Valencia Tests 8-9 November 2011

Keshav said:

In what way does the fuel & tire limitation make anything better for purposes of racing? It's wholly irrelevant and counter to the spirit of racing.

Click to expand...

Added something there. Thats different to saying fuel economy affects the competition to make the best racing bike though.



Ducati's innovative prototype was doing just fine with limited fuel, limited engines, limited chasis development options back when they had prototype tires. But the failure to redevelop the chasis to suit the current tires is not the failure of the rules, MSMA, Dorna, lack of funds or the failure of an electronics geek either. Its the failure of a man yes, an engineer, his name is Preziosi.

And might I add to that, fuel limitations have there advantages. Getting the most out of the fuel and its effects on combustion all filters down to production bikes in years to come.

I get exactly where Pov is coming from.

They have the options, either to dumb down motogp to the point where the Preziosi's of the world can get away with an inferior chasis because all the bikes become 5 seconds per lap slower.



Or they can go back to full prototype racing including tyres, bore, weight, cylinders, fuel and in the meantime Ducati can fire Prez and borrow a Honda engineer to make the Ducati 2 seconds per lap faster.



I know which option I would prefer to see.

corinthian said:

For those that haven't seen it, this online issue has some great interviews and photos, well worth a read: http://ontrackoffroa...ovember-8th-17/

Click to expand...

Awsome read. Thanks for the link.

Can't believe I have never seen this before. Great articles without the usual BS spin, great photos, and any mag with photos of hot Monster chicks gets my vote.

birdman said:

Added something there. Thats different to saying fuel economy affects the competition to make the best racing bike though.



Ducati's innovative prototype was doing just fine with limited fuel, limited engines, limited chasis development options back when they had prototype tires. But the failure to redevelop the chasis to suit the current tires is not the failure of the rules, MSMA, Dorna, lack of funds or the failure of an electronics geek either. Its the failure of a man yes, an engineer, his name is Preziosi.

Click to expand...

You are arguing my point. That the parameters make the creation. The rules dictate that they all must have conventional solutions with a .... load of electronics. It discourages and penalizes the spirit of innovation which is a staple of prototype racing. Your point that this was Ducati's fault for not CONFORMING, is the point you and Pov are missing. Conformity is antithetical to innovative spirit of prototype development. I think what you and Pov are trying to say is, who is building the best bike under these constraints, where the constraints make it a competition of who built the best computer.

birdman said:

I get exactly where Pov is coming from.

They have the options, either to dumb down motogp to the point where the Preziosi's of the world can get away with an inferior chasis because all the bikes become 5 seconds per lap slower.



Or they can go back to full prototype racing including tyres, bore, weight, cylinders, fuel and in the meantime Ducati can fire Prez and borrow a Honda engineer to make the Ducati 2 seconds per lap faster.



I know which option I would prefer to see.

Click to expand...

When did the factory bikes get slower? They aren't being punished, they're still playing by the rules they imposed. Why are you so scared of the CRT bikes. The only difference between the CRT bikes and the factory bikes will be that the CRT bikes can have engines that came from street bikes. They can also have one off engines if they choose to build their own. Besides the engines they can go out and buy anything that you can find on any bike on the grid. Brakes, ohlins, magneti electronics, titanium engine parts, pneumatic valve train, slipper clutch, CF parts, etc. All of these things can be purchased, just like Honda went out and bought some Yamaha electronics engineers. We might get limited electronics in the future but all the riders want them gone anyway. Casey, Rossi, Dovi, Hayden, and CE have all openly said they don't like the electronics so what are you so worried about. Last time I checked Duc haven't been able to get their chassis to work and they are having to build a YamaHonda as lots of people are calling it. If you look at what the factories have offered us this year for the street, Ducati would be the clear winner, the best power to weight ratio and the most innovative bike to hit the street in a long time. The fact that they couldn't replicate it for GP should make you scratch your head. The rules are .... and the only thing new is the electronics and a Honda transmission that would never work for a street bike by their own admission, not that they'd give you one any, after all we aren't even good enough for a V4.

Im not talking about CRT or conforming or anything like that. Prezi had 5 years now to make a Ducati chasis that worked. Its his problem. Why blame everything else under the sun? To make Prezi successful at present we have to slow down everyone else. Bayliss never got along with Ducati motogp either and I can see why. Prezi only looked good with the rider I'm not allowed to mention but more importantly with an engineer from Bridgestone making him the perfect tire. Credit goes more to Bridgestone then. I have no issue with CRT if the aim is to have CRT come up to challenge where factories are now. Thats great, fantastic, give em prototype tyres and fuel. Perfect.



