing a rule change because someone is lighter and shorter is almost like complaining that my rival has a faster bike and this gives him an advantage, so the authority should do something to make his bike slower.
Its not a case of losing weight you tarzer, do you think Rossi is carrying access fat!! It is purely down the physical size which equates to weight. When you are in a sport where power to weight is 90% of everything, and then they go and reduce cc (probably driven by Honda at the time), there should be some form of governance. I can imagine the frustration riding at top level giving it all and knowing that the midget has the advantage (regardless in which camp or bike he is on). Did you see the way Padroza flew past Lorenzo in Jerez, Estoril and Losail, that my friend was not just the power of Honda.
What a pleasure if the rule does materialize, use to race in a local series where I would get clobbered by chaps half my weight who had no talent. Same holds for gp. A midget on a 999s would out accelerate heavier chaps on 1098Rs’! And midgets on 1098R could not be touched.
For those complaining about not wanting ballast added to the bikes, guess what? They already do. The change involves adding the rider’s weight to the equation. This is a good idea. This will result in allowing talented riders of all sizes the opportunity to compete, not just the guys 5’4″/120lbs or less. It will allow more opportunity which I would think everyone would be ok with.
It’s not going to limit anything, except maybe the advantage that the little guys have. I for one don’t want to see the sport breed a generation of lilliputian riders. Let’s give all talented riders the opportunity.
I agree with the intent of the equalized weight, but feel that it can still be advantageous to lighter riders by allowing them to improve the handling (by proper weight placement), increase performance (by allowing HD parts), and/or lower costs (less exotic materials). I would much rather they get rid of traction control.
sorry guys, if any of you are for this new rule (may i suggest) it’s because you are not in possession of all the facts. you’re over simplifying. you’re stopping just short of the ACTUAL answer. human nature this, so you can be forgiven. however (comma) the reality is vehicle dynamics of motorbikes are markedly DIFFERENT from automobiles. in the rush to spare ourselves the “mental energy”, we can’t be so quick to mix our apples and oranges (again, human nature). while yes, all the same laws of physics apply, there are however ADDITIONAL ones that you’re failing to account for. if success is your goal (and i universally assume that it is)…? you don’t get to “punch out at 5”. there’s more thinking (ie. work) to be done.
BOLLOCKS!
I can’t believe this idea is even being entertained. Should there be a maximum height for NBA players? Should David Knight be dissallowed from competing in hard enduros because of his height advantage? Should Ricky Carmichael have his trophies stripped because his diminutive size helped him get holeshots. Ridiculous.
totally agree, can’t believe this rule isn’t already in place!
F=MA, or A=F/M. This equalization rule has been needed for years. with the technical precision being executed now days, it is only logical to eliminate this variable. F1 has long had the rule for that reason. why should pigmies (and i am one) have such an advantage? top level racing is a manufacturers’ commercial venture, unlike basketball and football, which are team ventures.
Comments on other comments:
-yes they do it in horse racing for exactly the same reason: to level the playing field. The response that this is done by “the racing moguls to randomize the results” is too funny. yeah, the man is trying to keep us down!
-the comments suggesting that “they just relax all the rules” will lead to “he who has the most money will win it all”. in other words, Honda will blow everyone else away and all the other manufacturers will just quit. bye bye motogp. the rules makers are doing a great job keeping Ducati, Honda, and Yamaha interested and competitive, and fostering fantastic racing. if the worldwide economy hadn’t gone in the dumper, the fields would likely be larger and Kawasaki and Suzuki would have had more $ to perhaps stay more competitive.
Not as straightforward as F1 for example. The movement of rider weight is part of riding. So if it was equal total weight there would be a disadvantage for lighter riders having a heavier bike and having less body mass to move it from corner to corner. I would say, give the heavier riders more gas based on a computed scale. And add a factored weight (say 30%) to equalize.. fine tune as necessary.
Makes perfect sense to me. I’m surprised there’s discussion. Horsepower to weight is much more critical in motorcycle racing than in any other motorsport. Even the playing field so the winners are determined by rider skill and manufacturer ability. Isn’t that what its all about anyway?
dont do that rule; I like gsf’s post. it’s moto gp not ama racing. Let them spend themselves crazy, let’s see more innovation and not more rules.
