Dovi speaks out against Ducati...and it's awesome

thedeal

3622881380659190

No I am not changing the story, Aprilia have moved on within its group and Ducati has not, that has been my point all along, fact. 

Click to expand...

 


Here is what is amazing in debating you (which isn't surprising).  You stated this before, clark and myself explained why you don't know this a fact, and here you are, several post later saying the same ignorant .....  And now what?  You want me to respond again?  Just go back and read our replies, do it a 100 times.  Though I doubt you will see the error of your assumptions.


 


 
thedeal

3622881380659190

as for your second part saying Honda Yamaha and Ducati have stayed the same, it is you who has harped on all year that the Honda has moved on and is now far better than the Yamaha.

Click to expand...

 


Breathtaking.  Deal, go back and read what I actually said, as I was very careful in wording it in a way I had thought was basic enough for you to understand.  (Then again, maybe I'm assuming too much by way of your ability to comprehend it).  First of all, you need to focus a bit, as your assertions is regard Ducati's advancement relative to those within their group NOT Honda vs Yamaha.  Second, not sure if you were around, but I had a lengthy exchange regarding the parity between the two Jap machines.  The advantages and disadvantages can be assigned but as is often the case when two entities are in close parity, it remains a matter of opinion.  It was/is my opinion that the RCV is superior.  During that time both have made advancements, which by the way this includes Ducati, as often is the case given development of technology and experience.  The question is, has the parity changed between the manufactures? Again, I said the advance between them, (that is relative to one another) had been basically stagnant, Ducati being behind them both.  Deal, all you need to do is scroll up your screen and read the previous post I made.  Get somebody to read it to you, and of course have them explain the words.


 
thedeal

3622881380659190

Jum if you are going to make .... up just to fight your corner there is no point. this discussion is taking place because you said Ducati's problems were caused by Dorna. now you are not mentioning that part any more,  there is no point in going any further, as the old saying goes, never argue with an ..... as they will bring you down to their level and beat you on experience.

Click to expand...

 


You are the one bitching that I repeat the same indictment on Dorna too much, and now you are asking me to repeat it in every post because you don't have the wherewithall to scroll up?  You see this statement I made in the last post:

"I understand you don’t see how the <u>rules imposed</u> have affected the projects.  But for a moment, please consider the repercussion."

Click to expand...

  


Of whom do you think I'm referring to in the underlined part of my statement?  Uhm, perhaps <u>Dorna </u>imposed rules?  Jesus man, do I need to teach you subject and predicate and how words are link together to assign meaning?  


 


Would you like to continue?  As I'm more than happy to continue pointing out what a fool you make of yourself.  I consider it fun.

mylexicon

3622781380653296

BMW are kiling off their DNA, but turbocharged engines is not part it. The 2002 turbo is an integral part of their brand DNA, and the vehicle pre-dated any of the naturally-aspirated M vehicles. The era of power-dense naturally-aspirated series production engines was a post-digital engineering fad, and I'm not surprised it is going away.

Click to expand...

 


Yeah, that's right Lex, BMW didn't rant on about their NA engines for a couple of decades did they? They didn't feed lines for journos to parrot about their naturally aspirated engines...noooo.


One car, produced in tiny numbers, does not make turbos integral to their "DNA" (.... that term makes me laugh!). Though, if you used their famous 1300 qualifying-hp F1 car as an example, I might agree on the heritage aspect.


 


Can you explain what you mean by "power dense" (what does that even mean? why not just use high-power? or high hp/litre? dense?) NA engines being a fad? If you're trying to imply that the moves toward turbos are caused by anything but the fleet emissions targets, well, you're flat out wrong.

what does everyone think Ducati could do with the crt sticky tyre, extra juice and engines? I think they may improve a little in times, but positions would be about the same.

barbed...I don't know if the Duc's need the extra juice or engines, but it would be interesting to see what they would do with the tires.


Someone correct me if I'm wrong on the engines and fuel part though. As far I know they are good on engines and not bumping too close to the 21 dead dinosaurs in the tank. 

The easy way to solve one part of the debate is to allow any team to use the CRT spec tyre if they choose it. Clearly Honda and Yamaha wouldn't want it - the construction would be too soft. And I doubt it would suit the Ducati either without a redesigned bike, which they seem unwilling/unable to build.


 


If it was available to everyone, you couldn't claim the CRTs are receiving special treatment.


 


If it is just fuel consumption that is the issue stopping Aprilia from going full factory, I'd say they are only a season or two from being ready to beat Ducati outright. To me the CRT concept has worked much better than I expected, in that it gives teams the chance to build there bike up to factory spec without having to go all out trying to build a race winning machine from day one.

L8Braker

3622981380673378

barbed...I don't know if the Duc's need the extra juice or engines, but it would be interesting to see what they would do with the tires.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong on the engines and fuel part though. As far I know they are good on engines and not bumping too close to the 21 dead dinosaurs in the tank. 

Click to expand...

Probably right about the engines, but couldn't see them knock back the juice if available.

barbedwirebiker

3623011380674311

Probably right about the engines, but couldn't see them knock back the juice if available.

Click to expand...

 


I wonder how much fuel a prototype realistically needs at this stage to run at the maximum for an entire race. It looks like the RCV must be very close to being able to do it on 21L, which is kinda impressive if you think about it from a racing technology point of view.

barbedwirebiker

3622181380620131

Even Aprilia are able to best the Ducati most weekends.

Click to expand...

 


One ART rider is able to best some Ducati riders... saying anything else is a real stretch.


 


Using your logic you could say Yamaha is able to best Honda every weekend because Jorge finishes ahead of Alvaro.

thedeal

3622791380654462

Het Lex, I used to own a 2002 turbo, I will dig out some photo's and post them up, one of those cars you should always keep.

Click to expand...

 


So did I. Really regretted selling that. Same for the 240Z. 

Yeah ok. Your right because isn't there a Honda crt at the bottom of the standings. Yet Aprilia are still relatively competitive across the weekend, even if its just asparagus

Dr No

3622931380669173

Yeah, that's right Lex, BMW didn't rant on about their NA engines for a couple of decades did they? They didn't feed lines for journos to parrot about their naturally aspirated engines...noooo.


One car, produced in tiny numbers, does not make turbos integral to their "DNA" (.... that term makes me laugh!). Though, if you used their famous 1300 qualifying-hp F1 car as an example, I might agree on the heritage aspect.


 


Can you explain what you mean by "power dense" (what does that even mean? why not just use high-power? or high hp/litre? dense?) NA engines being a fad? If you're trying to imply that the moves toward turbos are caused by anything but the fleet emissions targets, well, you're flat out wrong.

Click to expand...

 


Replacing a 4.0L V8 with a turbo 3.0L I-6 is about fuel efficiency? Replacing a 3.0L I6 with a 2.0L I4 turbo is about fuel efficiency? Not likely b/c the turbocharged engines are not particularly more efficient.


 


Turbocharging is about engine scaling and manufacturing costs. The twin-turbo I-6 has fewer pistons, valves, and cams. The inline block is cheaper to produce. By adhering to a 500cc-per-cylinder architecture BMW can use the same pistons, rods, valves, etc for the 1.5L I3, 2.0L I4, and 3.0L I6. BMW can also turbo scale by using the same engine in vehicles like 330 and M3, but altering the power output via electronic means and, perhaps, a few ancillary parts. In some cases the smaller turbos are indirectly related to fuel efficiency, especially in FWD vehicles (new 1-series?) with transverse engine mounting. If the manufacturer can reduce the length of the block by downsizing to 3-cylinders or 2-cylinders (FIAT twinair), they have space for hybrid systems in the engine bay.


 


Perhaps turbocharging is just another short-term trend. Time will tell.

mylexicon

3623271380693103

Replacing a 4.0L V8 with a turbo 3.0L I-6 is about fuel efficiency? Replacing a 3.0L I6 with a 2.0L I4 turbo is about fuel efficiency? Not likely b/c the turbocharged engines are not particularly more efficient.


 


Turbocharging is about engine scaling and manufacturing costs. The twin-turbo I-6 has fewer pistons, valves, and cams. The inline block is cheaper to produce. By adhering to a 500cc-per-cylinder architecture BMW can use the same pistons, rods, valves, etc for the 1.5L I3, 2.0L I4, and 3.0L I6. BMW can also turbo scale by using the same engine in vehicles like 330 and M3, but altering the power output via electronic means and, perhaps, a few ancillary parts. In some cases the smaller turbos are indirectly related to fuel efficiency, especially in FWD vehicles (new 1-series?) with transverse engine mounting. If the manufacturer can reduce the length of the block by downsizing to 3-cylinders or 2-cylinders (FIAT twinair), they have space for hybrid systems in the engine bay.


 


Perhaps turbocharging is just another short-term trend. Time will tell.

Click to expand...

Didn't say fuel efficiency, Lex. Emissions.


Turbos may well be a short term trend, but that won't change the fact that they are being pursued in the interest of maintaining the existing power levels while meeting Emissions requirements. They had to change fast. Across the whole range. Which accounts for the modular system.

thedeal

3622051380616482

I wondered when this would start, yes they changed the rules but it was a one rider bike even with the old tyre, Honda and Yamaha made their bikes work when tyres get changed, Ducati have had five years to get that bike to work, regardless of the rule changes, you can't blame Dorna for that. that the problems lie in the heart of Preziosi,s  concept can be seen clearly in the WSB team, even the out dated and four year old design was better, when Ducati entered motogp, they were on the pace straight away, why? because they had been building competitive four stroke race bikes for years in wsb, when motogp changed Ducati failed to keep up, then they introduced a flawed concept, whist I agree the rule changes should not have happened, you can't blame Dorna for Ducati's engineering failures.

Click to expand...

 


 


I think you can, when you have a low budget factory by all appearances on the boil all you have to do to .... them is get them to change direction. It takes money to absorb that change and as soon as rule changes began occurring in 2008 Ducati were screwed, they could never win a war of attrition with Dorna and by the time the yellow clown got there and Dorna didn't want to slow Ducati any more it was too late, the sponsor dollars could never match the developer dollars from Honda. 


 


All they got from the Burgess input was "build me jap bike" which was a stupid change in direction and from there to carbon frames. The lack of evolution and engineering continuity can be thrown back at Dorna for brokering rules and riders for Ducati rather than letting them win in 2008. In all the confused ...... up mess can be placed rather squarely at Dorna's feet. 

Jumkie

3621911380604085

Everybody blames Ducati and no mention of Dorna's instance in changing the rolling rulebook to give and deny advantage at will, all of them detrimental to this manufacturer. They dismantled their ability to work with a tire supplier, they introduced an engine rule that was detrimental to their design, the tire development has continued development away from their needs to the point they were forced to acquiesce to the twin-spar chassis now literally in its infant stage while this platform has been perfected over decades by Honda & Yamaha. Is it any real wonder why they are floundering? The Povols and his ilk of the world will tell u the rule book is the same for everybody, this without the fine understanding that the rulebook is basically writen at HRC. I said it many years ago, Ducati should have left the series in 08 when Dorna effective destroyed their project. Back then at least they could have competed in Wsbk, now they're ....... Im happy to see the project further embarrassed, especially now that Nicky is leaving. As i see it, their failure is an indictment on Dorna's influence over the competition decidedly for those they favor (a point repeatedly ignored and misunderstood by most). Not sure what keeps them in the series, their stupid (shared by many spectators) lack of understanding the control Dorna have over competition or the executives happy to just be participants (the Ducati teams on the ground want to win while the executives employ the Suzuki model of GP competition--expose of participation being the aim).

Click to expand...

Or it could have been all this is what led to Dorna finally wrestling power away from the MSMA and creating huge sweeping rules changes that will no doubt change GP and make it much more competitive for all teams in the future. Yamaha and Honda have dominated GP for a long time and it's no accident that Aprillia, Suzuki, and a bunch of new teams are now coming back and willing to invest huge amounts of money to go racing. You like to slag Dorna, and anything not Hayden, but I think things are looking good. Honda and Yamaha didn't want to have anything to do with leasing more bikes, but Dorna has forced their hands and now we'll have better bikes and we can already see the riders scrambling to get on those bikes. 

^ Oh yeah, that is an awesome strategy, now we only have two manufactures dominating.  One trying to keep up with the federal reserve investing close to a million bucks to make a gearbox.  There is your theory then there is reality.

mylexicon

3623271380693103

Replacing a 4.0L V8 with a turbo 3.0L I-6 is about fuel efficiency? Replacing a 3.0L I6 with a 2.0L I4 turbo is about fuel efficiency? Not likely b/c the turbocharged engines are not particularly more efficient.


 


Turbocharging is about engine scaling and manufacturing costs. The twin-turbo I-6 has fewer pistons, valves, and cams. The inline block is cheaper to produce. By adhering to a 500cc-per-cylinder architecture BMW can use the same pistons, rods, valves, etc for the 1.5L I3, 2.0L I4, and 3.0L I6. BMW can also turbo scale by using the same engine in vehicles like 330 and M3, but altering the power output via electronic means and, perhaps, a few ancillary parts. In some cases the smaller turbos are indirectly related to fuel efficiency, especially in FWD vehicles (new 1-series?) with transverse engine mounting. If the manufacturer can reduce the length of the block by downsizing to 3-cylinders or 2-cylinders (FIAT twinair), they have space for hybrid systems in the engine bay.


 


Perhaps turbocharging is just another short-term trend. Time will tell.

Click to expand...

The new 1 series is RWD and the turbo model is a blast to drive, though I would never spend my money on a BMW. The interesting turbo vs non turbo battle for me is the Ford f150 v6 eco boost vs the Silverado 1500 with the NA V8, the Chevy gets more mpg and I'm guessing will require less money spent on exotic fuel and turbo systems maintenance in the long run. 

Jumkie

3627231381181864

^ Oh yeah, that is an awesome strategy, now we only have two manufactures dominating.  One trying to keep up with the federal reserve investing close to a million bucks to make a gearbox.  There is your theory then there is reality.

Click to expand...

The reality is that Honda and Yamaha have always been the only two factories to dominate in GP. How many championships do the others have compared to those two?

hawkdriver

3627261381182567

The reality is that Honda and Yamaha have always been the only two factories to dominate in GP. How many championships do the others have compared to those two?

Click to expand...

 


Which blows your theory doesn't it.  Youre making the case that Dorna stepped in to make everything reasonable for other factories, since then two have left, one has said .... that too expensive (BMW) and Ducati (the worst affected by rules changes) have stuck around to be lame.  It got so bad that they introduced the CRT to provide grid filler.  Dorna were not looking to the future, they were looking to appease their cash cow for the moment.  We had a time where Suzuki, Kawasaki, and Ducati were making progress, then all that went to .... with Dorna's rolling rule book.

Dovi speaking out is only a consequence of certain changes that have already begun with the replacement of Durheimer with <span style="color:rgb(102,102,104);font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:14px;Hackenberg and will continue with the probable arrival of Dall'Igna with his core team of engineers from Aprilia. 

hawkdriver

3627241381182325

The new 1 series is RWD and the turbo model is a blast to drive, though I would never spend my money on a BMW. The interesting turbo vs non turbo battle for me is the Ford f150 v6 eco boost vs the Silverado 1500 with the NA V8, the Chevy gets more mpg and I'm guessing will require less money spent on exotic fuel and turbo systems maintenance in the long run. 

Click to expand...

The forthcoming 1-series, due in a year or two if I remember correctly, will be front-wheel drive. It'll share a platform and new 1.5-liter turbo three-cylinder with the new Mini that comes out next month.


Last EcoBoost F-150 we tested got worse mileage than the V8. Constantly in the boost and upper revs to carry the truck's weight.