Kenny Roberts Jr. (00 Champ & ??? Champ)

skidmark · Nov 28, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rising Sun @ Nov 28 2006, 04:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>When I mentioned the racecraft thing, I was taking into account Roberts Jr's own post-race comments. Sure he was being somewhat self-depricating with statements like: "It's been so long since I've been up the front, I wasn't sure what to do" and "I'm not used to dicing with these guys" and so on, but he's also an honest, upfront guy and there's an element of truth there. At other times he mentioned a wish that he pushed himself harder, because a better result was on the cards (e.g. Assen). And the horrible attempt at a pass on Tamada in Germany looked like rusty racecraft to me.Yeah the Tamada pass did look badly planned but let's take the Brno GP. We didn't get to see exactly what happenned because Rossi and Pedrosa were at it, but he sat behind Melandri, Stoner and Hayden for the whole race then got all three of them on the same lap with four to go, text-book stuff. I agree that Junior does play himself down in interviews but I reckon it takes a smart man to play the fool sometimes if you know what I mean.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Rising Sun @ Nov 28 2006, 04:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Now that's a BOLD prediction. There might be 18 events on the calender for next year, but it would be a shock win if Roberts Jr snagged one of them. The talent might still be there, but he can't ride last year's bike.

And as for the 2007 version... Team KR has done no testing yet; they probably won't even get the engines until January. The other teams doing the tyre testing will help, but Team KR will be behind the eight ball and playing catch up just as they were in 2006--the final version of their chassis didn't come until after Motegi.

But I tell you what: I'll buy you a six-pack of beer (and help you drink it) if Roberts Jr has PLURAL race wins in 2007

OK that prediction 50% what I'd like to see happen. It must be an Irish thing, to root for the underdog, I can't help it, I've a lot of respect for the guy and the team. It's not beyond the realms of possibility. The testing issue does concern me, but from what I can gather, team KR were trading tech info with HRC in the second half of this year so that trend will continue. I know they do have precise engine specs and dimensions, and have had those from just after Valencia so they're not completely in the dark as to what direction to follow.

A six-pack won't do it Rising Sun, I reckon we could get through a couple of crates before we'd run out of things to talk about

Paul

Jumkie · Nov 28, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Nov 27 2006, 03:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>There is no way I can possibly comment on this thread, Ive always had liked Roberts Jnr, and I would end up agreeing with Jumkie.

Cant have that, Im a self confessed rossi disciple.

So, no comment from me!

Pete

Ah come on pete, you can do it. I've read some very interesting stuff from you. Don't let the rossie colored glasses

keep you from saying something insightful about Roberts Jr.

And welcome Teo Alias

Roberts is a very honest interview for sure. It is refreshing to hear a guy admit when he makes a mistake rather than making excuses.

As far as testing, this is always a major issue for privateer teams that operate in national series. But I really don't understand how they can overcome this disadvantage at this international MotoGP level. It takes an "army" of engineers with super space age type equipment and data analysis to shave off mille-seconds from lap times. The reality is that the KR team does not have the personnel nor the resources to do this, and so they rely on good old fashion talent, sense, and experience. On top of that, they must do this in less time (waiting for Honda to assign them engines) and without the benefit of comparisons (as two bike teams have). This is a tremendous disadvantage, and I’m not so sure I would denigrate this year’s top 5 finish.

To say the chassis is not as complicated as F1 is like saying the Apollo rockets were not as complicated as the Space shuttle, that is to say, they are both super complicated enough to be extremely challenging to design for maximum performance since this is the foundation for the enigmatic perfect race set up (have I overstated or understated it importance?)

I think Roberts has been effected by the sub-par machinery he has ridden, which has made him a savvy rider as oppose to aggressiveness, which is what most spectators rather see. Either way, the guy is a talent and there is no real way to spin that he beat bona fide factory guys who are touted as great talents (hard to explain away as lucky). Which is why he is a very deserved top 5 this year, and led me to get other’s opinions about his career, potential, and talent.

Tom · Nov 28, 2006

I really enjoyed watching roberts winning races (and a title) in 99/2000, but at the time i was relatively new to the sport. Since then i have been very disapointed withhis performances and had to some extent written him off as a has been. But last year he put in a few very strong rides and this year he showed that still is truly a great rider and also reminded me why i like him. I think the suzuki machinary had been holding him back after all, something which it has been doing to hopkins also ( i wish he could get on a race winnng bike and prove himself to be as good as i think he is).

