Nicky Hayden ....

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ogunski @ Mar 22 2007, 03:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>^^ Are you insane? One of your WSBK champions came over to AMA and got his tail kicked all over over the country, all the while fully factory supported. I submit that there is more talent in the AMA paddock than the WSBK (formerly known as Ducati Cup Racing). And furthermore! Ducati left with their tail between their legs not because the rules were unfair, but because they were not given their usual overwhelming advantage they have become accustomed to. I submit that there are several riders in AMA that would be very competitive and a few that would even compete for the title (with equal machinery and support).
I agree with most of what you said except that the twin 1000s simply cannot compete with the in-line 1000s. It’s a totally different machine and the displacement does not tell the tale. It is the rules that hinder the Ducati because the rules are based on displacement not on configuration. Which is why they do well in the WSBK. It’s a very complicated problem to put twins and in-lines on the same track and expect them to have parity (this means uniformity). The only way is to allow twin have larger displacements (which AMA won’t allow) or have in-line with smaller displacements (which WSBK did for a while) or restrict intakes and power outputs (which WSBK is now doing). I think if there was a formula to make the power outputs equal, you would see Ducatis on a more level playing field with the AMA superbikes, because the AMA was not willing to do this, it simply doesn’t make sense to keep a twin in that series, period.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ogunski @ Mar 22 2007, 11:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>^^ Are you insane? One of your WSBK champions came over to AMA and got his tail kicked all over over the country, all the while fully factory supported. I submit that there is more talent in the AMA paddock than the WSBK (formerly known as Ducati Cup Racing). And furthermore! Ducati left with their tail between their legs not because the rules were unfair, but because they were not given their usual overwhelming advantage they have become accustomed to. I submit that there are several riders in AMA that would be very competitive and a few that would even compete for the title (with equal machinery and support).
I would expect virtually any European based rider to get his tail kicked all around the US circuit. I have only seen a few American tracks, but boy are they different to this side of the pond. The lack of track knowledge must be a huge disadvantage.
However, this shows just how good the US scene must be, with so many Champions and quality condenders throughout history.

I would like to see a 'Road Race des Nations', along similar lines to the Motocross des Nations. In MX, we never see the AMA Championship boys until the des Nations, when they more often than not royally kick everybodies arses!

The truth of the matter is,Ducati is holding up racing by insisting on running inferior technology.The twin has had its day,why should every other manufacturer have to restrict their technology so Ducati can play.I dont care about the heritage of Ducati and the twin.Make a v4 for superbike,they did for Gp and are doing quite well.They took their ball and went home from AMA because they were not allowed to run the 1098cc bike.They will come up with a thousand reasons they left but everyone knows they couldnt compete under current AMA rules.Another big difference here is the tracks themselves.When the Duck had 1000cc to the competition 750, their strenght on American stop and go,point and shoot tracks was exit speed,now its a weakness on the same tracks.The 1000 I4 is killing the Ducati on exit speed,top speed,and just about any kind of speed you can think of.I would have to look at the rules to see how many they would have to make for public sale to run a v4 but i think they can keep there heritage and still go racing.Collectors would scarf up the limited numbers of v4 they had to build and they could still market the twin and everbody would be happy.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Mar 23 2007, 04:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The truth of the matter is,Ducati is holding up racing by insisting on running inferior technology.The twin has had its day,why should every other manufacturer have to restrict their technology so Ducati can play.I dont care about the heritage of Ducati and the twin.Make a v4 for superbike,they did for Gp and are doing quite well.They took their ball and went home from AMA because they were not allowed to run the 1098cc bike.They will come up with a thousand reasons they left but everyone knows they couldnt compete under current AMA rules.Another big difference here is the tracks themselves.When the Duck had 1000cc to the competition 750, their strenght on American stop and go,point and shoot tracks was exit speed,now its a weakness on the same tracks.The 1000 I4 is killing the Ducati on exit speed,top speed,and just about any kind of speed you can think of.I would have to look at the rules to see how many they would have to make for public sale to run a v4 but i think they can keep there heritage and still go racing.Collectors would scarf up the limited numbers of v4 they had to build and they could still market the twin and everbody would be happy.

