The White Knight 9,039 Posted August 13, 2017 It's a different type of skill. It tests split second reactions and the expensive skill of the tuner. I prefer the other type of skill based purely on riding ability but each to their own. Hear, hear!!! :approve: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vince 9,458 Posted August 14, 2017 Increased torque = quicker starts but also = a lot more lifting in the corners on grippy tracks Increased bhp / revs = faster top speeds but also means less time to react to trouble Big sweeping tracks without a lot of shale are an answer to both of the above. Pay your money, and take your choice. I'd have said that increased torque lower down the rev range makes the bike spin more easily and therefore less lifting in corners. To my way of thinking it's the lack of flywheel weight in the chase for revs that cause the lifting and makes the bikes less predictable. As I've watched it for 50+ years now....let me think.....can't remember Olle Nygren having super tuners nor Ove Fundin but by god they had fantastic riding skills You can bet that for the big meetings they both had the fastest engines they could get their hands on from the likes of Lattenheimer. I do think that there is a problem with the modern short stroke engine but I don't think the skill level is any lower than it was, if anything it's higher. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The White Knight 9,039 Posted August 14, 2017 I'd have said that increased torque lower down the rev range makes the bike spin more easily and therefore less lifting in corners. To my way of thinking it's the lack of flywheel weight in the chase for revs that cause the lifting and makes the bikes less predictable. You can bet that for the big meetings they both had the fastest engines they could get their hands on from the likes of Lattenheimer. I do think that there is a problem with the modern short stroke engine but I don't think the skill level is any lower than it was, if anything it's higher. It probably has to be in order to actually control the 'Rocket Ships' they are riding these days. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waiheke1 4,295 Posted August 15, 2017 It probably has to be in order to actually control the 'Rocket Ships' they are riding these days.But also look at the quality of racing produced by these riders. Can you name even one world final where the racing was as good as at Mallila on the weekend? I've watched every world final that is available on DVD or YouTube and would suggest none come close. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steve roberts 9,246 Posted August 15, 2017 (edited) But also look at the quality of racing produced by these riders. Can you name even one world final where the racing was as good as at Mallila on the weekend? I've watched every world final that is available on DVD or YouTube and would suggest none come close. ...not obviously seeing the above mentioned meeting but the 1972 (Wembley) & 1973 (Katowice)...amongst others... had their fair share of drama, excitement and controversy which I'm sure most would agree are the main ingredients in what qualifies as a good speedway event. Edited August 15, 2017 by steve roberts 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stoke Potter 242 Posted August 15, 2017 (edited) So where are you going to site these tracks and the get the finance to buy the land and develop it? Most current tracks are in rented and shared arenas with little or no scope for alteration. You certainly could standardise machinery, you don't have to follow the herd. The same place you did for Somerset, Scunthorpe, Belle Vue, Leicester, etc. Putting tracks in places where they essentially don't fit is just stupid. Another benefit of not sharing with Greyhounds running 2/3 times a weeks is that you would have the possibility of running on your day of choice and not just when the Greyhounds could fit you in. Opens up the possibility of having a fixed race night, should you think that's a good idea. Also gives you more access and time to prepare a decent track surface as well. If there's going to be a future for British Speedway that's where it lies. Edited August 15, 2017 by Stoke Potter Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
foamfence 2,917 Posted August 15, 2017 The same place you did for Somerset, Scunthorpe, Belle Vue, Leicester, etc. Putting tracks in places where they essentially don't fit is just stupid. Another benefit of not sharing with Greyhounds running 2/3 times a weeks is that you would have the possibility of running on your day of choice and not just when the Greyhounds could fit you in. Opens up the possibility of having a fixed race night, should you think that's a good idea. Also gives you more access and time to prepare a decent track surface as well. If there's going to be a future for British Speedway that's where it lies. Sorry but that is just daydreaming, ask Cradley and Coventry fans. If you can build a stadium on a plot you can usually build something else, something that rakes in more money and which developers and financiers are more likely to invest in. Hopefully Cradley might get a new home but it's taken decades to get to the current stage. Somerset was built on the club owners land and Belle Vue will be lucky if it's financial backers ever get their full investment back. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fromafar 10,375 Posted August 15, 2017 The same place you did for Somerset, Scunthorpe, Belle Vue, Leicester, etc. Putting tracks in places where they essentially don't fit is just stupid. Another benefit of not sharing with Greyhounds running 2/3 times a weeks is that you would have the possibility of running on your day of choice and not just when the Greyhounds could fit you in. Opens up the possibility of having a fixed race night, should you think that's a good idea. Also gives you more access and time to prepare a decent track surface as well. If there's going to be a future for British Speedway that's where it lies. The same place you did for Somerset, Scunthorpe, Belle Vue, Leicester, etc. Putting tracks in places where they essentially don't fit is just stupid. Another benefit of not sharing with Greyhounds running 2/3 times a weeks is that you would have the possibility of running on your day of choice and not just when the Greyhounds could fit you in. Opens up the possibility of having a fixed race night, should you think that's a good idea. Also gives you more access and time to prepare a decent track surface as well. If there's going to be a future for British Speedway that's where it lies. Dont think there is enough money in the sport for Promoters to invest in new Stadiums on new sites,given the Planning,Permission and cost of finding suitable land. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The White Knight 9,039 Posted August 15, 2017 Dont think there is enough money in the sport for Promoters to invest in new Stadiums on new sites,given the Planning,Permission and cost of finding suitable land. And there's the rub. As regards running when you like - that would also be under the Rules of the Council as they always have stipulations on things like this. Curfews etc. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waiheke1 4,295 Posted August 15, 2017 ...not obviously seeing the above mentioned meeting but the 1972 (Wembley) & 1973 (Katowice)...amongst others... had their fair share of drama, excitement and controversy which I'm sure most would agree are the main ingredients in what qualifies as a good speedway event.For drama magic and controversy I agree you can't beat the old one off world final.However for quality of racing I defy you to say that either of those finals had better racing than the gp from Saturday which was the pint I was making. I'd really recommend you watch it on youtube. I'd say there are a range of factors driving the improved quality of racing (better track prep, a field where all 16 riders are world class, every rider having something to race for right to the final heat, improvement in safety meaning riders are willing to take more risks), but skill of riders is certainly one of them imo. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Starman2006 2,355 Posted August 15, 2017 Dont think there is enough money in the sport for Promoters to invest in new Stadiums on new sites,given the Planning,Permission and cost of finding suitable land. True. . Somerset was built on the club owners land and Belle Vue will be lucky if it's financial backers ever get their full investment back. Spot on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
keef robin 551 Posted August 15, 2017 For drama magic and controversy I agree you can't beat the old one off world final. However for quality of racing I defy you to say that either of those finals had better racing than the gp from Saturday which was the pint I was making. I'd really recommend you watch it on youtube. I'd say there are a range of factors driving the improved quality of racing (better track prep, a field where all 16 riders are world class, every rider having something to race for right to the final heat, improvement in safety meaning riders are willing to take more risks), but skill of riders is certainly one of them imo. The last two Cardiff GPS have seen some superb speedway. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bruno 1,790 Posted August 15, 2017 I watched the Wembley one which Penhall won a few months back and it wasn't as good as I remember it except a couple of classic races Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steve roberts 9,246 Posted August 15, 2017 I watched the Wembley one which Penhall won a few months back and it wasn't as good as I remember it except a couple of classic races ...but the atmosphere was electric! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GWC 495 Posted August 15, 2017 It was noticeable after seeing laydowns for the first time how riders sat forward almost hugging the fuel tank. The upright style was to sit back towards the rear wheel so the power must be far less. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites