motogp single tyre rule, good or bad??

47 posts / 0 new
Last post
motogp single tyre rule, good or bad??

as the title said. good or bad?
what in your opinion are the pro's and con's??

personally i'm all for it.
i'll be the first to hold my hand up and say i thought it was'nt a good idea when wsbk went for it, and ive been proved wrong.
wsbk is better than ever and i believe motogp will benefit from closer racing because of it.

i dont for a minute believe that lessons learnt at gp level benefit us on the road or track. if that were the case, why isnt everyone using michelins or bridgestones? even dunlop with their data from british tracks at bsb level cant make a tyre to beat pirelli and metzeler at club level. (sales seem to prove this anyway)?

if say for instance bridgestone won the rights to supply motogp. would michelin concentrate more on developing better tyres for the average road and track rider and vice versa??
the loser would have a huge amount of money to spend on r&d and that can only benefit every rider who isnt in gp racing surely??

so we get better tyres, motogp gets closer racing (natural talent combined with a fast bike wins races rather than a tyre manufacturer). everyones a winner surely???:smoke:

feel free to convince me i'm wrong, i'm always open minded.

Oops, sorry. I was looking for the toilets and stumbled in here by mistake

Yorick wrote

Oops, sorry. I was looking for the toilets and stumbled in here by mistake

old people eh???

No reason for the chosen manufacturer to get out of bed and try to make a better tyre at all is a bad thing, if we'd gone single tyre rule in 1970, bikes would still be struggling to lean past 45* now.Even though WSB is single tyre, that there is are similar home series on the same tracks that are not means they are still in a tyre war and so still try. BSB, AMA, All Japan etc. keeps them honest.

it's bad because it will stifle tyre development. it's bad for the manufacturers who aren't chosen to provide the control tyre because they won't be able to showcase their product.

Bad idea, tyres won't develop as fast without competition between manufacturers. Everything thats used in gps, from F1, MX and MotoGP filters down in some way, shape or form to influence our bikes and cars. Leave well alone IMO. :burnout:

bad idea IMOtheres are too many variables in this years rule changes (800cc,less fuel,tyre restrictions) to single out one cause of a teams dominance.historically look how many world titles at various levels of motorsport Michelin have won.they will bounce back from what has been a poor year for them.banning traction/launch control is the one thing i would like to see and it will be interesting to see how much it alters next years F1 racing

stud69er wrote

i dont for a minute believe that lessons learnt at gp level benefit us on the road or track.

Well then you're wrong, plain and simple.Road tyres now are streets ahead (sic) of where they were 4 or 5 years ago, that is directly related to the increased power output of the GP bikes and is about the one good thing IMO that came from the move to the 990's.Michelin were a bit behind this year in a few rounds while they adjusted to the new rules, but they seem to have got to grips with it again and to the best of my knowledge are reasonably happy that they won't be wrong footed again any more than Bridgestone will occasionally get it wrong.No need for change that I can see other than certain riders having a strop at losing another world title!

Dicky wrote

banning traction/launch control is the one thing i would like to see

I'd definately go along with that, it'd remove another excuse for the Rossi brigade to bitch about (doesn't everyone have it anyway????) and on a more positive note would make the tyre manufacturers work even harder still so even better tyres to come.

I just don't believe that the tyre manufacturers who don't get the contract will produce far lesser quality road tyres than the company that does. If this proves to be the case then I'll change my vote but until such time I'll be voting for anything that evens the playing field. Yep, bin the electronics too.

490 wrote

I'd definately go along with that, it'd remove another excuse for the Rossi brigade to bitch about (doesn't everyone have it anyway????) and on a more positive note would make the tyre manufacturers work even harder still so even better tyres to come.

Good work, for a moment it was beginning to look like the adults might have a conversation without being interrupted by a Rossi argument.

Skink wrote

Good work, for a moment it was beginning to look like the adults might have a conversation without being interrupted by a Rossi argument.

Not fair comment, I made the point as it's relevant to the discusssion. Everyone I've spoke to at both Michelin and Dunlop are quite happy with things as they are, and to the best of my knowledge the same applies at Bridgestone.So why change?

490 wrote

Not fair comment, I made the point as it's relevant to the discusssion. Everyone I've spoke to at both Michelin and Dunlop are quite happy with things as they are, and to the best of my knowledge the same applies at Bridgestone.So why change?

