Moto GP test ride...what the PROS think..

MCN Test rides the 2007 gp bikes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HwH47_c1ok&feature=related

They pretty much echo what was said in the article:
the suzuki is pretty easy and fun to ride... How about that.

if the ducati was so easy to ride then loris would of been second and melandri would of already topped the test time sheets.

ok melandri hasnt had enough time on it yet u may say? well hes been around motogp for 5 years now, he dont have much more time to get on the pace before the first race of the season.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinky @ Dec 8 2007, 03:04 PM) [snapback]103761[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
if the ducati was so easy to ride then loris would of been second and melandri would of already topped the test time sheets.

ok melandri hasnt had enough time on it yet u may say? well hes been around motogp for 5 years now, he dont have much more time to get on the pace before the first race of the season.


I don't think anyone said it was easy to ride in any interview? ... matter of fact all the stuff I saw even made me think that of all the bikes out there it is most like an old 500 .... easy down low .. then a big hit and then vision blurring vibration and revs and sound

which kinda was programmed for Stoners riding style in the corners, he squares them off then straightens up ( as the bike is getting through that easy power bit ) then it hits before he has even left the corner ( and the bike is allready going fairly straight and standing fairly upright if he is going past someone ), as we saw often going under someone in the process. It does remind me of what we used to see more of in the old 500 days. And you have to rememeber Stoner has been on 2 strokes from age 4 until he got on the LCR.

I think thats one of the reasons fol say his bike setup seems so odd. ( Re- the Ducati team thinking he had it all wrong in the beginning ) But I think he has just set it up to ride like a two stroke in its power delivery.

Which again is one of the reasons why I think the calls of "get Rossi on a Ducati" are a bit of a bad assumption. Rossi was the king of 4 stroke, sewing machine precision power around corners ( good even power everywhere especially down low for "railwaytrack" style cornering. ). I don't thing the Ducati power as Stoner has it would suit Rossi at all.

Could also explain why Stoner had problems on the LCR too ...... first 4 stroke and he isn't used to the power being there immediately the throttle is cracked on a 4 stroke. ...... I has touble with this aspect myself on dirtbikes ... after many years on 2 strokes I found the instantaneous reation around when the throttle is cracked, for 4 strokes, a bit hard to get used to ..... I was used to carrying a bit of revs in the corner then get ready for the build up then hit. 4 strokes, in out of the shop tune, build up so smoothly I found it hard

PS. I now finally have a 4 stroke dirt bike, but my brother in law messed up the low rev jet so it doesn't work .... so I get ..... burble burble no power then bang! power ... like the old days ..... and I do prefer it that way, ..... as my son has a newer KTM 525 and I find it just too sedate on power delivery . On mine I can find that spot and use it. His has no spot its just like a sewing machine from idle to limit.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(BarryMachine @ Dec 8 2007, 12:22 AM) [snapback]103749[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
Ah that was what I was wondering if you meant.

Crazy suggestion isn't it!! It would be a race series where Stoners TC programmer is "the main man" I think he'd get sick of his job pretty quick smart. Stoner does a few free practices and the other teams start lining up at their garage to get his settings.

Your initial statement was correct, I think. It is easy to get your robertses and haydens mixed up after a couple of glasses of GSM. I think roger lee at laguna, after his initial difficulties which put him well back, said that he turned off the tc and actually went faster. As you implied, it is perhaps not surprising that a rider unused to the bike he is riding, to motogp in general and to motogp-type traction control in particular might be able to go faster without tc.

Nicky may well have turned down his tc on occasion as well. I also have a vague memory of ducati saying that stoner did a lap without tc once which was just as fast as with tc.

There is some precedent for your crazy suggestion. I think that in the doohan glory years honda was wont to give doohan's set-up to at least alex criville and possibly the other honda riders. As I recall this did not impress mick greatly.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(michaelm @ Dec 8 2007, 05:38 PM) [snapback]103772[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
There is some precedent for your crazy suggestion. I think that in the doohan glory years honda was wont to give doohan's set-up to at least alex criville and possibly the other honda riders. As I recall this did not impress mick greatly.


yeah thats right ..... but the craziest thing is I think back in those days the other riders were getting so desperate for a win they actually thought setting there bike up like Doohans would get them a win

Crikey I know there aren't many bikes I get on and like straight up without a bit of fiddlig around to get it to suit me .... and thats just the ergo's .... there's brakes, engine map, clutch, suspension setting etc. etc. etc. matter of fact there hasn't been a bike I've had yet where I haven't had to touch it.

