PI Test

am i the only one that doesn't read the ten thousand word posts?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Feb 2 2008, 09:54 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Did we discuss setting up the bike? It's not what this is about. Settings on electronics are soon gone, except for very minor adjustments. In a way it will be back to the black box most bikes has as CDI unit today.

I don't understand what you are getting at really. Yes the TC must be set up it is not a "black box" .... most electronics on GP bikes are highly adjustable, and I would suggest that there would be several multi-variable algorithms running at any one time, (again look at the equipment available from the Magnetti Marelli site) ...... I don't get what you are saying?? are you suggesting that they have a CDI unit like bikes had some years ago? ... no engine mapping even??

I don't think you have grasped the concept of "electronics" on current GP bikes can do ...... your odd statement about a regulator ( I assume as in the electronics type ) makes me think you are suggesting one goes to an electronics shop and asks for "one TC unit please" ???

Here I have found a very simple one as an example ..... look at the tuning curves etc. and thats just on a EU190 unit ..... probably fit for a lawnmower when compared to the Marelli gear

http://electronic-ignition-system.com/dire...di/software.asp

thats an off the shelf adjustable unit with very few parameters for adjustment. Can you imagine when a GP bike last had a unit so basic!!??

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BarryMachine @ Feb 2 2008, 05:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Because I can envisage a contemporary bike as opposed to a GP bike pre electronics aids ......

bikes/riders have gotten faster with TC ...... are you saying they haven't?
Okey Dokey, now that I am awake I'll try to answer you properly.
In what way would a "contemporary bike" without TC produce poorer racing? Racing is not just about being able to produce faster lap times than last year. If it was then all other formulae which have slower lap times around the same tracks (125, 250, WSBK) would automatically be boring. And yet, they are not.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BarryMachine @ Feb 2 2008, 05:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>And now the funny bit ..... so are you saying all TC devices work how Chris Pyke described them??

Ducati/Stoner
Vermulen/Suzuki
Capirossi/Suzuki
Rossi/Yam
Lorenzo/Yam
Melandri/Duc.

??
Yes. The descriptions he provided of TC, anti-wheelie, braking control and launch control are generic and apply to all the manufacturers. Exact tweaks and setup of the electronics will obviously be tuned to the satisfaction of the team/bike/rider. FFS, you are the one who keeps bleating on about how the base ECU for both Yamaha and Ducati is made by Magneti Marelli (true) and then going on to claim that there is no difference between the behaviour of Stoner's electronics and Rossi's (bollox).

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BarryMachine @ Feb 2 2008, 05:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I believe if you read the first part od Chris Pykes forum post there at least he puts in a disclaimer attempting to make folk aware that that is what he dealt with .... not how others have it. He described a fairly specific system known to him.

To pre-suppose they are all the same ...... is wrong.
Nope. You'll even twist his words. Here they are again:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>I will try and briefly(maybe not so brief) explain the common strategies in a MotoGP (and increasingly WSB) ECU. I should explain that as far as I am aware most manufacturers give full control of two cylinders to the rider. This is to get a positive throttle connection feeling to the rear tyre, otherwise it can give the feeling of being connected by an elastic band(the rider input does not match the ECU ouput). The other two cylinders are controlled by the ECU. You can be sure though that they are working to full ECU control of the engine for the future.
As you will see, the only part he said he was unsure about was whether all the manufacturers give full control of two cylinders to the rider.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BarryMachine @ Feb 2 2008, 05:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>To pre-suppose they are all the same ...... is wrong.
Neither Chris or I ever said they were. As I said before, you are the one who is famous for stating that kind of clap trap.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BarryMachine @ Feb 2 2008, 05:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Do you have your bike set up the same as mine?? I doubt it. Why do you make the assumption one guy can describe how "TC" is?? ..... he can't.

So why are folk so ready ignore that?? ......... well its useful as "spin" is what it seems.
What spin? I can detect spin in your post, yes. Mine was a collection of quotes from CP in an attempt to answer your previous points. Why post more diatribe rather than simple answers?

Could it be because you have argued yourself into a corner?

BarryMachine, You long post was excellent and the most commonsense I have read on here in a long time apart from some of Jumkie's post which are also well thought out.

In my opinion I give a certain amount of confidence to what Chris Pike says however technical advancements are highly secretive and to assume that one person knows what every Factory MotoGP team is using is just naive.

Babel comments a long the lines of soon everyones electronics will be the same or very similar (I hope I have understood your post, appologie if I have not) and if this is the case then we will be back to a status of one team not having a perceived advantage and racing should be back to competitve ( I think it is anyway).

I think racing in 2007 was as competitve as it was in 2003 - 2005 for the following very simple reason:

During those years Rossi could have ridden off into the distance and finished 10 - 20 or even more seconds in front of 2nd place. But Rossi does not ride this way. He sits back in the front couple of spots in the pack and waits to the last 3-5 laps and then blows everyone away. This was great for the un-educated specator and even the educated spectator who knew he was doing it because you would be going "will he go for it this lap?"
So really there has always been a clearly faster rider/team/tyre/setup but this was tempered by Rossi's style of winning races.
In 2007 Stoner did not have that same style of winning races and neither does Pedrosa. They have the Doohan style of clearing out from the first lap if they can.