Why the hell don’t we just have IDENTICAL ROBOTS on IDENTICAL Machinery – C’MON, REALLY !!!
I’m not in favor of it. You know if Dani was winning all the races I’d say something but he hasn’t. I don’t want to see ballast on bikes. That’s ridiculous. It’s a sport which favors smaller riders anyway. What someone lacks in competetive size they can make up for in ability. Remember Aaron Yates at 6’1″? Yeah, he played 2nd fiddle to Mladin for years…maybe it was his size, maybe not as talented but whatever. I don’t want to start having them add weight to bikes…that’s dumb.
I’m not very good looking and have the IQ of a coke bottle, so does that give me one lap head start?
Big guy’s play contact sport and little guy’s play quarterback, race horses and motorcycles.
Even the playing field and eliminate electronic controls – then see how the leaderboard changes!!
In all forms of racing no matter what….lighter is faster.
Full out unrestricted prototypes may be interesting but will produce one offs of little possible development. I think Moto GP manufacturers should have several formats that they race and choose their tracks where they apply them. This would mean after a manufacturer sets their platform they choose the races they run under different levels of restriction, perhaps 3 levels from a minimum number of races at level 1 with field levelling restrictions, a certain minimum number of races less restricted and then a race or two with almost no restrictions. This woud make it interesting who shows up where running what and would allow for some more experimental trickle down for street.
Surely this will be a huge advantage to the lighter guys? They will need to add weight to make the limit – the engines and trannys will be able to be made stronger and they will get more races out of each engine before being forced to swap over. They will be able to push harder in qualifying and racing knowing their engines will take it. I just can not see an upside to this rule.
Sounds like an appropriate idea…
QUESTION: If the little guys have to add weight but it’s still to their advantage to locate that weight strategically, to enhance handling on their machine, does this lead to the suggestion of yet another rule to mitigate the first?
Whadyathink? – Ian Danby
rule rule everywhere a rule, f#ckin’ up the competition breakin’ the OEM.
Do this, don’t do that; can’t you read the rule?
Less is more.
The discussion should be about reducing restrictions, not imposing more limits.
Rossi is the only reason this is even a topic.
Purist,
Matt
I’m all for that. Keep it simple. Limit the materials used. No crazy expensive materials. No other restrictions other than something that has a pulse and weighs at least 100 pounds has to be aboard. I they want to strap a monkey onto a turbine engined bike and ride the thing by remote control I’m good with that.
Then comes silly season and Bobo jumps ship to some electric rig because the whine of the turbine give him the runs.
I feel that a combined bike and rider weight limit is fitting. Given the rules mandating obsolete engine technology, I feel that it’s the next logical step.
As the rules eventually mandate steam engines and then horse drawn “motorcycles” the rule will make more and more sense. They might as well get started now.
I wonder if they will start mandating retro tracks too. It would be interesting to see how the racing attire industry responds to board tracks with some sort of anti-splinter technology. It could spawn a new armor technology for the military and law enforcement sector.
This is done in throughbred racing, to level the competitive advantage.
Thoroughbred racing is not a sport, it is an excuse to gamble. By making horses carry extra weight, the racing moguls try to randomize the results, keeping the punters happily throwing away the family paycheck. This has nothing whatsoever to do with bike racing.
If a guy has to go through life at 110 lbs, let him have an advantage somewhere! Motogp is supposed to be prototype racing. Get rid of all the stupid rules and let them RACE! I hate races that are won by fuel mileage or low pit times. That is not RACING!
Sorry, but the claim that lighter weight puts you at a disadvantage in braking and mid-corner is laughable. Yes, friction force is determined by the weight of the rider. Unfortunately for Pedrosa’s argument, there is also less friction force required to achieve the same turn at a given speed. In an ideal situation, the turning speed should be independent of the mass and Pedrosa would be just as fast as any other rider. In the real world, Pedrosa might struggle mid-corner because he has less weight to hang off of the bike. In braking, however, his low weight is an advantage because it lowers the bike’s center of gravity and reduces the bike’s tendency to shift weight forward under braking.
Think about it for a second, all of motorsport knows that lighter vehicles handle better. I can’t imagine why Pedrosa would think differently.
