Win on Sunday, sell on Monday has always been BS

[Silverbird]

http://superbikeplanet.com/2012/Jan/120120c.htm

Makes you wonder if how much the cost of your bike goes into racing R&D.

How do you guys feel about companies saying they apply what they learn on the track to their streetbikes? Sounds like a load of crap to me, and somewhat insulting that a MotoGP bike would or could have anything in common with a mass produced sport/sport-touring bike.

[atadaskew]

I liked the Ducati Desmocideci.

Honda Rc45, Rc30, Suzi GSXR750RR, Yam R7 all seemed nice too.

[bomber]

hmmmm -- mass centralization, featherbed style frames, traction control, aluminum beam frams, disk breats, race-rep fairings, radial tires . . . .

Yer right -- nothing from racing programs in out street bikes at all!

[DogBoy]

Another massive over simplification of a complex subject by Dean Adams. Marketing and development cannot begin to be analyzed in just ten sentences.

The win/sell model applies to certain sectors of the market but not all.

[DogBoy]

hmmmm -- mass centralization, featherbed style frames, traction control, aluminum beam frams, disk breats, race-rep fairings, radial tires . . . .

Yer right -- nothing from racing programs in out street bikes at all!

Almost none of your list came from moto racing. Most important developments came from auto manufacturing. FI and ABS are good examples and have a much greater impact than feather bed frames (come on) and mass centralization. Marketing is the main reason for racing. We get some development but a lot of gimmicks, too (underseat exhaust, twin pipes, single-sided swingarms, etc).

[DogBoy]

Right. Supersport and Superbike, yes.

MotoGP? No. What's built for MotoGP - some of the tech - might eventually filter down so that some of the stuff ends up on the street, but that's after it's been relegated and deprecated from the GP bikes.

I agree. See my reply to bomber. And remember, there is a large market that has nothing to do with MotoGP or supersport bikes: offroad.

[Blunder]

Racing also promotes the sale of sticker kits and faux carbon fiber fiddly bits.

[bomber]

Almost none of your list came from moto racing. Most important developments came from auto manufacturing. FI and ABS are good examples and have a much greater impact than feather bed frames (come on) and mass centralization. Marketing is the main reason for racing. We get some development but a lot of gimmicks, too (underseat exhaust, twin pipes, single-sided swingarms, etc).

I agree that we get a lot of gimmicks from racing . . . . . god point.

Featherbed frames? Have you ridden anything from the pre-FB Frame days? Just curious . . . huge difference.

OK, if the question is reframed to ask what things originated in motoracing, as opposed to come through, I agree, precious little -- MotoGP and it's antecendents are simply too small to generate the kind of money needed to create stuff like this . . . .

[bomber]

MotoGP? No. What's built for MotoGP - some of the tech - might eventually filter down so that some of the stuff ends up on the street, but that's after it's been relegated and deprecated from the GP bikes.

So the question also excludes things that come to street bikes after being relegated and deprecated from GP bikes?

Narrower and narrower -- I guess the OP is absolutely correct ;-}

[JReazor]

MotoGP? No. What's built for MotoGP - some of the tech - might eventually filter down so that some of the stuff ends up on the street, but that's after it's been relegated and deprecated from the GP bikes.

In other words... "prototype".

[Liquidsilver]

http://superbikeplanet.com/2012/Jan/120120c.htm

Makes you wonder if how much the cost of your bike goes into racing R&D.

How do you guys feel about companies saying they apply what they learn on the track to their streetbikes? Sounds like a load of crap to me, and somewhat insulting that a MotoGP bike would or could have anything in common with a mass produced sport/sport-touring bike.

You don't like motorcycle racing?   Is this why Guzzis are so cheap?
 
And to the cited article... no, they haven't been winning, but they've been paying to play with the world's favorite rider, and the US ex-most hopeful rider.   I wouldn't say that's not paying off at the cash register.
 

[bomber]

In other words... "prototype".

Ah -- thanks for the translation ;-}

[bomber]

OK, I'm not being argumentative, but I AM confused . . . . . .

If something is a prototype (MotoGP hardware fits that definition to a tee, for sure), it cannot appear on streetbikes later?

Or is it the later part that is being focused on?

[DogBoy]

Featherbed frames? Have you ridden anything from the pre-FB Frame days? Just curious . . . huge difference.

Just trying to keep the discussion within the last 50 years. Or should we start a thread about horse vs. new-fangled motorized bicycle?

[ridingfar]

   Less Filling! Tastes Great!  

[bomber]

Just trying to keep the discussion within the last 50 years. Or should we start a thread about horse vs. new-fangled motorized bicycle?