The CEO of Dorna wasn't at all happy with the quality of the racing this year and I think the buck stops with him at the end of the day, regardless of who's happy or not. It's not all down to the Rossi brigade Also from what I gathered after the BSB races at weekend there's a very good chance that BSB is going to be going the way of a single tyre rule. And it's not forced to be any of the big three either, could even be Metzeler supplying the whole BSB weekends. Im in favour of it, if nothing it stops races being decided by who's on what tyre on any given weekend. WSB has proved it over the last couple of years with some outstanding races and the speed of development and how it filters down to the road tyres hasn't slowed down significantly because arn't Pirelli road/track tyres some of the very best you can get? Certainly no worse then the offerings from Bridgestone/Michelin and Dunlop, the arguement that development will slow seems unfounded to me

Dicky wrote

banning traction/launch control is the one thing i would like to see and it will be interesting to see how much it alters next years F1 racing

490 wrote

I'd definately go along with that, it'd remove another excuse for the Rossi brigade to bitch about (doesn't everyone have it anyway????)

Ha Ha i am a huge rossi fan BTWGot a dilemma next year as my 3 favourite racers are all in the same class (Rossi,Dovizioso and Toseland)Who do i support

Depends if you like curly haired man love or straight haired man love

490 wrote

I'd definately go along with that, it'd remove another excuse for the Rossi brigade to bitch about (doesn't everyone have it anyway????) and on a more positive note would make the tyre manufacturers work even harder still so even better tyres to come.

Blimey , can anyone else hear whitenoise?I would prefer to see a relaxing of the current tyre rules, allow teams to use as many tyres as they want in testing and the race. What with differing track conditions I think it is wrong to restrict teams in their choice.However there should be a ban on making tyres overnight, it was unfair on Bridgestone when Michelin was doing this.If things can't be evened out with 2 or 3 tyre manufacturers then it would be best to have just one, I watch MotoGP to cheer on riders, not Tyre brands.

Good idea. It's the racing that countsTyre development will continue regardless of whether there are one, two or ten manufacturers in MotoGP.The argument that we'd have rubbish tyres if we had one-make series is simply flawed. Advancements in materials and construction will continue regardless. It's the nature of the marketplace. I use racetecs for road and track and they're fantastic tyres. But Metzeler aren't in motoGP, so they should be crap right?

Metzeler are made by Pirelli who have the WSB control tyre sewn up. So there's flaws in your logic on that front.I think that tyre development would continue even if there was a control tyre in MotoGP, of course it would. It would depend on the attitude of the tyre manufacturers who missed as to whether they'd pursue new technology as vigorously as they would if they were in competition. They may or may not. Who knows, but if they were in competition you can rest assured they would. IMO.I also think that MotoGP should be kept as the pinnacle of engineering and that this would be compromised by turning to a control tyre. Yes it has worked in WSB and maybe MotoGP would benefit from a control tyre but additionally it would be a kick in the teeth for whichever manufacturer misses out given Michelins dominance until this year and the work that Bridgestone put in to get there. Dunlop have shown good signs this year as well and are closing the gap. More tyre manufacturers also means more money coming in to the sport.

I voted Yes. Get rid of as many variables as possible including the electronic shit and goofy curved dentures - we know they help in slipstreaming.May Rossi be praised.

mad dog 2 wrote

The argument that we'd have rubbish tyres if we had one-make series is simply flawed. Advancements in materials and construction will continue regardless. It's the nature of the marketplace.

Not really, even top club races aren't decided by tyres to the level MotoGP can be. If you've got the skill and the bike you can win on any top brand tyre.On the road it's irrelevent.So in MotoGP this year Bridgestone overtook Michelin, yes?Thus had Michelin been the control tyre this year, some races would have been won at a pace 30+ seconds slower, yes?And that's just one year, think of that over ten, fifteen, twenty years.So Michelin are forced to work harder to close the gap.Necessity is the mother of invention.

fontyy wrote

Not really, even top club races aren't decided by tyres to the level MotoGP can be. If you've got the skill and the bike you can win on any top brand tyre.On the road it's irrelevent.So in MotoGP this year Bridgestone overtook Michelin, yes?Thus had Michelin been the control tyre this year, some races would have been won at a pace 30+ seconds slower, yes?And that's just one year, think of that over ten, fifteen, twenty years.So Michelin are forced to work harder to close the gap.Necessity is the mother of invention.