I am all for a combined limit.
The thing that some people seem to be overlooking is that these guys are all incredibly fit. They’re all thin. However, a 6 foot thin guy is going to carry more weight than a 5’4″ thin guy. So why penalize a guy for being 6’0″ if you have options (this isn’t the NBA where you don’t have decent options to level the playing field.)
Also, if weight is such an advantage in cornering to offset the power / acceleration advantages of a smaller person, then why don’t we see the 5’4″ guys adding weight to the bikes? It’s because the acceleration advantages outweight the advantages of more weight in cornering.
As it stands, being a lighter rider may have a small advantage but next year that is going to change with the increase in engine displacement anyways. Going back to 1000cc machines will require more rider skill to tame the beasts. The engines will be slightly detuned to get the power to the ground, which will allow for a more even playing field. I believe that the fuel limit rule is stupid. Let the bikes race, they should allow for plenty of fuel to be consumed. The teams would be stupid to put more fuel than needed in the bikes anyways. But if the bike needs to be tuned a little richer to produce the horsepower desired than so be it.
re: “they should allow for plenty of fuel to be consumed. The teams would be stupid to put more fuel than needed in the bikes anyways.”
EXCELLENT point. same as F1, fuels density already makes it “self-regulating” to a degree.
+1 Fuel rules are idiotic in racing.
While I come from a karting background where everything is done on combined weight, I just can’t see it in MotoGP.
As has been mentioned: would it then be fair that Rossi hustles around a 300 pound bike, and little Dani has to wrestle a 350 pound bike around the track?
I say leave it as is. Maybe even drop the minimum weight on the bike a bit, and give them all the fuel they want. Turn them back into black striping machines!
Weight limits for bike and rider combined? No… Screw that. The pinnacle of motorsport is meant to be a touch uncompromising bitch of a place. Here is what these rule making monkeys should do.
1. No Fuel limit.
2. No fuel type restrictions.
3. Engine crank cases, crank, rods must be from a production motorcycle.
4. Minimum engine size 1000cc, max who cares!
4. Engine must be turbo charged.
5. minimum boost 15PSI regulated by a control wastegate and boost system.
6. Control ECU – limited traction control, wheelie control
Every manufacturer currently makes a bike that fits the base for these rules. Anyone can enter as long as they abide by the rules.
You would have the best racing ever! Only the truely gifted maniacs out there could ride them!
Wait, unfair advantage due to smaller size?
Does anyone think there should be the same limitations in NBA too? NFL? MMA?
Why is it that when you have a height/weight advantage in sports it’s fine… except Motorcycle racing? I say we are all born and have to make the best of what we have. No one is putting caps or restrictions on NBA player heights or NFL player weight, why do we have to restrict the one thing shorter/lighter people have an advantage on?
Boxing has weight classes… Lighter boxers are allowed to fight heavier boxers if they like, but a heavier boxer [b]has[/b] to lose weight to fight a lighter guy.
Of course there should be a minimum bike & rider combined limit. Anyone who has ever competed in kart racing at any level knows the importance of having a combined limit. Without one the 15 pound lighter driver will win every time. Ridiculous that there isn’t one today–regardless of the power the bikes make.
apples to oranges my friend. it’s more complex. other than the common denominator of forward/back motion, 4-wheelers like karts, autos, and open wheel F1 basically operate on 3 degrees of movement (X,Y,Z) pitch, yaw, and up/down. single track vehicles (ie. motorcycles) also operate on 3 degrees of movement, but it’s pitch, yaw, and roll. it’s the substitution of this variable of “roll angle in degrees” for the vertical Y-axis (and the exponentially larger displacement values involved with all 3) that changes CONSIDERABLY how one goes about the task of managing vehicle dynamics. again, it’s more complex… no aero packages here and increased weight IMPROVES mechanical grip so reaching for the “ez button” is not the option it once was.
Nor has it panned out that the lightest rider in MotoGP wins every time.
How about unlimited everything? Fuel, engine, etc. The actual racing will determine what goes fastest around the track. Oh, but then it gets “too expensive”. I thought this was the premier racing class. Maybe my suggestion would be entertaining but astronomically expensive to win.
