They make the tires and then build the bikes

I just read an article about Moto GP in a Swedish magazine originally written by Mat Oxley.
I don't know what magazine he works for but maybe some of you English/Americans might know.

He talks to Jean-Philippe Weber from Michelin about how the bike factories/teams are testing new compounds and constructions a few times a year so that the bike factories can build the bikes around the best tires in the tests.
I always thought they built the bikes complete then the tire companies ajusted to that and made a tire
that works for the biggest number of bikes and then all the bikes were fine tuned to the tires.

This ofcourse explains how the different brands of bikes can be just .10 seconds from each other on a lap rather than 1-2 seconds.
The bikes are quite different after all,from steel framed big fairing ,screamerengine powered to Yamaha/Kawasaki inline four asumetrical timing alu.chassie nimble machines.
By the way the similarity between Yamaha and Kawasaki in engine construction can be explained with the fact that the engineer who designed the Kawasaki later started to work for Yamaha or maybe it was the other way around.Their engines are from the beginning designed by the same engineer any way.

In the article they also talk about the basics in tires that we allready know,Rossi uses harder construction/carcass in his tires than any other rider,that is part of the reason he changed to Bridgestone.
They try to use as soft tires as possible and soft costruction and chemicals to help prevent overheating
and so on.
Maybe this is all old news to everybody here but i found it interresting now when there are no races.

link?
copy of article Etc...

It's from a Swedish bike magazine.
The magazine is called bike
Their website
www.bike.se
I don't have a link or a copy,sorry about that.I will do a search for articles written by Mat Oxley and maybe there is something on the internet.

He writes for the UK version of the same magazine. I normally get it but don't remember this article so it's probably in this month's issue.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (grifter @ Jul 28 2008, 05:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>He writes for the UK version of the same magazine. I normally get it but don't remember this article so it's probably in this month's issue.
I read that article and I think he might have been alluding to bike setup, not necessarily 'building' bikes for a tire.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (grifter @ Jul 28 2008, 09:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>He writes for the UK version of the same magazine. I normally get it but don't remember this article so it's probably in this month's issue.
I hope so,i have been searching the net for quite some time now.He writes about Valentino alot, and alot of books,but nothing about tires yet.

I think I've found it - July 2008 issue of Bike if anyone wants to read it. They don't put their articles online and I can't be arsed to type it out but here's a precis.

Tyres are the most crucial element in MotoGP cos grip is the most important factor in a lap time.

Therefore every other element of machine performance is tailored to maximise grip. Wherever the latest tyre technology heads, bikes follow and it's a cycle (a loop, not a bike, oh, anyway, you get me).

Different manufacturers converge on similar solutions because they're sharing tyres.

Hence, it took Rossi longer to win after switching tyre brands than after switching bikes because they had to learn how to set the bike up for the Bridgestones.

As an aside he mentions that Rossi alone prefers a much stiffer tyre than anyone else - no one else can make it work (this must be historical Michelin data though I guess).

All this stuff is great for you because this technology e.g. multi compounds, quickly filters through to road tyres.


Makes sense. Doesn't seem as compelling though when you strip the article down.

The change to a big bang configuration in 500s was driven by traction and everyone adopted that. It's not just MotoGP where it's a factor as well. The Ducs perform in WSBK because the low down torque of the twin is kinder to the tyre coming out of the corner.

There was a lot of talk earlier in the season about how Rossi's Yam had to be altered to behave like the Duc in order for them to get the best out of the 'stones. On the balance of the season so far you'd have to say he was right to push for the change. Michelin dropping the ball doesn't help either...

The 990s couldn't get enough grip to put their power down or corner as quickly as the 800s. Advances in tyres, traction control and smaller bikes now means quicker lap times because the grip is there.

Bit of a dry subject. There's only 2 tyre manufacturers out there so it's how each team is setting the bike up to use the tyre that's highlighting the differences between them. For me that's what's giving us more spread out finishes and less close racing.

There is a great article that I've cited previously from Aus MC News that showed the Yamaha and the Ducati (2008) in photo comparisons and basically it showed that the swing arm on the Yamaha was short like the Duc and the forks and triple clamps protruded a little (moved forwards).

The similarity between Rossi’s set-up and Casey’s set-up was amazing. Both bikes had the weight back and the front light.

Ducati has been working with Bridgestone’s for some time so I am somewhat impressed (as you could only be) with JB and the Yamaha team for getting the bike up and going with those tyres so quickly.

^^Example of a great team. JB always seems so affable when interviewed. Good quality to have.

In addition to my earlier post, apart from the bike being designed around the limitation of tyre technology, we all know that if you're high enough up the tyre pecking order the manufacturer will tailor the tyre for you and your bike's characteristics so it's a bit of both.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Doc 79 @ Jul 29 2008, 03:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I read that article and I think he might have been alluding to bike setup, not necessarily 'building' bikes for a tire.
Yes ,that is probarbly so,but the different bike manufacturers have to narrow the design down/zoom in
/ajust(don't know the best way to describe it in English) to the tyres.The tyres makes the limit and they
ultimately have to build the bikes around the tires.
I don't want to sound like a guy who is trying to "tell you all how it is".That would be kind of embarasing
to say the least,with the knowledge i have.
I just finally understood why the teams are so keen on testing tyres in the winter for example. A time of the season when the bikes are far from what they have become after only a few races.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (grifter @ Jul 29 2008, 12:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I think I've found it - July 2008 issue of Bike if anyone wants to read it. They don't put their articles online and I can't be arsed to type it out but here's a precis.