Its a pretty personal thing setup. ... and TC is included in that .... which is why I think I'm saying test ride evaluations of motogp bikes are like .... "can I borrow your false teeth"


Oh and PS... I do get my Robert's's and Haydens mixed up too just be thankful we don't see much of the Bostrums anymore, or that Hopper has no moto-siblings ...... I mean no disrespect to all you USanians ..... but we in Australia are now part of Asia .... so you guys all look the same to me

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(BarryMachine @ Dec 8 2007, 06:45 AM) [snapback]103774[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>. but we in Australia are now part of Asia


Interesting statement in view of the recent federal election result; how asian were we this time 2 weeks ago?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(michaelm @ Dec 8 2007, 07:01 PM) [snapback]103776[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
Interesting statement in view of the recent federal election result; how asian were we this time 2 weeks ago?


2 wekks is an eternity in politics

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(crvlvr @ Dec 6 2007, 07:20 PM) [snapback]103611[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
Thanks for the link,

Schwantz's article was excellent.

The other guy's sucked.

I think this article confirms that tires made most of the difference this year -- although the Yamaha was a little crappier than the rest.

I really don't buy the whole" honda is too tiny" argument. A rider
s perception of bike size is based on the positions of the foot pegs, handle bar and seat -- all ofwhich can be adjusted. Fuel tank width can be changed too, as what is visible is just a cover these days


spot on crvlr. Schwantz knows what he's on about. Guys like Schwantz or Mamola are the only guys who get to ride these things full power. They're the only guys worth listening to when describing a racebike. The rest is just bull. the Honda is no smaller than the next bike, it just that it's semi naked.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(crvlvr @ Dec 7 2007, 06:36 PM) [snapback]103758[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
Swing arm length has not bearing on seat height or distance of seat from handle bars as it is on a subframe. move the seat back and it will immdiately give the rider more room. Similarly footpegs are mounted on "rear-sets". which can be adjusted to suit the rider


I'm sorry but I can have no other reaction than this

This is the most pointless debate in the history of all debates. So I'm going to end it right now.

First, the only way to jam the subframe closer to the tank is to shorten the frame (or move the tank back but Honda didn't do that). Secondly, the only way to shorten the frame and maintain the same overall length is to lengthen the swingarm (or increase the size of the wheel/tire but Honda didn't do that). So both the frame and the swingarm are important in this instance.

Second, you need to do a track day with your seat 3-4" farther back and tell me how she handles. I reckon you'll be humping the tank all day because that's how Honda's are built. I can't even conceive how touchy a V engine layout would to 100 lbs hanging farther off the back.

Third, the idea that the Honda only looks small is an idea that should be classified as a conspiracy theory. We already know at the RC212V's unveiling MTV was filming for Nicky's show. In the interview that followed Nicky said he thought he was being Punk'd because the bike felt so small and the cockpit was even smaller.

So next time anyone wants to say the Honda isn't small all they need to do is drive to Owensboro and talk to Nicky. I'm sure he'll entertain the idea! Or you can go to England and talk to Vale he said roughly the same thing when the 211V was unveiled.

I'd imagine you'd feel pretty stupid trying to convince anyone in the Hayden or Rossi paddock that the Honda "looks" small. Why do so many people feel so at liberty to shout it from the top of their soap boxes on here?!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mylexicon @ Dec 8 2007, 08:36 AM) [snapback]103788[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
I'm sorry but I can have no other reaction than this

This is the most pointless debate in the history of all debates. So I'm going to end it right now.

First, the only way to jam the subframe closer to the tank is to shorten the frame (or move the tank back but Honda didn't do that). Secondly, the only way to shorten the frame and maintain the same overall length is to lengthen the swingarm (or increase the size of the wheel/tire but Honda didn't do that). So both the frame and the swingarm are important in this instance.

Second, you need to do a track day with your seat 3-4" farther back and tell me how she handles. I reckon you'll be humping the tank all day because that's how Honda's are built. I can't even conceive how touchy a V engine layout would to 100 lbs hanging farther off the back.