Still, limiting fuel in premier class racing seems silly. It will probably self-limit anyway as carrying too much fuel will have negative consequences of their own.
I’m totally down with it. They’re finding hobbit sized riders these days.
Yes, there should be a min. total weight, it is not fare that some riders weigh 50# less than most. They have that in most racing already and it is huge advantage to be lighter!
regarding this issue, i say no. as much as i’m all for applying the science of power/weight ratios, this does smell a bit of “belly-aching”. 99 times out of 100, i side with a rider’s complaints, but sorry, not on this one. you’re flagged fellas. if we go there, hell we may as well just adopt CAN-SBK (eh?) or old FUSA rules and make the class dyno controlled (250hp limited).
now if parity in power/weight were going to happen…? it should’ve been cried for back when we switched to the “gutless wonder” 800’s… not NOW when we were about switch to 1000’s (10cc’s larger than even the old 990’s)…?! puuuhhhlease, just allow everybody an extra .5 liter in tank size and be done with it.
My rules
1. NO FUEL LIMIT – get as much power out of your engine and optimize weight of fuel as you desire
2. LOWER BIKE WEIGHT – if they lower the bike weight to 300lbs(or what ever reasonable number) then get rid of all ballast. combined
3. NO COMBINED WEIGHT LIMIT – both bike guys and amml guy have their advantages in different parts – not statistically relevant discussion
4. MORE POWER THAN YOU CAN USE – 1000cc less restrictive, no fuel will bring more power than one can use and eliminate this stupid debate of weight
5.
It is rediculous that they dont already have this rule. With bikes and riders being so light (unlike cars) , the small difference in weight can make for large differences in performance. People can only change their bodies so much by losing weight etc.
There should absolutely be a rule allowing bike plus rider to be a certain minimum. This evens the playing field and makes your advantages and disadvantages based on your skills (and teams money unfortunately) .
A good way to look at these situations is always to take it to the extreme…..what if a very small person (aka Pedrosa) is in the championship hunt with a larger one (aka rossi) with a 50lb weight difference that can amount to 10 % or more of total bike and rider weight. In some racing venues a 1 or 2 % difference can be huge.
That is sooooo stupid. There will never be parity in any human endeavor. Do we have height limits with basketball players, weight limits on sumo wrestlers, talent limits on anything else? Hey, if you don’t fit the profile than change it or do something else.
Exactly! If weight was a decisive factor in Sumo wrestling and you were spotting 30 pounds to your biggest competitor then better get on down to the Sushi bar. If being lighter gave an advantage of flexibility then better take some hot laps around the Sushi bar. Wait a minute, there’s a better solution, if a wrestler weighs more than prime let’s fill his lungs with helium to make him lighter. If he’s less than optimum weight we’ll have him wear lead weights to even the playing field.
If a team feels they just have to have parity in overall weight then let them find a lighter rider.
Boxing has weight limits.
The fuel rule is stupid…Adding more weight to your bike when you weigh 30 lb more than an other rider is also stupid… We need rules against stupid rules…
I read somewhere that the yamaha M1 was much lighter than the min. weight required in moto GP.. So they added ballast in various locations that effected its overall handeling..Wouldn’t it be better to ballance the difference with combined weight by allowing the bike to weigh less to compensate for the heavyier rider…It doesn’t realy mean lighter riders will need to ride a bike that weighs more but heavy riders can instead ride a lighter bike ?
Has any rider ever had fuel issues? I’ve heard them talk about backing off a bit because of tire wear, but never heard any rider say he had to slow because fuel was getting low.
My must not follow MotoGP very closely. The stupid fuel limitation has affected many races in the last few years. The bikes don’t run out of gas, the ECU starts reducing fuel (i.e. power) until it calculates the riders has enough to finish the race. Pretty much all the riders have complained about the power disappearing late in the race.
I’m not opposed to a combined weight limit but the real problem in MotoGP these days is the stupid FIM reducing displacement to 800 CC and ridiculously small fuel load allowed.
Next year the 1000 will be back, if the FIM recovers from its HUA status and lets the teams decide how much fuel to carry I think a minimum combined weight will be unnecessary.
JMHO,
Goose
“HUA”? Thought about this one for a while, still can’t figure it out. And I can’t find my acronym dictionary.
