Aprilia quits the new Moto2 class following the FIM decree that all
particiating manufactures must use Honda engines and Dunlop tyres.
"The group believes that involvement in races where all competitors
must necessarily use the engine technology of a rival constructor
would serve no purpose and would be detrimental to its image as a
leading Italian and European motorcycle manufacturer," a statement
from Aprilia owner Piaggio
Can't fault that statement.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKGEE5AN1RD20091124

On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 06:21:45 -0800 (PST), Baldy <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Aprilia quits the new Moto2 class following the FIM decree that all
>particiating manufactures must use Honda engines and Dunlop tyres.
>"The group believes that involvement in races where all competitors
>must necessarily use the engine technology of a rival constructor
>would serve no purpose and would be detrimental to its image as a
>leading Italian and European motorcycle manufacturer," a statement
>from Aprilia owner Piaggio
>Can't fault that statement.
>
>http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKGEE5AN1RD20091124

Spec motors have been the plan for some time now. Why are you and
Aprilia just now choosing to make a fuss about it?

I don't think Moto2 is designed for having direct factory teams. It's
a chassis building series designed to bring in the (relatively) lower
budget independent teams. Teams run by aftermarket performance shops,
dealership consortiums, and such. Judging by the number of team
applications they had to turn away, it seems the formula has
widespread acceptance for controlling costs, leveling the field, and
leaving just enough room to tune for the best to succeed. Aprilia
really doesn't belong there as a factory effort.

I fail to see how it's a disgraceful monopoly.

On Nov 30, 7:19*pm, Dave <n...@home.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Nov 2009 06:21:45 -0800 (PST), Baldy <vo...@hotmail.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> >Aprilia quits the new Moto2 class following the FIM decree that all
> >particiating manufactures must use Honda engines and Dunlop tyres.
> >"The group believes that involvement in races where all competitors
> >must necessarily use the engine technology of a rival constructor
> >would serve no purpose and would be detrimental to its image as a
> >leading Italian and European motorcycle manufacturer," a statement
> >from Aprilia owner Piaggio
> >Can't fault that statement.
>
> >http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKGEE5AN1RD20091124
>
> Spec motors have been the plan for some time now. *Why are you and
> Aprilia just now choosing to make a fuss about it?
> ...
>
> I fail to see how it's a disgraceful monopoly.

I agree and second that thought.

I don't think how it is a monopoly when it is not like (a) Honda is
likely to turn it into a competitive differentiator (b) Honda is not
likely to turn it into a very profitable operation (c) the motor
honors are likely to be passed around the different vendors over the
years.

I think it would be a major competitive differentiator if a different
chassis with a Honda motor wins the championship though. It'd be a
major proof of superior handling know how for the brand, and sportbike
riders appreciate that...

It is a shame the exotic chassis makers are not as much en vogue
anymore as they were many years ago. It'd be nice if the Moto2 grid
had some Bimotas, Bakker, Egli...

I had rather hoped that this class would not take shape, after all
part of racing is determined by success away from the racetrack ie.
Win on Sunday, sell on Monday. Aprilia obviously aren't constrained by
finance so they do not want this 'production' class and that is part
of prototype racing - winning by the failure of your opponent due to
cost of racing and development. This halfbreed series will focus on
the personality of the racer and ignore the now diminished role of the
constructor. It isn't always a bad thing to have a clearly dominant
machine because I'd bet my bottom dollar that the one thing we'll see
more of next year from the Moto2 is going to be accidents - lots and
big. Its what always happens when a lot of guys with equal machines go
get to race. The macabre spectacle might appeal to some but don't kid
yourself, many racers who have had a fearsome crash (determined as
'the big one') are never the same again and there is sure to be a
hefty share in this new series.

On Dec 1, 1:43*pm, Baldy <vo...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> ... isn't always a bad thing to have a clearly dominant
> machine because I'd bet my bottom dollar that the one thing we'll see
> more of next year from the Moto2 is going to be accidents - lots and
> big. Its what always happens when a lot of guys with equal machines go
> get to race ..

I think accidents also happen when guys on inferior machines ride them
too hard to try to win. I think the opposite argument could be made
too. The one thing I never ever hope for in motorcycle racing is
accidents. I certainly hope your prediction doesn't come true. I do
think even with "equal" machines the best riders tend to be able to
set them up better. After a while it is never a coincidence that the
best riders and the best machines seem to come together on most
occasions.

Its not like the FIM are breaking new ground here, there has been
successive regimentation of motorcycle design from them since the
second world war. The engineer Dennis Jones (Derbyshire) built a
number of motorcycles for Grand Prix racing and was able to enter them
for competition. He built a 500cc 2 stroke 4 cylinder with
supercharger and would have raced this but for the FIM baning
superchargers after WW2. I am sure that many other equally meritorious
machines have been built by other engineers but thats not the point.
If we remove the time line we have - a ban on supercharging or
turbo's, a restriction of the number of cylinders, a restriction of
the number of gears used, ban of oval pistons and now a ban of the
manufacture of an engine. Its all going to wards rental of a
constructed racing machine and that alone.
I accuse the FIM of instigating a monopoly* because here is a
lucrative series with television coverage and a lot of money at stake
for other manufacturers but the condition is that Honda 600cc engines
and Dunlop tyres are used. Other engines and tyres are available. I am
calling it a disgraceful monopoly because this is an international
organisation and for it to be subject to law, each participating
country would have to be approached concerning Monopolies and Mergers
legislation.
I would like to think that I am wrong about an increase of accidents
but now that all riders have the same engine and control tyre there
are two less reasons for winning. This series is expected to be 'elbow
to elbow' (MCN) and at speeds of over 170mph that can only mean a
greater possibility of danger.

*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly

Baldy <(E-Mail Removed)> Wed, 2 Dec 2009 10:13:07
>If we remove the time line we have - a ban on supercharging or
>turbo's, a restriction of the number of cylinders, a restriction of
>the number of gears used, ban of oval pistons and now a ban of the
>manufacture of an engine. Its all going to wards rental of a
>constructed racing machine and that alone.

And severe restrictions on streamlining.

There's all sorts of reasons for motorcycle racing. But one of the most
important is that it's extremely expensive and lucrative entertainment.
Unfortunately some times the money and the entertainment get in the way
of the technology.

--
Julian Bond E&MSN: julian_bond at voidstar.com M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173
Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/ T: +44 (0)192 0412 433
Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/ skype:julian.bond?chat
Keep Out