Third, the idea that the Honda only looks small is an idea that should be classified as a conspiracy theory. We already know at the RC212V's unveiling MTV was filming for Nicky's show. In the interview that followed Nicky said he thought he was being Punk'd because the bike felt so small and the cockpit was even smaller.

So next time anyone wants to say the Honda isn't small all they need to do is drive to Owensboro and talk to Nicky. I'm sure he'll entertain the idea! Or you can go to England and talk to Vale he said roughly the same thing when the 211V was unveiled.

I'd imagine you'd feel pretty stupid trying to convince anyone in the Hayden or Rossi paddock that the Honda "looks" small. Why do so many people feel so at liberty to shout it from the top of their soap boxes on here?!



seat position and size of bike are two totally unrelated things. everybody is on their soapbox saying the 212 is SOOOO much smaller than the 211. i've given the #s. it isn't. if the seat position makes it seem smaller to the rider than tough, but that doesn't mean the bike is all of a sudden 50% of the size of the previous year. the FIM does have rules on bike dimensions you know.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(drumfu @ Dec 8 2007, 12:44 PM) [snapback]103816[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
seat position and size of bike are two totally unrelated things. everybody is on their soapbox saying the 212 is SOOOO much smaller than the 211. i've given the #s. it isn't. if the seat position makes it seem smaller to the rider than tough, but that doesn't mean the bike is all of a sudden 50% of the size of the previous year. the FIM does have rules on bike dimensions you know.


Well the person who started all the "rumors" about how tiny it was, was Nicky. So we should probably ask him about it. Just let me know, we'll fly to Owensboro and see if we can get a meeting with the Hayden's. You can show Nicky the stat sheet you pulled off the internet and tell him that the bike only looks smaller.

You can tell him how they didn't really shorten the frame and raise the seat to force the rider to sit on top of the tank. It's just in his mind. I'm sure he'll be happy to know he has no reason to complain.

I'll be chillin with a bag of popcorn waiting for a revisit of Estoril 2006.

Just let me know. I'm dying to meet him anyway.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(drumfu @ Dec 8 2007, 09:44 PM) [snapback]103816[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
seat position and size of bike are two totally unrelated things. everybody is on their soapbox saying the 212 is SOOOO much smaller than the 211. i've given the #s. it isn't. if the seat position makes it seem smaller to the rider than tough, but that doesn't mean the bike is all of a sudden 50% of the size of the previous year. the FIM does have rules on bike dimensions you know.


AND cocpit size is NOT determined by swingarm pivot position. It's mainly decided by distance between seat, clipons and pegs. All can be freely adjusted to maintian the same weight distibution for most rider sizes.
I can not answere for what Honda did or didn't do this year, but I do know that Hayden's cocpit in his special (and smaller) 211 was a lot larger than on danis regular (larger) 211 bike. Danis bike had higher pegs and back support moved forward and clipons backwards.

If Hayden says the cocpit is too small then it is, but then again failing to adjust this on a prototype bike sounds to me as contract issue. IF this is the case they really really really must want to get rid of him.

What I don't get here is :

DId Hayden not complain about the riding ergo's?

And if he did.... did the team not fix it for him?

Its a pretty small deal for them to lengthen it ..... or adjust any part of the chasis .... I don't get what everyone is saying? If Nicky wanted a longer subframe or chasis thats a pretty minor change to ask for ..... are you all saying the Repsol team had a hidden agenda not to do it for him?

I'm a bit bamboozled by all of this "the bike was too small " stuff. Its motogp usually the rider gets it changed fast if its wrong ... and I would have thought that wud have been sorted the first day he tested the 07 machine.

I guess I'm saying is the real issue here that Repsol wouldn't change it to suit Hayden from day one?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(BarryMachine @ Dec 8 2007, 11:15 PM) [snapback]103838[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
I guess I'm saying is the real issue here that Repsol wouldn't change it to suit Hayden from day one?

There have been a whole lot of conspiracy theories about how Repsol has been treating Hayden, even making him almost invisible when he was champ in 2006. What i´m wondering is if they are leaving with no developement then they must want him out...why does he stay in? Frankly, I don´t really know what to think.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(citadina @ Dec 9 2007, 12:04 PM) [snapback]103852[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
There have been a whole lot of conspiracy theories about how Repsol has been treating Hayden, even making him almost invisible when he was champ in 2006. What i´m wondering is if they are leaving with no developement then they must want him out...why does he stay in? Frankly, I don´t really know what to think.


