All Rights Reserved © 2008 Thomas W. Day
Last year, I found
myself the lucky correspondent in an
extended email conversation with Kevin Cameron as the result of an article I was
working on about motorcycle journalists and writers. An editor had fired up my
curiosity by claiming that Cameron was a motorcycle writer, like many, who
needed massive editorial correction to appear sentient. Several years ago, I'd
heard Kevin in a technical presentation and suspected he probably wrote at least
as well as he spoke. DynoTech's editor, Jim
Czekalaof, told me, "The thirty of so technical
articles Kevin Cameron has contributed to
DynoTechResearch are printed exactly as received. Since you've heard
him speak at some technical function, you know that Kevin speaks, even off the
cuff, exactly like he writes. I doubt that he has a team of editors helping him
in his home office." Jim forwarded my query to Kevin and a conversation began
that I hope will continue for a long time.
After reviewing Kevin's most recent
book, Top Dead Center, I continued my lucky stumbling when he consented
to an interview about the book and his life in motorcycling.
MMM: Is this a good time?
KC: It might be.
MMM: I can understand that.
One of the things I got from the
beginning of Top Dead Center is that you were a race tuner and a shop owner or a
dealer. Is that right?
KC: I was a partner in a little
outfit called Arlington Motorsports, which was in Arlington, MA. I think I was
sort of something extra added on there. The thing might have done ok, as a
business, but we were mad for racing and spent too much money on it. Kind of
like the Cold War.
MMM: It did look like you spent a
lot of money on racing.
KC: In those days a crankshaft for an
H1R was $105 to the dealer, in 1971. By 1977, when Kawasaki
were fazing out their KR750 liquid-cooled three cylinder, the cost of the
crankshaft to Kawasaki was $850. Now, basically, the same number of operations
to assemble, or to manufacture.
MMM: So it's all inflation or
materials changes?
KC: I think it's just the number
being built. Because the KR750 shared no parts with any
production model. The AMA originally required 200 machines for
homologation. And that's what was required, for example, of Yamaha TD1C's. There
had to be shown to be 200 of them. Or the TZ750A, in 1974.
For '76 or '75, they changed that to the "twenty-five rule."
And then, almost immediately, changed it to "you have to make one in order to
have it homologated." The crankshaft for the H1R -- all the flywheels,
the connecting rods, and so forth -- were the same forgings as production parts.
Then for the KR750, everything was low production, custom item. So, we used to
pay, during the '70's, $125 or something like that for a set of crankcases for a
TZ250. Then, the TZ250H of 1981, suddenly the crankcases were $1,000 because
they weren't shared with a production model.
MMM: What year did you go out of
doing race tuning?
KC: Sort of gradually in the 1980's.
Because the Daytona 200 was switched to a Superbike race in
'84. I built a couple of 4-stroke bikes engines and there was no economic
basis for it. The thing about a 2-stroke is that, if you have a piston seizure,
you can be running in a half an hour. If you wreck a 4-stroke, the chances are
that you need an engine. You are not going to rebuild it. Nobody works on
engines at the races anymore.
MMM: I didn't realize that.
KC: They just replace them. When
Honda was leaving Laguna, this past weekend, I think they had eight of those
molded plastic caissons on casters, each of which said "RC212VE/Z" and gave the
engine number. And those were eight engines that were at Laguna for the two
factory guys.
MMM: So you don't see a lot of
welding sparks going on in the pit area?
KC:
No, it used to be that people's frames were cracking and repairs were being
made. Rich Chambers, who does some announcing now, always had welding gas in the
back of his truck and was very generous with it. People welded things with coat
hanger, nice soft iron wire. You could hear the sound of die grinders as
recently the early 90's, because there was still a 250 class.
"The die grinders that you hear today
are doing things like finishing out little cooling holes in brake disk shrouds
or finishing the edges of windscreens that have been cut so that they don't
interfere with the rider's helmet. But it used to be, if someone was putting on
a new cylinder they'd have to raise the exhaust port. They'd have to do
something with the transfers. They'd be little operations.
Kel
Carruthers used to do desperate things at the
track; they came with the TZ250C in 1976. It had a
very low exhaust port. They struggled with that thing all through practice. The
Kawasaki's were threatening, the following year they were on the pole. At the
last minute, Kel said, "Alright, we're going to do
it." They raised the exhaust port 2mm and took 20mm out of the exhaust header
pipe and made some corrections in the morning warm-up and they had a race
winner.
MMM: All of these
precision-sounding changes, these were off of a rule-of-thumb or best-guess,
right? They're weren't any flow-testing or . . .
