View Full Version : Corser: MotoGP will fail...

03-28-2003, 01:31 PM
From AMA Superbike...

Corser is quoted in a story by Peter Krupka as saying: <strong>"At the end of the day, it's this championship they do sell street bikes off, not the grand prix class. I think all the other manufacturers will get sick of being beaten by Honda in the grand prix and I think they may well end up coming back here with their tails between their legs."</strong>

He's been hangin' around Foggy too long. And how many Foggy Petronas bikes did we get in the states again?

I bet the Telefonica Rep Gixxer 600 outsold it. :D

03-28-2003, 03:02 PM
Hey Sal,

You know, I think Corser's going to be proven right. I think the rest of Dean Adam's article points it out too. As a fan of racing for a long time, this sort of see-saw between prototype machines and street-based series always goes back and forth. It really is a cycle.

I remember the same thing happening to IMSA sports car racing in the USA. The GTP class became so specialized and expensive (and AWESOME) that only the Porsche 962 and TWR-backed Jaguar teams had any chance of winning. The series imploded because everyone lost interest and Porsche had proven the point that no one built a better GTP-class car than them.

I think 4-stroke MotoGP is the flexing of the corporate muscles, but the return is not going to be commensurate with the expense for anyone other than Honda. The companies will compare year-to-year sales and the easy correlation will be made that factory support of Superbike racing brings much more returns (in the form of more streetbike sales) than MotoGP participation. Financial ratios don't lie and the expense of MotoGP must be a big hit on the G&A line of the P&L. Money makes the world go around...

While I love relatively un-restricted prototype technology as a racing fan, as a consumer bike enthusiast I'll vote with my dollars to ride something that resembles what I watch racing every weekend - which is a Superbike.

Ricky J
03-28-2003, 04:19 PM
The new four-stroke GP bikes are mega-expensive budget busters, and with the world-wide economy in a funk it's a bad combination. Some tweaking of rules might happen to reduce costs. But Corser...hmmm...funny how this topic started with him. Still wearing his sour grapes pucker it seems!

03-29-2003, 08:42 AM
yeah, when I first saw the Corser statement I thought he was just being sour but after I read it he makes a lot of sense......seeing streetbikes race is what sells bikes to me........I don't necessarily think MotoGP will fail but I think WSBK has it's place and without effort concentrated there things will go downhill.

03-29-2003, 09:25 AM
I think it's nonsense. Who cares if Honda wins? Look at F1. They're even FURTHER off the deep end with Ferrari but no one seems to care

Someone WILL beat Honda, it's just a matter of time.

MotoGP isn't going anywhere.

03-29-2003, 12:32 PM
I don't think that MotoGP is going anywhere either, it's just that at some point in the future (maybe 2 years or longer) I agree with the prediction that factories will either drop out of it or concentrate their efforts back on Superbike (production-based) racing.

Comparisons with F1 are not entirely appropriate because F1 draws so much more TV coverage (read: $$$$) that sponsors foot more of the bill even for the development and racing budgets than in 2 wheel racing. Add to that the fact that car companies have MUCH bigger budgets to fund relatively esoteric excercises like F1 racing.

For sure this season of MotoGP will be smokin', but at some point the focus will be back on Superbikes with new production-based rules evening the field.

03-29-2003, 02:04 PM
I think you'd be surprised just how big MotoGP is. Ask Colin Edwards... In a recent interview he said that he feels bad for Rossi and many of the other racers since pretty much the only country he can go to is the U.S. because no one recognizes him.

We're very sheltered when it comes to motorsports in the US. I bet you more people watch GP Truck racing in the world than do NASCAR.

Ok maybe not, but it's close! :D

Stu Jones
03-29-2003, 05:53 PM
Why do people buy bikes because of what they see being raced?
I race a GP250 bike and there is no way I would want to ride one on the road. I ride a Suzuki 97 RGV250SP on the road which is probably one of the best handling bikes ever made for road use. The difference between what a race bike is designed for and what a road bike is designed for is immense. I agree that things developed on the race track can benefit road riders, think along the lines of rising rate suspensions, alloy beam frames etc, but at the end of the day I want the bike to perform properly on the road. The fact that you can buy a Ducati 996 which looks the same as the one being raced is really meaningless because the two are totally different bikes aprt from the way they look.
Lets be realistic Superbike racing does not allow development of new designs and parts etc in the same way that a proper race bike class like the GP's does. Yes it nice to sit in the pub and tell all your mates that you ride the same bike as Troy Corser won the world championship on, but if they have any knowledge they will know the bike you own does not even come close to the one Corser rode.

03-29-2003, 07:24 PM

You are a minority of the consumer motorcycle market. You have the first hand experience and knowledge of the difference between race bikes and road bikes. Furthermore, you choose to ride a bike that was designed to appeal to a very narrow part of the market. How well (volume of units) did the RGV250SP sell in the markets that it was even available in, compared to say, the same year CBR600 or GSX-R 600?

In general, the marketing of sport motorcycles is directly related to a companie's racing activities. All you have to do is look at the advertising for sport bikes for the past several decades. If that strategy didn't work, don't you think they would have changed it? Why did Honda (the biggest) go to great pains to draw such parallels between the RC211V and the new CBR 600RR? I think you understand the point.

