Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Racing' started by spezjag, Nov 7, 2011.
Can a Mod re-start this thread so Yooperbikemike shows as the originator? He's worked his ass off keeping the MotoGP threads accurate and technically competent. Seems like it'd be more respectful for a thread with his name on it to BE his thread.
swingarm too short by 12.34mm
De Puniet testing Suzuki and Bautista sitting it out could be an indicator of Suzuki plans for next year. Randy was impressive in 4th, was it on 800cc bike?
As far as Rossi goes he should run NOW. I do not know where though, back to Honda?
IDIOT! Anyone who knows swingarms knows it is too short by 12.46mm
rossi only needs to harden the f%$k up and ride the ducati like a man
Hey, at least the Suter is within 107% for qualifying!
Sorry if I missed it, but... any info on whether or not Ducati have rotated the cylinders back some to allow more weight on the front?
Its all pretty confusing, but I think the bottom line is that Ducati adopted a 2012 MotoGP chassis that allows them to move the motor around cheap and fast. They haven't changed the motor architecture yet, but they might.
They seem to have gone to the perimiter spar chassis to easily experiment with weight and flex. Also, we have tire evolution, which forces ready chassis changes as well. Of course, that's exactly why HRC and the rest have adopted the spar chassis for 30 years in all thier race designs . It's probably rooted in MX/SX designs of the 80's.
But whatever. Hopefully Ducati can catch up. The new superbike is a killer for style. Right up there with the 916 (and other Italian fashions).
Are they using the new spec (softer) tires in this test? Would be silly if they weren't.
And that picture of Stoner is crazy.
Have the engine sizes been formally announced, (or will they)? With the Suzuki 800 at the pointy end of the days testing, it would be interesting to know how much more displacement the other brands are employing.
Thanks for that article. Nakamoto-san seems like a driven and determined man. He is the right guy to get and keep HRC competitive.
I wasn't particularly put off by anything he said, pretty much he just speaks the truth (well that and he sounds like a Japanese guy talking, that is pretty much the way they roll).
Compared to Dani and Casey he was too slow, nice guy sure and quick enough to be in MotoGP but why pay for a third bike that gets beat by Yamahas and satellite bikes too much to ride on the fastest bike. I do think Dani doesn't have much more time either, he seems to overlook that while Dani is fast he also ends up out of contention (more often by his own doing) and it will probably not happen while Casey is on the same bike.
Rossi should have been the top Ducati every weekend, he is the best racer on the Ducati this year, no excuse to me than he just wasn't giving it his all and he has his reasons but I kept waiting for that miracle ride that never happened and I don't think he intended to ever.
From what I saw over the season (including being at Indy), it seems to me that the big problem for Rossi is that he just doesn't like the bike. Mostly because he doesn't trust it. JB's comments seem to indicate that as well.
If that don't change, he'll never win another race.
Am I the only one that finds Ducati going to a conventional Al twin-spar frame an amazing development? They have always been so "stubborn" to do it their own, different way...
Read Preziosi on motomatters. Lays out the reasoning pretty nicely.
Basically, running an engine-as-frame design means 1) it costs more to modify the chassis; and crucially 2) to do so may require wasting engines, which are limited in number by recent MotoGP rules.
The reasoning doesn't appear to mandate aluminium: they could have kept tubular steel if they'd thought it would have worked. However, IIRC all Ducati's tube steel chassis have relied on the engine casings to stiffen the frame at the swingarm pivot, so if they'd stayed with a "traditional" Ducati trellis design they'd still have been stymied by the engine limit, and maybe a steel full-frame would have been too heavy, carbon too tricky.
It's worth noting too that the MotoGP rules on engine numbers were designed with the currently typical Japanese chassis layouts assumed. It was obviously a good design anyway, and then the rules reinforced its advantages.