KC: No, you knew what had run for you
before. Well, the top of the exhaust should be this many millimeters down and
you knew what the shape of the exhaust port had to be in order to not snag the
rings. And so, that would take care of the exhaust port dimensions. If you
needed to adjust the transfers . . . Kel did it for
Kenny in Europe, over the objections of Mr. Doy in
1981 on the 0W54. They machined the base of the cylinder to lower the transfers
and, then, they raised the exhausts.
MMM: Looking at some of those
early articles you wrote, my guess is that you built close to 80% of a
motorcycle yourself, didn't you?
KC: Oh yeah. For instance, we had
chassis built by Frank Camillieri who has a machine
shop business in New Hampshire now. He used to be north of Boston. An avid racer
for years, until Rusty Bradley was so much faster than he was in practice, in
1971, that he said, "That's it. I'm outta here."
But a very good
builder. He also made some
swingarms for me. So when we built our 750 in
1972, that had a Frank Hamlari
frame and swingarm. It had a C&J gas tank made by an
outfit in California that was that low-boy tank that
was only about 3" high above the frame rail. That bike started out with a
Rickman fork, with had 1 5/8" tubes. Terribly modern.
At the start of the year, just for
Daytona, we had on a 250mm Fontana 4-shoe drum brake on the front. It was just
useless compared with the new disks. So, we quickly converted to disk brakes. I
mean, there was no transition there. There no period where drum brakes were
better for this, but disk brakes were better for that. It was like "Oh shit, why
didn't we think of this before?" The thing with the drum brake is that it has
some degree of weather protection, as far as off-road is concerned. As far as a
heat absorber, there is just no contest. That became obvious at Daytona in '72.
Of course, '72 was also the "hinge of
fate" for tire design. The new 750 triples from Kawasaki and Suzuki just tore up
every tire available and the race was won on a 350 Yamaha twin. So, it was the
end of the hard rubber era. Dunlop created their new speedway special tire,
which was 5 1/2" wide and it required a WM5 rim, I think. Suddenly, everything
was different. The end of '73, Goodyear were making something similar, although
much more flexible and the following spring the slick tire came out. 1974. At
the time, we just thought were having some tire trouble. We didn't see it as,
"Wow man, this is like history."
MMM: There seems to be a lot of
that going on right now, between Bridgestone and Michelin; especially in the
MotoGP territory.
KC: Mr. Giorgio
Barbier, the racing manager at Pirelli, says that there are now two
separate lines of development for motorcycle tires. There's the MotoGP line
which are inflated at 12-15psi, this is rear tires. And then there is everything
else. And "everything else" means tires with some commercial utility. Their spec
tires for British Superbike and World Superbike are some use to them in
developing world production tires.
Whereas, the new super-low pressure
racing tires are sort of retracing the footsteps of what happened when Dunlop
developed the R5 car racing tire, in the 50's. They had had some tire failures
and they decided they would start to use this nylon material for the carcass,
instead of cotton; which was the former choice. Nylon was much stronger, so you
need fewer plies. That meant a more flexible tire, which meant that you could
afford a lower inflation pressure and, therefore, get a bigger footprint. And so
they had the peculiar result of a tire that had less top speed but a much
quicker lap time. It had less top speed because the rubber was intentionally
made with a lot of internal friction, so-called hysteresis. In order to give it
enhanced dry grip and, in particular, much better wet grip.
So, this has been a trend; to make a
more flexible tire that lays down a bigger footprint and to permit the tire to
survive the heat that would generally be generated in that case by taking a lot
of the material out of the tire. Because the more rubber
there is there, flexing, the hotter the tire. So, the MotoGP
tire, now, the Michelins are very low pressure and,
in general, have a soft construction where the Bridgestone’s have equally low
pressure but a stiffer carcass construction.
Because both
Stoner and Rossi are at high angles of lean for some time.
As Rossi commented last year, he said "With the very soft construction that
Collin likes, as soon as I touch the throttle the back of the machine jumps
sideways." So, I asked Barbier -- you don't ask
Michelin people anything, they are sworn to eternal secrecy -- if there was such
a thing as compressive buckling in tire carcasses and he said, "Oh yes, it's
certainly true." So, I think that's what goes on. Anyway, Rossi and Stoner both
like a more substantially constructed carcass that has some resistance to
buckling, even by itself, without the inflation.
MMM: How stiff are these tires,
compared to what we use on the street?
KC: I think you'd find them softer.
MMM: A lot softer, or just some?
KC: Softer. The fact that there is
very little rubber on them and they, being semi-radial construction, they have
one main carcass ply and they have the two cut breaker plies under the tread.
Which makes that portion stiff, laterally. My analogy
for that is that it's like a tank track, which is flexible in one direction and
quite rigid in others.
MMM: That brings up a question I
have not found an answer for on my own. One of our writers referred to you as
some kind of "deity." On the internet, you have
everything from a tech school background to a PhD from Harvard.
