This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Pedrosa chassis woes

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SackWack @ Apr 22 2010, 11:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Lets look at the facts. Only one rider is able to ride the Honda. Everyone else is completely uncomfortable on the bike. The results state that Honda haven't changed one bit no matter how many quotes come out of Honda.
Assuming you're referring to Dovi as of Qatar - did you forget that De Punter was quite proficient as well?
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Apr 22 2010, 11:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Your description of the situation about a swingarm designed being longer and stiffer to take more load but not designed to take weight transfer made little to no sense.

The swingarm is extra stiff along the vertical axis and the chassis and offset is designed to carry weight on the rear wheel. You can play with suspension all day, that bike will be stiff and it won't transfer weight. It's quite simple.

Furthermore, the bikes has a lot of torsional flex like the Yamaha and the Ducati are rumored to have. Pedrosa hates this attribute as well.
 
The volcano thing was funny...maybe Nicky secretly snuck over and developed the bike so Dani would have an excuse, no where to hide now PEDROCCHIO......
<
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Apr 23 2010, 06:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The swingarm is extra stiff along the vertical axis and the chassis and offset is designed to carry weight on the rear wheel. You can play with suspension all day, that bike will be stiff and it won't transfer weight. It's quite simple.

Yeah, I guess it's just me. How is it that a stiff swingarm doesn't" transfer weight"?
And exactly what does "transfer weight" mean. I thought that was the riders job and the weight/COG) is where ever the rider want's it to be within his own limits of movement and weight, not?
I mean, I would understand it if it was way too soft or even if it broke but I thought a stiff part would transfer what ever you throw at it?
Is there really any real vertical flex in any modern swingarm? I mean look at them, it's pretty beefy stuff when you look at the height.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Apr 23 2010, 10:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yeah, I guess it's just me. How is it that a stiff swingarm doesn't" transfer weight"?
And exactly what does "transfer weight" mean. I thought that was the riders job and the weight/COG) is where ever the rider want's it to be within his own limits of movement and weight, not?
I mean, I would understand it if it was way too soft or even if it broke but I thought a stiff part would transfer what ever you throw at it?
Is there really any real vertical flex in any modern swingarm? I mean look at them, it's pretty beefy stuff when you look at the height.

Yes, it is you.

The chassis was designed to maintain a rearward weight bias without transferring weight from front to back. Established by the pundits.

The swingarm is stiff along the vertical axis. Also established by the pundits (MotoLiam specifically).

The swingarm is part of the chassis. Self-evident.

So what's the problem? The stiff swingarm is part of the chassis that was designed not the transfer weight. The big change to the new swingarm is that it doesn't flex along the vertical axis.

Call Honda and tell them it doesn't work. I don't know what else to tell you.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Apr 23 2010, 02:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yes, it is you.

The chassis was designed to maintain a rearward weight bias without transferring weight from front to back. Established by the pundits.

The swingarm is stiff along the vertical axis. Also established by the pundits (MotoLiam specifically).

The swingarm is part of the chassis. Self-evident.

So what's the problem? The stiff swingarm is part of the chassis that was designed not the transfer weight. The big change to the new swingarm is that it doesn't flex along the vertical axis.

Call Honda and tell them it doesn't work For Dani. I don't know what else to tell you.
Fixed it
 
The bikes the best you should be winning it's a Honda you know...bah


MOTOGP: Big Problems For Little Pedrosa
185-mph speed wobbles have Dani Pedrosa describing the 2010 Honda RC212V in less than flattering terms.
Colin Young | Posted April 23, 2010

A crucial chassis design flaw is set to cost Honda riders valuable points until after next week's Spanish GP at Jerez, now the second race of the season.

Repsol Honda factory rider Dani Pedrosa has described the 2010 model RC212V as beyond difficult to ride while Honda are rushing to find solutions to the frequently uncomfortable handling of their bike.

HRC vice-president Shuhei Nakamoto expects it will be after the Jerez race before Pedrosa and teammate Andrea Dovizioso are in a position to go for race wins.

Pedrosa is the one in the most trouble and his troubled seventh place, after a daring early dash, in the season opener Qatar GP reflects the current dramas with the RC212V.

Dovizioso finished third in the Qatar after briefly leading with six laps remaining but he had no late-race response to the Yamaha 1-2 of Valentino Rossi and Jorge Lorenzo.

