steve125

LIFETIME SPONSOR
Oct 19, 2000
1,252
0
The following is from VP Racing Fuels...


Steve Burns, director of research and development for VP Racing Fuels, today issued the following statement regarding the penalization of Ricky Carmichael for the San Diego Supercross race due to a fuel violation:

VP Racing Fuels is a supplier to Team Honda, Yamaha, Kawasaki, Suzuki and KTM and has been involved in supplying fuel to professional motocross teams for 25 years. VP develops and manufactures fuels for both motocross and road racing for all these teams. In business since 1975, VP is the Official Racing Fuels of NHRA, the largest racing sanctioning body in the world, as well as a sponsor of more than 30 other racing associations in various capacities. VP produces more blends of racing fuels for unique applications than anyone else in the world. We like to think we have more technology in racing fuels than any other company. This is illustrated by the fact that in racing venues that do not have a spec fuel rule, more championships are won by VP-powered engines than any other fuel company. VP has earned its reputation as a world leader in racing fuels.

It’s with great dismay that we learned of the latest incident regarding a points deduction due to a fuel violation at the Supercross race in San Diego. The matter is still being investigated and the jury is still out regarding the source of lead found in Ricky Carmichael’s fuel. Unfortunately, this marks the third time in the past three years one of AMA’s biggest stars was disqualified due to a situation of the AMA’s own making. The failure here is not the fault of the teams nor the fuel producer. The failure stems from a rule written to serve European interests. These disqualifications have also embarrassed three major corporations, essentially accusing them of cheating -- violating a rule that is poorly written, based on a specification of .005 grams per liter set by the FIM for European competition, while the USA EPA limit is set at .013 grams per liter. These lead levels are so low they could not have affected the performance or octane of the fuel, nor could it have any effect on the outcome of the race. Significantly, VP has never been contacted by the AMA prior to the implementation of any rule pertaining to fuels – which is very surprising given that VP supplies all the factory teams!

The specification that needs immediate attention is the lead level. Based on the European limit, it translates to trace levels -- parts per billion. The low limits set for lead in street fuels is to protect the catalytic converter from becoming coated over long term exposure, thus reducing the function of the converter. It is not a limit set for health reasons. Racing needs a wider tolerance for lead as the fuel is handled more frequently by more parties than pump fuels and in a more hostile environment. While pump gas typically goes from the manufacturer via pipeline or tanker to the gas station, then directly into the customer’s tank, racing fuel is typically shipped to the teams in drums, which are then opened for various purposes, e.g. to draw samples, run tests, transfer to smaller containers, dispensed into the vehicle, drained from the vehicle after the race for reuse, etc. The fact is all dirt contains lead in varying degrees and it is entirely possible that fuel could become contaiminated with trace levels of lead given the windy, dusty and dirty environment encountered at most race tracks. Significantly, none of the levels we are talking about have any affect on the fuel or its performance in the engine. The use of lead in racing fuels is allowed by the EPA Clean Air Act. There are no legal reasons for the elimination of lead from racing fuels.

The other area of concern is the oxygen content of the fuels. As the rule is written, it would render many pump fuels illegal for use in AMA Pro Racing. The current AMA limit is 2.8%, while pump gas can have up to 3.7% in certain parts of the country. According to past conversations with Rob King, former AMA technical director, the current rules originally were written to ensure U.S. pump fuels would be legal for AMA Pro competition. The current rules fail that reasoning on both lead level and oxygen content.

These problems do not need to be confronted again. They require an easy fix -- rewrite the rules, while maintaining their intent. Suggestions were made to the AMA to this effect after the incident with Yamaha in 2004 but it fell on deaf ears. This is the third time the current rules have disqualified a racer that in no way was cheating or possessed an unfair advantage. It has made Yamaha, Kawasaki and now Suzuki look like cheaters, and made VP Racing Fuels appear incompetent. Yet, despite the recent claim by AMA’s Steve Whitelock that the problem “was explained away” in the earlier incidents, an analyzation of the facts in both incidents led to total exoneration of VP by the teams affected and all others involved. We anticipate the same will also be true when all the facts in the current case are analyzed.

This whole situation is damaging to the health of AMA racing. It has cost the factories, the AMA, the racers, VP Racing Fuels and the fans wasted money, wasted time and misplaced emotions. It is time for the AMA to revise its fuel rules to reflect reality.
 

XRpredator

AssClown SuperPowers
Damn Yankees
Aug 2, 2000
13,510
19
interesting . . .

remember Okie and I suggesting that the AMA stick with one fuel supplier a la NASCAR? They seem to almost do that already . . .
 

karterron

~SPONSOR~
Mar 24, 2002
684
0
Good for them. Let Whitlock look like the idiot when he sets there in an interview and makes it sound like these guys are trying to pull a fast one when everyone knew all along the problem was the AMA. Even the amounts Reed and JS got caught with in their two strokes was insignificant and made no difference, so it's not a two stroke vs four stroke issue. It is an incompetent sanctioning body once again showing how clueless they are.
 

KX02

Member
Jan 19, 2004
781
0
Good for VP. This is the third time this has happened and made it look like the teams are trying to pull a fast one. If the AMA thinks there is a problem and is too dumb to fix it they should have every rider gas up at the official AMA fuel pump before the race. As Mr. Burns said the use of leaded race fuels is EPA approved. How did they come up with this idea in the first place? Just more smart thinking by the AMA along with displacement rules to eliminate lighter, quieter, more affordable bikes in favor of what everyone is riding now.
 

muddy226

Sponsoring Member
Sep 14, 2003
271
0
Whilst I understand the frustration and disappointment of all concerned, rules are rules, whether one agrees with them or not, and a company with as much expertise as claimed by VP should be able to ensure that the fuel supplied is suitable for the purpose. The AMA can test it, and presumably others can also. It is the responsibility of the teams to ensure that no rules are broken, and the AMA to police it. Whoever is responsible for the fuel in RCs tank must take the blame, not the AMA.
 

JMD

Member
Jul 11, 2001
1,402
0
I think the problem is that the AMA does not see itself as the promoter of the sport, it sees itself as the policeman of the promoters and the riders. Thus, in this adversarial position, it fails to see the big picture, that meaningless rules for their own sake carry the potential for exactly this kind of disaster. I say it again: AMA, find a way out of this, and give us our season back.
 

HiG4s

~SPONSOR~
Mar 7, 2001
1,311
0
muddy226 said:
Whilst I understand the frustration and disappointment of all concerned, rules are rules, whether one agrees with them or not, and a company with as much expertise as claimed by VP should be able to ensure that the fuel supplied is suitable for the purpose. The AMA can test it, and presumably others can also. It is the responsibility of the teams to ensure that no rules are broken, and the AMA to police it. Whoever is responsible for the fuel in RCs tank must take the blame, not the AMA.


did you READ the article?????

It mentioned that dirt has a lead content, and the rules are so strict, that dust or dirt being blown into the tank from the track while fueling, can make the gas fail.
For crying out loud, these are dirt bikes, every now and then dirt is going to get in the gas. :bang:
 

Tony Williams

LIFETIME SPONSOR
Mar 23, 2000
592
0
Does anybody know what the level of lead that exists in leaded race fuel? If RC had .018 to .021, and the limit is .006 to the EPA level (to protect catalytic converters, which our dirt bikes don't have) is .013.

When is actually "leaded" fuel ???
 

CJG

Member
Nov 24, 2001
221
0
Tony Williams said:
Does anybody know what the level of lead that exists in leaded race fuel? If RC had .018 to .021, and the limit is .006 to the EPA level (to protect catalytic converters, which our dirt bikes don't have) is .013.

When is actually "leaded" fuel ???
I think leaded race fuels have around 6 g Pb/L. Over 1,000 times the current AMA limit.
 

YZ165

YZabian
May 4, 2004
2,431
0
Shut your pie hole Muddy! j/k ;)
 

Chili

Lifetime Sponsor - Photog Moderator
Apr 9, 2002
8,062
15
I'd have been much more impressed if VP stated our fuel is always in spec and here is the test data to show the same.