KC: Yeah well. I'm self-taught in the
vocational end and . . . Lenin "seizing the means of production." And as far as
the other is concerned, I had an undistinguished college career at a
leaf-encrusted East Coast school. That was in physics and it was clear that I
wasn't going anywhere because I didn't have the math for it.
"Years later, I learned that the
reason for the clarity in Harry Ricardo's classic on the internal combustion
engine, The High Speed Internal Combustion Engine, was that he was
advised at university to stay on the practical side and avoid the theoretical,
because his math wasn't so hot. If you have the math, then you can say, "Well of
course, let's see now, velocity is going to appear . . . one, two, three . . .
ok, velocity cubed and we're going to need a coefficient that looks like this
and . . . for small angles of alpha these terms disappear so we end up with
this." And there is your understanding, but, for me, it has to be a word
picture.
MMM: I suppose physics programs
aren't big on word pictures.
KC: It's a strange thing. There are a
lot of people, in engineering, who work this way. The Russians, in their
theoretical physics groups, seem to recognize that there are the theoreticians
and the pure experimentalists and those who work by what they call "deep
physical intuition." I think you get that by messing with the stuff. You
probably have to be interested in it, I mean you
can't assign everyone in an army unit "go out there an get deep physical
intuition as described on page 73," but you could get more than you've got. What
I see going on now is that kids don't play with stuff. They get to university,
as the guys at RPI once told me, "every new entering freshman class has better
keyboard skills and more math," but they are less prepared to deal with the
physical world. When those people become engineers etc. and go on the job, they
have to go and do the playing that they would have done when they were 12 or 8
or 16. They do it on the job and some pretty ridiculous things come out of it.
But in the end, the same function is performed, namely, the person gets squared
away with physical reality.
MMM: When I was in engineering
classes in the 1970s, I took a "career development class." When the instructor
asked, "Why do you want to be an engineer." 99% of
the class replied "I heard it was a good job." Only a couple of older guys were
there because we wanted to build stuff.
KC: In '63, a lot of guys were saying
"Oh wow, man. I can start at 18k in Palmdale (Lockheed)"." 18k! Christ, you
could buy a house! That was the big draw. Now, of course, anyone would be an
idiot to go into such [engineering]
courses. You know when you go to work, the boss will
say "I can get four opinions from China for the price of one from you. Get
lost." And, of course, there is Professor Falco who
asked, "Did you ever meet a 40 year old electrical engineer?" I said I'm not
sure I ever had. And he said, "You never will, either. Because,” he said, “by
the time they get to 40 they've had to move into another field because they are
obsolete.”
MMM: At least engineering
management. When I was in college, they told us that "the day you leave college
is the day you become obsolete."
KC: Sure. The day
your education stops is an important day. You mustn't ever let it to
happen.
MMM: You talked, in your book,
about how you came to write for Cycle and Cycle World. You didn't talk about
where you started writing. You were obviously a good writer right from the first
things I read from you.
KC: The thing that happens there is,
I'm remembering my dad talking about it. My dad was in publishing. He was
talking about some guy who was struggling with writing. He said, "No wonder.
He's never read anything." I think one thing is exposure to example. If your
parents are good talkers, and they talk, that's one thing. If there is a lot of
reading going on, that's another thing.
"I think I was always interested in
explanations. I've got a couple of papers I wrote when I was having a moment
with anthropology grad school and they sound like me. There is just a little bit
of humor and a lot of explanation and it's grammatically constructed. That's
becoming more unusual every day.
MMM: Good point.
KC: I just finished with a revision
of that 1998 book, the Sportbike Performance Handbook. Most of the errors
were put there by the copy editor, because they are modern idiom. Instead of
saying "not that large a group of people," she wrote "not that big of a . . . "
"Big of a" is really taking over.
MMM: If you are going to be
modern, you are going to have to start every sentence with "like," too?
KC: And they didn't want my average
reader to be Lester Blogs, they wanted it to be Joe
Schmoe. I said, "No, I wrote it the way I wanted."
MMM: The group of people I know
who have read that book wouldn't be "average" by any means.
KC: Yeah. Another thing, I had a
little sister who wanted things explained to her.
I think, mostly, there are families
where there isn't a lot of conversation. The parents
are busy. The children are at daycare. The talking they do is going to be with
the so-called "peer group," which is actually an outreach organization of
television advertisers. The results are what you might expect. People speak in
what a machinist would call "canned cycles." Canned cycle, in machining, is you
would have a set of protocols for producing a radiused
edge which would otherwise be a 90 degree corner. You would simply . . . I guess
in computing it's called an "object" . . . a set of instructions you don't have
to physically write. You just call it in and tell it where you want it to
operate. So people memorize all these phrases and there are people you meet, who
are perfectly nice, but it's hard to get through their Hallmark persona.
