2012 MotoGP Entry List Delayed By Bargaining Over CRT Regulations

The long-awaited list of entries for the MotoGP class in 2012 has been delayed. The list of new entries to the class was expected to be released at the Catalunya MotoGP round, but the list has been delayed while the MSMA, Dorna and IRTA are discussing a clarification to the claiming rule. 

The problem was raised by a number of the teams who have submitted an entry. Speaking to MotoMatters.com, IRTA General Secretary Mike Trimby explained that the problems revolve around the price and the status of the engines used by the claiming rule teams. The factories are allowed to claim engines used by the Claiming Rule Teams for a price of 20,000 euros, but the new teams applying for CRT status have raised two objections to this issue.

The first is that in many cases, the simple material costs in a CRT engine exceed the 20,000 euro price tag paid by the factories, irrespective of the R&D costs involved. Just buying or producing the parts to replace the engine would cost more than the team would have received from the factory doing the claiming.

The other problem is that some teams will not actually own the engines they are using. Some teams will be leasing engines from engine builders, and therefore will simply not have the legal right to sell the engine.

As a result, Dorna and IRTA are locked in negotiations with the MSMA over revising the claiming rules to accommodate these situations. One avenue being explored is to allow a claiming rule team to change their status from CRT to factory team (meaning that they get 9 engines per season and 21 liters of fuel per race, instead of 12 engines and 24 liters) once a claim has been made, which would allow them to avoid handing over the engine to the MSMA member claiming it. Other options also being explored include putting in place extra criteria before an engine can be claimed, and taking another look at the price the engine can be claimed for.

Trimby said that he expected the issue to be resolved over this weekend and the upcoming Silverstone round, with a list of teams to be released at some time during the Silverstone MotoGP race next weekend.

Back to top

Comments

now i consider myself a reasonably intelligent human being

for the life of me i still don't understand what's going with the new rules

so marc vds racing rocks up with a bmw powered suter chassis and starts beating nicky haydens ducati

ducati don't like this and....buy the bmw engine and do nothing with it? then marc vds buy another bmw engine?

..Seems to me the whole 2012 rules saga has been plagued with broken deadlines and hasty backtracking. The MSMAs refusal to budge on 21 litres is the cause, rigging the rulebook is a symptom..

CRT was supposed to be for other CRT teams to claim engines, not the manufacturers for a paltry 20k so they have complete control over the status of independents. Now they want private teams to become factories to avoid having their engines claimed?

Let's hope Dorna and the MSMA don't get their hands on SBK..or it could be the end of civilisation as we know it..Jim.

The claiming rule is sound as is. Perhaps the price should be raised a bit but the reason for the rule is to prevent the CRTs from becoming "shadow" factory teams and taking advantage of their additional fuel and motors to blow away the factory teams. The CRTs exist with the expectation that they will be run cheaply (thus the cheaper horsepower of additional fuel) and the claiming rule is intended to be a disincentive from massive spending.

If other CRTs were able to claim motors we'd have a situation where the more well-funded teams could arbitrarily penalize their less well-funded competition. There is no chance one CRT will actually use the any motor they claim.

the rules also establish that a factory can only claim a single motor from a CRT. This leaves the teams with 11 more - even if they don't produce a replacement. Worst case scenario is they lose 4 motors (4 factories) but I see little chance of all the factories agreeing that a CRT motor is a threat. Most important though, if that CRT motor is actually a threat, you can be certain the team has the funding to replace any 4 claimed motors.

The rules are a bit complex at the moment but they are transitional. It is clear that the makeup of the bikes on the grid needs to change. Once the factories become less critical to the existence of MotoGP, the rules can be simplified and silliness like the 21L rule can be done away with.

The CRT rules are a means to an end.

Yes, 20k euros for a full on race engine is very low. How about set the claim price at what one engine would work out to when Honda set their exorbitantly high lease prices for engine only? That is likely over $100,000.

In this version of a claiming rule it is important to have the claim price higher than the cost to replace the engine to prevent the deep pocket factories from putting the CRT under financial duress through repeated application of the claim rules. 4 uses of the rule could put a easily put a CRT $100-200k in the hole, plus the additional labor to assemble and tune the engines. That's a pretty big hole for a private team to fill.

As for leasing engines, it is simple, if a leasing company wants to run in MotoGP and the engine is claimed then the lease company gets the claim fee and they provide the team with a new engine. As long as the leasing company gets more in claiming than a new engine costs how can they argue? If they really don't want their engines claimed to protect IP then they can change to a new factory team with 9 engines and 21 liters.

I still don't understand why the factories can claim private teams' engines but not vice versa. Actually I do understand but thought the expiration of the contract in 2012 would allow Dorna to create more balanced rules. Having the factory claim CRT engines is just like giving the insecure schoolyard bully official status.

