Daytona 2017

Discussion in 'General' started by twodocs, Mar 12, 2017.

  1. Yep. That's one of the reasons I mostly only race in SB (unlimited) classes.

    1. It lets me mod the bike however I want.
    2. I don't have to worry about misinterpreting the rules, or being DQ'ed for some chickenshit technicality.

    I did race the 1299S in SS classes last year, but that was because it was bone stock other than exhaust, rearsets, levers, and little bolt on shit like that. The motor, linkage, triples, even suspension was all bone stock. Since nothing was changed, I didn't have to worry about legality.

    But if/when I go to truly modding a bike, like getting into the motor or clutch and shit like that, I just go to racing only SB classes. Even if the build/mods are "light" and more than likely SS legal, it is just easier (peace of mind) to race in SB classes and not have to worry about it.
     
  2. Dude, do you really think that matters?

    Hell, we had somebody protest at a WERA race because of someone using a tube (rather than having an actual reservoir) on the REAR brake assembly. We are talking about a part that had absolutely zero effect on the performance of the bike or outcome of the race.

    Somebody protested about a part that is never used (rear brake), that did not reduce the weight of the bike, didn't add any performance or additional ground clearance or anything.

    When it comes to Daytona, we are talking about tens of thousands of dollars on the line. Of course people are going to hold others to the letter of the rules.
     
    MELK-MAN likes this.
  3. SpeedyTide

    SpeedyTide 'Bama's Bad Boy

    Maybe tech inspection isn't the right calling of it. But, as I also said.... something where teams could have things checked to be sure it's legal for "Gray areas" or confusion of the rulebook.... if so.

    Then if you come back post race tech and fail.... then you're DQ'd.
     
    MELK-MAN likes this.
  4. bored&stroked

    bored&stroked Disclaimer: Can't spell

    I get that. Just seems like a useless or at least very poorly written rule. If it doesn't give an advantage, why even bother with rules for it?
     
  5. worthless

    worthless Well-Known Member

    Even if something like that did exist, then you'd be talking about the need to be able to seal things to make sure they weren't changed from the time they were checked/approved.
    What makes you believe it doesn't give an advantage?
     
  6. flyboy

    flyboy Well-Known Member

    Not to mention the mess pulling apart 70 bikes before the race would create. And then who's determining what? I could see an official making a mistake or having a different interpretation on the rules than the guy who does post race inspection.Anyway, RB is a stand up guy and he's preached for years that its the rider of team's responsibility to adhere to the rules. I just feel bad for CW and the TSE people.
     
  7. GixxerBlade

    GixxerBlade Oh geez

    2010 IoM Guy Martin was penalized 30 seconds for going .122kph over pitlane speed. The official said that .122kph over the course of the 6-lap TT was something like 10 seconds IIRC. Who knows what a .1" larger diameter hole over a 57-lap 200-mile race would be at Daytona.
     
    TL/DR Tolstoy and 83BSA like this.
  8. 83BSA

    83BSA Well-Known Member

    Internal combustion engines are basically air pumps. Something that allows an engine to flow more air on the intake makes a potential difference in output. Hence, the rule. There are a lot of intake restrictions: carb size, snorkels on SV airboxes, type of air filter, the list goes on and on. Was the rule poorly written? Is it ridiculous? Should it have been different? I don't know the answer to any of that. I've never raced an R6, much less tried to race one in the Daytona 200. But, the time to argue any or all of the foregoing was before the green flag dropped . . . , the first (of many) time.

    I've got to believe Wests' crew thought they were within the rules. However, as one who regularly argues for his client's "interpretation," I understand that ultimately may be a long, hard and perhaps unproductive, slog.

    Cheers,

    Dave
     
    throwdown likes this.
  9. SPL170db

    SPL170db Trackday winner

    I'm sure anyone can pull a tech official aside to verify legality of something beforehand, but that's on the team/rider to do that. The org isn't going to go around scrutinizing everyone to make sure their bikes are legal from a modifications perspective beforehand.....only from a safety standpoint. If they did then they couldn't just stop at air boxes, they'd have to crack everyone's motors and make sure they didn't have illegal engine internals as well. That's why they save that scrutiny for the top finishers post-race, they don't have the time or resources to do that level of checking of everyone pre-race.
     
  10. GixxerBlade

    GixxerBlade Oh geez

    Not necessarily. You make speak to one official and get entire different interpretation of the rules from another one.
     
    motoracer1100, Lavana and ahastings like this.
  11. SPL170db

    SPL170db Trackday winner

    I'm sure that that's a possibility, but as long as you have it documented that you checked with an official then you shouldn't be penalized if there's a discrepancy after the fact.
     
  12. notbostrom

    notbostrom DaveK broke the interwebs

    Snorkelgate
     
    Steeltoe likes this.
  13. Steeltoe

    Steeltoe Breaker of chains.

    Memories of Mladin and the t-fal frying pan crank.
     
  14. Woodsrider

    Woodsrider Well-Known Member

    You know what is funny about this is that team with Wyatt Farris finished 3rd last year and maybe on the same bike/air filter? So if the team did the same in 2017 as they did in 2016 what has happened?

    weird
     
  15. Britt

    Britt MotoBigots Suck

    Despite the Airbox being designed as one componet to help pass sound and epa regs...
    It is a racebike.. Leave the airbox and filter rules wide open... Restrict the modification or replacement of the throttle bodies.
     
  16. TurboBlew

    TurboBlew Registers Abusers

    Pretty sure there is only 1 official whose opinion counts the most... head/chief tech inspector. Every org has one. Usually well versed in grey area or technical questions.
     
    MELK-MAN likes this.
  17. Missing the point of ssport creativity man :). It's actually a cost effective way to add performance and I agree with you. You make a slick welded mold and I'll make carbon ones. Split the profits 95% me and 5% you minus any PayPal fees.
     
    Britt likes this.
  18. SPL170db

    SPL170db Trackday winner

    I'm sure this has been asked and documented quite well but how much of a difference, ballpark, does it make on an R6 with and without that snorkel. I guess it chokes it off enough if there's enough of a stink to make a specific rule about it.
     
  19. ahastings

    ahastings Well-Known Member

    It's not a specific r6 rule. It's a typical supersport / superstock rule same as in wera. Airbox cannot be modified .it's just that on the r6 the airbox opening is part of the filter which is why it's not an issue on other bikes

    Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
     
    MELK-MAN likes this.
  20. SPL170db

    SPL170db Trackday winner

    No it is an R6 specific rule in this case, as you can see in the pics and description

    http://www.ccsracing.us/forms/Clarification of Legal Air Filters.pdf

    I'm not certain on Hondas/Kawi's/etc, but I know that Suzuki has no such "snorkel" over the air filter. The problem here as I see is that the R6 air filter comes with the snorkel integrated into it.
     

Share This Page