MMM: You didn't write about very
many people like that. There were some outstandingly interesting personalities
you described who were considerably different people than I had taken them to be
from the brief glance we had from, say, television.
KC: Roberts is a funny character.
He's a very intelligent person and that's why he was able to analyze what he did
on the racetrack. But he had to have some other quality, which I can't put a
name to. He has always been able to think of something that he thinks he should
be doing on the racetrack and to put it into his choreography.
It has often been the case that . .
. for example, Kenny tried to get Mike Kidd into
road racing. Mike Kidd was so outstanding on the dirt. They had him at Daytona,
practicing. Kenny would take him aside and say, "You are rushing these corners.
I want you to think about this. Which is more valuable, to keep going at a high
speed for another 17 feet at the end of the straightaway or to get a really
strong drive off of every corner which will add to your performance all the way
to the next corner?"
Kidd would say, "Yeah, I see what you
mean."
Kenny would tell him what you have to
do is to alter your line like this, get your turning done over here, and use the
rest of the turn as a launch pad for really strong acceleration. Kidd would go
out and kind of get it. A talented privateer, at Daytona at that time, would
turn 2:10. They change the course every year, so these lap times don't make any
sense. Kenny worked him down to 2:06. I think 4 seconds, just by talking, is
pretty good. Kenny would go to the hotel and Kidd would go back to 2:10.
Irv
had the same experience with Alex Barrows. Alex has had a long, really solid
career in top level racing, but he's never been a championship threat. The year
Irv worked with him, he made the same argument that
Kenny made to Kidd. Barrows accepted it and he went out in practice and he could
do it. It seems that it is just like an immigrant who learns English and speaks
it quite well, when he becomes agitated he begins to sound a lot more foreign.
MMM: Sure, he reverts to his
habits.
KC: Sure we are onions, not
watermelons. We just revert to an inner defense layer when the conditions seem
to warrant it. I think that's what happens with a lot of people. And I further
would argue the reason some people have left the sport -- like Luca
Cadalora, John Kocinski,
Max Biaggi, and many top people -- is that they did
not have that flexibility that Kenny and Rossi and a few others seem to have. As
the nature of motorcycle design and, particularly, tires evolve under them they
are unable to exploit the advantages of what is new and continue to try to set
their motorcycles up so they feel as they have always felt. Ultimately, that
becomes impossible and they have to give up. If they can't get the cues that
tell them what is going to happen next, they have no confidence. It's like you
are driving quite nicely at night and, suddenly, your headlights go out. You
have no cues, you stop. When these guys say that "such and such is really not
advancing in practice very rapidly," they will go to talk to those people and
he'll say "well, that front end feels . . . " They
just can't get it to feel like he wants it to. The rider has no way of
anticipating how much is too much. Kenny and certain others, it seems, were able
to make arbitrary adjustments to their style and still go fast. It's remarkable.
MMM: When I picked up TDC, I
stumbled on to your chapter on Kenny Roberts and what you just described. I was
sucked into the book because you did a terrific job of describing his
personality and he was so different from what I expected.
KC: This was something that surprised
Cook Neilson, when he met Kenny. He met Kenny in '73, before he was national
champion. At Dayton, one year, he had a long talk with him in the Goodyear
tower. He came out of there and he seemed almost dizzy. He said, "I went in
there and I guess I was thinking I was going to talk to this quick wrist kid who
just goes out there and kind of skids it around." I think of that as the Ken
Purdy view of racing. Big balls, hot blood, when this guy gets all emotional
he's unbeatable. He has to have his orange juice at the right time of the
morning or everything is off. Neilson said, "Instead, I have to call him an
'intellectual of racing."
I had my innings in 1980, when I was
sent to his house to do an interview. I thought of the old question the
sportswriter, with no imagination, puts to the champion. He says, "Hey champ,
how does it feel to hit the longest home run in Ebbets
Field history." The champ says, looking at the guy somewhat searchingly, "It
feels great."
So, I thought I was going to have to
do something to get his interest. How can there be a conversation if both
parties don't get something from it. Otherwise, it's called an interrogation.
So, I decided to leave the notebook and the recorder in the car. I went in, and
after the formalities, I said, "How far into your career did you get before you
discovered that you were more intelligent than the people you were working
with?" He sat and looked at me for a minute and I thought "oh shit." And then he
started with that business about what happened at Brands Hatch, going up into
the truck and making himself an office out of tires. And it was just fabulous
material. I was very appreciative, you can bet, because it made that story.
Yamaha liked it very much. It was really quite the gift.
MMM: It was a great story, no
question about it.
KC: He hadn't told it before because
nobody had asked him. He said that was the first moment, when he went out into
practice and in three laps he was right on the lap record. He said, "That was
the first time in my life when I realized that it was my mind that made
everything go fast, or not. And it didn't have anything to do with my hands, or
my ass, or my feet." Kenny, now, alternates between being this intelligent,
analytical person who understands this activity that he can't seem to leave. On
the other hand, taunting those around him by slipping into redneck obscurantism
and saying provocative things that sound like talk radio.
He can be a real pain in the ass.
Phil Shilling hated him, called him "that little shit."
MMM: Seemed like there was a
little conflict between KR and KR Jr., wasn't there?
KR: Kenny Jr. had the Einstein
problem; "Albert Einstein is my dad and much is expected of me, but I take it
all with a pound of salt." Kenny Jr. is kind of the flat affect man. Now that
he's no longer racing, his attitude is "I have a great time everyday. I get up
when I want. I eat what I want, If I want to go lie
around on the boat, that's what I do." He said, "I burned my passport.
Never getting on a commercial airliner again, as long as I
live."
MMM: I can understand that.
KC: Yeah. Curtis is, on the other
hand, is like a scary, close replica of his dad. He walks with his arms sort of
sprung out from his sides, like a person who has just come from the gym and
hasn't done his stretching. His voice has that sibilance that his dad's voice
has. All of his enunciation is very much like his dad's. Nobody can tell him
anything. He looked like he was set for a big career in racing, and up, up, up
he went but ooops . . . well,
his tire didn't last. His tire didn't last this time either. They sent
him to Freddy. They lectured him. He was moved from one team to another. He
sorta . . . I think his dad told him to go to
college. "Get a job, you know? Make some money in this life."
MMM: The designers you've written
about. Nobody else in the business writes much about those guys. Are those
people tough to sell to your editors?
KC: No, they were assignments. At
Cycle World, David Edwards doesn't want any advice from anybody. I want to do a
story about Albert Gunter but it hasn't happened yet. It was years before I
could do a story about Rex McCandles.
Fortunately, the research that I've done for those stories,
both written and unwritten, has had value in other areas. Those people
have a lot to tell us.
It's an interesting thing, how
different a motorcycle magazine is from a sports car magazine. Sports cars have
social standing. There is a class of dentists with 911's who devour the latest
tire shootout and they go back to the tire store and they have their Toyo tires
taken off and they have Chen Shins put on, or whatever won the last shootout.
Now they are cool. There is nothing comparable on the motorcycle side.
"Moreover, the readership keeps
getting older. It may be, as some propose, that motorcycling in the US was a
one-time, non-recurring phenomenon. There was a huge bulge in the '60s and '70s
and those people are now on their second or third marriages and, arguably, have
their lives under control. They can go out and buy any motorcycle they want. And
a lot of them have. Those are the "born again" riders. The big demographic
change that took place in the '80s and '90s, namely the evisceration of the
lower middle class and the end of good industrial jobs in the US, meant that
motorcycles moved upscale. So, an outfit like Ducati today is well advised to do
what those Chris-Craft guys have done. Namely, to market products aimed at
people who are not hurt by off-shoring or job loss.
MMM: I hadn't thought of that, but
it's obviously true.
KC: And that's why you can see all of
these outfits like Moto-Ecosse. They sell an all
titanium motorcycle, which is an ugly thing, but every single part on it is
machined out of billet or meticulously welded. You might call them "abstract
choppers." Two hundred and fifty thousand dollars.
And they have buyers; hedge fund managers, software designers . . . I was
talking to this guy in the energy drink palace at Laguna. He seems like this
happy, goofy guy, but they cut a lot of titanium in the shop and they do all
this really existential-looking welding. Focus on any part of these motorcycles,
which I think are ugly, but the parts are nice. There are people who want that.
It's not the same as somebody who buys a 4-wheel drive 911 with the
liquid-cooled heads; or whatever it is that's really out there at the moment. A
Ferrari F430, in comparison with something like that is a commodity.
MMM: I suppose that's so. The
article you wrote about Continental Tire, in the 80's, made it sound like there
was a huge middle-class motorcycle crowd that doesn't exist here. Is that
different now?
KC: I saw those people when we were a
little late getting to the paddock at Hokenheim, in
'81. We're in this jam and surrounded on all sides by tricked-out BMW's and, for
some reason, Germans really loved Laverdas at that
time. Two people on every bike.
His and hers, matching leathers, some all-black and many multi-colored.
With all the most expensive stuff that Her Krauser
used to make. I thought this is quite a crowd to be stuck in. Now, it was always
clear to me that when leaving the track at Louden to
get five gallons of gas that, a mile down the road,
nobody'd every heard of Kenny Roberts. When
Schlacter finished sixth in the 250GP at Hokenheim
in '81 and Krauser told us to come see him the next
day, we started off down the road. We stopped to get something eat and we went
into the restaurant and there were motorcyclists there. "Ah
Schlacter." They
pushed forward their best English speaker who then interrogated him as to why he
took this line, in this chicane, and why did he do something different from this
rider, and what was the point of this? It was all very much like football
morning after. It was an entirely novel experience for me.
The notion of
well-informed motorcyclists, as opposed to the guy who . . . Jim Allen brought a
friend to
Mosport
once. The friend said,
"Where should I watch?"
Jim said, "Well there is Moss's
Corner is a demanding place, there's this and that, there's the transition into
turn two . . ."
"No, no," the guy said. "You don't
get it. Where can I see the best accidents?"
At the time, in the 80's when I might
still be asked to be on the AMA pro-comp board, I was
the guy who would say, "Let's admit that spectators come to see somebody
injured. Instead of pussy-footing around the issue, let's talk about snipers in
the stands and oil jets in the corners." Of course, this is what's behind
all the anti-electronics thing. They want to see them
high-side.
MMM: Is the anti-electronics group
primarily US?
KC: No, Rossi is opposed to the
electronics. I asked Burgess about that and he said, "Oh, he is a member of the
outgoing generation and, of course, he would like to return to the status quo.
He would win." A year ago, Capirossi said he wishes
the 500's would come back. "Those were strong engines," he said. "If we put this
field on 500's, half of them would fall off in one lap."
Some of the people are simply making
the argument that this is entertainment and if the spectators aren't entertained
they won't come. There are the Hemmingway "true fight" types who want this manly
contest. Rossi spoke of the rider "in love with the throttle." It's a terrible
intimacy. He said, "You open up a bit from the edge and you wait. You put some
more footprint down and you can open up a little
more. Maybe 70 meters after the corner you have the throttle open. Now, you pick
your point in the corner and simply pin it and the system takes over." That's
evidently not true on the Honda's at this point. I think the Honda
are behind on the software developments.
MMM: It's hard to imagine that the
electronics are that quick and that good.
KC: I was told that by one of the
teams that they have a device by which they can take a sound recording at the
edge of the track, say at the apex of a corner. They can then process the sound
in such a way that they can tell when somebody's anti-spin
system begins to cycle. They say when Stoner's way down to 5mm off of the edge
of his tire that his anti-spin system is already at
work. Which means he already has the throttle open.
As Rossi comments, you get on to full throttle sooner and arrive at the next
corner going faster. The tires let you go through that corner faster and,
consequently, when you do have a loss of grip the resulting crash is worse than
ever.
I could imagine that somewhere the
FIM or DORNA or somebody are preparing grooved tires.
You've probably ridden knobbies on the road, you
know that feeling? Because they have grooved tires in so-called Formula One and
they may decide that everyone has to have a V-4 engine with this bore and
stroke. I think before then Honda will go home and it will all be over and
something else will have to go in its place.
MMM: It does seem like when the
regulatory agencies become obnoxious enough that the manufacturers don't like to
play anymore the manufacturers just find different places to play.
KC: Oh yeah, the budget goes
someplace. It just moves.
MMM: I remember when motocross was
all outdoors, most of the audience was made up of riders and their families.
Once it moved indoors in the 80's, the spectators are largely non-riders and the
tracks looked to me to be designed to create spectacular crashes. Is there an
equivalent in road racing?
KC: Well, I think now that they have
the runoff areas where the gravel is so deep even if your motorcycle is upright
it won't be for long. The tendency is to create a kind of bull ring in a stadium
like Valencia where you can see at least the positions, if not the action, most
of the way around the track. Part of this is that you're not going to be able to
get the real estate like Spa as a closed circuit because the land is too
valuable.
It's kind of like what's happened in
stadium jumping for horses. They just keep making the courses more technical and
requiring more outrageous sequences of maneuver and it's not the
Targa Floria anymore.
MMM: Does that result in more
horse or rider injury?
KC: I think probably horses don't
last that long at high level competition. Their poor joints,
all that whamming and twisting.
Motorcycles are . . . a guy crashes
and 20 minutes later you see him on the course again and everything is perfect?
They just replace everything that is not as it was. I remember when I first
began to see crews wearing these suits of lights and I realized they looked most
like the outfits that bicycle racers wore. The pit buildings, the first items
that were unloaded were the theatrical flat.
MMM: A couple of questions
directly related to Top Dead Center. Out of the five hundred some articles
you've written how did you select the fifty-some articles in the book?
KC: My editor, Lee
Klancher. Lee has a good editorial eye. It was his
idea to group the riders and engineer people and all of that arrangement was his
work. I really think it was good because if I had to refer to one of my articles
and read through until I found what I needed. And it just seemed like, "Yeah I
wrote that back then." It seemed, somehow, more coherent. I quite liked it. It
seemed to have acquired something as a whole that it wouldn't have, by any
means, in parts; aside from accessibility, and there's a lot to be said for
that.