Actually I think they should should develop the engines around crap fuel. My bike has a sticker 95 RON minimum. In other words premium. I get stuck somewhere with 91 RON. WTF do I walk home? Why does a 1000cc need 95? Also 91 RON is what it measures 30 minutes after production, I used to do the testing. After being pumped back and forth and sitting in a service station tank for 10 days it most likely would end up at 85 RON. Dont even need rev limits then, no use having pneumatics, electronics might still be handy but not everything. Then replace my sticker with 85 RON minimum rather than a stupid button for 5 engine maps that I never wanted anyhow.

birdman said:

Added something there. Thats different to saying fuel economy affects the competition to make the best racing bike though.



Ducati's innovative prototype was doing just fine with limited fuel, limited engines, limited chasis development options back when they had prototype tires. But the failure to redevelop the chasis to suit the current tires is not the failure of the rules, MSMA, Dorna, lack of funds or the failure of an electronics geek either. Its the failure of a man yes, an engineer, his name is Preziosi.

Click to expand...

Here's my take.



After the emergency tire meetings of 2007, MotoGP changed the tire regs for 2008. Both Ducati and Yamaha went into the 2008 season with new Bridgestone rubber, and we all watched the Rossi/Burgess/Furusawa triumvirate out-develop everyone in the paddock. It only took them 4 races to notch their first win. In 2009, Stoner has health issues and Rossi/Burgess/Furusawa consolidated their lead. In 2010, the newly redesigned control tire did not flatter the Ducati's handling characteristics. Stoner decided to reunite with Suppo in 2011, after Arrivebene's highly-public nicotine-fit left Stoner feeling slighted.



So what do you do? Imo, you pay Rossi/Burgess (the tandem that out-developed Ducati in 2008) to help you develop your bike.



If the bike demonstrated race winning pace in 2010, who is at fault for the backwards development of the GP11/GP11.1? I don't think Preziosi is to blame. They've moved heaven and earth for Rossi, but he hasn't accomplished anything. Even Burgess is getting a bit frustrated b/c he can't engineer the bike with Preziosi unless Rossi gives quality feedback. Neither the perimeter frame nor the softer 2012 Bridgestone have helped Rossi feel the front. Many Bolognese engineers will be sleepless this offseason. I don't think they are to blame.

birdman said:

Im not talking about CRT or conforming or anything like that. Prezi had 5 years now to make a Ducati chasis that worked. Its his problem. Why blame everything else under the sun? To make Prezi successful at present we have to slow down everyone else. Bayliss never got along with Ducati motogp either and I can see why. Prezi only looked good with the rider I'm not allowed to mention but more importantly with an engineer from Bridgestone making him the perfect tire. Credit goes more to Bridgestone then. I have no issue with CRT if the aim is to have CRT come up to challenge where factories are now. Thats great, fantastic, give em prototype tyres and fuel. Perfect.



Actually I think they should should develop the engines around crap fuel. My bike has a sticker 95 RON minimum. In other words premium. I get stuck somewhere with 91 RON. WTF do I walk home? Why does a 1000cc need 95? Also 91 RON is what it measures 30 minutes after production, I used to do the testing. After being pumped back and forth and sitting in a service station tank for 10 days it most likely would end up at 85 RON. Dont even need rev limits then, no use having pneumatics, electronics might still be handy but not everything. Then replace my sticker with 85 RON minimum rather than a stupid button for 5 engine maps that I never wanted anyhow.

Click to expand...

I agree about Prezi but he's also limited by the rules, I don't think they're done with the stressed engine concept. I think he'll use the aluminium to find the parameters he needs then eventually go back to his design/company design. If you want to give his success to a tire engineer and Casey then you should do the same thing with Honda except replace the tires and tire engineer with the electronics and electronics engineer from yamaha. The rider does stay the same though.

What are you riding, I've heard of people who mix race fuel and other chemicals with their fuel to get what they need. That isn't for me but I'm way to slow to be needing special brew fuel. I'm thinking about buying a Triumph Bonnie and just cruising around, no more need for HP wars for this old dog.

Ducati Motogp championship winning record



2003 - fail, Troy Bayliss, Loris Capirossi

2004 - fail, Troy Bayliss, Loris Capirossi

2005 - fail, Carlos Checa, Loris Capirossi

2006 - fail, Sete Gibernau, Loris Capirossi

2007 - success, Casey Stoner

2008 - fail, Casey Stoner, Marco Melandri

2009 - fail, Casey Stoner, Nicky Hayden

2010 - fail, Casey Stoner, Nicky Hayden

2011 - fail, Valentino Rossi, Nicky Hayden



The whole time Preziosi has been the head engineer. In the meantime the list of riders fired during this time includes:



Troy Bayliss

Sete Gibernau

Carlos Checa

Loris Capirosi

Marco Melandri

(almost Casey Stoner 2009)



So I say again, do we blame the rules or fuel or electronics geek or riders for the situation, or is it the head engineer?

mylexicon said:

Here's my take.



