I am sure there there are more talented riders/riders more likely to win a title than Jack available to Ducati, although he is up to being a Pramac or LCR rider imo. What I was saying is that they seem to be in the habit of setting up their second factory rider to be under enormous pressure to keep his ride on a one year contract, while winning the title is the only acceptable result for the number 1 factory rider regardless of whether they have taken a wrong turn with the bike. In the current case they seem to have put it all on Bagnaia to lead development of the bike, which is a lot of pressure at his age and with the premier class experience he has, particularly given it is not unknown for Ducati to stuff up their bike. They also seem to be happy to have pressure on both factory riders from the satellite riders, perhaps alright as a philosophy but nor necessarily conducive to the best results in terms of winning a riders' title from their lead factory rider.
2022 Portimao - Grande Prémio Tissot de Portugal
Help Support MotoGP Forum:
I am sure there there are more talented riders/riders more likely to win a title than Jack available to Ducati, although he is up to being a Pramac or LCR rider imo. What I was saying is that they seem to be in the habit of setting up their second factory rider to be under enormous pressure to keep his ride on a one year contract, while winning the title is the only acceptable result for the number 1 factory rider regardless of whether they have taken a wrong turn with the bike. In the current case they seem to have put it all on Bagnaia to lead development of the bike, which is a lot of pressure at his age and with the premier class experience he has, particularly given it is not unknown for Ducati to stuff up their bike. They also seem to be happy to have pressure on both factory riders from the satellite riders, perhaps alright as a philosophy but nor necessarily conducive to the best results in terms of winning a riders' title from their lead factory rider.
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2008
- Messages
- 5,926
- Location
- In Cider
Shame, I know it looks twisty but I was excited to see them at Kimiring
Trueand 5 years later he'd be reporting they make 2500hp
To be fair to Oxley, MotoGP bikes can reach 19,000rpm.....if someone kicks it into 4th gear on the main straight at 350kph.
Someone in the paddock was probably messing with him, by quoting an rpm figure in a braking zone. Either that or he lazily carried that number forward from the 800cc era.
Absolutely. All the 800's were running 20K+, until the engine limit rule and even then they kicked it down to 19k max.
As I have said before in other threads on here, some journo's seem to fail to grasp the concept that the agreed 81mm max bore allowed under the rules (to allow teams to use the 800cc heads I believe into the 1000cc era) predicates your stroke. In this case to use the full 1000cc under the rules gives you a 48.5mm stroke, which limits you to about 27m/s if you want any longevity.
Quick math on that gives you a max RPM of 16,700.
Agreed, Ducati have cost themselves a number of titles with their mismanagement of riders imo.
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2015
- Messages
- 985
- Location
- Siebenbürgen süße Heimat!
Oof Marone! I thought it was just the desmo revving that high...thought especially yamaha topped out at 17-18k.
Has there ever been serious speculation that an engine might be in the 900ccs?
330ml per cylinder sounds good and the last inline 3 had quite a bit of oomph. Sounded great.
Torque doesnt seem to be an issue, maybe effeciency goes down with a shorter stroke?
Has there ever been serious speculation that an engine might be in the 900ccs?
330ml per cylinder sounds good and the last inline 3 had quite a bit of oomph. Sounded great.
Torque doesnt seem to be an issue, maybe effeciency goes down with a shorter stroke?
Yeah, and one of the easiest ways to reduce friction to get a few extra tenths of mean piston speed is to lengthen the connecting rods so the angle at which the crank pushes the piston during exhaust and compression strokes is less acute.
Heavier parts strain the engine, and since unobtanium and hollow rods are apparently banned, I'd be surprised if they are hitting 27m/s. Maybe, I don't know the latest cylinder lining or piston ring tech.....
But anyway, we can say conclusively that MotoGP bikes are not making 300hp per liter and 30m/s.
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2008
- Messages
- 5,926
- Location
- In Cider
Are you talking about volumetric efficiency or mechanical efficiency? I'm guessing you mean mechanical efficiency, and yes that goes down with a shorter stroke. Well, to clarify, if you have a shorter stroke your stroke-to-bore ratio decreases (i.e. the bore is larger than the stroke, oversquare) and that increases bearing friction on the rod and crank bearings owing to the larger surface area of the piston.
Agreed, I'd say they are about 26m/s. Again loosely the math with a 1000cc 81mm bore revving to 16,700 is about 250bhp.
Absolutely agree, those figures are way off the mark. ESPECIALLY when limited to 22 litres of fuel.
There is an argument that theoretically a 1000cc 20k rpm, 300bhp GP engine could be built but it would be 1. Totally unridable and 2. Not meet the minimum life requirement, by a long margin.
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2015
- Messages
- 985
- Location
- Siebenbürgen süße Heimat!
Hehe, I'm gonna do something you'd never suggest with car people.
Chop a cylinder off! Inline 3 ftw. I can do without the v5 but this era motogp is like moto2 compared to 990cc.
I'm not sure why they arent used. Less cylinders= less friction losses. And going by that 300-500ml per cylinder is ideal idea (and that orgasmic cube sound) this seems like a no brainer
Chop a cylinder off! Inline 3 ftw. I can do without the v5 but this era motogp is like moto2 compared to 990cc.
I'm not sure why they arent used. Less cylinders= less friction losses. And going by that 300-500ml per cylinder is ideal idea (and that orgasmic cube sound) this seems like a no brainer
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2008
- Messages
- 5,926
- Location
- In Cider
In a word, cost. I believe IIRC that one condition of moving back to 1000cc was keeping the 800cc cylinder heads (hence the 81mm bore).
I miss the variety of the early MotoGP days with screamers, big bangs, V5's, Inline 4's, V4's, triples etc. But they aren't coming back anytime soon.
Well, the sport is bore limited at 81mm. An 81mm 3-cylinder would get wrecked compared to it's 81mm 4-cylinder counterpart because the 3-cylinder would have 25% less piston surface area.
Assuming 48.5mm stroke, a 3-cylinder would need approximately 93.5mm bore to make competitive peak horsepower at 1000cc. Might be difficult to make the top end of that engine reliable at 16000 rpm. They could do it in F1, but that's a bit pricey.