I think if honda sort out their engine, and i am confident they will, there is every chance that KR team could build a superior chassis, and with any luck we could see Roberts fighting for the title once again.

teomolca · Nov 28, 2006

I don't know why my post came up as written by "Teo's Alias" I guess it's because I used Firefox and had a different cookie and the forum's software names "xxxx's Alias" to the clone cookies.
So no need to welcome me.

Anyway back to the topic, I didn't mean to say that Kenny won by mere luck or that he didn't deserve it, I just said that the level of competitiveness of the championship was lower than in a normal season because of the reasons I stated.

There's nothing wrong with that, but I consider it lucky, because for example Sete got more points in 2003 and 2004 than Roberts in 2000 and it wasn't enough to win a championship. I believe Sete and Kenny are roughly equally talented, but one faced an easier opposition in his prime than the other.

Tom · Nov 28, 2006

To be the world champion a rider must out perform all his rivals, it is impossible to know weather or not roberts on his 99/2000 prime could have raised his game even higher and defeated even higher competion.

Unfortunately for sete, his prime came around the same time as rossi's and riding at maximum capacity was still not quite enough.

skidmark · Nov 28, 2006

Man, more great reading.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Racejumkie @ Nov 28 2006, 07:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>As far as testing, this is always a major issue for privateer teams that operate in national series. But I really don't understand how they can overcome this disadvantage at this international MotoGP level. It takes an "army" of engineers with super space age type equipment and data analysis to shave off mille-seconds from lap times. The reality is that the KR team does not have the personnel nor the resources to do this, and so they rely on good old fashion talent, sense, and experience. On top of that, they must do this in less time (waiting for Honda to assign them engines) and without the benefit of comparisons (as two bike teams have). This is a tremendous disadvantage, and I’m not so sure I would denigrate this year’s top 5 finish.I was going to type something but I'd only be repeating what you're saying here Junkie. You nailed it.

skidmark · Nov 28, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Racejumkie @ Nov 28 2006, 07:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>To say the chassis is not as complicated as F1 is like saying the Apollo rockets were not as complicated as the Space shuttle, that is to say, they are both super complicated enough to be extremely challenging to design for maximum performance since this is the foundation for the enigmatic perfect race set up (have I overstated or understated it importance?)Yeah I'd say overstated. Ok apart from tyre performance in relation to power delivery, what maks a bike fast around corners is almost exactly the same as it was 10 or 20 years ago. Corners haven't really evolved that much. The fact that a home-made chassis finshes the year higher placed than a factory Yamaha and two very sorted Hondas speaks volumes. Both Honda and Yamaha have over-engineered things and got it wrong in the past, so a NASA-esque development programme is not always a match for sheer talent.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Nov 28 2006, 08:01 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>To be the world champion a rider must out perform all his rivals, it is impossible to know weather or not roberts on his 99/2000 prime could have raised his game even higher and defeated even higher competion.Wasn't it Doohan who said 'you got to win the title by as little as possible' or something like that. If nobodys pushing you, why take risks?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (teomolca @ Nov 28 2006, 07:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Anyway back to the topic, I didn't mean to say that Kenny won by mere luck or that he didn't deserve it, I just said that the level of competitiveness of the championship was lower than in a normal season because of the reasons I stated.

There's nothing wrong with that, but I consider it lucky, because for example Sete got more points in 2003 and 2004 than Roberts in 2000 and it wasn't enough to win a championship. I believe Sete and Kenny are roughly equally talented, but one faced an easier opposition in his prime than the other. Ah Teo good to have the real you back. I reckon Junoir's got way more Jams than Sete, he's made of tougher stuff. I honestly think he would have made much more of that Telefonica Honda.

Jumkie · Nov 28, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (teomolca @ Nov 28 2006, 11:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>So no need to welcome me.

Anyway back to the topic, I didn't mean to say that Kenny won by mere luck or that he didn't deserve it, I just said that the level of competitiveness of the championship was lower than in a normal season because of the reasons I stated.

That's weird. Anyway, I see you have over 1500 posts, but welcome anyway (since I think this is the first time I exchange some thoughts with you.)

I see what you are saying about the lack of talent in those years (99/00). I guess that might be an interesting topic for another thread: What years in MotoGP had the greatest abundance of talent?... And perhaps a sub-topic could be: Of all the multiple title winners, which do you think won them amongst a lack of challengers. (If nobody gets to it I think I'll start this one soon).