After the emergency tire meetings of 2007, MotoGP changed the tire regs for 2008. Both Ducati and Yamaha went into the 2008 season with new Bridgestone rubber, and we all watched the Rossi/Burgess/Furusawa triumvirate out-develop everyone in the paddock. It only took them 4 races to notch their first win. In 2009, Stoner has health issues and Rossi/Burgess/Furusawa consolidated their lead. In 2010, the newly redesigned control tire did not flatter the Ducati's handling characteristics. Stoner decided to reunite with Suppo in 2011, after Arrivebene's highly-public nicotine-fit left Stoner feeling slighted.



So what do you do? Imo, you pay Rossi/Burgess (the tandem that out-developed Ducati in 2008) to help you develop your bike.



If the bike demonstrated race winning pace in 2010, who is at fault for the backwards development of the GP11/GP11.1? I don't think Preziosi is to blame. They've moved heaven and earth for Rossi, but he hasn't accomplished anything. Even Burgess is getting a bit frustrated b/c he can't engineer the bike with Preziosi unless Rossi gives quality feedback. Neither the perimeter frame nor the softer 2012 Bridgestone have helped Rossi feel the front. Many Bolognese engineers will be sleepless this offseason. I don't think they are to blame.

Click to expand...

Only one man could ride the Duc so what should they do. The bike hasn't been changed that much, they used an aluminum chassis to satisfy them that the CF wasn't a problem and now they used an aluminum perimiter chassis and they are in the same place. So it's time to start moving things around and the perimeter chassis lets them do that faster. The engineers are indeed to blame, when Casey was complaining about the bike did they fix it ? Have they fixed it now? We have heard the same complaints for the last two years, no front end feeling. Now they are forced to fix it because no one can ride the thing.

Reading Matthew Birt's Twitter today was depressing. In response to a poster asking, "what if the L engine is the problem" he responded "JB absolutely adamant this is a philosophy ducati won't ditch, but we've heard that before."

Maybe we should be happy that Rossi and JB's failure is making Ducati take a look at it's design instead of continuing to force it on the riders. It's just to bad they lost another good rider, RDP, before fixing it.

birdman said:

I get exactly where Pov is coming from.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure you do. A composite of Povol's many posts about "real prototype racing" indicates that Povol categorizes participants into two categories--desirables and undesirables. Povol gives the manufacturers a blanket endorsement to caste the participants appropriately according to their cubic dollars. He never pauses to consider the ramifications of arbitrarily ranking participants so he doesn't realize that MSMA plutocracy actually reduces competition and weakens the breed over time.



Page 1 (the only page) of "Povol's Guide to Organizing International Prototype Racing":



If Honda had not pushed for 800cc, 21L, and 6 engines; no one could discern the men from the boys, and MotoGP would be overpopulated with posers. Any and all attempts to return posers to the ranks of MotoGP must be resisted. Better to let MotoGP die an honorable, heterosexual death than to have it perverted by the .... socialists who think they know how to build/ride prototype motorcycles better than the manufacturers. The end goal of any respectable racing series is to have one bike and one rider. When the series goes bankrupt, and the new organizers implement "necessary" reforms to improve the racing, the .... socialists who like close racing must be lynched one by one, along with their monkey gods, until the new organizers acquiesce.

birdman said:

Ducati Motogp championship winning record



2003 - fail, Troy Bayliss, Loris Capirossi

2004 - fail, Troy Bayliss, Loris Capirossi

2005 - fail, Carlos Checa, Loris Capirossi

2006 - fail, Sete Gibernau, Loris Capirossi

2007 - success, Casey Stoner

2008 - fail, Casey Stoner, Marco Melandri

2009 - fail, Casey Stoner, Nicky Hayden

2010 - fail, Casey Stoner, Nicky Hayden

2011 - fail, Valentino Rossi, Nicky Hayden



The whole time Preziosi has been the head engineer. In the meantime the list of riders fired during this time includes:



Troy Bayliss

Sete Gibernau

Carlos Checa

Loris Capirosi

Marco Melandri

(almost Casey Stoner 2009)



So I say again, do we blame the rules or fuel or electronics geek or riders for the situation, or is it the head engineer?