You are making a judgement on how the general public actually falls for this marketing strategy. Yes, it's a little sad, but that's how it works. Of course the racebikes don't have nearly ANYTHING in common with the bikes in the showroom, but they do resemble them from an aesthetic and general technology (layout) point of view.

The point is that racing exists for no other reason than to sell products - pure and simple. It is an integral part of a marketing campaign, tied directly to product development. Our argument here is that MotoGP is where the manufacturers are currently choosing to spend that budget, and my position is that it won't be as effective in selling more motorcycles as efforts in Superbike racing, where products more directly RESEMBLE what people see on TV and identify with.

03-30-2003, 02:55 AM
The resemble part is where I think everything has gone askew in modern day racing.

Formula 1, again, is a great example. Enzo himself said he made cars so that he can race, which naturally goes against the grain - but the success of his company can't be denied. It's the image. It's the name.

Mercedes and BMW are the same way. But looking at a BMW F1 Car you'd think Compaq went into making cars.

Don't even get me started on NASCAR. Rumor has it Toyota wants to enter. Not that it matters, but are they going to run, a Camry? Maybe an Echo? Ooooh... a Prius on Pole? ;)

And to bring it back to 2 wheels... Aprilia has pretty much dominated 250 GP racing in the 1990s, but when's the last time you really saw someone buy an Aprilia because Melandri was so dominating? Hell, when I first sat on a Mille in 2000, I had no idea what the years on the gas tank meant.

No denying that the "appearance" class bikes MIGHT help sell bikes (although I'm a firm believer that word of mouth, reviews, and peer influence- like message boards- are the biggest of all), I think that today, it's the name that they're trying to sell, not the particular model.

On caveat though... I think the 1000cc I-4s being allowed in the top classes will change that... But not much.

03-30-2003, 04:20 PM
all this bs about superbike being more closely related to road bikes is always being said, do you know that the WSB ducatis share only one component part with the road going ones? MotoGP will destroy WSB in the next few years.

03-31-2003, 08:59 PM
I certainly didn't buy my Mille because of Superbike races but because because of magazine reviews / tests / comparos - I think in the end you have to look at how F1 cars / races dominate the car race scene. In the end it is the brand name associated with the glamour and money of motoGP and formlua 1.

It's interesting that a small company like Ferrari has dominated over the huge Japan / US / Euro companies. Something Ducati or possibly even Aprilia could end up doing.

In the end it's the company with the best team (riders/designers/mechanics) that wins.

As much as I love Superbikes I will be just as happy if Aprilia does well in motoGP as if they had done in WorldSBK.

I would love to see the series combined so it is Super Sports / Superbikes then motoGP in one event.

Smoke Eater 41
04-01-2003, 09:08 AM
The only reason Petronas won't be beaten by Honda is because Honda left WSB. Maybe Foggy and Corser were scared of Honda and that's why they backed out on MotoGP.

Moto Gp
04-01-2003, 10:39 AM
The Petronas team where unable to get into Moto Gp which is why they turned to WSB's. They were initially in development with Sauber (the F1 team) developing a 990cc triple, like the Cube's, to race in that class but due to Dorna's grid slot allocations rule they where unable to get a placing, as a result of this they turned to WSB's and Foggy who was not involved in the Moto Gp effort in anyway, so in just over a year they took a 990cc Gp bike and turned it into a WSB with a road going counterpart, speeding up there eventual emergence into producing road going machinery to challenge the likes of Honda, Yamaha, Aprilia etc etc. Foggy was chosen to run the shw and especailly with his image and name within the motorcycling world there wasn't a much better alternative! Corser was hired as a good, reliable, fast and probably most importantly... development rider, look what he did with the Mille!

I personally think both classes of racing have a place, WSB's is now going back to more road based machinery over the coming years with the introduction of inline 4 thousands like the R1's, GSXR1000's but that is a gradual process, so this is where the factories can get to show what they can do with a bike developed for the road. Moto Gp is the pinnacle of the sport, like F1 is for cars, where companies get to show their absolute best at creating an out and out race machine, they arn't anywhere near enough usable on the roads, but development from Moto Gp's helps companies develop new technology applicable for the road in time and which will then be shown on a WSB and raced there! That's just my opinion on the 2 classes of racing, it would be good to see the 2 come together to showcase all the worlds best bikes in one weekend of racing, 125's, 250's, Gp's WSS's and WSB's but until that does happen I'll be very happy to sit and watch ech event on the box each weekend and enjoy what we all love to see... bikes going fast!!!

04-02-2003, 03:10 AM
watched superbike , ducati won 8 of top 10 -- with aprilia and honda gone to GPto prove 4 stroke GP ruined superbike-- it become ducati club racing now , unfair rules to 750s and2 strokes and how can you beat 10 honda V5 with rossi and biaggis on them ?

04-02-2003, 06:09 AM
I agree both classes have their place too. I don't look to Superbike racing for the next bike I'm gonna buy though, magazines and newspapers do that for me.


04-04-2003, 05:04 AM
all the best superbike riders gone to GP because bikes are similar and easy to adapat compare to 250 :rolleyes: