This might be as close as Honda comes to admitting they got alot wrong with the current machine. It also might mean they are giving up as far as this year for the satelight teams. It's gonna be a long year for most of the Honda boys. http://www.motorsport.com/news/article.asp...59021&FS=MOTOGP
Help Support MotoGP Forum:
and to think they had the least work to do of all the manufacturers to make an 800cc machine!
Hayden doesn't seem that great at developing a machine, and Pedrosa only in his second season and his size is not ideal to take whatever he says as progression.
They should have had someone like a Bayliss/Biaggi in the team.
Hayden doesn't seem that great at developing a machine, and Pedrosa only in his second season and his size is not ideal to take whatever he says as progression.
They should have had someone like a Bayliss/Biaggi in the team.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (an4rew @ Jul 1 2007, 02:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>and to think they had the least work to do of all the manufacturers to make an 800cc machine!
you mean they had the most work to do.
you mean they had the most work to do.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jul 1 2007, 07:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>you mean they had the most work to do.
Honda where running a v5 last season so they only had to remove one cylinder. Hayden was testing bits of the engine throughout 2006 season. A clear advantage no other manufacturer was able to have.
Honda where running a v5 last season so they only had to remove one cylinder. Hayden was testing bits of the engine throughout 2006 season. A clear advantage no other manufacturer was able to have.
Austin
Dr. Gonzo
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2005
- Messages
- 6,706
- Location
- Woody Creek
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (an4rew @ Jul 1 2007, 01:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>They should have had someone like a Bayliss/Biaggi in the team.
Having Biaggi in the team in 2005 worked great... And Bayliss is rubbish on a true GP bike. If it's not a Ducati then it's not for him.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (an4rew @ Jul 1 2007, 07:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Honda where running a v5 last season so they only had to remove one cylinder. Hayden was testing bits of the engine throughout 2006 season. A clear advantage no other manufacturer was able to have.
Suzuki was running parts all last season that were designed for the 800, pneumatic valves among other things.
Having Biaggi in the team in 2005 worked great... And Bayliss is rubbish on a true GP bike. If it's not a Ducati then it's not for him.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (an4rew @ Jul 1 2007, 07:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Honda where running a v5 last season so they only had to remove one cylinder. Hayden was testing bits of the engine throughout 2006 season. A clear advantage no other manufacturer was able to have.
Suzuki was running parts all last season that were designed for the 800, pneumatic valves among other things.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (an4rew @ Jul 1 2007, 08:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Honda where running a v5 last season so they only had to remove one cylinder. Hayden was testing bits of the engine throughout 2006 season. A clear advantage no other manufacturer was able to have.
Honda's bike is by far the most radical change from the 990 compared to what other factories did with their new bikes.
Honda's bike is by far the most radical change from the 990 compared to what other factories did with their new bikes.
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2006
- Messages
- 22,701
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jul 2 2007, 12:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Honda's bike is by far the most radical change from the 990 compared to what other factories did with their new bikes.
how so tom ?
how so tom ?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Jul 2 2007, 12:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>how so tom ?
Because they totally altered their approach, changed their philosophies and even their engine configuration. All the other factories almost literally downscaled their 990, and Suzuki were actually racing theirs last year to some extent (as mentioned by Austin earlier).
Because they totally altered their approach, changed their philosophies and even their engine configuration. All the other factories almost literally downscaled their 990, and Suzuki were actually racing theirs last year to some extent (as mentioned by Austin earlier).
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2006
- Messages
- 22,701
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jul 2 2007, 12:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Because they totally altered their approach, changed their philosophies and even their engine configuration. All the other factories almost literally downscaled their 990, and Suzuki were actually racing theirs last year to some extent (as mentioned by Austin earlier).
i no they went from the v5 to a v4 but v4's have been around for years so what else is more radical change than the others ?
and how did they change there philosophies ?
i no they went from the v5 to a v4 but v4's have been around for years so what else is more radical change than the others ?
and how did they change there philosophies ?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Jul 2 2007, 12:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>i no they went from the v5 to a v4 but v4's have been around for years so what else is more radical change than the others ?
and how did they change there philosophies ?
Well they shrank their bike down much smaller than anyone else (from one of the largest to one of the smallest) , adopted a more extreme aerodynamic approach with more cut back fairings and such, and the new engine obviously required a whole new chassis with major parts re-located to assist mass centralization. That is far more significant than the changes from any other manufacturer
and how did they change there philosophies ?
Well they shrank their bike down much smaller than anyone else (from one of the largest to one of the smallest) , adopted a more extreme aerodynamic approach with more cut back fairings and such, and the new engine obviously required a whole new chassis with major parts re-located to assist mass centralization. That is far more significant than the changes from any other manufacturer
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2006
- Messages
- 22,701
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Jul 2 2007, 12:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well they shrank their bike down much smaller than anyone else (from one of the largest to one of the smallest) , adopted a more extreme aerodynamic approach with more cut back fairings and such, and the new engine obviously required a whole new chassis with major parts re-located to assist mass centralization. That is far more significant than the changes from any other manufacturer
well by all accounts the 800 is the same wheel base as the old 990 so the bikes are pretty much the same size apart from the cosmetics, and the most advanced in aerodynamics is the ducati who used some fancy wind tunnel to design there fairing. and as for mass centarization ,thats the reason they used a v4 unlike yamaha who i believe are the only ones to still use a straight 4.
well by all accounts the 800 is the same wheel base as the old 990 so the bikes are pretty much the same size apart from the cosmetics, and the most advanced in aerodynamics is the ducati who used some fancy wind tunnel to design there fairing. and as for mass centarization ,thats the reason they used a v4 unlike yamaha who i believe are the only ones to still use a straight 4.
Yup Kawa uses an inline 4. And IIRC they have pneumatic valve closing system too so considering Suzuki has it too and Ducati uses Desmodromic that makes the Honda (conventional springs) the least technologically advance engine ... jeez how low can they fall.
Does anyone know who the test/development rider for HRC is? thats seems to be the probem. Ukawa did a great job on the 211. It was fast out of the box.. Did he help develop the 212 too?
But, then may be the competition has caught up.. Honda screwed only in underestimating how fas the other bikes were going to be. almost everyone thought that lap times (with the switch from 990 800) were going to be going up, not coming down.
But, then may be the competition has caught up.. Honda screwed only in underestimating how fas the other bikes were going to be. almost everyone thought that lap times (with the switch from 990 800) were going to be going up, not coming down.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Austin @ Jul 2 2007, 09:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I thought Ukawa was still riding in GPs on a 500 when the 211 was being developed, no?
He rode under Repsol colours in 2001 on an nsr500 very similar to what Criville and Rossi had. He and Rossi did have a development input, but i think Tamada did a lot for it as well. HRC will have testing only riders back in Japan but they normaly aren't at the level to push like the actual racers are, so their input is less valuable.
He rode under Repsol colours in 2001 on an nsr500 very similar to what Criville and Rossi had. He and Rossi did have a development input, but i think Tamada did a lot for it as well. HRC will have testing only riders back in Japan but they normaly aren't at the level to push like the actual racers are, so their input is less valuable.
Yamaha has springs also. Honda has a brand new V4. In no way is that going to be good right out of the box. A year of racing to get it right seems reasonable. Yes Suzuki did it right last year by designing the 800 and testing it all last year. Damn smart since they weren't in the championship hunt anyway and that is all Paul Denning if you ask me. If only they would bring out the much rumoured new engine.
