2024 Daytona 200 aka Big D

Since the D200 became a Supersport race for tire safety...do you think they could make a tank that would make it a 1 pit stop race? I don't think you could make it 27 and 30 laps on a set of tires. So I think the tires are the limiting factor not fuel.

 

Most of the contracts are laid out for a specific schedule of races aboard a superbike platform. Daytona is not a superbike race. Additionally, you have to build a one off Daytona motor if you want to run up top. After Daytona, it's done and you need a rebuild. Many teams don't want or truthfully need the additional expense.

 

Nope. Maybe on lightweight bike but not a supersport. The tank size alone to do it would make that thing so hard to ride.

 

We can do a four hour on a single front. 6 hour is pretty sketchy.

On rears, trying to remember who had chords showing at Pitt. It was wild they made it that far.

 

Candidly speaking, based upon your posts here, there is a lot about motorcycle road racing you don't understand.

 

Candid is what I prefer...opinions are like noses, everyone has one and they all smell

 

Most things are not like they used to be.

 

Bring back two strokes! TZ750's FTW!

 

Someone explain how them 2 YART bikes were so good around Daytona. One of those guys nearly put down the fastest lap of the race. I read one of them did a ASRA event last year but them bikes got some secrets hidden beneath the tank.

 

I believe Giacchetto built the bikes. At least, that's what the RRW article said in October of last year.
As for the fast laps, they are literally world champion riders.

 

https://www.roadracingworld.com/new...yart-yamaha-prepping-for-daytona-200-assault/

https://www.roadracingworld.com/news/asra-team-challenge-yart-yamaha-wins-at-daytona/

 

A Daytona story John wrote for Cycle World a few years ago, and a couple more:

https://magazine.cycleworld.com/article/1983/6/1/fast-enough-to-do-the-job

https://magazine.cycleworld.com/article/1983/6/1/big-enough-to-do-the-job

https://magazine.cycleworld.com/article/1983/6/1/return-of-the-native

 

At about 30 min, Richard says the method MA uses to measure fuel tank capacity is wrong because they weigh the amount of fuel that can fit in the tank, convert that weight to volume based on density of the VP fuel at 60 degrees F, and then compare that volume to the regs.

He says that gives a wrong volume of the tank because the actual temp of the fuel during the race is likely 80-90 degrees F or more.

I agree that the fuel is actually hotter than 60 F during the race. But I don't think that matters. All that matters is what the temp of the fuel is during the post-race tech inspection. If the fuel is actually 60 F during the inspection, then using VP's density at 60 F would give an accurate estimate of the fuel tank volume.

In fact, in theory MA wouldn't even need to use the fuel. They could use any liquid with a density known at the temp the test was completed to determine the volume of the tank. Any liquid with a relatively temperature-stable density would work well, in theory. Having said that, teams wouldn't want liquids other than fuel poured into their tank, so I'd imagine in practice that's why MA uses the VP fuel.

And in any case, using the density at 60 F would UNDER estimate the actual volume of the tank, assuming the fuel is actually hotter than that during the test. Right?

 

I understand what you are saying. Essentially, the only way to accurately test the tank would be to fill the tank it with gasoline at a specific temperature and that method becomes the constant.

 

Forgive my ignorance, but why is the test anything other than:
1. Drain tank
2. Measure out 20 liters in fresh jug
3. Refill tank
4. Measure volume of remainder in jug

 

There is a thermo expansion equation used on jet fuel. 1000 gal at 32 deg F becomes 1040 gal at 104 F.

VP must know that equation for their fuel.

 

Back of a napkin math: https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/mc-mc...nds.pdf/$file/VCF_Gasoline_Ethanol-Blends.pdf

This chart is based on 15C which is approx 59F, not 60F, so... again, back of a napkin rough estimating here. If the tank and gas were actually 90F / 32.2C the correction factor for pump gas, up to 15% ethanol is .9783, or just over 2% difference. Ambient air temps while I was there were mid 70s, say 75, that puts the correction at .9890, a hair over 1% correction. I can't find a doc with the fuel tank volume test procedure from MA?

 

I think Paasch double stinted a Pirelli rear when he won.