MMM: It's a readable book as a
collection of short stories or as a book, from front to back.
KC: Lee is a kind of editorial
consultant, now. He used to work for MBI. He's the architect.
MMM: Of the people you wrote
about, were there any people you felt almost unprepared to talk to before you
interviewed them?
KC: Well certainly, KR. You know
you're getting the opportunity to talk to someone who has particularly
distinguished himself in this particular way. You want to deserve the confidence
that has been placed in you for that. I think what that does is creates a little
tingle of fear, which is not a bad thing. If you don't have that little tingle
you might begin to wonder if you are going to look at your watch during the
interview. And you don't want to do that.
MMM: I'm almost certain that in
"Reasons to Romp" I found evidence that you might be a Monty Python fan?
KC: That piece came as a result of a
conversation with Big Sid Biberman, the
VIncent guy. He talked about
Vincents as being these long-legged equestrian wheeled vehicles that
allow you to roll through the scenery and not be too athletic about it. I think
I decided that was a worthwhile idea because we can't all go to turn 8 at Willow
and live there. Years ago, I used to write a lot more stuff about some aspect of
shop work or some aspect of that shared life. Sleeping in
vans. The night we drove to Detroit, by mistake. That
sort of thing. I've got away from that as I've got away from the shop.
MMM: Do you think that's because
you've become much more intelligent or just lower energy?
KC: [laughs] I think you get to a
point where you can see that your efforts don't tend toward greatly improved
results. I could see that, in comparison with Irv
Kanemoto, my bikes were going to be also-rans. His
understanding is on a much higher level than mine. That's sort of liberating in
a way, it gives you something not to strive for. Having a family means that you
can't be off to the races. Jerry Burgess has a family in Australia and they
simply live that way. He's away in Europe for several months of the year and
they've structured their lives to accommodate that. I couldn't and I don't think
I would have wanted to.
Irv
Kanemoto and I have had conversations in which it's
clear that each of us has a certain wistfulness about
the direction the other one chose. That's the irreversibility of life.
MMM: You have to pick a path and
that means you didn't pick a bunch of other paths.
KC: Steve
Whitelock and I, when we were both working on Kawasaki triples liked to
imagine vast R&D shops with saluting technicians and rows of milling machines
that grew indistinct in the distance. We both love to construct palaces of words
and Whitelock went on to become a Honda
troublemaker, that's different from a troubleshooter. He was with their
motocross team in Frankfurt for years and, then, he was something in
international road racing for a long time. Most recently, he was AMA
Supercross manager. Before that, he was the tech
inspector at World Superbike. He's had an extremely varied career and he's a
wonderful talker and just filled with stories. Many of which can't be told to
the larger audience.
MMM: I suspect you have a few of
those too.
KC: Those guys have been a lot closer
to the machinations of the big teams. I get to hear sort of reverberations and
whisperings, but they participated.
One of the things that will happen is
that someone in a responsible position will tell you things that you can't
possibly used. I had that relationship with Gary
Mathers and, at the end of one conversation, I said,
"Gary, I'm stupefied. There is nothing here I can
use." And Gary said, "You'll protect me, I'm sure." Off he went.
Basically, he said if it had been up
to him Miguel would have been out in the 90s. Because it became clear that he
lacked the concentration to win a championship. He was always going to do
something like endo into the bales at the Daytona
chicane or keep trying to qualify even though his screen was covered with rain
at Louden. And those are the kinds of events that
made him furious. At the same time, he was 100% company man and very protective
of all the secrets that needed to be kept secret. I think, sometimes, people
want you to have the background, even though they know it can't see the light of
day.
MMM: Thanks to Martin
Belair, I got a chance to interview Martin
Lampkin a few years back. When I asked him why there
hasn't been a US world trials champ since Bernie Schrieber,
he said, "You don't ride enough."
KC: That's always been a problem in
the US. The Ontario Speedway near LA, people thought it was going to be a huge
success. It just dribbled to a stop. The reason is that nothing outdraws the big
town. Too many choices. The notion of driving all the
way out to Ontario and baking there . . . forget it. Motor sports on Long Island
never got anywhere for the same reason.
MMM: Riverside had some problems
for that reason, too.
KC: Yeah, you have to create a kind
of cult event, like Laguna is now. People go out there and campout or they stay
in the $300 a night hotel and eat and drink expensively. It's of its kind, the
same thing that Louden was in the early 70's. It's a
gypsy encampment, a defect isolate. Everyone there is on your wavelength. People
will pay a lot for such a weekend.
MMM: How do you think Indianapolis
will do then?
KC: I don't know. They, supposedly,
had less success arm-wrestling paddock passes out of DORNA than at Laguna. I
think there is 1200 or 1500 passes. American spectators are accustomed to that
kind of access. In Europe, the whole Formula One thing is sort like a black box
or a black hole. The Hawking radiation is emitted at the start of the race. The
little hole opens, the cars come out, they take their places on the grid, they
race, they go back into the hole and close the door.
