In a recent conversation with Hervé Poncharal, the president of IRTA told us about the causes which will more than likely lead to a profound remodeling of the characteristics of MotoGP in 2027.
Basically, with the current performances generated by the power of the engines and the aerodynamics in full swing, the circuits have quite simply reached their limit in terms of safety! Mostly built several decades ago for much lower top speeds, it is hard to imagine what would happen if a MotoGP were to lose its brakes at more than 360 km/h!
And as it is not possible to infinitely enlarge the run-off zones, and ultimately the maximum speeds do not add much to the spectacle, the authorities which govern the MotoGP world championship, Dorna Sports, IRTA, FIM and MSMA are working on a 2027 regulation based on 850cc, smaller aerodynamic elements and a ban on various suspension lowering devices.
Peter McLaren interviewed Corrado Cecchinelli, the technological director of MotoGP, for the British site crash.net, and he learned a lot more, especially about the displacement/bore ratio, currently 1000/81.
“At the moment, we have a maximum displacement [1 cm000] with a maximum bore [3 mm], which gives a convincing result. If you simply "downsize" the engine the way people understand it, i.e. by reducing the displacement, you may end up with the same power [by increasing the rpm], but with a "less efficient" engine. ”, which means it will be difficult to drive and less reliable. So we're looking at both reducing displacement and reducing bores. So the [81cc] engine will not only lose power, but it will become the same, if not more reliable, and will be as easy to ride [as the 850cc], hopefully.
The proof is that, at the same time, we are also thinking about reducing the number of engine changes per year. So we are confident that with the new parameters the engine will not be weaker, but will be stronger in terms of reliability. »
Everyone is now aware of the new four-cylinder engine architecture, and the manufacturers will have a meeting with Dorna Sports in Qatar this week. Agreement on this subject is in sight…
But two other files are on the table for 2027, with reduced aerodynamics and an outright removal of the suspension lowering systems. Views on these topics are further apart than those regarding future engines, but Conrad Cecchinelli Explain :
“We are further [from an agreement] on aerodynamics than on engines, so it is difficult to say. But our basic proposal, which has not yet been approved, is more or less the same concept but with reduced dimensions, yes. I sometimes read “they should get rid of aerodynamics”. But that doesn't mean anything, because when something moves quickly through the air, it is an aerodynamic body. We therefore cannot say “no aerodynamics”. So this is nonsense. But then, honestly, that wouldn't be our intention even if it were in principle magically possible. Because we think it's a fascinating area, it's a technical challenge, there are links with production. In addition, it is an important marketing tool for us as a sport and for sportbikes on the road. So there are several reasons why we wouldn't want to go back in time completely, even if it were possible. But what could be said in a regulation anyway? We have tried, unsuccessfully, to ban aerodynamics in the past. We now realize that this is a pointless battle.
Rather, it is about reducing its effect. Because this effect is dangerous to a certain extent. Some will argue that motorcycles are safer because they have a higher physical limit with aerodynamics. The truth is that if you take a motorcycle, increase the physical limit of it and go at the same speed as before, then it is safer. But if you go faster than before, you will end up falling at a higher speed.
Going too far with aerodynamics also leads to a number of dangerous side effects, such as making the bike difficult to predict when you're in a slipstream, and putting the front tire under excessive load, making it very difficult to maneuver in case of panic. So a compromise needs to be found, but we are not in favor of a ban, whatever that might mean. We are for correct limits in terms of performance and cost of evolution. »
There remains the problem of the different devices. From what we understand, the Ride Height Device would be purely and simply banned, while the Holeshot Device itself (which is only used initially) is currently on the hot seat...
In any case, this entire overhaul of the regulations for 2027 is based on a simple objective…
“The main objective is safety. The side effects are cost reduction, spectacle, and road relevance, which for me goes hand in hand with reliability. These are all side effects that we want to achieve along with safety. And security is basically performance reduction. »