so why do the majority of club racers (not all, agreed) use racetecs or supercorsa's??? its got very little to do with development from top class racing. pirelli and metzeler were the leading/best selling brands at club level before pirelli won the rights to supply wsbk. the 1st year in wsbk's, the laptimes were slower but the racing got better.who cares if every race in motogp this year would have been 30 seconds slower? i'm pretty sure the racing would have been closer and less predictable? thats got to be a good thing surely??i dont see your point about the next ten or twenty years?? are you trying to say it will get slower??? 1 thing i'll put money on is that bike racing will get faster, regardless of what tyres they all end up on.

stud69er wrote

i dont see your point about the next ten or twenty years?? are you trying to say it will get slower???

Doh!I meant if we'd gone single tyre rule last year we'd be 30 seconds slower (than we are now), yes?So had we done it 20 years ago we'd be where now? 5 mins slower maybe (than we are now), more?How much less lean does that equate too? What would the lean-o-meter on the TV be topping out at? 60*? 55*? Less?Not this much, that's for sure.Without competion you get stuck in a rut, doing no more than you have to.

Objection - conjecture.

fontyy wrote

Doh!I meant if we'd gone single tyre rule last year we'd be 30 seconds slower (than we are now), yes?So had we done it 20 years ago we'd be where now? 5 mins slower maybe (than we are now), more?How much less lean does that equate too? What would the lean-o-meter on the TV be topping out at? 60*? 55*? Less?Not this much, that's for sure.Without competion you get stuck in a rut, doing no more than you have to.

do you really think so?????thats fookin ridiculous!!!development will always happen regardless of who's got the contract.the demands by the riders and teams will ensure that it does. if a manufacturer doe'snt develop its tyres but instead decides to rest on its laurels, it would be sent packing quicker than a stoner qualifying lap.bikes have come a long way development wise over the last few years. tyres have too because they've had to. both will continue to do so at an alarming rate regardless. always have, always will. until the powers that be decide that theyve outgrown the tracks available and look at more ways of slowing it down/making it safer ala f1 and its grooved tyres rule.and if slowing the racing down to make it more competitive/better to watch is the way to go, then i'm all for it.i personally dont give a fook about lap times and lean angles, i want to see racing.

So do you really think the work Michelin are doing right now (and have done this season) they'd do anyway?By the same token, do you also think the work HRC have done this year to close the gap on Ducati they'd have done anyway, even if Dani had wiped the floor with everyone in Losai?

so the Bridgestones are a teeny tiny bit better than Michelins this year, on some tracks, with certain weather conditions. Who cares? The tyres are all really really good, whichever brand you choose.Does a road rider care? Does he hell. Does he rear-wheel steer his way to the butty van on a Sunday? Can he feel the tyre degrade when unleashing 240+ bhp on lap 25? Does he ride slicks FFS?All the modern tyres are good. The tyre firms will continue to develop good products for road riders, irrespective of who's winning MotoGP races.If motoGP tyres were important then everybody would be riding round on Michelins, as they've been the dominant tyre for the last 20 years, give or take the odd year here and there.But do we all ride round on Michelins? In my group I don't know anyone who does.

fontyy wrote

So do you really think the work Michelin are doing right now (and have done this season) they'd do anyway?By the same token, do you also think the work HRC have done this year to close the gap on Ducati they'd have done anyway, even if Dani had wiped the floor with everyone in Losai?

michelin-probably not to the same extent if they were the sole provider of tyres agreed. but it would have been a better spectacle. think virgin media/r6 cup, where talent gets to the front and some of the battles are fantastic to watch! this season could have been stunning with stoner,rossi,pedrosa and co battling it out. imho of course.hrc-of course they would. the duke would have still been faster!! straight line speed is nothing to do with tyres. both hrc and yamaha seem to have narrowed the advantage that the duke had and would have done exactly the same amount of work regardless of tyres. if someone can pull half a dozen bike lengths on you down a straight, you've got very little chance of outbraking them. the bikes are always being developed.

I don't see how you can compare last years race times and this years race times fontyy, far to many rule changes make them of little relevance to each other surely? The thing that is mainly worrying the CEO of Dorna is that even if MotoGP remains the zenith of motorcycle racing it doesnt matter much of a fuck if nobody is watching it anymore ! And this ultimately is what counts to both Dorna, the sponsors and the all the manufactuers. Is it not true that back in the 90's the GP races at Donnington were only getting crowds of 30,000 compared to at least double that now? I think he's just trying to protect the entertainment of the sport and I think the race times have little or no effect on the entertainment of any given race but watching the top 5 riders going round and round for 45mins with barely any overtaking will have me reaching for the off button in no time at all. As it did with F1 towards the end of the 90's, you can only take so much before you lose intrest.

interesting to see theres nothing in it so far?? (poll wise).i'm surprised tbh.