Chris
http://moto2-usa.blogspot.com/

The lease companies are not worried about the money. They are concerned with protecting their technology (even from the manufacturers) which is why lease companies don't sell engines.

I tend to agree with Jerry. The rules as they are written are pretty decent, and there is no reason for this posturing by IRTA and the potential CRT teams, imo. CRT is designed to contain costs and making allowances for lease companies is completely out of the question, imo, b/c CRT is supposed to free the teams from lease contracts.

This squabbling is quite disheartening. If IRTA are too lazy to develop their own production-derived engines, who is going to do it. Teams all over the world already answer to manufacturers or private technology firms. Tragic that the GP teams seem eager to continue the same circus that has caused so many problems in production bike racing.

I intended to make a point about lease motors but thought I might be getting long-winded. I completely agree that leasing motors runs completely counter to the intention and actual value of the CRT rules. Lease motor creates a whole extra layer of complexity and cost to the whole situation that is entirely unneeded and is verging on skirting the rules.

The only reason a good team would use a leased motor is if it contain some expensive technology that they couldn't produce themselves which is exactly what we are trying to avoid.

The claiming rule makes leasing a motor a risky proposition, as it should. Making rules to allow for this arrangement makes a mess of something that is quite elegant.

I refer back to my first post on this site in 2006: Dorna, establish a clear and decisive vision for MotoGP.

Leasing certainly adds an unwanted layer of complexity, and though I support the idea of CRT in principle (since the MSMA won't allow a better solution), I hope Dorna doesn't cave to the demands of CRT teams. Leasing is too dangerous b/c it takes control away from the teams, and technology leases can be used as a technology-laundering operation for factories who wish to sell WSBK factory parts to IRTA teams through 3rd parties like Geo Tech (M2 engine supplier).

Unfortunately, engine leasing is not exclusively for high technology parts. Both WSS and AMA SBK competition are primarily stock engine internals, but both classes are free compression which leads to proprietary technology and leasing arrangements. Stock racing with leasing arrangements?! It's a sad situation. I'd like to think that IRTA teams are capable of developing their own "free-compression" mods without leasing the technology from 3rd parties.

If IRTA are not capable of such modest development work, why bother with CRTs? Furthermore, if teams won't sell "free compression" technologies for WSS or AMA SBK, will the series have to include limitations on static compression, valve lift, valve duration, etc (like production car racing)? The sport is supposed to be production oriented, but if proprietary technologies are the key to victory, is the sport really production?

The business model for motorcycle racing technologies strikes me as completely senseless. It is a shame that the FIM have let this situation get so far out of hand.

I mentioned this as a possibility in the forums section, that the price was simply too low to be practical. An easy fix would be to bump the claim price up to 50k Euros or more. Moto2 Engines cost 90k per season, for what amounts to little more than a production CBR600 engine with a Suter Clutch. Moto3 engines are to be made available for 15k euros for a single!

That said, I still don't like the idea of a factory claiming an engine from a private team, there is just something too big brother about this all for me.

Can you explain how this is "a little too big brother". I honestly don't understand.

If the MSMA sets the rules and allows for private/CRT teams to enter but then has the ability to snatch up their motors at their will, what's to stop them from taking any and all engines?

They aren't going to claim the engines to use, they will tear down the motors to see what the CRT's have developed on their own and reverse engineer to make the manufacturer engines better. This only if the CRT has developed a competitive engine of course.

It would be like if Honda could sweep into Moto2 and claim the best frame on the grid to use in their next production CBR 600RR... Someone else developed it and then they get it at a bargain to turn a huge profit, theoretically.

So essentially what the CRT's are thinking is "why would I develop this engine with the possibility that they could buy it for 20,000 (euros/pounds), when we've spend 5 times that on our own".

i have heard talked about CRTs is by Jerry Burgess--"hair brained scheme" he calls it.
I think Motogp should be for prototypes only,and to get more bikes on the grid they should restrict the use of electronics and exotic materials far more than they do at present. Even the restriction to 21lts per race and 6 engines per season must of cost the factory`s much money to make the motors acheive this.
This way a few more teams might be able to afford to lease the bikes

A CRT's engine can only be claimed directly following a top 5 finish by said CRT.

Done.

I have a feeling the CRTs' engines and race budgets would be plenty safe under this rule...

That's actually a really good idea. However, I get the feeling that a motor would never be claimed unless a CRT made it well into the top 5 even without this rule.

There seems to be this idea that the factories want to ankle the CRT when in fact, they have an interest in having them there. With the CRTs a top ten finish looks a lot more impressive. Suzuki would not look nearly as pathetic if their riders were regularly finishing in front of 10 guys.

The only reason for the claiming rule is for circumstances where the CRTs are getting on the podium in dry races. And we shouldn't be deluded, the CRTs, without factory support (which is against the rules) have no chance of being on the podium.