Head Up in the Air. Or something like that…
This is ridiculous. If “jockey-sized” riders like Dani Pedrosa won the championship every year, one could say that there was a size/weight issue. Winning the MotoGP championship requires a good level of fitness and a good bike package. End of story.
re: “This is ridiculous. If “jockey-sized” riders like Dani Pedrosa won the championship every year, one could say that there was a size/weight issue.”
exactly, both dani and casey are known for going down faster than “2-dollar” whores. meanwhile rossi has bagged 2 titles in the gutless 800 era, nicky bagged a 990, and giant simoncelli bagged a title on a ‘250 in the modern era.
i think dani is right, there are advanteges and disadvantages having a low weight,
so finish with that rule of fuel comsumption,
which, to begin, is there for what reason ????
Having to save fuel in a MotoGP race has got to be one of the most ridiculous rules on planet earth!
If that remains, then yes, the weights must be equal.
Absolutely!!!
The greatest and longest standing professional racing has always had combined weight guidelines/rules.
I helped my Gramps when he raced horses. There was always a weight balancing factor.
I always get a kick out of guys/gals carrying 20 extra pounds of belly/butt who spend major $$$ putting titanium and carbon fiber all over their bikes.
Anyone who thinks rider weight is not a factor just didn’t do well in physics class!
I think that fuel consumption is that issue, because if limit would be same for 1000cccm engines like is atm for 800cccm, there is no reason why factories should switch to for bigger engine, or they just cant use him for his full potencial. FIM or Dorna should ask for data about consumption, compare it with heavy and light riders and find our right ratio for some weight categories and then give them a bit more fuel. Othervise we will see in front only small riders, boring races + huge investment from factories, what certainly wasnt goal of switching back to 1000ccm.
It seems like adding a minimum weight would just be one more regulation to stifle development of new technology. Get rid of the fuel limitations, that’s a far simpler solution. If light riders have an advantage, so be it. That’s just one more factor in determining a winning season.
i say if they move forward with this rule…? then rossi must cease and desist sticking his leg out in turns. 🙂 i’m gonna saw that frickin’ limb off…!!! LOL the only thing he’s doing there is “dynamically” using his EXTRA weight to HIS advantage. in contrast, static ballast on a motorcycle doesn’t afford you that option. once the race is underway, if it ain’t correctly placed…? you’re stuck.
Forget all these restrictions, what about motocross style? Instead of one race, how about two, shorter ones? Best average takes the overall, and fans get to see two different races… Tire problems would be solved for heavier riders, so they can let it hang out more!
Problem solved.
I used to hate the idea of any regulations, but now that they regulate fuel I only think it’s fair that they even out everyone’s total weight.
My preferred way would be to not regulate fuel, let them burn as much as they need, but to appease the greenies they can’t do that so instead make it even and regulate weight.
I’m looking forward to seeing MotoGP turned into andro-riddled gorillas riding 300hp pocketbikes. That would be fun!
The problem with not making the weight minimum inclusive of the rider is that, if it applies only to the bike, then uniformity of accelerated mass is not genuinely accomplished. If the goal is to achieve uniformity of accelerated mass, then it is necessary that the weight minimums be inclusive of the rider. The only alternative that gets around the conundrum is to do away with the weight minimums altogether. It therefore seems to me that the more interesting question for debate is whether the weight minimums are even desirable to begin with.
I agree directionaly.. but the minimum weight rule is there most racing forms to prevent cost escalation is search of exotic materials and engineering them.
Makes sense to have as even a playing field as possible. Always amazed that this wasn’t implemented years ago. Hard to argue that part of Dani’s appeal to HRC was his tiny weight affecting the bike and tires.
But using Dani as a specific example it hasn’t been shown that his light weight and size has translated into pdium finishes each time he’s raced. I think it’s just good ol’ whining at its best.
supermodels and MotoGP riders are too skinny these days; something must be done!
i see lucrative McDonalds and Burger King sponsorships in our future…!? 🙂
You haven’t seen what’s next. A limit in shoe size to no more than size 9 (US). It is believed that riders with a larger shoe have an unfair leverage advantage with the gear lever, making gear changes faster. Unfortunately, this had lead to some riders amputating toes and binding their feet in order to comply. After that they’re going to look at wind resistance in respect to riders with long necks. I’m not even going to tell you what riders are thinking of doing if that goes into effect!