Yeah but to fix the Ergo's on a bike is a pretty minor deal. Hell they could bolt a new engine in for him why not a new subframe or even start with a different chasis?

It all seems to odd to me for reality. Hell if they weren't doing it deliberatley .... I'm sure he would have heard about it from Hayden in the 07 preseason tests ... then he would have said I asked for a new chasis/subframe but they refused.

Where would be the benefit to Repsol to sabotage Hayden in such a way?

Maybe Hayden needs a better manager .... if he was even remotely being treated in such a way.

First, the swingarm pivot point does matter. If you lengthen the swingarm and maintain overall length you've shortened the frame. If you've shortened the frame you've moved the subframe closer to the bars which is precisely what's happened.

Honda aren't sabotaging Hayden. The problem is the frame is shorter and the body of the bike is significantly smaller. Hayden doesn't fit very well. If he moves the seat and rearsets 3 or 4" back they center of mass needs to be moved forward or he's going to have to hump the tank to get the thing to handle anyway.

Honda's development is about centralizing the mass of the bike and the rider. Hayden can't shrink, Honda won't move the engine towards the front and away from the center. That is the source of the friction between Hayden and Honda.

Honda don't think they are harming themselves because mass centralization is the perfect strategy on paper and it has to work whether the real world results indicate it or not.

It wasn't a big deal on the RC211V because it had 5 cylinders and the extra one was stacked on the front. The engine already had a slightly forward weight distribution so it wasn't a big deal if the rider sat slightly off the back. But the power producing counterbalance has been lopped off.

So they won't just make a longer chasis for him?? or deck out an old 06 chasis for him??


Sounds very odd!! Makes it sound like they deliberatley want to lose.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(BarryMachine @ Dec 8 2007, 07:56 PM) [snapback]103862[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
So they won't just make a longer chasis for him?? or deck out an old 06 chasis for him??
Sounds very odd!! Makes it sound like they deliberatley want to lose.



Despite what everyone says, Honda are building Nicky his own chassis and probably his own bike. Nicky will get the new 08 spec frame and Dani will get the updated 07. What will happen with the engines remains to be seen. The 08 engine is poor. The 07 is significantly improved. Whether or not the 07 can be improved enough to be competitive for the entire season is the question at hand. Whether or not Honda will let Nicky decentralize the mass and make a bike he fits on is also an intriguing issue.

Honda are giving Nicky what he needs to defend the title he already gave back. It's a day late and a dollar short, typical big red.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Babelfish @ Dec 8 2007, 11:11 PM) [snapback]103836[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
AND cocpit size is NOT determined by swingarm pivot position. It's mainly decided by distance between seat, clipons and pegs. All can be freely adjusted to maintian the same weight distibution for most rider sizes.
I can not answere for what Honda did or didn't do this year, but I do know that Hayden's cocpit in his special (and smaller) 211 was a lot larger than on danis regular (larger) 211 bike. Danis bike had higher pegs and back support moved forward and clipons backwards.

If Hayden says the cocpit is too small then it is, but then again failing to adjust this on a prototype bike sounds to me as contract issue. IF this is the case they really really really must want to get rid of him.


i agree with all that.

lexicon the swingarm pivot point has no bearing on where a rider sits his .... the hayden thing is a different issue, he said the bike was small, the media jumped on it after that making the honda 'tiny' and some people have bought into it. i thought mass centralization was hondas marketing slogan in 2003 when they launched the cbr600rr and then blade, was a good one because it seems to have stuck.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mylexicon @ Dec 9 2007, 04:45 AM) [snapback]103861[/snapback]<div class='quotemain'>
First, the swingarm pivot point does matter. If you lengthen the swingarm and maintain overall length you've shortened the frame. If you've shortened the frame you've moved the subframe closer to the bars which is precisely what's happened.


What are you trying to get at here? There is NO law that says the "tank" air filter carbon cover MUST end in the joint between the frame and subframe. They can freely position the seat where they want, if nesesarry with a fake extra cover in front to cover any gap. Thay can also raise the seat for a big guy and they can raise the clipons and move them forward.
The pivot point matter but not for riding position.