pevol, you really should learn some basic physics before you go out with statements like "inferior technology". All sorts of racing that I know of have rules, including AMA SB, and they all use the rules to make the field competetive.
In a 1:1 (cc) comparison between a twin and a 4 cylinder, a twin will allways be the looser. That's not technology, thats mathematics. Less valve area, less rpm, higher forces on cranc pistons and rods are a few of the limiting physical factors that that limits the twin.
When we know this, why that obsessive thought that displacement is <u>the </u>allmighty limitation? We have an enormous amount of other rules as well, that limit the power, so what ever "advantage" twin engines are given is not limiting the fours, quite the oposite, they have to continue to improve the engine desipte all the limiting rules. This is what goes on i all kind of racing regardless of the number of engine configurations and different displacement.

Actually, if you look at WSB today many would say that the Ducati is the bike with the superior technology. Despite the fact that the engine develop far less power than the fours they still win races. In other words, the whole package must be so much more efficient at puting the power to teh ground; a suerior technology.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Mar 23 2007, 03:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>pevol, you really should learn some basic physics before you go out with statements like "inferior technology". All sorts of racing that I know of have rules, including AMA SB, and they all use the rules to make the field competetive.
In a 1:1 (cc) comparison between a twin and a 4 cylinder, a twin will allways be the looser. That's not technology, thats mathematics. Less valve area, less rpm, higher forces on cranc pistons and rods are a few of the limiting physical factors that that limits the twin.
When we know this, why that obsessive thought that displacement is <u>the </u>allmighty limitation? We have an enormous amount of other rules as well, that limit the power, so what ever "advantage" twin engines are given is not limiting the fours, quite the oposite, they have to continue to improve the engine desipte all the limiting rules. This is what goes on i all kind of racing regardless of the number of engine configurations and different displacement.

Actually, if you look at WSB today many would say that the Ducati is the bike with the superior technology. Despite the fact that the engine develop far less power than the fours they still win races. In other words, the whole package must be so much more efficient at puting the power to teh ground; a suerior technology.

^^ All very good points. I think Ducati have done so well for three basic reasons. Thw twin engine configuration gives a. superior traction, and b. more torque (especially in the lower end of the rpm's) and last, they recruit the youghest, most aggressive riders. You have to be willing to physically throw Ducati's around the corners compared to riding an inline four.

Actually, if you look at WSB today many would say that the Ducati is the bike with the superior technology. Despite the fact that the engine develop far less power than the fours they still win races. In other words, the whole package must be so much more efficient at puting the power to teh ground; a suerior technology.

No i would call that restricting superior technology for a series that has been called the Ducati Cup.Its a European based series that molds the rules to meet a European bike makers needs.When the corporate world comes up with a better mouse trap,do they shelve that technology,or alter it so their competitors can keep up,NO, they bury your ... with it.
You are kidding yourself if you cant see the superiority of the I4 bike over the VTwin Ducati.Its like comparing a push rod V8 to a F1 motor.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Mar 23 2007, 02:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Actually, if you look at WSB today many would say that the Ducati is the bike with the superior technology. Despite the fact that the engine develop far less power than the fours they still win races. In other words, the whole package must be so much more efficient at puting the power to teh ground; a suerior technology.

No i would call that restricting superior technology for a series that has been called the Ducati Cup.Its a European based series that molds the rules to meet a European bike makers needs.When the corporate world comes up with a better mouse trap,do they shelve that technology,or alter it so their competitors can keep up,NO, they bury your ... with it.
You are kidding yourself if you cant see the superiority of the I4 bike over the VTwin Ducati.Its like comparing a push rod V8 to a F1 motor.
excuse my ignorance,i dont really follow wsb, but didnt honda with its sp1 and sp2 play by the same rules as ducati.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Mar 23 2007, 10:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>excuse my ignorance,i dont really follow wsb, but didnt honda with its sp1 and sp2 play by the same rules as ducati.