MotoGP is an open class, let’s not dilute it down with this stuff. It’s all part of what factors in for each team.
I believe it makes sense. Either that, or do away with the fuel limits or the one tire manufacturer choice. Anything that will make the racing closer, I’m all for it. I don’t believe with the bigger motors that acceleration will be such a big issue for the larger riders next year, but something needs to be done to make these races more competitive. I agree I don’t want to see them reach NASCAR extremes, as far as restrictions and rules, but nothing wrong with a little balance to try to sort our who is really the best rider. MotoGP has been boring as heck since going to the smaller motors, that much is undisputable.
I understand the viewpoint here about the best rider. But as I’ve mentioned before, for me it’s all about the machines and the engineering that goes into them. Yes, I like some of the riders but not that crowning the best rider is all that important to me. I’d love to see some of the engineers who developed new technology and won with it be placed on the podium. Riders are certainly a big part of the equation but not the only part. I don’t want the engineering dumbed down in order to even the playing field for the riders. Let them apply their own skills to overcome other areas.
AFAIK, both 125cc and Moto2 have combined weights totals. Since a small vehicle such as a MotoGP has such a small mass, the weight of the rider is very important. Dani is too small and weak to ride his big bad ‘sickle? He does win races, he doesn’t seem to have the brainpower to put together a championship.
A total weight would mean that ballasting would aid the engineers and be one more thing that adds to the parade lap style of MotoGP.
I say go for it. Total weight suggestion, 1,000 KG. :-))
Shut up and race!
Spec tires end tire wars, what will spec (or minimum) weights do to suspension development? One can argue that it levels the field, placing restrictions, but why not let the companies run what they can afford to? I’d love to see a field of bikes where it is how fast can you afford to go with no restrictions on engines, tires, suspension or aerodynamics on both two and four wheels. Will that ever happen? No, but it would be cool to see what comes from it…
I hate to see these restrictions. Lets keep it simple.
We certainly don’t want to get like nascar.
It would really be great to run what you brung!!!!
re: “We certainly don’t want to get like nascar”
you sure about that…? i wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss nascar. not a fan persay, but definitely a fan of the business model. if only we motorcyclists can stop and be objective for a sec, there IS something we can learn from their healthy economics. fan support of the franchise, fan support of the sponsors, etc. consumer behavior is the key. it always has been.
I’m not anti NASCAR. They definitely get some things right. My biggest problem with NASCAR is they simply allow too many cars on the track. Way too many laps are ran under the caution flag. Nothing fun about watching that.
Rossi’s heavy? 🙂
Race what you brung, that includes yourself. If you’re a fat bastard lose some weight, if you make spaghetti look thick eat a cheeseburger, and if your bike is slow ride something faster. Quit bellyaching and race!
This is the norm in many other sports. Seems to make sense to me.
Even with Pedrosa’s light weight, he hasn’t won any MotoGP Championship yet unlike Mr. Rossi who’s heavy and won many champioships already. So what’s the issue here?
One is skilled the other is just light?
I beleave this idea has merit. Weight the riders at the begining of the season, take the average weight and make that the add on weight for riders under the average weight.
Then let the teams add the weight in any manor they want as long as it is safe. It would be fun just to see the ideas they would comeup with.
The factories can get plunty crazy. Does anyone else remeber the Randy Imola factory test fram they made of ultra light tubing and then charged the fram with inert gas to try and regain thestrength and rigidity.
No, this is a bad idea.
1) Smaller riders will have to push around heavier bikes and bigger riders have to push around lighter bikes. I agree with that.
2) Aerodynamics will still be a factor. The bigger guys will complain about that too. Spec fairings anyone?
3) Once you start down this path you will wind up with NASCAR on two wheels.
4) The only fair way to do this is to examine every part for the forces it exerts on the dynamic aspects of a motorcycle and adopt a sliding scale of weights for things like wheels and tires (rotational mass), crankshafts, etc., so the bigger guy’s bikes are harder to steer and such so their weight isn’t an advantage.
