Ducati claimed another victim

Keshav said:

From the empiric point of view - that would appear to be the case - tho
the same could be said when Marquez was winning everything in sight.
I suspect Honda is again the victim of their usual tone-deaf approach
to engineering.

Click to expand...

The Bridgestone front was more conducive to heavy braking while the Michelin front is pretty much not meant for that.

I think it's a combination of several things for Honda: chassis, electronics, and tires.

Iamapony said:

They revised their engine in 2015. They did a moderation in 2016. They have revised it again in 2017. I think your information is dated. Dovi is not a rider who manhandles a motorcycle and he just won a race on a pretty tough track. He may have had "home court" advantage, but I don't think he would have won that race on a bike that couldn't turn.

They may need more chassis work, but I don't see KTM or Aprilia breathing down their neck, do you? Again, I would not give up the HP advantage. I think it works. If Stoner was there or Marquez, I don't think you would question the engine at all. My opinion, of course.

Click to expand...

Well... I'm not an engineer, so am not qualified to make a call on the "revised" engine. Tho - I've yet to hear anyone state that it's radically different from previous iterations. My understanding is that in it's current reincarnation the engine is essentially more manageable. RE: Dovi not manhandling the bike, I'd say watch this
last race again. The Duc got seriously out of shape in several place. Can't see how Dovi survived some of those moment without manhandling it. Ducati are for sure
missing their wings.

Re: Dovi - who I am a big admirer of, you have to ask yourself, why such a talented rider, has so rarely been on the top of the podium? The answer is, I think, self-evident.

Re: KTM etc. - Not a reasonable comparison. Ducati has been competing at the MotoGp level for a long time now, with a bigger budget and better riders. I think if you look at HP specs on the KTMs and Aprilias you'll find the HP gap is not as great as you think. How many times have we seen bikes with lesser top end speed, win the races, because the chassis and electronic were more finessed and in-tune with the rider's style? Ducati's years of experience with electronics at the GP level alone are worth half a second per lap.

JPSLotus said:

The Bridgestone front was more conducive to heavy braking while the Michelin front is pretty much not meant for that.

I think it's a combination of several things for Honda: chassis, electronics, and tires.

Click to expand...

The thing I question is, whether the Michelin is "meant" for Yamaha, or whether the Yamaha is simply more forgiving of Michelin's deficient front end. About that we can all speculate endlessly.

I'm all in re: Yes, Rossi has overmuch influence etc.. But we have all of us acknowledged that Michelin front ends have sucked right from day one of their introduction in the control tire era.

Keshav said:

The thing I question is, whether the Michelin is "meant" for Yamaha, or whether the Yamaha is simply more forgiving of Michelin's deficient front end. About that we can all speculate endlessly.

I'm all in re: Yes, Rossi has overmuch influence etc.. But we have all of us acknowledged that Michelin front ends have sucked right from day one of their introduction in the control tire era.

Click to expand...

I would say the Michelin front is meant for the Rossi, which means by proxy it's meant for the Yamaha M1. The front tire would be intended to work for Rossi on whichever bike he was on. If he were say on the RC213V, my opinion is that the tire would be working far better for the bike than it currently is.

JPSLotus said:

The Bridgestone front was more conducive to heavy braking while the Michelin front is pretty much not meant for that.

I think it's a combination of several things for Honda: chassis, electronics, and tires.

Click to expand...

Something I don't understand, especially with regard to the electronics, is why they can't solve these problems on the bench.

Can't they have an engine running with the ECU on a bench and figure out how all the parameters affect behaviour, then apply this to the bike on race weekends? It seems like they would if they could, so maybe they can't get access to a spare ECU? Are they limited to use only on weekends, on the race bike?

One of the things that frustrates me about this sport is the lack of real information about the bikes (and riders, tires, etc). Of course, if I wouldn't release any engineering info either so I don't blame them.

Anyone know why they can't fix their software/electronic issues back at the factory on the bench?

MadMax said:

Something I don't understand, especially with regard to the electronics, is why they can't solve these problems on the bench.

Can't they have an engine running with the ECU on a bench and figure out how all the parameters affect behaviour, then apply this to the bike on race weekends? It seems like they would if they could, so maybe they can't get access to a spare ECU? Are they limited to use only on weekends, on the race bike?

One of the things that frustrates me about this sport is the lack of real information about the bikes (and riders, tires, etc). Of course, if I wouldn't release any engineering info either so I don't blame them.

Anyone know why they can't fix their software/electronic issues back at the factory on the bench?

Click to expand...

Spec ECUs are (to the best of my knowledge) sealed to prevent tampering. They are not nearly as sophisticated as those designed by the manufacturers. I have no doubt that the Hondas would be much more dominant if they were allowed to use in-house designed electronics.

MadMax said:

Something I don't understand, especially with regard to the electronics, is why they can't solve these problems on the bench.

Can't they have an engine running with the ECU on a bench and figure out how all the parameters affect behaviour, then apply this to the bike on race weekends? It seems like they would if they could, so maybe they can't get access to a spare ECU? Are they limited to use only on weekends, on the race bike?

One of the things that frustrates me about this sport is the lack of real information about the bikes (and riders, tires, etc). Of course, if I wouldn't release any engineering info either so I don't blame them.

Anyone know why they can't fix their software/electronic issues back at the factory on the bench?

Click to expand...

A good friend of mine who used to build race cars for the Ferrari Challenge series over in Europe has always been big on telling me that at the end of the day, there is no substitute for real world data collection. He said that's how all the CAD jockeys (his term) wind up chasing down dead end alleyways because they believe in the computer simulations more than real world operating data for determining whether a part actually works or not. The simulation may say the part works, but then out on the track it doesn't work and creates other issues that leaves them befuddled as to how the computer could have gotten it wrong.

Running an engine on a dyno will never simulate the seemingly infinite variables from atmospheric conditions to the G force stresses engines are subjected to under race conditions. You can certainly gather useful data from a dyno, but it's never been a substitute for the real world. It's why I was never a fan of locking engine development or limiting in-season testing as if you find yourself behind the 8 ball as Honda did going into 2015, it's pretty much a lost season.

JPSLotus said:

A good friend of mine who used to build race cars for the Ferrari Challenge series over in Europe has always been big on telling me that at the end of the day, there is no substitute for real world data collection. He said that's how all the CAD jockeys (his term) wind up chasing down dead end alleyways because they believe in the computer simulations more than real world operating data for determining whether a part actually works or not. The simulation may say the part works, but then out on the track it doesn't work and creates other issues that leaves them befuddled as to how the computer could have gotten it wrong.

Running an engine on a dyno will never simulate the seemingly infinite variables from atmospheric conditions to the G force stresses engines are subjected to under race conditions. You can certainly gather useful data from a dyno, but it's never been a substitute for the real world. It's why I was never a fan of locking engine development or limiting in-season testing as if you find yourself behind the 8 ball as Honda did going into 2015, it's pretty much a lost season.

Click to expand...

Agree. How many posts here have lamented the intrusive use of electronics? Can't turn the clock back. But it is a shame that more time and energy isn't directed towards chassis, suspension, brakes etc? Without electronics the bikes would be slower, but doubtless, the racing would be better and more companies could affordably competitive and racing would be more about the riders. To my mind, the racing isn't more exciting at 220 mph, than it is at 195mph. Racing isn't about the numbers, it's about the competition between riders. More affordable racing would also mean more teams because costs for sponsorship would be more reasonable.

Keshav said:

Agree. How many posts here have lamented the intrusive use of electronics? Can't turn the clock back. But it is a shame that more time and energy isn't directed towards chassis, suspension, brakes etc? Without electronics the bikes would be slower, but doubtless, the racing would be better and more companies could affordably competitive and racing would be more about the riders. To my mind, the racing isn't more exciting at 220 mph, than it is at 195mph. Racing isn't about the numbers, it's about the competition between riders. More affordable racing would also mean more teams because costs for sponsorship would be more reasonable.

Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly, however we may already have such a formula -- it's called Moto2. We could cancel MotoGP and force all the top riders to go there, we could have some fun...

J4rn0 said:

I agree wholeheartedly, however we may already have such a formula -- it's called Moto2. We could cancel MotoGP and force all the top riders to go there, we could have some fun...

Click to expand...

Moto 2 needs to go back to 250cc bikes...

Keshav said:

Agree. How many posts here have lamented the intrusive use of electronics? Can't turn the clock back. But it is a shame that more time and energy isn't directed towards chassis, suspension, brakes etc? Without electronics the bikes would be slower, but doubtless, the racing would be better and more companies could affordably competitive and racing would be more about the riders. To my mind, the racing isn't more exciting at 220 mph, than it is at 195mph. Racing isn't about the numbers, it's about the competition between riders. More affordable racing would also mean more teams because costs for sponsorship would be more reasonable.

Click to expand...

The most fun I've ever had, as a fan, was following a regional series that had a good selection of classes and an open class that allowed anything.

This was back in the early eighties, and people were trying everything. A GS1100 motor stuffed in a GS750 frame, 16" wheels, ratty exhausts ... just anything that could be tried was going on. Of course, what was going on when you were a young guy always seems better in retrospect. I might be a prisoner to my past! The sound of a screaming two-stroke, or a screaming in-line four excites me more than the sound of a moto gp bike, though I do like the sound of the big bang engines.

When everything is locked down and you can't get any info it's hard to get too excited. Now add on a suspicion that the whole thing is orchestrated from behing the scenes to produce the most profitable series and it's hard to maintain interest, tbh.

If they'd let them run any tires they want, I think I'd like it better.

JPSLotus said:

A good friend of mine who used to build race cars for the Ferrari Challenge series over in Europe has always been big on telling me that at the end of the day, there is no substitute for real world data collection. He said that's how all the CAD jockeys (his term) wind up chasing down dead end alleyways because they believe in the computer simulations more than real world operating data for determining whether a part actually works or not. The simulation may say the part works, but then out on the track it doesn't work and creates other issues that leaves them befuddled as to how the computer could have gotten it wrong.

Click to expand...

Yes, that has to be it.

I'd really like them to get that Honda back in the game.

JPSLotus said:

Moto 2 needs to go back to 250cc bikes...

Click to expand...

Since the series went 4 stroke I've always thought moto 2 should be 500cc twins, they would sound great and have loads of torque. Not a fan of the single engine supplier either, bring in more manufactures as well. The racings good, I just don't like the format.

danski said:

Since the series went 4 stroke I've always thought moto 2 should be 500cc twins, they would sound great and have loads of torque. Not a fan of the single engine supplier either, bring in more manufactures as well. The racings good, I just don't like the format.

Click to expand...

I know their focus is on keeping costs down, but Moto 2 seems to go from one extreme to the other with races. It's either competitive with a couple of bikes or more at the front, or it's a no contest race. It's my least favorite class to watch. Moto 3 is far more enjoyable of the two to watch, and for that matter I would rather watch World Supersport than Moto 2. I don't think this is going to change with Triumph supplying engines. They should have had two different engine suppliers for 2019 IMO. If you want to prepare these guys for GP, they should get used to equipment disparity as that is more reflective of what GP is IMO.

Keshav said:

Well... I'm not an engineer, so am not qualified to make a call on the "revised" engine. Tho - I've yet to hear anyone state that it's radically different from previous iterations. My understanding is that in it's current reincarnation the engine is essentially more manageable. RE: Dovi not manhandling the bike, I'd say watch this
last race again. The Duc got seriously out of shape in several place. Can't see how Dovi survived some of those moment without manhandling it. Ducati are for sure
missing their wings.

Re: Dovi - who I am a big admirer of, you have to ask yourself, why such a talented rider, has so rarely been on the top of the podium? The answer is, I think, self-evident.
.

Click to expand...

A. Ducati is going to put the engine in their WSBK, and probably kill the awkward over-bored two cylinder stock bike for it. What do you think of those Desmos?

You say the engine is the problem. I am telling you that Honda wanted that engine the last two years. ;-) The engine is "bitchin' ".

D. Last year was the first time that Dovisiozo ever finished higher than a team mate in MotoGP. EV-AR! I can almost guarantee that MM would finish ahead of AD on the Ducati or any other damn bike. I like Dovi, too and he is probably a top-half rider, but he ain't no true contender.

JPSLotus said:

Nothing terribly surprising here. While I agree with him that you can't change your riding style overnight, I also think it's increasingly looking as if this is not going to occur.

Click to expand...

I see it a little differently.

For me, the major positive in the posted comments is that he knows that he must change his style, he must step outside his comfort zone in order to get the bike to work.

He recognises that the problem is him and his style and thus wishes to change to fit within the bike, whilst at the same time, change the bike within it's capability to come back to him.

Yes it reads a little frustrated but to me, it is positive frustrated in that he knows what but it is happening to slow for his liking (and again, I read that he accepts blame here)

danski said:

Since the series went 4 stroke I've always thought moto 2 should be 500cc twins, they would sound great and have loads of torque. Not a fan of the single engine supplier either, bring in more manufactures as well. The racings good, I just don't like the format.

Click to expand...

You want the output of a CBR600 engine at massively increased cost?
Great plan.

Dr No said:

You want the output of a CBR600 engine at massively increased cost?
Great plan.

Click to expand...

Never said anything about matching power output, I would like to see moto 2 as a true prototype racing class as the others are.

That, I agree with.
Here's a thought: Rather than horrible 4T twins that will devolve to 90deg Vs like amodern Pantah, maybe something like, ummm...a 250 2T would do the trick? Much cheaper, too

Think of a noise like a moto 3 bike x 2 , delicious!