^^^ Yes they did. Honda's RC51 raced by none other than Colin (I'm simply building my retirement fund) Edwards.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ogunski @ Mar 23 2007, 12:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>^^^ Yes they did. Honda's RC51 raced by none other than Colin (I'm simply building my retirement fund) Edwards.
the real crusin caretaker...

Yes they did and won 2 titles in 3 years with it.That is a nationality debate though as to who had the better V Twin,Japan or Italy.When WSBK allowed 4cyl 1000, the twin was dropped like a hot rock by everybody except Ducati.Why is that?The Japanese certainly dont have a history of going backwards when it come to technology.Like i said before,why not make a v4 and face the Japanese on even terms instead of manipulating the rule book to make you competitive.

Well I'm so glad you boys came on this thread and turned it from a crapload of rambling to a smart thread. Notice they all left once the posts became alittle more technical...

(Its a great debate, I'll get back to it later but right now I'm busy).

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Racejumkie @ Mar 23 2007, 01:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well I'm so glad you boys came on this thread and turned it from a crapload of rambling to a smart thread. Notice they all left once the posts became alittle more technical...

(Its a great debate, I'll get back to it later but right now I'm busy).

^^^ I agree 100%, I was actually going to suggest they all get a room.

Back on subject, The RC51 was a double championship winner for sure. Owning one on the otherhand is a labor of love. I have spoken to a few chaps here in Florida who say it is a nightmare from many perspectives. First is the upkeep, very expensive unless you do it yourself, the sparkplugs alone are over $60.00usd each! Then there is the horrible fuel consumption, less than 25mpg for a modern sportbike is diabolical at best. They also have a tendency to run hot, so if you are caught in traffic you may overheat. Finally they handle poorly and are not very powerful. None the less they once ruled WSBK & AMA.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Mar 23 2007, 03:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Actually, if you look at WSB today many would say that the Ducati is the bike with the superior technology. Despite the fact that the engine develop far less power than the fours they still win races. In other words, the whole package must be so much more efficient at puting the power to teh ground; a suerior technology.

No i would call that restricting superior technology for a series that has been called the Ducati Cup.Its a European based series that molds the rules to meet a European bike makers needs.When the corporate world comes up with a better mouse trap,do they shelve that technology,or alter it so their competitors can keep up,NO, they bury your ... with it.
You are kidding yourself if you cant see the superiority of the I4 bike over the VTwin Ducati.Its like comparing a push rod V8 to a F1 motor.

Again, you obviously don't even have a clue about what you are talking about. I can only guess that you think I4 is superior to V2 because it has this fantastic invention twice as many cylinders. Well, guess what, the advantage of extra cylinders where discovered decades ago, and all serious motorsports have limits on those now. Comaring the VTwin with I4 is not at all like comparing a pushrod V8 with an F1 engine, rather it is to compare a "F1" I4 with a F1 V8. That put your far superior I4 into some perspective, 25% less power in an F1 would do wonders with the result list, don't you think?

As a final note: I'm not saying that the old ruels where right, the VTwin's had an advantage, but that is not the same as to say a displasement rule must be wrong, it just have to be adjusted. Ducati want a change as the development, production and maintainance of the VTwin engines has become far higher than for the I4s due to the extra tuning they are allowed to and must do to stay competetive. They want a system where the level and ruels of tuning are the same, but with a different displacement. Maybe 1000-1200 is wrong. Maybe 1000-1100 is right, I don't know. But the request seems fair to me. After all they are by far the smallest factory in WSB and of cource it cost them a high price to stay competetive as it is now.
And make no misstake, I want fair and close racing nothing else, but I love twin engines I would hate them to go away just because people think displacement is the absolute measurement of power or what type of engine has the "superior technology".

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ogunski @ Mar 23 2007, 05:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>^^^ I agree 100%, I was actually going to suggest they all get a room.