5) In tarmac racing cars the center of mass stays relatively close to the same position relative to the ground all the time. You can ballast the vehicle much easier to obtain optimum weight distribution and it doesn’t affect the steering very much. In motorcycles the CoG shifts position relative to the ground much more and the location of that weight would affect the steering to a much greater degree.
6) This is petty bickering because of the idiotic fuel limitations. Let them run as much fuel as they need to and quit the economy run. It didn’t work in Group C auto racing and it sucks everywhere else they’ve tried it.
7) Coming next: The NBA is going to have lower hoops for the small guys they’re going to have to hire to be politically correct and Michael Phelps is going to have to swim in a pool of corn syrup to equalize for age differences in the next Olympics. Sign up Grandpa. All in the name of equal results.
8) The drivers are not really part of the aerodynamic package and are less of a percentage of the weight of the vehicle. The drivers are also locked down so they don’t influence the handling the way a motorcycle rider does.
I do agree that the fuel limit should be removed. Give them 6+ gallons if they so choose. The rider will have to decide if the weight penalty for all that fuel is worth it…
I think this is going too far. There comes a point that you just have to let each physical specimen figure out how to go fastest with the machine he has. It is an important part of the overall calculation strategies of racing like power vs fuel economy, and tire grip vs tread life. Otherwise what is next? Varying the effectiveness of steering dampeners (dampers?) based of the riders’ most recently measured forearm strength?
If a guy is too big to ride in motorcycle racing, let him take up cars…or tractor pulls, or America’s Cup yachts.
Too big is too big. But how small is too small? Pedrosa weighs maybe 110 lbs. in gear… The rest of the riders have a wrestling mentality where they have to cut weight to be competitive.
Which makes it hard for Americans because we are all either tall or fat.
I’m not a Pedrosa fan. I’d love to see him have to muscle a heavy bike around, but it’s not fair, so I’d have to say no. But, I don’t wanna see little jockeys picked over real riders and make it into thoroughbred racing. Big talented racers such as Ben Spies might still find a way (probably will) to win but it would be nice to see a level field. Ballasting a bike is bad, but at least a heavier rider can shift weight to advantage whereas a bike is stuck where it’s stuck.Drag racing has dealt with this dilema but they don’t have the radical shifting on all axis.
If a small, light rider like Dani Pedrosa has such a weight advantage, then how come he hasn’t won the MotoGP championship. Valentino Rossi has won the championship a number of times and his size didn’t seem to disadvantage him. Sounds like a bit of a whinge.
Pedrosa isn’t very consistant. And atleast in the past, if the bike wasn’t perfect he couldn’t ride around the problems.
As long as the min. weight isn’t too high, it seems like a way to even things out. If the min. weight is so high that all combined weights are the same then you’ve got the smallest riders muscling around the heaviest bikes, which doesn’t seem fair either.
Excellent point Mike. A worst case scenario: The heavy guys get really light and flickable bikes, while the light guys have to muscle really heavy bikes. That doesn’t sound fair.
I do like the bike/rider weight limit…so there has to be some happy middle ground here.
I totally agree with it. Like said above, it would let the riders skill set and bike itself be the deciding factor. I did track days on my R1 in the Advanced class and at 6’2″ 255 lbs., I had everything against me to keep up with the skinny / short guys. Fuel consumption, tire wear, braking, accelorating, etc. Being lighter is always and advantage in most catagories.
Who’s winning now heavy, light, or neither. I don’t see an issue personally.
I am surprised that it took this long for them to come up with an idea like this… The bigger guys shouldn’t have to become annorexic (sp?) to compete with abnormally small people like Pedrosa.
What should the minimum weight be then? 500 lbs? 520 lbs? 150-160 lbs for a rider in gear sounds fairly reasonable… Another 350 or so lbs for the bike? 500 lbs total? More?
Many forms of racing have a minimum weight for driver/car combined, Formula 1 being the most prominent. I know that bikes are a little different but I think it would work well for MotoGP. Lets have a nice even playing field and let rider skill and engineering be the deciding factors.
Minimum weights are used all over motorsport. I think it makes sense. It would do a little more to level the field. It would seem to make even more sense with the rider being a much higher percentage of the overall weight versus cars.