The WSBK experience with Pirelli is misleading. With a single supplier development is controlled by them and different bikes have different requirements. I would be amazed if Pirelli haven't favoured Ducati in development but it isn't obvious because the 4's are inherently stronger under the existing rules.I recall Foggy's frustration when Pirelli wouldn't supply tyres that suited the characteristics of his Petronas bikes. They may never have been race winners but they could have been a lot more competitive.Ducati chose Bridgestone as they knew they would never get the same support from Michelin as Honda and Yamaha. A single tyre supplier is always in a position to produce options that favour one manufacturer's bikes over another and hence influence the outcome of races. Making the change will simply play into the hands of the biggest and most influential manufacturers.

I think it will never happen anyway. The 3 tyre manufacturers don't want it and all they have to do is state that they can't supply the whole paddock and Dorna would have to give in.Unless Pirelli or Avon etc put their neck out I doubt it would go ahead.

stud69er wrote

interesting to see theres nothing in it so far?? (poll wise).i'm surprised tbh.

60/40 against it in a similar pole on the RGV forum.So, fans don't want it, tyre companies don't want it, half the manufacturers won't want it (the half with the advantage this year), we'll get it for sure

fontyy wrote

So, fans don't want it,

Going by this poll half the fans want it

well nobody has managed to convince me i'm wrong yet.theres been some good points made, but i still think the benefits far outweigh the negatives to a 1 tyre rule. very surprised to see the vote is 50/50??i thought the majority of people wanted closer racing in gp's?

KorkyKat wrote

I voted Yes. Get rid of as many variables as possible

It works OK in Formula 1

I read that all the current tyre manufacturers say they DON'T have the ability to supply ALL the teams at the minute.

this is a real left field idea but how about alternating between tyre manufactures each meeting next year? ie michelin one week bridgestone the next.This would stop the tyre people saying they cant supply the whole field and everyone would have some data from this year.Then when everyone starts whinging we could throw a Dunlop weekend in to really shake things up.

Hi all, I would like to say a single tyre series is counter productive to the sport, I would like to point out when Bridgstone got the F1 contract Michelin spat the dummy and suggested it was time to give up racing as a whole, but was convinced to supply current contracts by highly anoyed teams that would be left high and dry....So Michelin decided it would produce rubber but without development, this caused a major drama to all the motogp teams most of whom immediatly signed up with Bridgstone for their R&D.Along comes a new engine capicity change courtesy of the "Rossi Soulution" put forward by Honda to beat Rossi as payback for Rossi Insult to Honda.Now we have a tyre company who has stopped development, a tyre company that has an F1 and a R&D advantage and all new bikes, some bike are better than others and all of a sudden Rossi groupies are raging mad their Idol isnt winning....again.A single tyre would have had the same result the best package would still win....easy. So why not go with compitition and develope better products.A single tyre would only create another pecking order where say two teams direct development obviously around there package and the rest suffer just as they did when Rossi got the Michelin A tyre built soley for him and the rest get the mass produced B tyre. thats not racing at all thats gifting WC's to one indervidual and Im way over that.

Wow, he used to be #27, comes from Coourser country.....do you think it really is him??? Do ya?? do ya???Would be great if it was, but I doubt a newly crowned world champ would have time / give a fuck about the views of us.Some good points made though, ref preferential treatment, how is it handled in WSB?

X27 wrote

Hi all, I would like to say a single tyre series is counter productive to the sport, I would like to point out when Bridgstone got the F1 contract Michelin spat the dummy and suggested it was time to give up racing as a whole, but was convinced to supply current contracts by highly anoyed teams that would be left high and dry....So Michelin decided it would produce rubber but without development, this caused a major drama to all the motogp teams most of whom immediatly signed up with Bridgstone for their R&D.

so because michelin spat their dummy out, its detrimental to the sport?? michelin deserved to lose the rights to f1, and imho if it goes to 1 manufacturer in motogp, bridgestone deserve it. michelin have been caught with their pants down yet again. (remember the farce that was the f1 gp of usa)?