LOL -- I belileve I am beginning to understand . . . . . . it's NOT about GP-level racing tech moving into street bikes as a topic of conversation ;-}

[JReazor]

OK, I'm not being argumentative, but I AM confused . . . . . .

If something is a prototype (MotoGP hardware fits that definition to a tee, for sure), it cannot appear on streetbikes later?

Or is it the later part that is being focused on?

A prototype class should be a testbed for things that will eventually filter their way down to street bikes and production classes.

Problem being that gains in most technologies are small and expensive. Some of the rules changes of late have stifled some innovation in an effort to keep the series viable from a cost perspective. F1 and the ALMS have gone through the same thing.

[bomber]

A prototype class should be a testbed for things that will eventually filter their way down to street bikes and production classes.

Problem being that gains in most technologies are small and expensive. Some of the rules changes of late have stifled some innovation in an effort to keep the series viable from a cost perspective. F1 and the ALMS have gone through the same thing.

Yes. I would agree.

This is somewhat beside what I thought the point was, but right.

I read (Kevin Cameron, perhaps) that one of the major expenses for MotoGP teams was travel -- it might have even been THE most expensive . . . .

If being timely with tech is one of the criteria for "Race on Sunday, Sell on Monday" in any area, it was always marketing hoopla . . .

[bomber]

And we've gotten to a point where we're kind of reaching practical limits on the power and capability of the machines. It costs MAJOR R&D and money to go a tenth faster than last year, when 10 years ago that same money would have gotten you 9 or 10 tenths faster. I don't think (much) faster bikes are going to come from increasing power, but in better management of power and traction, combined with better weight and aerodyne management.

$.02

I would agree . . . . .

Active aero and weight management would be game changers (where's Dan Gurney and Jim Hall when you need them?).

[Silverbird]

hmmmm -- mass centralization, featherbed style frames, traction control, aluminum beam frams, disk breats, race-rep fairings, radial tires . . . .

Yer right -- nothing from racing programs in out street bikes at all!

All those things were invented for the purpose of racing? COOL!

[X1Glider]

No factory needs to race to bring new technology to the showroom.  They can forego the ridiculously large expenses of travel, PR tents, overpriced racers and Dorna fees and simply employ full time a badass test rider who can test any day of the year for as many hours as they wish.  The can also test tech that is not banned by race rules.  Seriously, we can just about buy a more technologically advanced bike right off the showroom floor, excepting advanced materials like Carbon-Carbon brakes which are actually useless for street duty anyway.

[black hills]

I don't know, the win on sunday sell on monday seems to work on the squids?

[Silverbird]

No factory needs to race to bring new technology to the showroom.  They can forego the ridiculously large expenses of travel, PR tents, overpriced racers and Dorna fees and simply employ full time a badass test rider who can test any day of the year for as many hours as they wish.  The can also test tech that is not banned by race rules.  Seriously, we can just about buy a more technologically advanced bike right off the showroom floor, excepting advanced materials like Carbon-Carbon brakes which are actually useless for street duty anyway.

Exactly

I don't know, the win on sunday sell on monday seems to work on the squids?

And idiots

[jfusaro]

hmmmm -- mass centralization, featherbed style frames, traction control, aluminum beam frams, disk breats, race-rep fairings, radial tires . . . .

Yer right -- nothing from racing programs in out street bikes at all!

you got that right!

[Mr. Whippy]

They told me my Multistrada descended from racing stock.

[Kneescrubber]

http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&source=hp&q=win+on+sunday+sell+on+monday+quote&pbx=1&oq=win+on+sund&aq=1&aqi=g2g-v2&aql=&gs_sm=c&gs_upl=87097l90118l0l93019l11l9l0l1l1l0l236l1619l1.5.3l10l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=621ca5448073768&biw=1152&bih=959


 

[DogBoy]

This thread returns three times in the first two pages. Nothing from SuperbikePlanet.com. Nice work Dean.

[tomek]

 I don't think (much) faster bikes are going to come from increasing power, but in better management of power and traction, combined with better weight and aerodyne   management.

$.02

Captain Obvious  said .


Let see , list of components on your typical sport bike that have directly descended from the prototype class , from the top of my head with no additional research :

- Upside down forks ,pretty soon in pressurized form

- monoblock brake calipers , radial mount calipers , radial mount master cylider .

- deltabox aluminum frame , it is  standard now but IIRC it was Yamaha that debuted this kind of design back in 80 on 500 cc gp bikes.
 -braced , triangular swingarm

 - rear monoshock suspension

- big bang concept of power delivery , Yamaha R1 engine is using the same firing order as M1 .