Tyres are the most crucial element in MotoGP cos grip is the most important factor in a lap time.

Therefore every other element of machine performance is tailored to maximise grip. Wherever the latest tyre technology heads, bikes follow and it's a cycle (a loop, not a bike, oh, anyway, you get me).

Different manufacturers converge on similar solutions because they're sharing tyres.

Hence, it took Rossi longer to win after switching tyre brands than after switching bikes because they had to learn how to set the bike up for the Bridgestones.

As an aside he mentions that Rossi alone prefers a much stiffer tyre than anyone else - no one else can make it work (this must be historical Michelin data though I guess).

All this stuff is great for you because this technology e.g. multi compounds, quickly filters through to road tyres.


Makes sense. Doesn't seem as compelling though when you strip the article down.

The change to a big bang configuration in 500s was driven by traction and everyone adopted that. It's not just MotoGP where it's a factor as well. The Ducs perform in WSBK because the low down torque of the twin is kinder to the tyre coming out of the corner.

There was a lot of talk earlier in the season about how Rossi's Yam had to be altered to behave like the Duc in order for them to get the best out of the 'stones. On the balance of the season so far you'd have to say he was right to push for the change. Michelin dropping the ball doesn't help either...

The 990s couldn't get enough grip to put their power down or corner as quickly as the 800s. Advances in tyres, traction control and smaller bikes now means quicker lap times because the grip is there.

Bit of a dry subject. There's only 2 tyre manufacturers out there so it's how each team is setting the bike up to use the tyre that's highlighting the differences between them. For me that's what's giving us more spread out finishes and less close racing.
Thank you,yes that's the one.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Anders GUZZI @ Jul 29 2008, 10:55 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yes ,that is probarbly so,but the different bike manufacturers have to narrow the design down/zoom in
/ajust(don't know the best way to describe it in English) to the tyres.The tyres makes the limit and they
ultimately have to build the bikes around the tires.
I don't want to sound like a guy who is trying to "tell you all how it is".That would be kind of embarasing
to say the least,with the knowledge i have.
I just finally understood why the teams are so keen on testing tyres in the winter for example. A time of the season when the bikes are far from what they have become after only a few races.
Definately man. I still think that in most cases, the bike manufacturers are looking to 'build' the machine they want, but the tire research is important because they need to find a suitable tire to make the whole package work. Good article.

Well Lorenzo has won a race and Rossi uses different tyres so the bike can't all be built around them.

Also you got Gresini using different rubber on the satellite Honda, compared to Dovi.

I always thought setup made the difference.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (an4rew @ Jul 29 2008, 10:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well Lorenzo has won a race and Rossi uses different tyres so the bike can't all be built around them.

Also you got Gresini using different rubber on the satellite Honda, compared to Dovi.

I always thought setup made the difference.

It does and the way the tire companies look at each others and design tires to a specific rider/bike combo there is every reason to think a good bike design will run well on any good tire. But then again there are more specific riders or bikes that only work well with one or the other tire.

Double Post.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (an4rew @ Jul 29 2008, 08:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Well Lorenzo has won a race and Rossi uses different tyres so the bike can't all be built around them.

Also you got Gresini using different rubber on the satellite Honda, compared to Dovi.

I always thought setup made the difference.
I always thought that too ,and the difference between Rossi's and Lorenzo's bike is probarbly not all that big but Lorenzo as a rookie won a race this year before Rossi did.It could be a little bit down to the fact that Rossi was injured during the winter brake and didn't have time or give time for the bike developement around the Bridgestones.
Rossi has said with the Bridgestones you need a little bit different ridingstyle so maybe the weight distribution can be or need to be different.Different swingarm length for example as already has been said or swingarm flex,and different front forks,im just guessing.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Andy Roo @ Jul 29 2008, 01:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>There is a great article that I've cited previously from Aus MC News that showed the Yamaha and the Ducati (2008) in photo comparisons and basically it showed that the swing arm on the Yamaha was short like the Duc and the forks and triple clamps protruded a little (moved forwards).

The similarity between Rossi’s set-up and Casey’s set-up was amazing. Both bikes had the weight back and the front light.

Ducati has been working with Bridgestone’s for some time so I am somewhat impressed (as you could only be) with JB and the Yamaha team for getting the bike up and going with those tyres so quickly.
I posted a precis of the article back in May because I found it fascinating - here's the LINK

I included a couple of side shots of Rossi and Lorenzo's Yamahas which illustrate the changes that JB and Rossi made beautifully. Not seen any similar shots of both bikes from the side in the same corner since to compare any further changes - anyone else seen any?

I heard that Toseland has a "shorter" chassis now, but without comparison shots can't tell if the other Yamahas have learned anything from the "Bridgestone" setup.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Babelfish @ Jul 29 2008, 10:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It does and the way the tire companies look at each others and design tires to a specific rider/bike combo there is every reason to think a good bike design will run well on any good tire. But then again there are more specific riders or bikes that only work well with one or the other tire.

Yea and i think when Michelin lost their overnight advantage.. they changed the way they made their tyres to be more universal.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (an4rew @ Jul 31 2008, 10:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yea and i think when Michelin lost their overnight advantage.. they changed the way they made their tyres to be more universal.
Well, they didn't do that very well last year. Spesific tires for riders but most important, you neded one tire for almost every degree change in the temperature to get the best tire for the race.