Motorcycle Forums banner

One Racer's Opinion Regarding The Future Of AMA Superbike

21260 Views 163 Replies 24 Participants Last post by  eddyline
first! AMA Superbike racing is already dead..
101 - 120 of 164 Posts
Re: Well it didn't take long. kpaul's short rebuttal

Ah but shortride, its not obscure. I´ll put it a bit simplier to help you understand better: The worst case is not a person who is often wrong. Much worse is a person that is not all that often wrong, but absolutely and categorically refuses to accept that sometimes he is wrong. I hope "categorically" was not too long a word, sorry about that.

- cruiz-euro
Re: Slow down there, killer

Actually I think MO is the monkey, KWalterMitty is the poop.
Re: Slow down there, killer

Your analogy is amusing but not original and certainly not me.. The kPPI remains the same as when I invented it. Changing the rules would be dishonest.
Re: Slow down there, killer

Just remember MO is my blog...and you are only one puppet on a string..
Re: Well it didn't take long. kpaul's short rebuttal

So now that you understand that you are wrong, can we drop it now, or do I need to put it more simply, so you can understand it?
Thanks for the constructive criticism

You are absolutely right. This only strengthens the case for the V-4....
I prefer Seruzawa's Price Performance Index.

1- Any bike that makes you whoop it up and laugh like a fool = 100.00

2- Any bike that doesn't make you whoop it up and laugh like a fool = 0

All else is pure bullshyt.
I think overall i'd have to agree but i have these observations.

I would observe that only dunlop and bridgestone tires have had the catastrophic failures. in motogp or ama. pirelli and michelin have not.

lap times drive racing and right now it appears the 800's are turning faster lap times during testing. i can't figure out if that means they are safer. since top speeds are down that must mean corner speeds are up.

so is it more likely that the 800's will increase safety? I don't know for sure, but i don't think so. i believe the limits are now with tire grip and durability, not engine displacement.

as for the debate, i think ama doesn't need both superstock and superbike. superstock will allow more people to afford it. it is a way cheaper bike to build and without superbikes, better contingency money.
See less See more
This intelligent post of LightninRVF750 needs more visibility

pdad13 said "Alas, they (V-4s) were too complex, expensive and heavy--oh, and not all that competitive."

LightninRVF750 replied with

Right... the VF/VFR and the RC30 won five consecutive AMA Championships from 1984-1988; won the first two WSB Championships in 1988-1989; the RC45 won both the AMA and WSB in 1995; and Joey Dunlop and company won SIXTEEN consecutive Isle of Man TT's from 1983-1998 on VF/VFR/RC30/RC45's.

Nope, just not competitive at all...

Read more

Excellent use of facts and data LightninRVF750 you are my hero
See less See more
LMAO.....there's absolutely no possible retort to that one!!!!
Now that's an index I could live by.

Oh wait, I do.
Re: This intelligent post of LightninRVF750 needs more visibility

And look at all the V-4 street sportbikes they spawned!

Just like the Honda RCV 211V V-5 in MotoGP spawned the current V-5 revolution!

The technology trickles down!

Listen, no one is saying that a V-4 isn't a good configuration.

It's just that our resident kook thinks that because there are 800cc V-4s in MotoGP now, it MUST be a superior layout. What he doesn't seem to grasp is that choice of engine architecture is primarily guided by the rules and not what is best for consumers or streetbikes. (Although, I'd love to have a V-4 streetbike.)

If it were more feasible (e.g. competitive) and economical to continue with the V-4, they would have done so instead of going to the 1000cc twin and then the I-4. The rules indeed helped to make the V-4 less competitive.

But in recent years the I-4s have been more economical to produce with similar performance. And yes, the V-2s had a displacement advantage but also had two fewer cylinders.

I have no idea if Ferrari might like to run a 4.5 liter V-6 instead of 3-liter V-10, especially since F1 runs V-8s now. You'd have to ask them.

Most people in the know seem to acknowledge that the V-4s were dropped by Honda because of the reasons I cited. I'm sorry if that offends you. Maybe you should take it up with Honda.
See less See more
Re: Excellent Point Thanks

"As long as someone gives me credit for it.. "

That's very important for you, isn't it?
Re: Wrong

KP, look at the MGP rules, numbnuts. It's not that simple.
I'm just baffled by all of this tiresome "prediction" stuff. What void does it fill in kpaul's life to bloviate about what may or may not happen, bring these things up ad nauseum, then loudly crow whenever something in real life crops up that might some day in some way somehow make some part of some prediction of his somewhat correct?

I literally don't know anyone else who engages in this. It's like watching a toddler get excited about a turd he just dropped in his training potty.
Re: This intelligent post of LightninRVF750 needs more visibility

"Excellent use of facts and data LightninRVF750 you are my hero"

Honda's, too. Right now they're smacking themselves on the heads saying, "Damn, we had the perfect engine configuration, and we just arbitrarily dropped it! What were we thinking?!?"
Re: Well it didn't take long. kpaul's short rebuttal

Would you please go look at the MotoGP rules. It's not that "V-4s are better engines." It's that some of the manufacturers have decided that the MotoGP rules make V-4s desirable--again, under the current rules. And, by the way, not all agree.

Boy, you are dim.
Re: Talk about faulty logic read this and then read my response to seruzawa

kpaul, why do you always link to posts that have nothing to do with what's been said? Take you Ritalin.
101 - 120 of 164 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.