- traction control . Car systems don`t work very well on motorcycles and huge additional R&D was needed to make them work on  race bikes .This technology has just started to trickle down to production models but basically we have not seen anything yet , it is just a beginning .

 - tires

- slipper clutch

-  new Ducati 1199`s frame-less chassis is a direct descendent from their MotoGp program , although ironically 2012 Ducati 1000 will use conventional deltabox frame . Blame Rossi for that .

- those long front engine hangers also come form racing , they are there for the reason - flame flex in the steering steam area .  

 - about gazillion little things inside of the 4 stroke engine , port shape , titanium valves , valve springs from specially develop alloys .

 

 

[keepergale]

No factory needs to race to bring new technology to the showroom.  They can forego the ridiculously large expenses of travel, PR tents, overpriced racers and Dorna fees and simply employ full time a badass test rider who can test any day of the year for as many hours as they wish.  The can also test tech that is not banned by race rules.  Seriously, we can just about buy a more technologically advanced bike right off the showroom floor, excepting advanced materials like Carbon-Carbon brakes which are actually useless for street duty anyway.

Oh I heard about that factory  Harley Davidson.

[DogBoy]

I understand USD forks and monshock linkage rear suspensions were developed on motocross bikes. That tech came to road racing bikes later and production street bikes much later. slipper clutches were available for a variety of applications about the same time as they appeared on MotoGP bikes.

ABS has never appeared in competition on a MotoGP bike and somehow that tech is well developed with availability on budget bikes. Big Bang came from Honda 500cc 2-strokes in the early 90s. The RVF750 racers also used a narrow firing order. The M1 was a late adopter.

[X1Glider]

I understand USD forks and monshock linkage rear suspensions were developed on motocross bikes. That tech came to road racing bikes later and production street bikes much later. slipper clutches were available for a variety of applications about the same time as they appeared on MotoGP bikes.

ABS has never appeared in competition on a MotoGP bike and somehow that tech is well developed with availability on budget bikes. Big Bang came from Honda 500cc 2-strokes in the early 90s. The RVF750 racers also used a narrow firing order. The M1 was a late adopter.

I'm pretty sure Honda came up with the mono shock pro-link suspension and USD forks as a way to get more travel.

Other things on production bikes that didn't come from prototype racing is computer controlled suspension, variable cam timing, electronic steering dampers, variable length intake tracts and exhausts with variable mufflers or exhaust valves.  Probably fuel injection as well.  Even stacked tranny shafts started on a Vincent. 

[tomek]

No factory needs to race to bring new technology to the showroom.  They can forego the ridiculously large expenses of travel, PR tents, overpriced racers and Dorna fees and simply employ full time a badass test rider who can test any day of the year for as many hours as they wish.  The can also test tech that is not banned by race rules.  Seriously, we can just about buy a more technologically advanced bike right off the showroom floor, excepting advanced materials like Carbon-Carbon brakes which are actually useless for street duty anyway.

Without competition you essentially don`t know what works or what is just engineer`s pipe dream . There is a reason BMW went racing with S1000rr .
Nobody had ever said there were building , simple unsophisticated bikes  .

Racing is a filter , it separates reality from the fiction in this regard .

[black hills]

Let me guess, dual compound tires didn't come from racing either?

[Playinthestreet]

Big Bang from Honda in the 90s?

Dood... crossfire Ford flathead V-8s in midgets in the 50s.  Sesco cross fire V-8 in the 80s.  




http://v-quad.com/images/circle.pdf

[tomek]

Most of auto and bike related things ( electronics being an exception ) were invented in late XIX/early XX century by some dudes living in obscure  and remote villages , or maybe even by Leonardo Da Vinci .

What matters here is the fact  racing tests and validates those sometimes crazy ideas , those that work have a potential to  end up on production sport bikes .
I`m not talking about Goldwings or FJRs here , their DNA does not come from racing , more like cars and Vespas .    

[Silverbird]

Basically, you'd have to be a complete jackass to see a CBR1000 win by the width of a tire and go buy one the next day because of it. No body does that...most dealers aren't even on Mondays

[phatphil]

There is nothing better than competition to improve a breed.  The marketplace is one area.  The racetrack is another.  They cannot replace each other.  

Winning a motor sport World championship demonstrates speed, consistency, persistence, reliability, teamwork, innovation, and desire.  Why wouldn't you want to buy your machinery from people like this?  There is no doubt in my mind that racing trickles throughout company culture.  Mostly because racing is cool.  And you want every part possible of that machinery have some coolness.  Racing as part of corporate culture has contributed to what us gearheads want most.  

I  am so glad the formula works and is usually successful. 

