News for fans of standard 2V engines

[OveFundinFan]

56 minutes ago, Sings4Speedway said:

Won't wash though as all riders starting out will want the fastest equipment. Its a sport where results are the only thing riders are judged upon (rightly or wrongly). 

The best hope of getting it off the ground is by making one or two factory teams, every rider in that team is supplied the engines and that is all they run at all tracks all season. The results at the end of the year will then be validated by the success of the team on track and by the club financially off track. 

and when there are only a few tracks in the country running anything like a meeting, rides will be low in numbers, so all their fancy equipment is lying there doing nothing. Cant even use a speedway bike on the grass, wouldnt last 2 laps with no suspension.  Mind you, there could be a resurgance of grass track racing, but prize money is not too generous except for the very top ones, most do it as a hobby.

[Sings4Speedway]

58 minutes ago, OveFundinFan said:

and when there are only a few tracks in the country running anything like a meeting, rides will be low in numbers, so all their fancy equipment is lying there doing nothing. Cant even use a speedway bike on the grass, wouldnt last 2 laps with no suspension.  Mind you, there could be a resurgance of grass track racing, but prize money is not too generous except for the very top ones, most do it as a hobby.

Im certainly not disagreeing that something needs to be done to sort the mess out. Although is making a mini comeback and most of the equipment is interchangeable bar the frame which is largely a throw away item in speedway these days as all the money goes on engines & clutches.

Although UK grasstrack needs to revert a little to the older more solid frames (possibly win shock) rather than the hard mono's as essentially they are trying to use smooth longtrack bikes on rough fields and become shocked when the rides a bit bumpy. 

[barrybishop]

Hey,

In my view what needs to be implemented here is not a replacement of the the existing machines used today, because although we think it could be cheaper and we think it will be closer we have only staged a few meetings worldwide on these engines.  What the next steps need to be are an increased amount of meetings and whether thats more meetings on the Island  or a cup challenge with engines provided by NICE or another benefactor remains to be seen but this is the only way forward in my view and is what I will discuss when I meet the NICE team again next month. 

Doing a larger meaningful set of meetings will enable us to truly have some answers to the questions of how close will the racing be, what will the action be like, how will the engines be after 5, 10 or 15 meetings. For me it is not about cost reduction although this is a great additional benefit, it is about how we improve the show, while maintaining rider safety. All of the riders said the engines were great to control, needed setup and throttle control and not just flat out.

I am hopeful that this early experiment can  now be expanded to enable us to do real comparisons, real analysis and then mover forward.

One other point here... I dont actually think it matters whether the engines are 2 or 4v, what matters is that they are standard and they are balloted for at each meeting.

It is great to read your feedback on here, I can tell you the feedback all over has been really encouraging, now I just have to work harder to show even more proof.

See you trackside - #positivityisking

[OveFundinFan]

Barry, have you (or anyone) got race times for the 2 valvers to compare with same/similar riders on 4 valvers? Not that race times matter, its the quality of racing/more cost effectiveness that matters.

And are these 2 valvers laydown engines as someone posted a race clip? And are there any common components between the 2 and 4 valvers?

[AFCB Wildcat]

43 minutes ago, barrybishop said:

Hey,

In my view what needs to be implemented here is not a replacement of the the existing machines used today, because although we think it could be cheaper and we think it will be closer we have only staged a few meetings worldwide on these engines.  What the next steps need to be are an increased amount of meetings and whether thats more meetings on the Island  or a cup challenge with engines provided by NICE or another benefactor remains to be seen but this is the only way forward in my view and is what I will discuss when I meet the NICE team again next month. 

Doing a larger meaningful set of meetings will enable us to truly have some answers to the questions of how close will the racing be, what will the action be like, how will the engines be after 5, 10 or 15 meetings. For me it is not about cost reduction although this is a great additional benefit, it is about how we improve the show, while maintaining rider safety. All of the riders said the engines were great to control, needed setup and throttle control and not just flat out.

I am hopeful that this early experiment can  now be expanded to enable us to do real comparisons, real analysis and then mover forward.

One other point here... I dont actually think it matters whether the engines are 2 or 4v, what matters is that they are standard and they are balloted for at each meeting.

It is great to read your feedback on here, I can tell you the feedback all over has been really encouraging, now I just have to work harder to show even more proof.

See you trackside - #positivityisking

A season long GP style series to fill in some of the fixture gaps we currently have would be great.

I'm sure riders would be keen to prove that they can compete with the best on a level playing field and put themselves in the shop window for attracting sponsors and advancing their careers.

As you say though it will rely on a major sponsor to supply and maintain the balloted engines. Good luck with the project I hope it's a success.

