My previous blog synthesized down to one sentence-
Dustbin fairings (true to the definition) add unnecessary risk for a racer competing on the IOM.
The second most convincing attribute compelling us to pursue the C1 (ICE) engine layout had do to with a potential aerodynamic benefit. After neutralizing the gyroscopic forces of the crankshaft the aero benefit of a 6” wide engine was tantalizing. We knew we could not create more HP than Honda- fortunately we also thought we may not need to. Some of the time our HP deficiency would not matter as the rider is using less than full throttle 70% of the time. Our rider may be at 55% throttle while the Honda rider is only at 50% throttle, we would be less efficient but traveling at the same speed. However full throttle is full throttle there is no 110%, so our strategy to make up the full throttle deficit was- Aerodynamics.
The MotoCzysz C1 engine is 6.5” wide; though the perimeter of our fairing generally matches the silhouettes of the other offerings we had less frontal area. We also had the added benefit of exhausting the high pressure air captured for the radiator more efficiently to the low pressure side as the air would move cleaner past a 6” wide obstruction than an 18” wide obstruction. When the riders are at 100% throttle the speeds are often high, a minor aerodynamic improvement of only a few percent can trump any HP advantage left to be found in an internal combustion engine (ICE).
One of the early examples that aero matters, has been substantiated by Craig Vetter’s Fuel Economy Contests-
Additionally and to the finest point- teams behind elite bicyclists understand this best. Over a 40km race distance an aero helmet can save a rider 47 seconds over a none-aero helmet, a disk in the rear wheel 33 sec. and smoothing you’re your shoelaces with tape 7 seconds… Aero matters- this is not the issue.
Law of Cube
2X speed = 8X power
Want to double your speed with no aero benefit then find eight times the power! Doubling your speed increased the aerodynamic drag or resistive force by a factor of 4. Doubling your speed means, to achieve the same distance in half the time, 2X the work. The conclusion; 4×2 = 8 the law of cube.
Since 90% of the energy delivered to the wheels is used to overcome aerodynamic drag, reducing drag is “found” energy. Every vehicle, ICE or electric should make aerodynamic efficiency a priority- this is also not the issue.
Dustbin by definition
The definition of a dustbin fairing is very specific; a Hayabusa fairing is NOT a DB fairing. Typical DB fairings have large surface areas far forward of the bikes Cg, resulting in the center of pressure (CP) forward of the Cg, this is inherently unstable. Like the unstable fighter jet tamed by massive amounts of electronic intervention, a dustbin fairing could also be neutralized- but not by any current e-teams budgets.
BMW and Honda both
have had formula one teams thus access to the most advanced aerodynamic data on the planet. To think these companies are following some conspiracy by not improving their own motorcycles ability is… lets just leave it at, an interesting theory. The lack of development has also been blamed on the “ban”. Read the rules for MotoGP and you will find Dorna and the FIM allow for significantly larger fairings covering a much greater area than what the teams and engineers have elected to run- trust there is some foundation for this decision.
We are still racing
The goal of racing a motorcycle is to complete the circuit in the shortest time possible. It is a misnomer to assume (and this is only being done by those with no high level race experience) that because the machine is NOW electric everything should change. As one of the only companies to have built a chassis specific for e power, that also runs proprietary suspension, MotoCzysz is obviously not rooted in tradition. The game changer is the “form” of energy and the method to create torque. Decades of development that have made the fastest motorcycles fast- is still relevant.
The rules for electric racing are very open; I believe this to be one of the purest prototype classes left in racing. To that end we are drawn to this because it is new, the playing field is uniquely level, progress feels important and innovation can prevail. In fact all the internet “experts” confident in their own opposing ideas should grid up, no excuse. There is plenty of opportunity for innovation as the rules stand now- this too, is not the issue.
The IOM is a tough and honorable proving ground but should be limited as a testing ground. A true Dustbin exchanges rider’s safety for efficiency. I have taken great risks over the last several years riding my own prototype machines but I have never been more concerned than when someone who has little to prosper from the experience does the same. Until you have built a bike baring your name you cannot understand the pressure of having a rider set off for a hot lap. Racing is risky, accidents and untimely deaths happen and we all accept it- that is racing and that- is not the issue.
The real issue is-
are we holistically dedicated to the future of our sport?
Will the future of motorcycling come down to making riders less safe? Real advancements need to be improvements in both technology as well as safety. Sending a rider out on an inherently unsafe machine, to race the most demanding circuit in the world because as a group we failed to make any other real advancements, seems very antiquated.
PS. Unfortunately issues like these are too common in e racing as a result of the disproportionate amount of new individuals involved with NO prior racing or motorcycle experience.
PSS. MotoCzysz will also have a second fairing on the Isle- a Streamline/BD style fairing, if Mark Miller (a very brave man) chooses to race with it will be his sole decision- I hope we do not have to have that conversation.