Sure, these companies can save money by acting like a bunch of tight wads and not do anything fun, but they need to do just for the hell of it and challenge. If they were not like this, they would not understand why we take our bikes, wasting resources, risking our lives for no practical reason and go rip around for a few hours, a few days and if lucky a few months. 

  It is not a waste.  It's  necessary.  It's not like computers or electronic products.  It's not like hobby products.  Motorcycles and  cars are very high performance offerings (autos less so) that are very costly to design, develop, manufacture and bring to market. It is also financially risky.  Most of the cars, trucks and motorcycles offered in the marketplace today are totally not needed nor are equipped with necessities (as much as they seem to have become). 

Manufacturers have every right to give themselves the best chance of marketplace success.   Absolutely nothing wrong with that.  And who doesn't like motorsport racing?  There is a lot of passion involved and this must never be forgotten, belittled or unappreciated.  IMO, of course.  

[Silverbird]

Is anyone that literal?  

But if you see the CBR1000/RR dominating racing for a season or two, then yeah, you're way more likely to buy that than the others, don'tcha think?

Like I said...Win on Sunday sell on Monday is BS

[Silverbird]

Suzuki, was floundering in Motogp when their GSXR1000 set the world on fire

Kawasaki, which hasn't won anything in ages makes absolutly stunning horsepower on their 10R and 14R

Then Honda and Yamaha, winning quite a bit recently puts out the VFR1200 and technology that has nothing to do with racing.

There is a correlation, but it's more about pride and reputation on a level far below what they might have you think.

Now Ducati, on the other hand, those boys don't fool around. Desmosedici anyone? But those are a bagillion dollars. As for a $14,000 sportbike compared to a half a million dollar prototype...go ahead an keep telling yourself they have anything in common.  

[bluedogok]

Basically, you'd have to be a complete jackass to see a CBR1000 win by the width of a tire and go buy one the next day because of it. No body does that...most dealers aren't even on Mondays

That quote originated with car racing and most of their dealers are open in Monday, the corporate MC dealers around Austin are open in Monday, the independent dealers are not. It may not be one race that sells the squids but I would bet a bunch of the wanna-be racers bought GSXR's because they have typically dominated production for a number of years...it doesn't take much but shiny trophies to entice the ADHD wanna-be group. I do think that technology does not migrate as much as it used to because improvements in tech tend to be in very small increments now rather than the large leaps like it seemed to be in the 70's and 80's and as others stated the rules now limit all sorts of development in the name of competitive balance and cost containment. Since manufacturers no longer have the blank canvas they used to changes are much harder to develop.

A bunch of tech has migrated down over the years, it isn't win in MotoGP and bolt it onto the production bike the next day but prototype racing is a test bed for many items. There is probably a bit more of it engine wise since most classes have gone away from the two-stroke engine. I think some of the developments come from different sources, I think that MX has always been more of test bed for suspensions, the first monshock rear that I remember was on the Yamaha MX bikes in the mid-70's and adapted later to race and then street bikes.

MotorcycleUSA - Memorable MC: 1973 Yamaha Monoshock

[Orson]

1951 250cc World Championship standings

1  Bruno Ruffo, Moto Guzzi 22
2  Tommy Wood, Moto Guzzi 18
3  Dario Ambrosini, Benelli 14
4  Enrico Lorenzetti, Moto Guzzi 12
5  Gianni Leoni, Moto Guzzi 10
6  Maurice Cann, Moto Guzzi 6
7  Arthur Wheeler, Velocette 6
8  Fergus Anderson, Moto Guzzi 3
9  Wilf Hutt, Moto Guzzi 3
10  Alano Montanari, Moto Guzzi

[JReazor]

Like I said...Win on Sunday sell on Monday is BS

Not so much BS as marketing. Some people would say they're the same thing. I would disagree.

[JReazor]

1951 250cc World Championship standings

1  Bruno Ruffo, Moto Guzzi 22
2  Tommy Wood, Moto Guzzi 18
3  Dario Ambrosini, Benelli 14
4  Enrico Lorenzetti, Moto Guzzi 12
5  Gianni Leoni, Moto Guzzi 10
6  Maurice Cann, Moto Guzzi 6
7  Arthur Wheeler, Velocette 6
8  Fergus Anderson, Moto Guzzi 3
9  Wilf Hutt, Moto Guzzi 3
10  Alano Montanari, Moto Guzzi

You agree with Silverbird then?

[black hills]

Basically, you'd have to be a complete jackass to see a CBR1000 win by the width of a tire and go buy one the next day because of it. No body does that...most dealers aren't even on Mondays

Have you looked at the sport bike demographic? most are jackasses. the GSXR series was top selling for years and just happened to be top winners at the time as well?