So really electronics/tyres/bikes have less to do with the spectacle of racing then the style of winning of the fast rider (the one who has the best setup).

If everything is left alone and the teams are allowed to develop until they are all getting pretty close as in the last 2 years of 990's then it will get back to purely the riders again. Keep changing things and the riders will always be chasing the bikes and the spectacle will be less.

You never know, maybe this season Stoner will be less overawed by his speed and be prepared to play with the other riders more like Rossi used to do.

That makes a lot of sense TP70! I think the tyre rule changes this year were a good idea but you have to let things be for a few years to see how it will all pan out.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22920948@N05/

PI test images

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yamaka46 @ Feb 3 2008, 09:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Exact tweaks and setup of the electronics will obviously be tuned to the satisfaction of the team/bike/rider.

Exactly

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yamaka46 @ Feb 3 2008, 09:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>FFS, you are the one who keeps bleating on about how the base ECU for both Yamaha and Ducati is made by Magneti Marelli (true)

I agree it seems they may use the same manufacturers gear as to whether or not Duc. and Yam. use the same components, and how they use them is anyones guess.



<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yamaka46 @ Feb 3 2008, 09:27 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>and then going on to claim that there is no difference between the behaviour of Stoner's electronics and Rossi's (bollox).

Well I have never claimed that, and as a matter of fact it is quite to the contrary of what I have said..... hence what you say here is what is complete bollox.

What I say is that nobody can claim any one rider has more TC than the other ..... due to the highly programmable and personalised nature of setting up such a system. And as such I commented to such effect when the vid. clip of Toseland "being TC'd" was shown.

My point was, that irresepective of how it sounded that outing they may well have adjusted it the next time he went out.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Son of Doohan @ Feb 2 2008, 07:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>http://www.flickr.com/photos/22920948@N05/

PI test images
Son, did you take those pics? Wow, the're awesome dude.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Son of Doohan @ Feb 3 2008, 01:52 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>http://www.flickr.com/photos/22920948@N05/

PI test images

Wow!! nice pics ..... kinda felt I should walk away backwards saying " I saw nutting .... I know nutting ..."

You got right in there!

Thanks heaps!!.... now should I burn the negatives/files on my PC ...??

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Feb 3 2008, 01:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Son, did you take those pics? Wow, the're awesome dude.
Haha, I wish I did Jumkie. No, the great thing about forums (besides the ridiculous amount of BS spinning), is finding stuff on the net and sharing it with fellow enthusiasts. Some quality photos here. I'm sure this guy won't mind people burning them, if he did I don't think he'd put them in an open source.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BarryMachine @ Feb 3 2008, 03:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well I have never claimed that, and as a matter of fact it is quite to the contrary of what I have said..... hence what you say here is what is complete bollox.
Ok, I apologise for that - I just checked back through the TC type threads (perhaps should have done that before I posted) - sorry for the bollox.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BarryMachine @ Feb 3 2008, 03:17 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>What I say is that nobody can claim any one rider has more TC than the other ..... due to the highly programmable and personalised nature of setting up such a system. And as such I commented to such effect when the vid. clip of Toseland "being TC'd" was shown.

My point was, that irresepective of how it sounded that outing they may well have adjusted it the next time he went out.
I'd agree that in your original post (#91) the first two and a half paras were indeed about this. If you'd stopped there I'd have never replied.

It was the following five and a half paragraphs of diatribe which prompted my reply. You ranted on about the following :
1. that removing TC would make the racing more boring
2. that complaining about TC is crazy given how long it's been present
3. that without TC Motogp would be pretty much running road bikes
4. the obligatory dig at Rossi fans - "in order to believe that their rider is "still the best" then there must be a fault in the equation ..."
5. how 'cos its a "development formulae" electronics must be unregulated or Rossi might win.

So my reply was purely aimed at your points in these paras. To date you've not countered any of the points I made other than by stating that not all TC is the same. A point which I never tried to make.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yamaka46 @ Feb 3 2008, 04:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>1. that removing TC would make the racing more boring

Well I can tell you now, I will find the lack of development boring. Where will the development be?


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yamaka46 @ Feb 3 2008, 04:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>2. that complaining about TC is crazy given how long it's been present

So why is it valid to complain about it now after so so long?? I must admit I am missing your point.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yamaka46 @ Feb 3 2008, 04:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>3. that without TC Motogp would be pretty much running road bikes

Well even though I didn't say it in those words I suppose you have put it nice and simply.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yamaka46 @ Feb 3 2008, 04:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>4. the obligatory dig at Rossi fans - "in order to believe that their rider is "still the best" then there must be a fault in the equation ..."

What is your point?