X27 wrote

Now we have a tyre company who has stopped development, a tyre company that has an F1 and a R&D advantage and all new bikes, some bike are better than others and all of a sudden Rossi groupies are raging mad their Idol isnt winning....again.A single tyre would have had the same result the best package would still win....easy. So why not go with compitition and develope better products.

i dont believe theyve stopped development for a minute. they're just obviously not as good at it as bridgestone. some bikes are better than others same as some riders are better than others. the whole idea behind a single tyre rule is to make the racing more competitive. (with the best man on a competitive bike deservedly taking the win), it has fook all to do with rossi groupies. in fact the people who are saying it will ruin the sport seem to be the anti rossi brigade? when you know that riders on a certain tyre hav'nt got much of a chance of winning because they're disadvantaged (at certain tracks especially), it ruins the entire race as a spectacle. i say lets see rossi go head to head with stoner with neither having a tyre advantage at any track, and then we'll see who's the better rider??

X27 wrote

A single tyre would only create another pecking order where say two teams direct development obviously around there package and the rest suffer just as they did when Rossi got the Michelin A tyre built soley for him and the rest get the mass produced B tyre. thats not racing at all thats gifting WC's to one indervidual and Im way over that.

while that may well happen, it wont be to the extent that you say. whatever happens, the disadvantage someone might have will be at a minimum compared to the difference this year. are you suggesting that bridgestone will favour rossi over stoner?? i dont think so? from most of the anti '1 tyre rule' posts on here, i'm starting to think that most just dont want rossi winning and are happy to see him disadvantaged even though its detrimental to the sport itself. its been a pleasure replying to ya casey, good luck next year.

stud69er wrote

i thought the majority of people wanted closer racing in gp's?

I'm not sure what "they" want, I want to see the best riders given the best equipment fighting round the best tracks in the world, if that's close racing then all well and good, if not then to the victor the spoils of victory.Add into it people's rose tinted sunglasses and bitter "Casey/Nicky can't beat Vale, they don't deserve it" problems and you've got a recipe for some serious whining.So lets take the first GP from every year back as far as MotoGP.com goes;2007 the top 3 are covered by 8 seconds2006 the top 3 are covered by 10 seconds2005 the top 3 are covered by 18 seconds2004 the top 3 are covered by 8 seconds2003 the top 3 are covered by 8 seconds2002 the top 3 are covered by 8 seconds2001 the top 3 are covered by 0.9 of a second2000 the top 3 are covered by 1.5 seconds 1999 the top 3 are covered by 5 seconds1998 the top 3 are covered by 5 secondsAs we can see it's NEVER been good for close results since it went 4 stroke. It just that it was Vale whipping everyone so that's OK as in general he can neither qualify nor start as well as you would expect given his race pace. That is the sole reason we've not had 5 years of watching him check out in the same fashion Casey has for much of this year.So sod the tyres, ditch the tracion contol and more over, ditch the launch control if you want to see more overtaking. That is what people want (IMHO), no one will care if Rossi, Lorenzo or whoever else wins by 10 seconds if they've hacked through the field, it's leading from start to finish people don't like and with all the electronics on the bikes that'll happen more and more.

1st gp's of a season are never a good yardstick for how the seasons going to go though fonttyy.after the first gp this year, i honestly thought that we were going to be in for a great season. one that was going to be more like 125gp racing where you couldnt take your eyes off the screen for fear of missing something. do you not agree its been rather predictable and borderline boring this year. interesting statistic though. without quoting statistics though and only quoting what i remember from recent years. rossi dominated the class on the works honda, but there were still some great races. he was pushed all the way by the likes of sete,max and loris in the races. he jumped ship and did it again against all odds on a not so competitive bike. last year was one of the best i can remember, and that includes the 500cc 2 stroke days. hats off to nicky (one of the most likeable blokes in bike racing). hats off to stoner this year, he's been awesome and fully deserves it. BUT i honestly believe that without the tyre advantage he's had at most tracks, the likes of rossi and pedrosa would have been battling it out with him at the front most of the time. i honestly think that both vale and dani believe they can beat him more often than not given the same rubber too. (dani was the dominant one in 250's so why wouldnt he)? what a season to watch that would be?? thats what i want. i stopped watching f1 years ago because it wasnt a race between drivers.the similarities this year are too worrying to ignore imho. i'm not prepared to wait for michelin to get their act together as i'm not sure they will. what a shame if one of the greatest riders ever and one of the most promising young talents around are'nt able to show the world what they can do in 2008 because their tyres were'nt up to it again. or look at it another way. it will probably cost nicky his job if he cant run at the front next year.

stud69er wrote

michelin-probably not to the same extent if they were the sole provider of tyres agreed. but it would have been a better spectacle. think virgin media/r6 cup, where talent gets to the front and some of the battles are fantastic to watch! this season could have been stunning with stoner,rossi,pedrosa and co battling it out. imho of course. .

