Shanghai MotoGP Race

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ May 8 2008, 05:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well it was a bigger top speed, that is a fact. You might consider the difference negligable though, which was the intention of my post in the first place. I was not trying to suggest Hayden had some kind of significant advantage, but rather the speed difference that many use to rationalize his poor results didn't appear to exist in this race and the difference was still huge between Dani and him.

Fast in a straight line is a good thing....but if you can't go fast around the twisty bits then you are not going to win races....the 800s allow riders to carry much more corner speed which apparently Nicky can't adapt to do since he is used to sliding it 990 style....this shreds his tyres quicker in a race versus the 800s (250 feeder series) smother style required....Nicky is a relic of 990 era, and his sliding down the order is evidence of that....inspite of his fast in straight line...

On a related or side note; If Ducati does have Biaggi and Bayliss test the GP bike then I would huge interested to hear Biaggi comments and times since I think he would be awesome on 800 Duke...but don't get me wrong I still can't stand the guy.....and think he should be given a shot at Guintolis ride.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ May 8 2008, 11:24 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well it was a bigger top speed, that is a fact. You might consider the difference negligable though, which was the intention of my post in the first place. I was not trying to suggest Hayden had some kind of significant advantage, but rather the speed difference that many use to rationalize his poor results didn't appear to exist in this race and the difference was still huge between Dani and him.
In a situation where everyone's running up to and beyond their rev range and avoiding slipstreaming so as to not overrev, I'd say that how they approached that speed is a million times more important than what it was. If everyone's at their rev limit on the same gearing...of course there's not going to be anything to separate their top speeds. That doesn't mean there wasn't a difference going from corner speed to top speed. If they hit the same top speed due to mechanical limitations but one rider hits it earlier on the straight and maintains a speed advantage throughout the straight up until the other rider(s) hit their limit, there's still a pretty significant advantage there.

I'm not saying that's the case, but I am saying it's stupid to compare top speeds when people are on gearing that mechanically limits top speed and try to draw any conclusions either way from it.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mattsteg @ May 8 2008, 08:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>In a situation where everyone's running up to and beyond their rev range and avoiding slipstreaming so as to not overrev, I'd say that how they approached that speed is a million times more important than what it was. If everyone's at their rev limit on the same gearing...of course there's not going to be anything to separate their top speeds. That doesn't mean there wasn't a difference going from corner speed to top speed. If they hit the same top speed due to mechanical limitations but one rider hits it earlier on the straight and maintains a speed advantage throughout the straight up until the other rider(s) hit their limit, there's still a pretty significant advantage there.

I'm not saying that's the case, but I am saying it's stupid to compare top speeds when people are on gearing that mechanically limits top speed and try to draw any conclusions either way from it.

I agree, the whole point of my post is to make an example of the relative insignificance of top speed. Something which is excellently backed up every week with Ducati's performance

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ May 8 2008, 11:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I agree, the whole point of my post is to make an example of the relative insignificance of top speed. Something which is excellently backed up every week with Ducati's performance

Yes, Pedrosa was way down on the list for top speed yet he got second. How they got to that top speed is of the most imprtance and its kind of hard to see data on that. I think that Pedrosa being smaller than a horse jockey could have something to do with. But when they get the extra ponies with the pneumatic engine will they suffer in other departments? Its pretty scarey, being a Pedrosa hater, thinking that he may get a pneumatic valve engine and blow the field away. Of course it could also work against him as well, like the Ducatis.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ May 7 2008, 05:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Sorry but I don't get this.
1. While you may call it controlled they make sure the pressure change all the time, depending on speed, that's what Ram Air is about.
2. Any temperature changes on top of that wold work totally independently. Time for the air flow through the box does not change dramatically with temperature and nither does consequently the tempearure at the intake valves have the surounding temperature as one major factor.
3. Last time I checked the engineers did not say no thanks to free extra power, rather they tried to isolate the airbox and gas tank from the hot engine so as to avoid heating.

I don't know if my airboxes are big or advnaced enough but I definatly have power in cold wether, and so do every normal breathing or ram air intake engine I've ever heard of have.



