ducati in 2006

Yeah OJ's still developing the Kawa with some Jap dude. Still I think he could do an even better job of developing if he was on the grid. He might even get some good results, too. DePuniet was a good chice for a rookie, But when they've got this oppourtunity (Honda being down, new engine) They should be charging hard for podiums. They could do that with Nakano and OJ. Now There's a pair of racers who can push each other.
I don't think KHI are putting enough money into MotoGP. Perhaps if the new ZX-RR can perform, They'll take this seriously. Maybe even a Kawa satellite team? Somwhere for rookies like DePuniet to cut their teeth.
A sponsor would help Kawa, too. Now the only Factory team without proper sponsorship.

It will all depend on how good dePuniet is at giving feedback to the team, I reckon it's a long shot as this is his first year but it's more likely that Kawa are hedging their bets for next year and the new rules, it would be great to see OJ near the front again, remember him and Barros at the Sachsenring?
I was reading in today's UK MCN that Rossi and Edwards have got big chatter problems, apparently or should I say 'allegedly' that's why they performed so badly at the last test. Also Tady Okada is quoted as saying the Honda's problem is a chassis one, from the apex to the exit to be exact. He says the bike can't hold a line when you really try to push off a turn. Same problem as Ducati's at the top of this thread, the plot thickens.

That's what I had read from Hayden's comments, skid. Can't hold a line and the bike won't hook up and just spins on exit.

Oh, this is a good chance for Kawa and Suzi (And Ducati ) Could be a bridgestone podium

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (skidmark @ Mar 15 2006, 08:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yeah the crank, cams, flywheel, balance shaft, basically anything that spins all create a gyroscopic effect of varying degress. They don't relate directly to traction but all have an effect on power delivery, how freely/loosely the engine revs which has a lot to do with feel and traction.
Hey Wreckless, my first racer was a ZX6R and I've a lot of good memories of her so Kwaks are cool in my book and I do believe that green ones are the fastest of them all Thats a good point on OJ with the Kawa thing, isn't he still testing for them?
my bike , before the one i currently own was a zx6rf2,so no problems there.due to unforseen circumstances it was red ,my apologies!Back to the duke thing .this engine configeration has me in a bit of a spin.I will get some stick over this but here we go ! As i understand it the effect of the teams first efforts to produce a gp bike were to basically to marry two 916 engines side by side (check out v4 from yester year) it is well documented that the 916 was difficult to tip of the vertical .But after much playing about with swinging arm lengths ect they managed to produce the best wsb since or before the rc..so in essence the duke doesnt hold such a tight line or tip in so easily cos it tends to wanna be upright due to the nature of the power delivery I.E.gyroscopic effect! cheers for all your replys ,not really a techno head s please dont say that two times 916 dont add up!

Well a 1832cc engine would have some seriously heavy runnuing gear, combine that with the high engine speeds of a racebike you've got a lot of moment of inertia, which creates a force opposing any change of speed or direction. That's probably why that idea was such a beast.
The thing I don't get is Gyroscopic effects are only on rotating parts like the crank, cams, ect. Therefore how can the arrangement of the cylinder bank(s) affect the gyroscopic effect. What difference does an inline four have to a V four or even V five? Sure they're different engine configurations but they all go to a crank which I imagine would weigh about the same. It's got me confused

The weight would vary considerably between a V4 and L4. The L4 is much longer so it should have a longer and therefore heavier crankshaft, also the flywheel is heavier as the number of cylinders decreases, so Honda may have an advantage there since they have a not very long crankshaft (3 cyl wide) and a small flywheel.

Quite possible but an in-line 4 has only 2 cams whilst a V4 or V5 has to have four, two for each bank of cylinders. This will have a gyroscopic effect with regard to direction change but it is the crank and flywheel that also have an inertia effect which is different in that they can make big changes to how the engine revs. Still these make small differences in handling compared to unsprung weight, i.e. wheels, discs and the tyre. It's all part of the bigger picture.

Good points. Maybe this is (or was) a secret to the honda's sucess. Do gyrosopic forces from the engine really have that much affect on conering?

Richo, I think I we were posting at the same time there. That last post should answer your question.

Good points skid. I guess it's just one of those little things that all add up in the world of making a fast GP bike.

Yeah a V engine has twice as many cams, but they ought to be half as long, so overall I think that will be more or less equal to the L4.

I don't know if this is really an advantage for Honda because of course there are drawbacks too. The L4 engine is shorter, so you can have a longer swingarm and a lower centre of gravity.

cheers everyboby ,who had the time but i is going jerez ,on wedensday .so see ya .and enjoy the racing whatever happens!

Watch yer back, man. Them spaniards are a dangerous type

the pot calling the kettle black.

Australia is a 220 year old pommy prison camp. Our greatest hero was an outlaw and we got lotsa sharks.

"Where the bloody hell are ya?"

I'd say you're all a bunch of mongrels

And most of us come from Ireland Because the poms only sent their criminals over.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (richo @ Mar 17 2006, 10:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>And most of us come from Ireland Because the poms only sent their criminals over.


I wish the same laws still applied