Standardised Equipment

[Ray Stadia]

No of course not. No one is saying that engines can't be be sold "down" a league, if they did then that WOULD be a problem.

I am not sure what is meant by a 'standardised engine', but if we assume it is an engine that is governed to a certain power output, either due to being literally governed or the engine's construction, e.g. 'all engines are 2 valves', then surely, an interim solution would be to govern old/pre-standardised engines. I am sure many will say it isn't possible. Assuming it is possible, it will mean all pre-standardised engines can be used, so long as they are compliant with the new power output limit. Just a view!

[foamfence]

So you would be happy if the government said everyone has to have an electric car, But you would not be able to sell (ie your petrol/diesel 65 plate one) and you just leave it on the drive/in garage.

Engines were (in many cases) standard engines before someone tinkered with them and added a few fancy parts, so if they can be converted one way, can they not be converted back, and wouldn't the eventual saving easily cover any cost?

[ch958]

 

 

So on this basis, we would have the 'Elite' League on the new standard equipment and the PL and NL on existing non-standard equipment, with the PL introducing standard equipment, say, 2 years later and the NL after that?

 

With EL riders who participate in other countries and in FIM events requiring both sets of equipment? And the doubling-up and EDR riders would need both sets of equipment for a period of time?

 

It looks to me an even bigger incentive for riders to quit riding in Britain,

 

 

getting the costs under control is a bigger problem than losing the odd rider

ANY decent business person will tell you that cost control is the most important aspect of being solvent and profitable

[Reviresco]

 

getting the costs under control is a bigger problem than losing the odd rider

ANY decent business person will tell you that cost control is the most important aspect of being solvent and profitable

 

And this will control costs for who and how?

[Deano]

 

And this will control costs for who and how?

 

Do you not know how much a complete bike with race ready engine costs?

 

Do top riders not have ten plus bikes race prepared across Europe?

 

A large proportion of costs are taken by the rider which come from the promoter (subsidised by sponsorship) via falling gate receipts.

 

So all will benefit.

Edited March 11, 2016 by Deano

[eric i]

Engine tuners ripping riders off ? Take it you have not read the article in this weeks speedway star, 5 page interview on Peter johns

I don't think Peter johns is going say he is making a load of money, naturally he wants to protect his business and investment.

[Reviresco]

 

Do you not know how much a complete bike with race ready engine costs?

 

Do top riders not have ten plus bikes race prepared across Europe?

 

A large proportion of costs are taken by the rider which come from the promoter (subsidised by sponsorship) via falling gate receipts.

 

So all will benefit.

 

Thank you for your informative reply to my questions.

 

So this standardised equipment will reduce costs, somehow, and top riders will no longer need ten plus race prepared bikes across Europe. Riders wage demands will be decreased, which will mean more money in the promoters' hands (partly funded by sponsorship) and reduced admission prices for spectators? As you suggest, a win win for everyone.

[ch958]

 

And this will control costs for who and how?

are you kidding?

[FAST GATER]

Did all the riders moan and retire when the 4 valve engine consigned the 2 valve Jawa to the "bin" or the Jap before that I think not !!!!!

[BWitcher]

Did all the riders moan and retire when the 4 valve engine consigned the 2 valve Jawa to the "bin" or the Jap before that I think not !!!!!

 

or laydowns and uprights.

 

I don't understand folk saying "Oh but riders will have to buy different bikes for the UK"...

 

They do that anyway!

[Humphrey Appleby]

So you would be happy if the government said everyone has to have an electric car, But you would not be able to sell (ie your petrol/diesel 65 plate one) and you just leave it on the drive/in garage.

The 'top boys' will undoubtedly be replacing their engines every year anyway, and probably even the average professional as well. Provided there's some relaxation at the lower end of the sport where riders haven't got the money to throw at tuners anyway, then the engines will still have resale value.

[Gresham]

 

Of course you can create engines that runs on regular petrol but one advantage with methanol is that it has a higher fire safety then petrol.

Petrol ignites much more easily and it burns with a much higher temperature. So from a safety aspect, methanol is to prefer over petrol.

http://www3.epa.gov/otaq/consumer/08-fire.pdf

Thanks for the reply GW...However... The majority of other motor sports seem to cope...why should speedway be any different?

 

A sealed standardised engine used in team events, is something I've wanted in all the years I've watched speedway.

 

Fans aren't interested in who's got the best engine tuner, most money etc.

 

All they want is to see, are four blokes race on equal machinery and see their individual track craft.

 

Nothing worse than watching a race, when it's obvious riders have better tuned bikes than others. Regardless of skill...they have no chance of catching them.

 

It takes away from the sport...the only people that gain from this are the tuners.

 

Personally...I would make all the teams supply the sealed engines.

