What if it wasn't a SPEC class ??

[Mark Schellinger]

How would this have gone if it wasn't a spec class?

I personally am very disappointed with the way the 200 went this year.
I don't like the idea of a spec tire class.
Why would a tire manufacture try to make a tire better, when there is nothing to compete against.

It seems weird to me that a manufacture could test in December and again in January and still get it so wrong.

Clearly I am bias, BUT
I am entitled to my opinion.

a tire manufacture calls a red flag?
a tire manufacture shortens the race?

If this wasn't a one tire series, then there would not have been a RED flag.
It would have been up to "each" tire brand to decide weather they should pull "their" riders in or not.


This picture is from one of the top riders front tires.

[HAMMER]

Holly shit ....

[Christman29]

I think spec tire racing sucks! It's like saying we all have to use AT&T cell phones.........their service sucks but you can't sign up with anyone else. Spec tire racing is UN-AMERICAN.........let the manufacturers compete! Way to go AMA..............Let's go back to REAL Superbikes, on whatever they want and i'll be excited about the 200 again.

[jmaher]

Why would a tire manufacture try to make a tire better, when there is nothing to compete against.

+1

Competition will only give us better tires.

Joe

[Blue Junk]

Spec tire racing works when everyone in the race/paddock is getting the same tires. When there are incidents like what happen yesterday going on, it surely doesn't show how well a real spec tire series can run.

Kinda sad really, but this is what has been going on for a couple of years that I know of.

[dave.gallant]

I didn't see the race.

How was it? Close racing?

(I stopped watching racing when it was always the same people running away at the front and no one else even close...WSBK definitely is good watching now-a-days compared to the old crap.)

[Desmodromico]

I think it goes both ways, a few years back in MotoGP one tire manufacturer was completely lost and it made for really poor racing, F1 has had the same when one gets ahead on the development curve (sometimes read spending).

I can see where a spec series doesn't inspire them to improve, however a bunch of the AMA riders last year said the tires got a lot better as the season went on. Shame Dunlop got it so wrong for one race, just glad Eslick and Holden were ok. Disalvo said he was getting some funny feelings from the front end and pulled up to check his front for chunking too, luckily he didn't have it and ran a great last lap.

[HAMMER]

What I did see was pretty cool , I must say .. Disalvo is a freekin animal... and it was close racing ... I only saw like 5 laps at the end ...

[dave.gallant]

What I did see was pretty cool , I must say .. Disalvo is a freekin animal... and it was close racing ... I only saw like 5 laps at the end ...

Now, that is cool.

All of us want to run away with the race, but none of us want to watch that on TV. Close racing rocks no matter what the brand of tire.

[Throttleroller277]

I agree with Mark too....

And to shorten the laps.. making it so no-one needs to do a tire change? So much decides the outcome of the 200 just in the pit stops....

Did they do that because they did not have enough of the tires that they made everyone run, after the mandatory tire change?

-1 for Speed's coverage too... way too many commercials (NASCAR Commercials), and when they re-aired second portion of the race, it was 15 min before they actually got to racing... then left out a bunch of laps when they aired the Superbike races... what?....

[The GECCO]

Regardless of the effect it had on this race in particular, I've never been a fan of "partial" spec racing. What I mean by that is it should be all-or-nothing. Either it's a spec class where EVERYTHING is the same (bike, motor, suspension, tires, fuel, etc) and the only variable is the rider, or it should be that anything goes within a set of rules that everyone has to follow.

And why tires? Why not make everyone run a spec shock? Or brakes? Or fork oil? Spec tires are a silly rule resulting from backroom deals and have a negative effect on product development, IMO.

[Jon]

As someone who was there and working the event, I must say it was handled rather unprofessionally on many accounts. First off, while I understand that Dunlop was caught with their pants down as far as testing was concerned,and has an obligation towards safety for all it's riders, it's hard to believe that their tires wouldn't last longer than they did with the temps just a few degrees warmer than it was the day prior. Why they the AMA wouldn't allow riders to make the choice on rather or not they were safe was beyond me. Most riders have enough common since to know when their tires (both front and rear) are having troubles, I didn't think it their choice to require the mandatory change.
After the first change they actually managed to change their minds and actually mandated still another change to another tire after someone called out that they had mounted last years rubber to their wheels. Regardless, it made the Daytona 200, the Delaytona 147 and I, as a spectator, would like to have my day back.
Personally, I hate Spec tires, spec bikes, spec fuel and I suspect racing would be better without any of the above.

[JWinter]

I agree with Glen...All or nothing. MotoGP is slowly starting to suck. Give everyone a set of rules to work with and go racing. The AMA is a joke. The real racing is on the club level.