Instead they chose the pile on the anti AMA bandwagon approach which is popular at the moment. Looks like an easy out to me. As the primary fuel suppplier you should be able to meet the spec or decline to provide the fuel, not whine that the spec is unrealistic.

How many of you supply clients with product? If they ask for something you can't reliably supply do you tell them yes we can supply it and then hope they don't notice you can't comply 100% to spec?

Do any of you really believe possible dirt contamination cause Reed, Stewart and now Carmichael's fuel to fail at almost the identical amounts of lead? Elf fuels in Europe has supplied fuel for 5 years now to these spec's without issue that I have seen. Last I heard they had dirt at MX tracks in Europe too.
 

muddy226

Sponsoring Member
Sep 14, 2003
271
0
HiG4s said:
did you READ the article?????

It mentioned that dirt has a lead content, and the rules are so strict, that dust or dirt being blown into the tank from the track while fueling, can make the gas fail.
For crying out loud, these are dirt bikes, every now and then dirt is going to get in the gas. :bang:

Well yes, I did read the article. Rules is rules.Shouldn't race gas be the best there is ? Sounds to me like with all that crap getting blown into it RC should fill up at the pumps next time. I don't believe that dust or dirt blown into the tank would cause that much contamination anyway, depending on the size of the sample, but I suppose if the fuel supplier says it can I must accept his superior expertise.
 

Jon K.

~SPONSOR~
Mar 26, 2001
1,354
4
Amen Muddy.

Whitelock is the good guy here, doing a tough job.

I have no problem with Whitelock. I liked the way he handled the KW / DV incident, and see no foul here either.

When you get busted for speeding, do you tell the cop that the limit is too low? More to the point, do you get a break when you tell the cop that the limit is too low?
 

AngryCandy

Member
Mar 2, 2001
51
0
Chili said:
I'd have been much more impressed if VP stated our fuel is always in spec and here is the test data to show the same.

Instead they chose the pile on the anti AMA bandwagon approach which is popular at the moment. Looks like an easy out to me. As the primary fuel suppplier you should be able to meet the spec or decline to provide the fuel, not whine that the spec is unrealistic.

How many of you supply clients with product? If they ask for something you can't reliably supply do you tell them yes we can supply it and then hope they don't notice you can't comply 100% to spec?

Do any of you really believe possible dirt contamination cause Reed, Stewart and now Carmichael's fuel to fail at almost the identical amounts of lead? Elf fuels in Europe has supplied fuel for 5 years now to these spec's without issue that I have seen. Last I heard they had dirt at MX tracks in Europe too.


NO, NO, NO. What you suggest would only point another finger at the factory teams suggesting that they tampered with the fuel to cheat. VP handled the situation correctly.
 

steve125

LIFETIME SPONSOR
Oct 19, 2000
1,252
0
Yes rules are rules. But this one needs to be changed. Everyone agrees, and now the AMA is under tremendous pressure to do something about this. My beef with them is they should have seen this coming. Their actions and in- actions have really caused a lot of negativity on what could have been the best SX season EVER!

I hold them accountable! :|

February 28, 2006


AMA Pro Racing to Investigate Fuel Situation
- press release -

PICKERINGTON, Ohio (February 28, 2006) – AMA Pro Racing announced today that it will launch a special investigation into the fuel situation surrounding the Amp’d Mobile AMA Supercross Series.

On Friday, Feb. 24, Ricky Carmichael was penalized 25 points for using illegal fuel at round six of the series at Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego, Calif., on Feb. 11.

As part of a routine post race technical inspection at the end of the San Diego event, the fuel from Carmichael’s motorcycle, along with seven others, was tested. The fuel from Carmichael’s motorcycle was found to be out of compliance with the rules and the Team Makita Suzuki rider was assessed a 25 point penalty. The fuel from the other seven competitor’s motorcycles was determined to be within the rules. The list of riders whose fuel was tested includes Mike Alessi, Grant Langston, Jeremy McGrath, Nate Ramsey, Chad Reed, Andrew Short and James Stewart.

AMA Pro Racing has required the use of unleaded fuel in AMA Supercross and AMA Motocross competition since the 2004 racing season.