That's all you get. You don't get "I was as close as from me to you and they
rolled this thing right past me. Fantastic!" In any NHRA race, you're in amongst
them. When a team has to get back to its work area, they have a police car with
its siren going that makes a hole through the crowd so they can roll the car
back in time to make the next round.
MMM: Have you been to a NASCAR
event? Is it the same kind of spectator access?
KC: I haven't. You can see what
they've done at Daytona. They've turned it into a theme park. It's
uninteresting, if you went in times past. It's well enough suited to the modern
spectator. If you go up to one of those windows, look in, tap on the window, and
you slide your expensively purchased poster through the poster slot, they scrawl
on it, and slide it back out to you, if they choose to. And you can walk along
and you can see who has the biggest toolbox on little go-cart wheels.
Every year it used to be more and
more annoying at Daytona, with the geriatric cops who would come around at seven
and say "You all have to leave." Then it would be six, then five. Because in
NASCAR, the cars only have three moving parts and they can change all of them in
12 minutes, so they can get out of the garage quickly. They couldn't see why the
bikes wouldn't be the same. Now they have this theme park thing with all the
brick and the places to buy beer and posters. I can't say that I'll ever regard
it as progress.
MMM: One last question, I saw one
piece of evidence in Top Dead Center that you ride motorcycles. Do you still
ride motorcycles?
KC: No.
MMM: No?
KC: Occasionally, somebody comes to
visit with a new bike and I'll find my helmet and have a go. In the 80s, I think
I had a Honda Saber, 750, for several months. It was from the magazine, Cycle,
and I rode it to Boston a few times because I was building exhaust pipes for
somebody in that way. Normally, if I drove in my van, I'd be behind sixteen cars
and there would be a motor home at the front or a local farmer, on two-lane
highway. On a motorcycle, you can pass them all in an instant and see the needle
come back past 100 as you pull into your own lane. I thought "that's thrilling,
but I'm not a god. I could kill myself, this way." It was wonderful to just
burst past those motor homes or the local farmer who
has been driving at this speed since 1927.
"I think somebody like Paul Dean, who
has ridden every day of his life is very much safer
than someone who rides now and then. Like flying.
"I never had any interest in adding
my penetrating insight from the saddle, because I did a little racing but I
never got to be any use at it. And I don't think there is any point in confusing
myself with such information. I can get information from people who know. Of
course, a little motorcycle is looking pretty attractive with $4 gas.
MMM: You'd kind of hope someone
might bring a little motorcycle over here, occasionally.
KC: Well, it hasn't happened. I had
lots of motorcycles, years ago; some considerable variety. The more I got
involved in the construction, the less interesting it seemed to actually ride
them.
MMM: There are certainly lots of
racers who don't ride anywhere outside of a race track.
KC: Freddy didn't have a driver's
license for a long time, until Kawasaki gave him a Z1, I think, after the '78
season. He had to get a driver's license so he could drive. Then, he was
appalled. He said, "People really ride these things?"
MMM: He'd have loved a cruiser,
wouldn't he?
KC: Oh my god. But, we're used to what we're used to.
[POSTSCRIPT: This interview and the following dozens of emails I've exchanged over the last five years with Kevin are pretty much the highlight of my moto-journalism career. As I've said more than once before, Kevin's Cycle World column and articles are the reason I read that magazine. Getting to spend an extended time talking with this brilliant man and having the incredible opportunity to run ideas by him before I expose my ignorance and foolishness to the world has been somewhere beyond my wildest expectations. Thanks for being who you are, Kevin.]
7 comments:
What a fantastic interview. Thanks
This is great! I love Kevin Cameron. Thank you for this!
I was disappointed that there wasn't more. Thoroughly entertaining. John B.
Thanks, John. You should have been on my end of the telephone. Kevin could have gone on for hours and I would have remained fascinated and honored to hear him talk as long as he wanted to spend time with me.
For years I put my head on the pillow at night thinking I was the only guy in Red Wing who corresponded daily with KC. Now I come to find out there are three of us. Wow!
Very enjoyable interview. As you know it's easy to let him out the gate and just wait for great stuff to return. "What is nikasil?" or "Did you ever own a cat?" or "What are your dreams like??!"
Thanks
Dean Adams
Good to hear from you, Dean. I've been a ways from corresponding "daily with KC" for a couple of years. We go in spurts, sometimes not having anything to say for months then a rally of emails over a week or two. His opening line in this interview pretty much set the tone for our "relationship" over the years. ;-)
I know this interview happened many moons ago, but I just stumbled over it today - and it is still a great read. Thanks!
Post a Comment