[barrybishop]

27 minutes ago, OveFundinFan said:

Barry, have you (or anyone) got race times for the 2 valvers to compare with same/similar riders on 4 valvers? Not that race times matter, its the quality of racing/more cost effectiveness that matters.

And are these 2 valvers laydown engines as someone posted a race clip? And are there any common components between the 2 and 4 valvers?

Hi.... yep they averaged around 2 -3 seconds more to our usual timings... I am looking at a way to give away the entire meeting footage for everyone to review it and see that action, which in general was really close and only spread out for a coupleof races.

They are the 2v Laydowns you saw on the clip but my view it doesnt matter if they are 2v or 4v really but they must be standard engines. I will ask about the common parts for both but I am there will be.

[barrybishop]

23 minutes ago, AFCB Wildcat said:

A season long GP style series to fill in some of the fixture gaps we currently have would be great.

I'm sure riders would be keen to prove that they can compete with the best on a level playing field and put themselves in the shop window for attracting sponsors and advancing their careers.

As you say though it will rely on a major sponsor to supply and maintain the balloted engines. Good luck with the project I hope it's a success.

For sure it is not one I can fund...but I can certainly provide a workable business plan and would love to run it and build it...

[Big Al]

20 hours ago, OveFundinFan said:

The riders will certainly have a load of door stops when speedway in the UK collapses.

Sounds like an opportunity for someone to begin buying engines off riders to make them into "upcycled" fancy doorstops to sell to (the large number of) people with more money than sense. I'm sure they'd go down a storm with Shoreditch hipsters and the like.

[Fortythirtyeight]

2 hours ago, barrybishop said:

For sure it is not one I can fund...but I can certainly provide a workable business plan and would love to run it and build it...

Some people on here really are dillusional if they think the BSPA/SCB (who licence the tracks ) are going to allow a rival engine company to hold a series of race meetings on their tracks when they have a ' contract ' ( however idiotic it is ) with GTR .

Unless of course there's something in it for them.

[AFCB Wildcat]

11 minutes ago, Fortythirtyeight said:

Some people on here really are dillusional if they think the BSPA/SCB (who licence the tracks ) are going to allow a rival engine company to hold a series of race meetings on their tracks when they have a ' contract ' ( however idiotic it is ) with GTR .

Unless of course there's something in it for them.

The proposal was standard, balloted engines. Nothing to say they can't be GTR.

In fact it could save the GTR's becoming the doorstops that they currently are!

[OveFundinFan]

22 minutes ago, AFCB Wildcat said:

The proposal was standard, balloted engines. Nothing to say they can't be GTR.

In fact it could save the GTR's becoming the doorstops that they currently are!

Thought it was a 2 valve class, GTR was 4 valve surely.

[Gresham]

4 hours ago, barrybishop said:

Hey,

In my view what needs to be implemented here is not a replacement of the the existing machines used today, because although we think it could be cheaper and we think it will be closer we have only staged a few meetings worldwide on these engines.  What the next steps need to be are an increased amount of meetings and whether thats more meetings on the Island  or a cup challenge with engines provided by NICE or another benefactor remains to be seen but this is the only way forward in my view and is what I will discuss when I meet the NICE team again next month. 

Doing a larger meaningful set of meetings will enable us to truly have some answers to the questions of how close will the racing be, what will the action be like, how will the engines be after 5, 10 or 15 meetings. For me it is not about cost reduction although this is a great additional benefit, it is about how we improve the show, while maintaining rider safety. All of the riders said the engines were great to control, needed setup and throttle control and not just flat out.

I am hopeful that this early experiment can  now be expanded to enable us to do real comparisons, real analysis and then mover forward.

One other point here... I dont actually think it matters whether the engines are 2 or 4v, what matters is that they are standard and they are balloted for at each meeting.

It is great to read your feedback on here, I can tell you the feedback all over has been really encouraging, now I just have to work harder to show even more proof.

See you trackside - #positivityisking

There are two great articles in this weeks Speedway Star that cover your Nice meeting at the IOW and another by Josh Auty about running costs and how modern speedway is going.

It's not rocket Science when you read the quotes from riders about the meeting, and it's benefits and the positives that came out of it.

Club Speedway has to go down this route...for every conceivable positive reason. Both for the benefit of fans and riders alike.

The only recurring theme is riders saying what do they do with the engines they've already invested in.

Just use them in Individual events...sell them to riders for Individual events. The maintenance and tuning costs will catch up over time....to their benefit.

As Auty says...the only people benefiting are the tuners. £350 for labour alone to strip a bike before parts Quoted. Madness considering how often that has to happen.