As for this year, I think we could both agree that certainly their was/is an abundance of talent in areas of up-and-coming, proven, and veteran riders. Yet in this field he finished top 5. Which is why I make the case that Roberts is really better than what he has shown (or placed). Which I attribute in great part to talent.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (skidmark @ Nov 28 2006, 12:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yeah I'd say overstated. Ok apart from tyre performance in relation to power delivery, what maks a bike fast around corners is almost exactly the same as it was 10 or 20 years ago. Corners haven't really evolved that much. The fact that a home-made chassis finshes the year higher placed than a factory Yamaha and two very sorted Hondas speaks volumes. Both Honda and Yamaha have over-engineered things and got it wrong in the past, so a NASA-esque development programme is not always a match for sheer talent.

Skidmark, you make some great points.

But I’m not so convinced the chassis is not the foundation of race set-up. I think Roger mentioned it on a previous post here in this thread that (and I’m paraphrasing) slight changes to a chassis account for significant consequential effects to the performance of the machine as a whole (power delivery and transfer, traction, corner speed, handling dynamics, breaking, etc. etc.). I read what you said but I just wanted alittle more elaboration since you think I might have overstated its importance. I do agree that this can be over-engineered (Honda) but to under-engineer the chassis, I think has a greater detrimental effect compared to over-engineering; which would be more probable with a microscopic team like KR. What do you think?

basspete · Nov 28, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Racejumkie @ Nov 28 2006, 09:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>That's weird. Anyway, I see you have over 1500 posts, but welcome anyway (since I think this is the first time I exchange some thoughts with you.)

I see what you are saying about the lack of talent in those years (99/00). I guess that might be an interesting topic for another thread: What years in MotoGP had the greatest abundance of talent?... And perhaps a sub-topic could be: Of all the multiple title winners, which do you think won them amongst a lack of challengers. (If nobody gets to it I think I'll start this one soon).

As for this year, I think we could both agree that certainly their was/is an abundance of talent in areas of up-and-coming, proven, and veteran riders. Yet in this field he finished top 5. Which is why I make the case that Roberts is really better than what he has shown (or placed). Which I attribute in great part to talent.

Skidmark, you make some great points.

But I’m not so convinced the chassis is not the foundation of race set-up. I think Roger mentioned it on a previous post here in this thread that (and I’m paraphrasing) slight changes to a chassis account for significant consequential effects to the performance of the machine as a whole (power delivery and transfer, traction, corner speed, handling dynamics, breaking, etc. etc.). I read what you said but I just wanted alittle more elaboration since you think I might have overstated its importance. I do agree that this can be over-engineered (Honda) but to under-engineer the chassis, I think has a greater detrimental effect compared to over-engineering; which would be more probable with a microscopic team like KR. What do you think?

God I hate agreeing with you jumkie, but again you make some good points. Talking about chassis engineering, in 1993, when Rainey couldn't get the Yamaha to handle, Cadalora started to use the French made ROC chassis, and kicked ..., If I remember rightly, I think Rainey went onto the ROC chassis too for a while, so yeah, the big guys can and do get overly clever sometimes and make an arse of it. Honda arent the first and wont be the last to do it.

Its always nice to see the little guys get it right too, so keep up the work KR jnr and snr.

But please jumkie enough valid points eh? it freaks me out when your not telling us all how good Nicky is.....

Pete

chopperman · Nov 28, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Nov 28 2006, 10:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>But please jumkie enough valid points eh? it freaks me out when your not telling us all how good Nicky is.....
im with you on this one pete

i think sometimes people like team kr have a bit of an advantage in that they dont build engines so they can focus more on building superb chassis.
which bike used the moriwacki chassis.
not sure if ive spelled it right but i think it used a kwak lump.

basspete · Nov 28, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Nov 28 2006, 10:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>im with you on this one pete

i think sometimes people like team kr have a bit of an advantage in that they dont build engines so they can focus more on building superb chassis.
which bike used the moriwacki chassis.
not sure if ive spelled it right but i think it used a kwak lump.