Back on subject, The RC51 was a double championship winner for sure. Owning one on the otherhand is a labor of love. I have spoken to a few chaps here in Florida who say it is a nightmare from many perspectives. First is the upkeep, very expensive unless you do it yourself, the sparkplugs alone are over $60.00usd each! Then there is the horrible fuel consumption, less than 25mpg for a modern sportbike is diabolical at best. They also have a tendency to run hot, so if you are caught in traffic you may overheat. Finally they handle poorly and are not very powerful. None the less they once ruled WSBK & AMA.
i can verify this to a degree. had a vtr1000 & this sounds very familiar except the spark plug part.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Mar 23 2007, 04:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yes they did and won 2 titles in 3 years with it.That is a nationality debate though as to who had the better V Twin,Japan or Italy.When WSBK allowed 4cyl 1000, the twin was dropped like a hot rock by everybody except Ducati.Why is that?The Japanese certainly dont have a history of going backwards when it come to technology.Like i said before,why not make a v4 and face the Japanese on even terms instead of manipulating the rule book to make you competitive.
the reason i mentioned the worldchampionship winning honda v2 sp2 is to highlight that calling wsb the ducati cup is a bit unfair but i no where your comming from,funny how an italian runs the show and perelli get the tyre contract and ducati get there way every time i have heard mates say. i think there should be a viraty of bikes and displacement racing in wsb because that represents the bikes that are for sale for road use. they have to keep the series competitive so engineers take onboard all the vareiable then the rules are made,, even motogp have rules inplace for the amount of cyclinders a bike has except that done on weight not capasity because there prototypes not homologated bikes. wsb is raced on sunday sold on monday, if you dont think the v2 are as good as a v4 or straight 4 then dont buy one thats how you get people like ducati to build a v4 road bike.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Mar 23 2007, 05:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yes they did and won 2 titles in 3 years with it.That is a nationality debate though as to who had the better V Twin,Japan or Italy.When WSBK allowed 4cyl 1000, the twin was dropped like a hot rock by everybody except Ducati.Why is that?The Japanese certainly dont have a history of going backwards when it come to technology.

The reason is very simple: All the japanse make fours, and have allways done so since the start of the 70s. Their tradition is in fours, and most important, their street racers are fours. WSB is suposed to be based on street bikes. That's why they dropped it, or actually, Honda dropped out of WSB after the last RC51 Victory and the others never went with the twin.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (povol @ Mar 23 2007, 06:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>1. No i would call that restricting superior technology for a series that has been called the Ducati Cup.Its a European based series that molds the rules to meet a European bike makers needs.

2. When the corporate world comes up with a better mouse trap,do they shelve that technology,or alter it so their competitors can keep up,NO, they bury your ... with it.

3. You are kidding yourself if you cant see the superiority of the I4 bike over the VTwin Ducati.Its like comparing a push rod V8 to a F1 motor.
Provol. I once felt like you about the twins. But once I realized that it must be looked at within the perspective of "rules", this changes things. We, the casual spectators have become accustom to thinking that displacement is the major parameter for which to judge bikes. But this is an error in judgment. There are a number of reasons why one could look to the twins as a viable and competitive technology on bikes. Power output to displacement is only one of many characteristics to look at. But all to often we get stuck on that and compare displacements, which really is an inaccurate comparison (apples to oranges). The torque signatures of these engine configurations are vastly different. Also the twins are much more narrow than in-lines. This makes Ducatis for example have greater corner speed. The real problem is when they try to put these different configurations on the same track bound by rules that attempt to make them comparable. All to often, the rules are stuck on displacement. It would be the same problem if the rules stated that in-lines could be limited say in valves. So what happens, they limit the displacements in the rules, which in effect, dumbs down the technology in a sense, as you say. But in actuality, if they allowed for larger displacements in the twins, this would be a more fitting solution in uniformity of power out put. But people don't accept that because we have grown so accustom to the "magical" number of cc.

2. I'm sure an engineer could come up with an engine configuration that could produce more "power" in relation to displacement than an in-line four. Do you remember the 5 cylinder bikes? But under the rules of WSBK (as it is with AMA) they require a production model bike. This is in a way "limiting" technology, as you say is it not. So why don't they allow it in the WSBK or AMA, well simply because these series are meant to have production type bikes, something you could pick up at your local dealer. So in reality, it is the rules restricting the technology not the manufactures. They must operate within the rules, it is the series to decide what rules will make for competitive racing, and unfortunately they don't always get it right.

