BMW pulling out of WSB *BOOM*

Well they built it in the first place without racing it... and I'd say they did OK.
And I know Chaotic likes to point out how much in common the WSBK bikes have with their street-going counterparts...

No doubt racing improves the breed... but to what extent, I'm not entirely sure anymore. It's definitely not a requirement. Kawi wasn't really racing anywhere before they released the current 10R, but they seemed to have hit a home run with it. Honda's been racing for quite some time, but the CBR is still a shitty race bike.

BMW will do just fine. The S1000RR won't get left behind. If they make a S600RR, it stands to reason that it'll be pretty awesome. Somebody will continue to race them, and I'm sure the factory will have some sort of feedback loop.

 

I'm more worried about the reduction in seats now. I desperately want Hayden to go to WSB, but even with his resume there are precious few open spots anymore.

 

Why? They've had the baddest bike in superstock for years.

 

Papa, if the series goes to a more superstock formula, couldn't BMW handle it through customer teams and save the factory expenses? Let someone else do the dirty and just collect the cash for the customer bikes and buy the ads touting their wins?

 

I've always liked the idea of keeping bikes as stock as possible.

Put some slicks on it, take off the lights and turnsignals and add an aftermarket exhaust.

Other than that, I don't see why any other mechanical modifications should be allowed. If teams want a more competitive bike, force the factory to make changes to the real bike that we can all buy. Not only does that make our bikes better, but it allows us to see what the bikes can really do without 100's of thousands of dollars worth of modifications.

I've heard some factories and fans argue that they need to be allowed the modifications for R&D, but I think that's BS. They can still do R&D in their labs and on the tracks (on non-race days). Putting a $100,000 suspension on a bike isn't R & D. . . it's just putting a $100,000 supsension on a bike - and forcing your competitor to put a $120,000 suspension on theirs.

 

I agree. That is why i like the WSTK class, where engine modifications arent allowed (only bolt-ons). In that class, you ONLY see the Panigale, BMW and ZX-10 running up front...because they are the only bikes that put out 180+hp from the showroom floor. The other bikes simply can't compete.

But the scenario you mentioned (forcing the factories to make the bikes better so they can compete) doesnt happen because WSTK isnt the premier class. If it was the primary class, with Honda, Suzuki, Yamaha, KTM, MV and even Aprilia ALWAYS sucking hind tit, they would be forced to come out with better bikes.

 

I am surprised that the true root cause hasn't surfaced.....apparently Mongo's roadracing killing ways have made their way over to BMW and WSBK.

 

What's cheaper for the factory? Dumping $200K into a WSBK spec machine, or R&D to make next years model able to compete in WSTK form? Not being a smart ass, serious question.

I love the idea of WSBK, I just wish they would ditch the electronics.

 

Racing parts and production street parts generally have opposing purposes thus putting them into service for the wrong purpose isn't really the right way to go about it.

 

They spend a ton more than $200k in a WSBK spec machine.

It isnt so much a question of initial cost, as it would be return. In other words, initially it would be less expensive to just modify the shit out of their WSBK's. But, at the end of the day, they would likely see a return by putting more R&D into creating a bike that was a world dominator off the showroom floor.

Keep in mind, that i am referring to the hypothetical scenario i talked about before, where WSTK was the primary, premier class (or where WSBK went to WSTK rules, you know what i mean).

In that scenario, they would get much more ROI by putting the R&D into a bike that dominates the field...and then used that to advertise that they have the best bike you can buy, hands down, right off the showroom floor.

Just imagine how good the marketing would be if there was no WSBK and only WSTK, and somebody like BMW completely dominated. They could stress to the general public that the bikes raced in that class are almost identical to the bikes in the showrooms, and the BMW completely dominates.

 

I know the money dumped into it is more than $200K for a season. I was referring to building an engine that will grenade at the end of the race.

For example, what do you think the parts value of Biaggi's title winning bike is? Not for one season, just one race, one bike.

I also read that where the contingency money is paid, is what people (WERA/CCS etc) race. If Honda came out with a killer 600CC race bike stock that destroyed everything else, but paid no money, would racers still be prone to buy it?

 

Yes.

These days people race to race. Not to make money. Those days are long gone. Ducati had one of the best contingency packages last year with the 848 EVO. Still don't see many of these around... People that buy and build new race bikes still want a bike that can win.

 

That is hard to say. Just parts only, no manpower, no software, no data...just stuff you could pull off and sell on eBay, im not sure. $200 might be close. That is a better question for somebody like JU.

Not necessarily. People will race what they feel they have the best chance to win on. Honda pays contingency now, but the grids are full of R6's.

So to answer that question, yes...if Honda (or somebody else) came out with a 600cc bike that destroyed everything else, racers would be prone to buy it. There is other contingency besides just OEM contingency. You have to figure tire money, sponsor bonuses, future sponsorship opportunities and everything else that comes along with winning.

All modern bikes are so good, it ultimately comes down to the rider in every case. But yeah, if somebody put out a bike that was blatantly a class dominator...people would race it.

 

You put the wrong name in the quote box. I didnt ask the question you quoted.

 

The loss of quality seats and the increased chances that good riders may end up without rides is the tragedy for me.

I couldn't care less whether they were racing the quarter-million wonderbikes they are racing now or closer-to-stock-spec machinery...

I hope Davies lands himself a decent ride and that there can be room in WSBK for guys like Hayden and (soon enough...) Spies.

 

Ok wow that was weird - I even edited his quote to whittle down just the lines I was referencing...

 

Bike prices will continue to sky rocket if every model was race ready off the floor. I know we spend the money at some point anyway, but where's the line?

I won't be lining up to go buy a $32000 liter bike to race.. :shrug:

 

I understand the point you are getting at. But improving the bikes and making them more capable machines doesnt necessarily have to equal skyrocketing prices.

Look at what BMW did for example. They heard all of the complaints about how the S1000RR was a missle, but didnt turn very well and was a handful at tighter tracks (in SS form), the gearing was too tall and the throttle travel was too long. So they went back to the drawing board, revised the Triples, swingarm, linkage etc, changed the gearing, reduced throttle travel and made some good changes to the bike to make it better. But the price stayed the same.

Look at the 2011 ZX-10 compared to the 2010 ZX-10. It has a ton more HP, better brakes, good electronics, handles a lot better etc...but the price didnt skyrocket; they simply came out with a better bike.

They made improvements to the 2013 RSV4, but didnt raise the price.

Making a bike more capable doesnt mean you have to add Ohlins Gas forks and Carbon Fiber wheels. It just means making the necessary changes to the improve the bike. And IMO, "forcing" all of the manufacturers to race their bikes very close to OEM specs would create an environment where changes such as those happened more often. You either improve your platform, or suck hind tit.