Yep there definately were Moriwaki Kawasakis, I think it makes for more interesting racing when you get some "one off" frame builders involved. (though please, dont bring back the elf Hondas)

Pete

chopperman · Nov 28, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Nov 28 2006, 10:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yep there definately were Moriwaki Kawasakis, I think it makes for more interesting racing when you get some "one off" frame builders involved. (though please, dont bring back the elf Hondas)

Pete
personaly i would like to see more expermenting like with the twin wishbone frame the elf had.
there are advantages with this,like rake and trail angles stay the same under hard braking,not the case with teliscopic forks,
trouble with the wishbone hub centre steering set up was a problem called bump steer,normaly a problem associated with cars. this is why bmw looked into different systems like the teli lever,.

Hub-center steering is one of several different types of front end suspension/steering mechanisms used in motorcycles. Hub-center steering is characterized by a swingarm that extends from the bottom of the engine/frame to the center of the front wheel instead of two forks.

The advantages of using a hub centre steering system instead of a more conventional forks are that hub centre steer separates the steering, braking, and suspension functions. With forks the braking forces are put through the suspension, a situation that leads to the suspension being compressed, using up a large amount of suspension travel which makes dealing with bumps and other road irregularities extremely difficult. Also, having the steering working through the forks also causes problems with stiction, decreasing the effectiveness of the suspension.

Its complicated assembly is only one of the reasons hub-center steering is implemented in relatively few motorcycle models. The telescopic fork steering system is much more commonly used.

Currently, Bimota's Tesi 2D and the Vyrus 984C3 2V and the 985C3 4V are the only production motorcycles using hub-steer.

just incase anybody was wondering

basspete · Nov 28, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Nov 28 2006, 10:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>personaly i would like to see more expermenting like with the twin wishbone frame the elf had.
there are advantages with this,like rake and trail angles stay the same under hard braking,not the case with teliscopic forks,
trouble with the wishbone hub centre steering set up was a problem called bump steer,normaly a problem associated with cars. this is why bmw looked into different systems like the teli lever,.

There must be valid alternatives to conventional chassis design, telescopic forks have been around a long time. I see the newer BMW front end borrows heavily from Norman Hossacks 80's front end design.

I think one of the problems is that its the imperfections that make traditional design work. Separating braking, steering and fork dive works well on paper, but not when racers are using the front end dive to sharpen the steering. Just like a stiff chassis works better in theory than in practice.

Keeps it all interesting though.

Pete

Jumkie · Nov 28, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Nov 28 2006, 02:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>God I hate agreeing with you jumkie, but again you make some good points.

Talking about chassis engineering, in 1993, when Rainey couldn't get the Yamaha to handle, Cadalora started to use the French made ROC chassis, and kicked ...

But please jumkie enough valid points eh? it freaks me out when your not telling us all how good Nicky is.....

Pete

Ah come on Pete, we may not agree that Nicky deserves the accolades he has earned (I don’t understand why) but I've said a fair share of good things about your boy Rossi. In fact, look at Roger-m’s quote of me regarding the “former champ” on his signature display (“Usually legends are…”). Now if I can take the time to construct a splendid description of your guy, (and I’m not even a fan) I’m sure we can have some concordance between us. It must be burning you up a bit to agree with me, but maybe I can quote you on some of your insightful posts as I did Roger-m (when on the very rare occasion he actually makes alittle sense).

Maybe I can someday call you buddy; as I do other mindless cheerleading Rossi fans like Roger-m (even though he is a bit of drunken and babbling alcoholic.)

Anyway, enough of the jokes. We were having such a great and serious discussion; (besides, I don’t think I’m going to win you over with my comedic attempts anyway). I would be interested to know what you and Roger think about the importance of a chassis as how it relates to performance. (I know it’s a rather techie question but it seems it relates to the KR team (since as you suggest, they just sit around thinking about this while Honda does all the heavy lifting building an engine).

Also, please tell me more about that ROC chassis Rainey used. What was that all about?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Nov 28 2006, 02:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>just incase anybody was wondering

Damn that was fast, I wasn't even done putting up my post and you had already read my mind. Man, are you practicing Voodoo?

teomolca · Nov 28, 2006

IIRC Moriwaki used Honda engines.

richo · Nov 28, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Nov 29 2006, 10:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I see the newer BMW front end borrows heavily from Norman Hossacks 80's front end design.

I think Hossack consulted BMW when they were building that system. Either that or he designed it for them.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (teomolca @ Nov 29 2006, 10:32 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>IIRC Moriwaki used Honda engines.

Yeah I thought they were Hondas too.

skidmark · Nov 29, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Racejumkie @ Nov 28 2006, 09:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Skidmark, you make some great points.