Slightly different sitting there in comfort making your final plans and adsjustments before the race in the padock compared to being out there and decide what braking point to use, a unknown one or the one I used last time?

Yes, cooler air measn more air density, more intake pressure, better breathing and so better combustion. With the old carburettors it could be really significant. But in modern bikes and especially with MotoGP ultra-sophisticated air intake - fuel injection systems, temp changes of +/- 10° C can not make much difference as the air pressure is kept optimized as much as possible independently of those variations.

Surely it could not make THAT much difference in such bikes. In Shanghai the MotoGPs were running 10 kmph faster during the race than during any of the previous days. That could only be a tailwind, strong enough to make even Doctor Rossi misjudge his braking point twice in the first laps.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J4rn0 @ May 8 2008, 11:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yes, cooler air measn more air density, more intake pressure, better breathing and so better combustion. With the old carburettors it could be really significant. But in modern bikes and especially with MotoGP ultra-sophisticated air intake - fuel injection systems, temp changes of +/- 10° C can not make much difference as the air pressure is kept optimized as much as possible independently of those variations.

Surely it could not make THAT much difference in such bikes. In Shanghai the MotoGPs were running 10 kmph faster during the race than during any of the previous days. That could only be a tailwind, strong enough to make even Doctor Rossi misjudge his braking point twice in the first laps.

A. So you are effectivly saying they make sure the engine don't take out maximum in cold wether or that it miracously output more than it normaly would when the wether is hot but not when it's cold.
I don't belive that for a second. All that so that the power output is the same at all conditions?
Pardon my words but ultra sophisticated my ass. Air box shaping is still a trial and error "sience" but even if they were truly so advanced i'd like to see how they change the laws of physics. What injection has given us is an even more distict diffrence with weather changes as it will give the engine the optimum air/gas ratio no matter what wind, temp and humidity conditions are. That's the easy part, the one where they equalize power no matter conditions is probably nothing they would want anyway.

B. I never said tailwind was not a factor. Actually I think it was the major factor just added that high humidity and cold wether contributed.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ May 9 2008, 07:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>A. So you are effectivly saying they make sure the engine don't take out maximum in cold wether or that it miracously output more than it normaly would when the wether is hot but not when it's cold.
I don't belive that for a second. All that so that the power output is the same at all conditions?
Pardon my words but ultra sophisticated my ass. Air box shaping is still a trial and error "sience" but even if they were truly so advanced i'd like to see how they change the laws of physics. What injection has given us is an even more distict diffrence with weather changes as it will give the engine the optimum air/gas ratio no matter what wind, temp and humidity conditions are. That's the easy part, the one where they equalize power no matter conditions is probably nothing they would want anyway.

B. I never said tailwind was not a factor. Actually I think it was the major factor just added that high humidity and cold wether contributed.


Actually I say that they try to obtain the optimal intake air pressure as much as possible at all times, independently of external air conditions which may be favourable or unfavourable. Anyway this is all a rather idle academic discussion, since it is a fact that all riders and commentators attributed the higher speed to a tailwind, and nobody mentioned external air temperature/humidity as a possible or additional factor. That should be enough. Even if it isn't for you, well, I've spent my two cents of wisdom on this issue and we can agree to disagree. Cheers

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (J4rn0 @ May 10 2008, 10:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Actually I say that they try to obtain the optimal intake air pressure as much as possible at all times, independently of external air conditions which may be favourable or unfavourable. Anyway this is all a rather idle academic discussion, since it is a fact that all riders and commentators attributed the higher speed to a tailwind, and nobody mentioned external air temperature/humidity as a possible or additional factor. That should be enough. Even if it isn't for you, well, I've spent my two cents of wisdom on this issue and we can agree to disagree. Cheers

Well, regarding the reason for the higher speed we can disagree. It's impossible to say if the changing temperature and humidity played any role. But regarding the added power you just didn't get your facts right, that got nothing to do with pressure, it's all about density and waters ability to absorb heat amongst others, so that's not really up for discussion.