Posts
6438
Joined
10/16/2014
Location
Buda, TX
US
Edited Date/Time
10/21/2019 11:26am
Would Works Bikes bring an F1 / MotoGP type mystique back to the sport? Was the concept to keep the smaller manufacturer's from having to compete in an arms race?
The Homologation rule requiring 400 bikes was made when the sales were as much as 10 times more than they are today.
The Homologation rule requiring 400 bikes was made when the sales were as much as 10 times more than they are today.
after all in mid 80's we saw every day something new in technology but that only lasted until late 80's.
The Shop
A couple of years ago Honda ran a head om the 450 where the exhaust came out on the other side of the frame tube. So a totally different head than stock.
The yzf250 also ran billet blocks with built in electric starter at the time.
The european bikes are true works bikes but they never get the same hype as the old mid 80 hondas.
Not to mention the parity issues that come with the development structure of F1. Right now the fastest guy could hop on any bike and with some work win. That is absolutely not true in F1 or MotoGP. The more money you spend the more competitive you are, this sport needs the opposite.
Full works like you see in MotoGP are halo products, Marc Marquez and the works Honda are more about selling a bazillion 50cc Honda scooters in developing markets than they are about selling any CBR1000s.
If anything, maybe they should open it up to ebikes since I'm sure we will all be reading the shootouts on the 450 "E" in a few years...
might look production but thats about it
bending the rules would be common place.
even the riders meantion about being on a competitive bike.
450s even up a bit, but put one of the top guys on a stock one and watch him drop in places.
Whole thing has been complete bullshit since 01/01/86. The AMA could give two fucks about you, your racing, your rights...... Just keep them dues coming in. Absolute joke of an officiating body.......... They couldn't count there own balls twice in a row, and have the same answer both times.
https://dirtbikemagazine.com/two-stroke-tuesday-on-the-line-racing-cr12…
Let’s either go to a true production rule. (I.e. nothing other than tuning) or just eliminate it. I favor the latter.
P.s. listen to the Gary Jones pod cast. Very interesting piece of history.
At the time and this is before the rule change, factory bikes were light years ahead of production bikes.
They had up pipes, long travel suspension and water cooling long before those changes made to production bikes.
When the production rule came into effect, that gap closed almost over night.
So, imho, we as consumers are very fortunate to be able to purchase bikes that with a few mods can compete at a professional level.
There is no way a privateer could compete or afford to purchase specialty factory parts, that's even if that was an option.
I think the rule is a good thing for us non-factory riders.
Removing it would only create an even bigger gap between factory and privateer bikes.
Another thing, most factory development wouldn't make it to production bikes and waht we could by off the showroom floor would become dated, years behind what the factory pros are riding.
I think i'd be a mistake.
In GP's you can get a 450FE and stick A kit suspension in it, get Volleberg to do the motor, and a GET ECU and you are there , near enough. Factory finishing of engine parts and coatings and the like are all available. You just need ££.. but not like you did in the old days.
for the end consumer, it's only made it better. go back and read reviews of bikes in the mid-to-late 80s; it was basically anything honda, then everything else. that gap has closed dramatically, whether induced exclusively by racing is an argument to be had, but it's certainly had a positive change.
E-bikes are coming, and likely auto clutch/ transmission will likely evolve to keep the ICE bikes competitive. All of this so called "development" is over rated ideas poached from the auto industry and 50 years old. Water cooling, electric start, fuel injection, disc brakes whoopee!
The Homo rule IMO is far more detrimental, keeping manufacturer's from taking steps forward. Perhaps a number like 20 would make more sense and bring innovation and small manufacturer's into the sport. There needs to be a "Mulligan" to allow exceptions for developing new models without bringing them to production immediately.
The Homo rule does prevent Bespoke models like the 167 lb. Carbon Fiber CR125 as listed above from being raced when they would likely be affordable for many. Time to look at the weight rules also. The world has changed with Cad/Cam design and 3D printing since these rules were developed.
Pit Row
Ex: Honda produces tens of thousands of bikes a year. TM does not. Why should each one be subject to the same homologation number for manufacturing? It rewards the big and punishes the small which only hurts the sport. Not only on a professional level but a local level as well. It deters small manufacturers from entering a market. Many people will avoid buying a bike to race locally that isn't raced professionally whether they intend to race professionally or not.
Just choose a percentage. I don't know production numbers but lets say Honda produces 10,000 2020 450's. 400 is only 4% of their production line. If TM produces 1,000 2020 450's that's 40% of their production line. How is this still considered fair for a rule that was supposed to make things "fair"?
http://www.mxworksbike.com/
your saying all we,ve got is auto hand me downs
even during the period of unlimited works bikes.
so how is the rule bad?
It's not too hard to look at automotive and see what's next. CVT's and 9/10 speed transmissions with dual clutches. Variable Valve train. Direct injection. The "development" is right in front of the industry and if we loosen up the rule book some of it may come to production sooner.
Post a reply to: Production and Homologation Rules, helping or hurting 34 years later?