Bring on the beast!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Oct 15 2008, 04:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I'll try too.

Carbon fiber has never been a viable solution as Barry said b/c it doesn't flex well.

The reason carbon fiber is now a viable frame material is due to bike design. On modern GP bikes the swingarm bolts directly to the engine casing, so the engine-casing/swingarm/frame are all major stress bearing members.

Nowadays frame flex isn't as important as it once was, so companies are encouraged to drop steel/aluminium for lightweight materials.

It's also a good marketing ploy.
Maybe they thought ,as the engine bolts into the swing arm and takes away half the frame ,why not try to create the same thing in front of and above the engine to create stiffness from stearing head to the swing arm attachment.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Oct 17 2008, 11:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Not just "genius" but real passion for racing and technology. If anybody here hasn't read or heard of Mr. Britten, you would do yourself a favor if you research this man. He was years ahead of his time.
yeah, fascinating bloke.
link

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Oct 14 2008, 08:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>the only 800 that could be called a "beast" is dani's because puig beasts him over it every night

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BarryMachine @ Oct 16 2008, 05:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Lex is wrong! .... CF flexes very well and can be easily tuned to give flex where and how it id required.


Whats new? The guy spouts pish daily. I love "ignore" it means I have no idea what he's talking about. Actually, niether does he.

Pete

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Oct 19 2008, 05:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>yeah, fascinating bloke.
link


John Britten was a very very clever guy, his bikes always made me think, thats what Vincent would be building now if they were still on the go. I was reading a bit about him last night, Britten, Kaaden and others who took bike design or engineering up a gear, and had the balls to go with it.
(including the ELF guy, cannae mind his name, but he kept giving Ron Haslam a job)

Oh my god, so many names to Google in this post!!!!!!!! Some members may be AWOL while they go into OverGoogleDrive!

Pete

Actually, on the Haslam front, has anyone read his biography? The guy was (may still be) illiterate, so an autobiography must be an "interesting" read.

Sorry couldnae resist it!!!!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Oct 19 2008, 08:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>John Britten was a very very clever guy, his bikes always made me think, thats what Vincent would be building now if they were still on the go. I was reading a bit about him last night, Britten, Kaaden and others who took bike design or engineering up a gear, and had the balls to go with it.
(including the ELF guy, cannae mind his name, but he kept giving Ron Haslam a job)

Oh my god, so many names to Google in this post!!!!!!!! Some members may be AWOL while they go into OverGoogleDrive!

Pete

Actually, on the Haslam front, has anyone read his biography? The guy was (may still be) illiterate, so an autobiography must be an "interesting" read.

Sorry couldnae resist it!!!!
now that bike was a true prototype ans a pity know body has tried that design again. the conventional teliscopic fork design has fundementle flaws like rake and trail angles changing under braking, this elf twin wishbone system eliminated that but suffered from bump steer. that system could be made to work now but i feel its trend and marketing that prevent it. yam made a road going wishbone bike but not many sold. john britten didnt give a stuff about trend, he went with true engineering.

Here in Italy there is already a carbon fiber frame replacement for the Ducati Monster, a prototype which has been built and tested by a small company near Bologna. It is a trellis carbon fiber of the same shape and geometry of the steel version and weighs 4 kilos against the almost 13 kilos of the original frame, while offering the same performance.

Test riders have reported a better handling and more nimble bike in rapid direction changes (due to less weight above the center of gravity), and for the rest it behaves just the same as the stock piece. To hand-build one such CF frame takes these guys 65 hours of work and the price, if sold on order, would be 12,000 euros a piece. Bimota seems interested to work with this company in the near future. I have seen photos of two Ducati Monster side by side, one with the steel and one with the CF frame, and unless you know you wouldn't see the difference.

The little I know about carbon fiber tells me that it has little meaning speaking of 'stiffness' generically. It all depends on the orientation of the 'fibers', i.e. fibers have to be 'angled' in different directions to meet the various vectors at the various stress areas. Not so easy, but it will work once the design is sorted out. That means you can also have different behaviors to suit different riders. And it will be way lighter.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J4rn0 @ Oct 19 2008, 08:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Here in Italy there is already a carbon fiber frame replacement for the Ducati Monster, a prototype which has been built and tested by a small company near Bologna. It is a trellis carbon fiber of the same shape and geometry of the steel version and weighs 4 kilos against the almost 13 kilos of the original frame, while offering the same performance.

Test riders have reported a better handling and more nimble bike in rapid direction changes (due to less weight above the center of gravity), and for the rest it behaves just the same as the stock piece. To hand-build one such CF frame takes these guys 65 hours of work and the price, if sold on order, would be 12,000 euros a piece. Bimota seems interested to work with this company in the near future. I have seen photos of two Ducati Monster side by side, one with the steel and one with the CF frame, and unless you know you wouldn't see the difference.

The little I know about carbon fiber tells me that it has little meaning speaking of 'stiffness' generically. It all depends on the orientation of the 'fibers', i.e. fibers have to be 'angled' in different directions to meet the various vectors at the various stress areas. Not so easy, but it will work once the design is sorted out. That means you can also have different behaviors to suit different riders. And it will be way lighter.
OK that explains why the interviewed guy from ducati said that the shape of the cf frame was more important than the material,when asked about it.The typical cf frame perhaps wouldn't be expected to have the shape of their trellis frame,but it probably has then.Why not,the weight can be moved to a more suitable place.The stresses/flexing can be altered without moving too many grams of weight or changing the design,just align the fibres differently.I would guess Ferrari uses some pretty well developed computer programs and test facillities that Ducati can use for this.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Anders GUZZI @ Oct 19 2008, 09:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>OK that explains why the interviewed guy from ducati said that the shape of the cf frame was more important than the material,when asked about it.The typical cf frame perhaps wouldn't be expected to have the shape of their trellis frame,but it probably has then.Why not,the weight can be moved to a more suitable place.The stresses/flexing can be altered without moving too many grams of weight or changing the design,just align the fibres differently.I would guess Ferrari uses some pretty well developed computer programs and test facillities that Ducati can use for this.
exactly. this is what i was saying to barrymachine when he was trying to compare the gp9 carbon frame to his fly fishing rod.