Ok, so thats control tyres and control bikes for the pinnicle class in bikesport- who gets the bike contract? Honda, Doocarti, CCM or Harley Davidson?

stud69er wrote

hrc-of course they would. the duke would have still been faster!! straight line speed is nothing to do with tyres. .

Tyres have a major impact on straight line speed - rolling resistance, stability, carcass construction and weight, heat cycle deviations etc. To even contemplate control tyres in the blue ribband class is disturbing to me - hope I never see it happen. The problem this year wasn't the rules -it was Michellin getting caught with their pants around their ankles thrashing off with a jizz mag in the workshop whilst Bridgestone got on with making the best tyres they could to suit the rules. For what its worth, yes the racing in superbikes is closer just now, I think the control tyre gets way to much credit for this > The rules for years suited 1 manufacturer's production machine for many years,result:- the rest packed their toys up and fooked off.Impact:- rules changed and bikes closer again.Next year, suprise suprise its getting slanted again.Italian seriesItalian tyresNext year Italian winner and all is rosey in Mama's garden again.Theres a lot of work to be done to make it a credible (World) championship IMHO - first thihng would be to bin control tyres.Shite rule, always has been always will be. And dont play the 'good for club racing card' it fookin isn't - all that happens is you end up paying over the odds for old technology 'control tyres' which you have to buy from a single source - its my bloody bike I should be able to put whatever rubber I want on it.Excuse me for I moment, whilst I pick these toys back up and put them back in me pram

just thought of a way to make a one tyre rule remotley interesting :burp:Make the contract duration 1 year only 1st January till 31st December and have a clause stating that you cannot bid for the contract for the next year if you are the incumbant contracted supplier.Thus all tyre manufactures could only ever win the contract every second season at the very most.Imaging it, one year Bridgestone, year after Dunlop, then maybe Bridgestone again then Maxxis, followed by whoever That would be fun

you missed TOMOHAWK out

.....Shinko.....

Anteater wrote

Ok, so thats control tyres and control bikes for the pinnicle class in bikesport- who gets the bike contract? Honda, Doocarti, CCM or Harley Davidson? Tyres have a major impact on straight line speed - rolling resistance, stability, carcass construction and weight, heat cycle deviations etc.

eh?? is this a wind up??

Anteater wrote

[To even contemplate control tyres in the blue ribband class is disturbing to me - hope I never see it happen.

why?? dont we all watch hoping to see a bike race, not a tyre race??

Anteater wrote

[For what its worth, yes the racing in superbikes is closer just now, I think the control tyre gets way to much credit for this > The rules for years suited 1 manufacturer's production machine for many years,result:- the rest packed their toys up and fooked off.Impact:- rules changed and bikes closer again.Next year, suprise suprise its getting slanted again.Italian seriesItalian tyresNext year Italian winner and all is rosey in Mama's garden again.

agreed the italian influence looks dubious on paper,but it looks like we might get a british winner on a japanese bike,riding for a dutch team (not a factory team). the racings been great to watch, the best riders have been at the front. i dont see too much wrong with wsbk.

Anteater wrote

[Theres a lot of work to be done to make it a credible (World) championship IMHO - first thihng would be to bin control tyres.Shite rule, always has been always will be.

your joking right???

Anteater wrote

[And dont play the 'good for club racing card' it fookin isn't - all that happens is you end up paying over the odds for old technology 'control tyres' which you have to buy from a single source - its my bloody bike I should be able to put whatever rubber I want on it.

youve totally misunderstood what i said. what i said was that the technology learned at gp level doesnt filter down to club level otherwise we'd all be on michelins or bridgestones.

Log in or register to post comments

Follow Visordown

Latest News

Latest Features

Latest Bike Reviews

Crash Media Group
Visordown is part of the CMG Full Throttle Network© : welcoming over 3 million consumers each month