3. Not quite the same. But I understand your meaning. Here is the thing. Ducati has built a loyalty to their brand by a few unique attributes. One of which is the twin engine, the other major thing is the trellis frame. So they have operated within these parameters. The bike handling, which is a major part of a bikes performance, if not the greatest aspect, is outstanding on a production Ducati. So then the issue lies in power output. This is why they have decided to increase their displacement while keeping the twin configuration in the engine. It makes sense, (but not to the casual onlooker that thinks that number on the side of the bike inherently means something magical). So Ducati is not gonna produce a bike simply to appease what the rules makers think should be done, why? Because they have completely different goals. The goal of the series is to have competitive racing (this means close to equal racing), the goals of the manufacture are to produce performance and reliability in their machines, and in Ducati’s case, make it look super sexy in the process. The goals are different. Here is another analogy, have you ever seen what a NASCAR race looks like? It looks like a block of cars all going around almost attached. This is because the rules are so strict that the cars are a almost all equal. However, surely the manufactures participating in the series are not equal, are they? So what accounts for this, it’s the rules. This is the goal of the people making the rules. So its not that Ducati engineers are any more dumber than the Japanese who make up the in-lines in their production models, just think for a moment which engine/package had an outstanding power/performance output in Qatar. It’s the simple fact that they are bound by rules in WSBK and AMA that accounts for the difference between twins and in-lines.

^^good post jumkie and we agree, one point i would like to mention is by increasing the cubic capasity of the v twin they also increase the resipricating weight which causes a hole load of new problems to solve like lower rev celing and engine stresses so an increase in cc is not always an easy option to the problem for the engineers

babelfish

i agree in everything.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ Mar 23 2007, 03:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>the reason i mentioned the worldchampionship winning honda v2 sp2 is to highlight that calling wsb the ducati cup is a bit unfair but i no where your comming from,funny how an italian runs the show and perelli get the tyre contract and ducati get there way every time i have heard mates say. i think there should be a viraty of bikes and displacement racing in wsb because that represents the bikes that are for sale for road use. they have to keep the series competitive so engineers take onboard all the vareiable then the rules are made,, even motogp have rules inplace for the amount of cyclinders a bike has except that done on weight not capasity because there prototypes not homologated bikes. wsb is raced on sunday sold on monday, if you dont think the v2 are as good as a v4 or straight 4 then dont buy one thats how you get people like ducati to build a v4 road bike.
Rog, you make some great points, as does Babel. (Yes I'm agreeing with you boys cuz your not spouting off something about your boy being
God and all ) (just keeping it real boys ha-ha). All kidding aside, yes both of you hit the nail on the head as far as "homologated" bikes, its really down to the rules of competition.

I love it when the Japanese bikes succeed in WSBK, because this is an indication that the people making the rules are getting closer to their goals of making racing competitive. I'm sure it’s not an easy thing to do.
But it does seem they have favored the twins a bit. But of the twins competing, Ducati has trumped them all. This is why as Provol said, its been called a Ducati cup. Even though Kawasaki and Honda have had success in the series.

Anyway Rog, I'm not sure buying in-line 4s is gonna decide who makes the better bike and send a message to those companies making twins. Twins have an exclusive following among people who like something different than what is mostly produced in Japan. It’s unique in a sense, though not new. I have both an in-line 4 GSXR and a twin Ducati. Both are great and fun to ride. The Ducati has been hampered, in my opinion, by this limit of thinking that the liter was to be the end all to be all in displacement. I'm glad they went beyond this magical liter, as they went to the 1098. I think this will equalize the power output, which was lacking in the Ducatis. God knows that the handling was a dream.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Mar 23 2007, 02:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>1. As a final note: I'm not saying that the old ruels where right, the VTwin's had an advantage, but that is not the same as to say a displasement rule must be wrong, it just have to be adjusted.

2. I would hate them to go away just because people think displacement is the absolute measurement of power or what type of engine has the "superior technology".
1. Absolutely agree.

2. Me too. Twins have viability in motorcycle racing. It’s just that in-line fours have become the more common configuration, but certainly, this does not mean the twin is the inferior configuration.