<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yamaka46 @ Feb 3 2008, 04:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>5. how 'cos its a "development formulae" electronics must be unregulated or Rossi might win.
More Bollox ...... I don't think Rossi will or won't win dependent on whether he has more electronics or less, or none, or lightbulbs, in place if TC ....... Rossi won when he did because he was the best out there at that time. Rossi has been on waht has been the "top electronics for quite a while now" to assume he will go better without it seems a big call to me.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BarryMachine @ Feb 3 2008, 06:26 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>What is your point?
Those 5 points were paraphrases of your points from post #91.

My replies were in post #93.

Anyway. Let's just agree to differ. I'd rather watch a racing series where the bike (ECU) doesn't know which track it's at, or where it is on that track, and doesn't decide exactly how much power is applied for each corner regardless of the throttle position. You say you would be bored without the development of the electronics to this level.

As I said before "Obviously all electronics should not be banned, but equally obvious (IMO) is that we cannot continue with unregulated electronic development and still have a racing series that is worth watching. Remember that, although this is a development formula, many aspects of it are (and always have been) regulated. Otherwise you could (for example) rock up with an 1000cc Rotary and kick Stoners ... "

Good fun arguing anyway

Hi Everyone,

This is my first post on here. So glad to find a MotoGP forum to post on.

I was wondering; does anyone know why FIAT Yamaha did not attend the Phillip Island test? seems strange to me that they would miss a test when they could have got more critical mileage on the new pneumatic engine and more set-up time for Rossi's BS's.

The teams can only attend 7 test, and there are 8 possible, so they have to drop 1.
They can test at non Motogp tracks as much as they like, but Motogp rider may only attend 8 tests per season.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (yamaka46 @ Feb 3 2008, 08:21 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Those 5 points were paraphrases of your points from post #91.

My replies were in post #93.

Anyway. Let's just agree to differ. I'd rather watch a racing series where the bike (ECU) doesn't know which track it's at, or where it is on that track, and doesn't decide exactly how much power is applied for each corner regardless of the throttle position.
I am not sure it is quite at this level yet (output of the bike at each point on the track predetermined before the bike leaves the pits), but if even the potential for this exists, they might as well continue the scaling down process from 990 to 800 a bit further and run them on scalextric tracks, or take out the middlemen entirely and run the motogp championship on playstations.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (michaelm @ Feb 3 2008, 10:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>they might as well continue the scaling down process from 990 to 800 a bit further and run them on scalextric tracks, or take out the middlemen entirely and run the motogp championship on playstations.

now you're talking!!


ok no I don't want it ever to get that far

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (sarto @ Feb 3 2008, 11:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>The teams can only attend 7 test, and there are 8 possible, so they have to drop 1.
They can test at non Motogp tracks as much as they like, but Motogp rider may only attend 8 tests per season.

Cheers for the reply. They only have another 1-2 tests before the start of the season though, so find it strange why they would drop out of one of the pre-season tests, in turn for attending one when the season has started. Surely they need more testing miles under their belt before the season opener?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (michaelm @ Feb 3 2008, 11:28 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I am not sure it is quite at this level yet (output of the bike at each point on the track predetermined before the bike leaves the pits), but if even the potential for this exists, they might as well continue the scaling down process from 990 to 800 a bit further and run them on scalextric tracks, or take out the middlemen entirely and run the motogp championship on playstations.
It's not yet, but unregulated electronics development will surely lead us there. Your point is exactly why I am against this.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BarryMachine @ Feb 2 2008, 04:59 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I don't understand what you are getting at really. Yes the TC must be set up it is not a "black box" .... most electronics on GP bikes are highly adjustable, and I would suggest that there would be several multi-variable algorithms running at any one time, (again look at the equipment available from the Magnetti Marelli site) ...... I don't get what you are saying?? are you suggesting that they have a CDI unit like bikes had some years ago? ... no engine mapping even??
Of course not, what I suggest is that the TC will be so refined that there is little to nothing to adsjust. Similar to the CDI. Just a black box with a lot more IO than the old one.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>I don't think you have grasped the concept of "electronics" on current GP bikes can do ...... your odd statement about a regulator ( I assume as in the electronics type ) makes me think you are suggesting one goes to an electronics shop and asks for "one TC unit please" ???
You are very funny and even more ignorant. What make you think think regulators can't be inside computers? I've seen a few thousands of those. Very convinient to adjust, or just turn the adaptive tuning on. Connect them together to sum up an outpt, cascade them and so on. I can't prove they are using regulators, but I seriously hope they do. Using simple threshold limits to step output would be hoplessly primitive and harsh compared to a multiple regulator system.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>Here I have found a very simple one as an example ..... look at the tuning curves etc. and thats just on a EU190 unit ..... probably fit for a lawnmower when compared to the Marelli gear

http://electronic-ignition-system.com/dire...di/software.asp

thats an off the shelf adjustable unit with very few parameters for adjustment. Can you imagine when a GP bike last had a unit so basic!!??
You are really priceless and are obviously clueless.
To bad as any debate become boring.