Unfortunately riders and promotors in general seem set in their ways...it's so ingrained. And riders are like lemmings...they just follow whoever is fastest and winning. Copy them in the hope of also winning.

As Auty pointed out...however much he spent on fast engines, he came to the conclusion it was his technique that was lacking, regardless of how much money he spent.

Which is pretty much what we witness now every meeting.

Things have got to change...and the 'Nice' way is the way forward imo.

 

[Fortythirtyeight]

At the last count there are less than 20 GTR engines in the country and only 4 being used in competitive racing by just two Riders ( NL riders ).

Mr.Godfrey has actually given engines away to juniors as no one will buy them and last I heard the BSPA were trying to get their money back ( good luck with that).

I think the NICE 2v experiment has potential but I still don't think the muppets on the top table have the numption to get their £300,000 back and go in a completely different direction.

[AFCB Wildcat]

31 minutes ago, OveFundinFan said:

Thought it was a 2 valve class, GTR was 4 valve surely.

Yes that's true but as Barry said it makes no difference if they are 2 valve or 4 valve as long as they are all standard and balloted engines.

The article in the Star said that while they were 2 valve engines the valve size was twice the size of the 4 valve units so in practice not much different.

These are modern laydown units and not like the old 2 valve engines that we remember.

I assume that the Nice competition is tied in with the Jawa engines but if the BSPA would block their use because of their GTR contract as has been suggested by Fortythirtyeight then they could replicate the project with the GTR engines that they probably have a surplus of.

[AFCB Wildcat]

39 minutes ago, Fortythirtyeight said:

 

Mr.Godfrey has actually given engines away to juniors as no one will buy them and last I heard the BSPA were trying to get their money back ( good luck with that).

Well there you go then.

The BSPA GTR challenge series.

Everyone's a winner!  ;-)

[GWC]

When you read and hear that today’s engines are too strong for juniors and then hear that settings have to be spot on to get maximum performance you wonder where this sport is going.

It seems long gone that a rider could tune his own engine so the makers are in league with the tuners to extract cash at all angles.

The Nice project is from Poland and considering their current domination of world speedway didn’t that say something about the sport. They can see that the current way is unsustainable.

[OveFundinFan]

On 7/22/2019 at 8:40 PM, AFCB Wildcat said:

Yes that's true but as Barry said it makes no difference if they are 2 valve or 4 valve as long as they are all standard and balloted engines.

The article in the Star said that while they were 2 valve engines the valve size was twice the size of the 4 valve units so in practice not much different.

These are modern laydown units and not like the old 2 valve engines that we remember.

I not fully sure that is true.  An engine has a diameter, the bore, an it has a area concaved in the cylinder head.  You get more efficiency through 2 smaller inlets then one large one. The total area of 2 could be more then 1 large one, meaning more fuel. And you cannot put larger single inlet due to the constraints of the area available i the head. Hope that makes sense.

[AFCB Wildcat]

57 minutes ago, OveFundinFan said:

I not fully sure that is true.  An engine has a diameter, the bore, an it has a area concaved in the cylinder head.  You get more efficiency through 2 smaller inlets then one large one. The total area of 2 could be more then 1 large one, meaning more fuel. And you cannot put larger single inlet due to the constraints of the area available i the head. Hope that makes sense.

Yes it makes sense and after re-reading it I misquoted saying "twice the size" but Steve's words were "They have 2 valves instead of 4 but it's 2 big ones instead of 4 little ones".

[Tsunami]

On 7/22/2019 at 8:36 PM, Fortythirtyeight said:

At the last count there are less than 20 GTR engines in the country and only 4 being used in competitive racing by just two Riders ( NL riders ).

Mr.Godfrey has actually given engines away to juniors as no one will buy them and last I heard the BSPA were trying to get their money back ( good luck with that).

I think the NICE 2v experiment has potential but I still don't think the muppets on the top table have the numption to get their £300,000 back and go in a completely different direction.

That's not the detail that I heard. Apparently the commission for the bought engines, was progressive, and based on the number of engines bought. There was never a one lump of £300,000 paid. 

[Fortythirtyeight]

1 minute ago, Tsunami said:

That's not the detail that I heard. Apparently the commission for the bought engines, was progressive, and based on the number of engines bought. There was never a one lump of £300,000 paid. 

Then you are misinformed. That's why there is a leagal challenge trying to get The BSPA's money back ( which was never authorised by the BSPA in the first place but done covertly by the top table members) and why there is so much penny pinching going on by the BSPA ( withdrawing funding for youth championship, selling Team GB , etc)