 

The riders draw lots as to which engine they get, then fit to their own rolling chassis.

 

Obviously there would be spares for EF's etc...

 

Standard sealed Jawa engines for example would surely keep costs down?

 

As for Individual events...I would allow any engine like now...that way riders and fans would get the best from both worlds?

 

Can't see it happening though as it's too simple an idea...Speedway doesn't do simple.

[Ray Stadia]

Did all the riders moan and retire when the 4 valve engine consigned the 2 valve Jawa to the "bin" or the Jap before that I think not !!!!!

I suppose the counter argument to the above, is you are theoretically going from something superior to something inferior.

[martinmauger]

Probably the best, most cost effecive method would be an homolgated rev limter (say 14,000RPM) in corporated intot trh ignition system, as described this week's Star by Peter Johns. That way all riders can keep all their existing equipment, apart from the ignition system. Most engine damage occurs when riders hold the throttle wide open at the start and when in the pits - especially when starting the bike from cold . Don't have the time or inclincation for an engineering discussion but ask anyone mechanically informed, particularly bikers, about the effects of revving a 500cc 4-stroke single cylinder engine to 14k RPM and above ....

[foamfence]

Probably the best, most cost effecive method would be an homolgated rev limter (say 14,000RPM) in corporated intot trh ignition system, as described this week's Star by Peter Johns. That way all riders can keep all their existing equipment, apart from the ignition system. Most engine damage occurs when riders hold the throttle wide open at the start and when in the pits - especially when starting the bike from cold . Don't have the time or inclincation for an engineering discussion but ask anyone mechanically informed, particularly bikers, about the effects of revving a 500cc 4-stroke single cylinder engine to 14k RPM and above ....

Wouldn't that encourage faster engines that reach the limit quicker, an expensive engine with a rev limiter is still an expensive engine?

Edited March 11, 2016 by foamfence

[Ray Stadia]

Probably the best, most cost effecive method would be an homolgated rev limter (say 14,000RPM) in corporated intot trh ignition system, as described this week's Star by Peter Johns. That way all riders can keep all their existing equipment, apart from the ignition system. Most engine damage occurs when riders hold the throttle wide open at the start and when in the pits - especially when starting the bike from cold . Don't have the time or inclincation for an engineering discussion but ask anyone mechanically informed, particularly bikers, about the effects of revving a 500cc 4-stroke single cylinder engine to 14k RPM and above ....

I know you haven't the time or the inclination to discuss your post, but cold starting for instance, is not start the engine and then rev the guts out of it, they gradually increase the revs to get the engine warm. And even when warm, I haven't witnessed, personally, full throttle revving in the pits. I agree on the start line, the riders generally give it some wellie, but that is not, usually, for very long. And are there many start line blow ups? Probably, most blow ups are caused because the engine has been so stressed to the limit by the tuner, that is the trade off, unreliability. Which is where a cheaper less stressed alternative would be good for the riders pocket. Whether it would make a big difference, who knows.

[Deano]

I think a basic engine designed to see the whole season through, would be a good base to work from.

 

Not sure how these engines would cope with changing from big wide line tracks to tight corner tracks, but I guess everyone would be on the same level footing anyway.

Edited March 11, 2016 by Deano

[f-s-p]

Excellent interview of PJR in the latest Spar, an eye opener for many numbnuts.

 

Earlier I also thought top guys replace evetything yearly. Not in real life though, some engines are kept for years, some frames not even taken in to action until someone else has ridden 150 heats with them.

[E I Addio]

Thanks for the reply GW...However... The majority of other motor sports seem to cope...why should speedway be any different?

 

.

Because methanol allows a higher compression ratio. Grass track bikes also use methanol because , like Speedwáy it is a sprint and needs a lot of power in a short burst. They would seem quite boringly slow on petrol

[Ghostwalker]

Thanks for the reply GW...However... The majority of other motor sports seem to cope...why should speedway be any different?

 

I don't know. Perhaps (speculation) it's due to the nature of the speedway sport and the general design of the bikes?

 

In most other high speed motorsports, the fuel tank is usually much more well protected and most car series, regardless if it is F1 or WRC or WEC or DTM,

they have some special types of safety tanks (safety fuel cells http://fuelsafe.com/ http://atlinc.com/racing.html) which is usually embedded in the car to

protect it from external forces.

On a speedway bike on the other hand everything is very exposed, the engine, the exhaust and the fuel system so if there is a crash (which there often is in speedway)

I think the risks if petrol is leaking out might be quite more dangerous (very hot engine and exhaust pipe+silencer) then if methanol would leak out

since petrol is more prone to ignite, perhaps using petrol would increase the risks of a fireball a bit too much?

 

*while I was typing E I Addio also answered. Perhaps it's a combination?