In making the announcement that a special investigation will be launched, AMA CEO Patti DiPietro noted that while a fuel penalty is not an appealable offense, there is enough evidence in this case to warrant an investigation.

“Our goal here is to get to the bottom of this ongoing fuel situation,” said DiPietro. “The rule on unleaded fuel is clear cut. If the lead content in fuel exceeds 0.005 g/l (grams per litre) it is illegal for competition. This is an objective, easily defined measurement that has been in place for three racing seasons. What concerns us here is that we keep finding fuel that is outside of the rule limits. We expect our competitors to take every possible step to ensure that their equipment is completely within the limits of the rules, but to penalize a competitor for an offense that is completely beyond his or his team’s control is not our purpose.

“Furthermore, it is not our intention to have a ruling influence the outcome of the series unless completely and absolutely warranted. This investigation will objectively determine all of the facts surrounding this issue.”

DiPietro stated that an outside consultant will be contracted to conduct the investigation. It is expected that teams as well as fuel suppliers, among others, will be interviewed in this process. The finding and recommendations of the consultant will be the foundation for any further action to be taken by AMA Pro Racing officials.

Until the outcome of the investigation is determined, Carmichael’s penalty stands.
 

Ryone

Member
Jun 18, 2004
391
0
Chili said:
As the primary fuel suppplier you should be able to meet the spec or decline to provide the fuel, not whine that the spec is unrealistic.
It took three instances for VP to finally step up and say something. I think they were tired of others making them the scapegoat. VP probably provided fuel to the other 7 bikes that passed inspection. They don't have a problem meeting the specs in the rulebook, but they have no control as to what happens to their fuel once it leaves their stockpile.

muddy226 said:
I don't believe that dust or dirt blown into the tank would cause that much contamination anyway, depending on the size of the sample, but I suppose if the fuel supplier says it can I must accept his superior expertise.

When you're talking about parts/billion or even parts/million, the theory of dirt being the culprit is not far off at all.

Ryan
 

kelseybrent

Member
Sep 25, 2002
266
0
Jon K. said:
Amen Muddy.

Whitelock is the good guy here, doing a tough job.

I have no problem with Whitelock. I liked the way he handled the KW / DV incident, and see no foul here either.

When you get busted for speeding, do you tell the cop that the limit is too low? More to the point, do you get a break when you tell the cop that the limit is too low?

If I get caught for speeding, I fight the ticket. It's nice to be able to do that.
 

Reesknight

~SPONSOR~
Oct 31, 2002
942
0
I believe that its a good possibility that the SAMPLE was contaminated rather than RC's fuel supply. The AMA better be glad Johnny Cochran isn't around any more! :nod:
 

Jon K.

~SPONSOR~
Mar 26, 2001
1,354
4
kelseybrent said:
If I get caught for speeding, I fight the ticket. It's nice to be able to do that.

Good point.
 

dante

Member
Mar 24, 2004
555
0
I don't know all the details, but this is a terriable blow to what's turning out to be a great season... However I think it's going to just motivate RC more... He might come out and win all of these east coast rounds and still win the chapionship... If he does'nt win the chapionship it sure takes away some of the prestage of winning it this year for someone else...
I don't think the lead gives any advantage in the four strokes... those bikes put out so much power you don't need to mess with the gas too much, I would'nt think...
It's just a bad situation, I don't think Rickey is a cheater, as well as the others who have violated in the past... Why don't they just fine him like a 50k or something like that, why take points from the leader... :bang:
 

dklink2000

Damn Yankees
Feb 18, 2002
765
0
Ryone said:
When you're talking about parts/billion or even parts/million, the theory of dirt being the culprit is not far off at all.

Ryan

I'm not sold on the "dirt in gas" theory. While it is VERY possible and likely that lead, naturally occurring or not(i.e. contaminated soil) would leach out, the amount of dirt required would have clogged the fuel system so much, I don’t think the bike would even run. Even talking works case, you would probably need upwards of a couple of tablespoons of soil in a tank to move the lead levels up a part per billion. If it was just dust getting into the gas and causing the elevated lead levels, the AMA has a much bigger problem on there hands. Everyone in that stadium was just exposed to very contaminated soil.
 
Top Bottom