The lightweight Pedrosa is suffering from scary, 300-kph speed wobbles and a lack of balance that he says gives him no chance of winning.

Chassis and swingarm stiffness, weight distribution, and center of gravity are linked to the problem, all complicated by the 110lb Pedrosa's light weight.

Nakamoto says the switch to Öhlins suspension is not the major issue and he also claims a new engine management system for the factory bikes is taming the aggressive power delivery.

Dramatic on-board television pictures from the rear seat unit of Pedrosa's Honda in Qatar were clear evidence that his bike is shaking all over, at times almost out of control.

"It is [expletive] to ride like that because I can tell you that the bike must at least go in a straight line on the straight," Pedrosa said. "Don't misunderstand me but it is not nice when you ride at 300 kph and the bike is shaking.

"I am not even looking to the guys at the front, I know they are too far and you cannot start to build a house from the top."

Qatar race winner, Valentino Rossi, finished 16.5 seconds ahead of Pedrosa who was a brief early leader in the race after a lightning-quick, launch-control aided start.

Even Frenchman Randy de Puniet, on the satellite LCR Honda (running the smaller diameter 2009 Öhlins forks) was sixth, seven seconds ahead of Pedrosa in Qatar.

It seems that the 2010 chassis is too flexible and even though a frame and swingarm with higher stiffness helped at Qatar, Honda have failed to fully solve the problems.

Dovizioso also had a stiffer chassis and swingarm in Doha but his heavier weight and more rearward riding position assists his set-up options. A modified -- and even stiffer -- frame is now being supplied to Pedrosa.

Nakamoto said the main problem is not because of Honda's switch from Showa to Öhlins suspension. It is a design flaw because Honda tried to build an easier riding bike similar in concept to the Yamaha, with big changes to stiffness, balance, and rear suspension link.

Nakamoto said, "Honda engineers were trying to make a different character, more rider friendly bike for this year but the result so far has not worked properly. For this year's bike the chassis stiffness target was a little low, maybe too soft, too much flex. We know his from Dani's comments and data.

"It has probably cost us at least three races, until after Jerez when we have more updates. And then another revision before midseason. I am positive will find the solution."

Nakamoto also denies that the latest Honda engine -- now matching Ducati for top speed -- is a major issue in chassis balance and performance.

For the moment only Pedrosa and Dovizioso are using the latest factory electronics and traction control system with satellite teams still using an earlier system.

“It is frustrating but the only thing I can do is put my head down, stay positive, and look to the next race,” Pedrosa said.

The next race, following the postponement of the Japanese GP, is his home event at Jerez, the Spanish GP on 2 May.

Bag of .....
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Apr 23 2010, 08:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yes, it is you.

The chassis was designed to maintain a rearward weight bias without transferring weight from front to back. Established by the pundits.

The swingarm is stiff along the vertical axis. Also established by the pundits (MotoLiam specifically).

The swingarm is part of the chassis. Self-evident.

So what's the problem? The stiff swingarm is part of the chassis that was designed not the transfer weight. The big change to the new swingarm is that it doesn't flex along the vertical axis.

Call Honda and tell them it doesn't work. I don't know what else to tell you.

I just asking because I don't understand. Sorry to bother you.

That said, you do make an effort to avoid any questions raised.
Until now I was living under the impression that all race bike swingarms are designed with absolute minimal horizontal flex and as little torsional flex as possible. Both, I thought, were a necessity to a fast bike. You tell me it's not so, the world has changed and the thrid fastest bike at quatar use a rubber swinarm and refer to motoLiam as an expert!
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Apr 22 2010, 11:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Your description of the situation about a swingarm designed being longer and stiffer to take more load but not designed to take weight transfer made little to no sense.

Asking questions. Right.

Back when the tires were unlimited and Honda and Yamaha thought that the bikes were going to produce 210hp, I think everything was designed to be a torsionally rigid as possible. I guess that's not the case anymore.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Apr 24 2010, 06:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Asking questions. Right.
Oh, did I hurt your feelings? thousand times sorry lex. But is still doesn't make any sense to me
A bike designed to be easier to ride with a side effect that it turns out worse for those smaller guys using quite violent power and brakes to load the tires and by that overloading the new chassi is understandable. Your description of a chassi designed not to transfer weight still make no sense to me.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>Back when the tires were unlimited and Honda and Yamaha thought that the bikes were going to produce 210hp, I think everything was designed to be a torsionally rigid as possible. I guess that's not the case anymore.
And the situation has changed how? I would like to hear what advantages a twisting swingarm could give. Are you suggesting that the tires are designed the give better grip when the rear wheel twist underneath the bike when pushed at max angle?
I'm sorry if my suggestions are way off but as you continue to say A but not B (not to even mention C) all I have is speculations.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Apr 24 2010, 01:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Oh, did I hurt your feelings? thousand times sorry lex. But is still doesn't make any sense to me
A bike designed to be easier to ride with a side effect that it turns out worse for those smaller guys using quite violent power and brakes to load the tires and by that overloading the new chassi is understandable. Your description of a chassi designed not to transfer weight still make no sense to me.