But I’m not so convinced the chassis is not the foundation of race set-up. I think Roger mentioned it on a previous post here in this thread that (and I’m paraphrasing) slight changes to a chassis account for significant consequential effects to the performance of the machine as a whole (power delivery and transfer, traction, corner speed, handling dynamics, breaking, etc. etc.). I read what you said but I just wanted alittle more elaboration since you think I might have overstated its importance.Spaceshuttle vs Apollo, gravity hasn't evolved that much either so the same set of problems present themselves. Physics has been around a long time. Chassis is the only thing you've got to play around with when you can't open the motor and mess with it ( TeamKR ). That makes it pretty hard to overstate it's importance. Jumkie, I think I've taken you in the context of NASA style engineering with guys in white coats and lab monkeys like the ones at HRC and overstating the importance of super high tech versus a group of talented people like the Roberts squad working in Dad's back yard. My bad.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (basspete @ Nov 28 2006, 10:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>God I hate agreeing with you jumkie, but again you make some good points. Talking about chassis engineering, in 1993, when Rainey couldn't get the Yamaha to handle, Cadalora started to use the French made ROC chassis, and kicked ..., If I remember rightly, I think Rainey went onto the ROC chassis too for a while, so yeah, the big guys can and do get overly clever sometimes and make an arse of it. Honda arent the first and wont be the last to do it.Good point yourself Pete.

skidmark · Nov 29, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Nov 28 2006, 10:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>personaly i would like to see more expermenting like with the twin wishbone frame the elf had.
there are advantages with this,like rake and trail angles stay the same under hard braking,not the case with teliscopic forks,Good description Roger but that's exactly what you want the fork to do. Under braking the geometry is changed in the riders favour, basically the steering angle is at it's steepest when the forks are just about to bottom out. Is that bike easy to turn in or what? It's like putting the fork up in the yoke 100mm for a couple of seconds.

Twin-spar hub-centre streetbike suspension 'gimmicks' do only one thing in racing, remove sensation from the rider. Excellent for certain types of streetbikes. If you could design a system that did the same thing to the geometry under braking but put all the wieght on the back wheel though, you be a millionaire.

Paul

basspete · Nov 29, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (skidmark @ Nov 29 2006, 09:57 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Good description Roger but that's exactly what you want the fork to do. Under braking the geometry is changed in the riders favour, basically the steering angle is at it's steepest when the forks are just about to bottom out. Is that bike easy to turn in or what? It's like putting the fork up in the yoke 100mm for a couple of seconds.

Twin-spar hub-centre streetbike suspension 'gimmicks' do only one thing in racing, remove sensation from the rider. Excellent for certain types of streetbikes. If you could design a system that did the same thing to the geometry under braking but put all the wieght on the back wheel though, you be a millionaire.

Paul

A few quick points (I'm in the office!) Wayne Gardner rode a Moriwaki modded Kawasaki in the early 80s, a nasty (but nice looking) machine.

I'm not sure, but I think there was some legal wrangling over the new BM front end, I might be wrong but I thought there was a problem with Norman Hossack over patents. Could be wrong though.

Hey Jumkie, The ROC chassis was built by Frenchman Serge Rossett in the early 90's, they were mainly used by privateers. Scot Niall MacKenzie was the top privateer 500 rider in both 93 and 94 using a ROC chassis. It ws 93, that the Roberts Yams used them for a few races with Cadalora 1st, Rainey 2nd (on the Yam frame I think) and Mackenzie 3rd at Donnington that year.

British frame builders Harris also built frames at this time. Both used Yamaha engines.

And Jumkie, I'm just givin you the cheek back you deserve! to be honest Roberts Edwards and Hayden are the only guys I watch apart from Rossi, I do like the guy!

Cheers

Pete

frosty58 · Nov 29, 2006

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (teomolca @ Nov 28 2006, 03:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I don't know why my post came up as written by "Teo's Alias" I guess it's because I used Firefox and had a different cookie and the forum's software names "xxxx's Alias" to the clone cookies.
So no need to welcome me.

Search

Search

Kenny Roberts Jr. (00 Champ & ??? Champ)

skidmark

Jumkie

Tom

teomolca

Tom

skidmark

skidmark

Jumkie

basspete

chopperman

basspete

chopperman

basspete

Jumkie

teomolca

richo

skidmark

skidmark

basspete

frosty58

Similar threads

Recent Discussions