And the situation has changed how? I would like to hear what advantages a twisting swingarm could give. Are you suggesting that the tires are designed the give better grip when the rear wheel twist underneath the bike when pushed at max angle?
I'm sorry if my suggestions are way off but as you continue to say A but not B (not to even mention C) all I have is speculations.

Babel, none of this information is coming from me. I'm simply gathering information from other sources and then tying it all together.

If MotoGP design decisions don't make the grade, you have to direct your questions and comments to Masoa Furusawa, Ichiro Yoda, Filipo Prezisoi, and Tetsuo Suzuki b/c they've been pioneering all of these changes.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Apr 24 2010, 08:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I just asking because I don't understand. Sorry to bother you.

That said, you do make an effort to avoid any questions raised.
Until now I was living under the impression that all race bike swingarms are designed with absolute minimal horizontal flex and as little torsional flex as possible. Both, I thought, were a necessity to a fast bike. You tell me it's not so, the world has changed and the thrid fastest bike at quatar use a rubber swinarm and refer to motoLiam as an expert!
Flex has to be built into the bike somewhere, whether its in the forks /swingarm or the frame.The science it calculating how much flex. Ducati were building flex into the rear suspension when designing the carbon swinarm because of the lack of flex there. If a bike had no flex all the energy forces would be transferred to the rider, The cause of many high sides. To much flex on the other hand would be one crap race bike.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopperman @ Apr 25 2010, 10:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Ducati were building flex into the rear suspension when designing the carbon swinarm because of the lack of flex there.

Actually, Nicky said why they were using carbon fiber. Apparently it's nearly impossible to get high quality aluminum alloy in Italy which has been built to MotoGP levels of specification. Ducati got tired of all of the problems so they transitioned to carbon fiber which is more readily available.

It gives them better flex properties simply b/c they can't aluminum on demand in Italy.
 
So Honda made the new chassis too soft and as a result Dani Pedrosa can't get the load transfer he needs. Seems reasonable to me
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopperman @ Apr 25 2010, 06:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>If a bike had no flex all the energy forces would be transferred to the rider

I don't think its a comfort issue, but rather that a total lack of flex would mean the wheel couldn't track anything but a perfectly smooth surface without the tyre load varying way beyond the limits of traction
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Apr 25 2010, 09:16 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I don't think its a comfort issue, but rather that a total lack of flex would mean the wheel couldn't track anything but a perfectly smooth surface without the tyre load varying way beyond the limits of traction
Who said anything about comfort ?
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mylexicon @ Apr 25 2010, 08:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Actually, Nicky said why they were using carbon fiber. Apparently it's nearly impossible to get high quality aluminum alloy in Italy which has been built to MotoGP levels of specification. Ducati got tired of all of the problems so they transitioned to carbon fiber which is more readily available.

It gives them better flex properties simply b/c they can't aluminum on demand in Italy.
Better or more consistent from each replacement part ?
If it flexed better than ally they would not of built more flex into the suspension when they switched to carbon. But if the flex levels vary every time they used a different ally swing arm then it made sence to use different materials. You would think they could import aluminium if there's was so bad.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (chopperman @ Apr 25 2010, 09:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Who said anything about comfort ?

You suggested stiffness is a problem because of loads transfered to the rider, rather than applied to the tyre. I don't think that is a significan't issue
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Apr 25 2010, 09:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You suggested stiffness is a problem because of loads transfered to the rider, rather than applied to the tyre. I don't think that is a significan't issue
It was an issue even years ago when the stiffer "upside down' forks were starting to be used.
 If you think about staying sat in the saddle when landing a bike from a jump. exaggerated example but the same affect of the forces being transferred to the rider because the chassis can't absorb it.
 

Recent Discussions