Click to expand...

I think it's the company and Prezi who should be blamed, they should have been working on the front end when Casey wasn't happy with it. Who knows how many championships the two could of had together if they would have fixed the bike. I'm not a huge fan of Casey but I was happy for him when he moved to Honda because I knew they would be able to give him what he asked for with the bike. When I called him an anomaly and said he needed to be on a Honda because they would have the ability analyse his style and give him the best bike, I was attacked by the bonners but Honda have certainly done more for him than Ducati. They have put together one of the most dominant seasons we've ever seen.

Nicky Hayden.

"Our bike works really good in the rain," Hayden said. "There's a couple of different theories that we have. One is that it's quite a stiff bike, and it pushes the rain tires into the ground and generates some heat. It's the same way that if you look at the first five minutes of a session, it's often the Ducatis on top." There is more to it than just the stiffness of the chassis, though. "Our electronics are good and we got some good rain riders on them," Hayden added.

"Sometimes we feel our bike is too stiff at full lean to go round the corners," Hayden said. "In the rain, everybody's bike is too stiff. At that amount of force, everybody's bike is too stiff. We're all in the same boat and we rely more on the suspension to do the work, you don't need the frame to do any work. It's definitely something we've talked about and thought about before to try to help understand what it is."





Ducati reportedly have always had competitive electronics. They cant be 1.5 seconds off the pace because the electronics suck. So can we cancel out competition by the best computer?



Fuel/engine limits. Well Ducati aint slow on the straights, the engines dont blow up either. So can we cancel fuel limits for the 1.5 sec deficit?



Tires. The latest 1000cc generations are reportedly causing chatter for the rider who cant be mentioned, so I assume they werent made with him in mind. I guess they were made more for Ducati then. Still 1.5 seconds behind?



Chasis. Whether its carbon or aluminium "conforming" doesnt make any difference its still vague in the front and off the pace. I thought aluminium would alter the stiffness? Nope, 1.5 sec too slow.



Finally the Hayden quote, they are still trying to understand what it is? I think we have a winner. Its not that its innovative, more like they dont have a clue. Whether its carbon or aluminium conforming doesnt make any difference its still vague in the front and off the pace.



Please do not bring in slow mush for tyres and a control ECU resulting in backwards progress for this engineer. Its just the same as sacking all those riders.



Doesnt mean the guy cant be a great production bike engineer.

What ECUs do the teams use now?



You want to hear something interesting? Back in 2003, Honda wanted to continue working on their mass centralized theory, and they wanted to create a bike with higher cornerspeed. Rossi didn't like it. He went to Yamaha b/c he was angry (I also think Dorna wanted him there). Yamaha redesigned the M1 with a forward weight bias to keep the front down, and they put a soft rear shock on the bike so it would transfer weight. Then Rossi put a mush-hoop on the front tire and a brick on the rear so he could ride point-and-shoot. He beat Honda in his first season at Yamaha, and he embarrassed them in 2005. The mush front tire was faster, and by your reckoning, it was more technologically advanced.



In 2006, fuel capacity was reduced to 22L. Michelin designed a new tire for the 22L formula. The Yamaha stopped working properly b/c the bike didn't have sufficient fuel to scrub off extra kph, and Yamaha couldn't build a chassis to work with the tires. Rossi always blamed Michelin for making tires according to Honda's wishes. I don't think that was the case, but Rossi bailed on Michelin ASAP b/c he felt betrayed.



The Brickstones are not faster or more advanced than the yucky, old 990cc Michelins. In fact, it was the rules changes in 2006 and 2007 that made Bridgestones cornerspeed technology so potent. Technically, the fuel rules are moving us backwards to a less advanced time, but you don't see it b/c the bikes get more technologically refined. I don't know about you, but I would love to see Casey Stoner on his Brickstones vs. Rossi on his low-tech Michelin mush hoops. It would probably be a battle for the ages.



Alas, Honda had to ruin the formula to save us from a fate worse than death--high fuel consumption. We're saved.

mylexicon said:

What ECUs do the teams use now?



Back in 2003, Honda wanted to continue working on their mass centralized theory, and they wanted to create a bike with higher cornerspeed. Rossi didn't like it. He went to Yamaha b/c he was angry



I don't know about you, but I would love to see Casey Stoner on his Brickstones vs. Rossi on his low-tech Michelin mush hoops. It would probably be a battle for the ages.

Click to expand...

ECU is on the list for next year 2013? How will it work with all those engines. It wont, its just like control tyres. Bricks are good for some, bad for others. Control ECU will be good for a V4, bad for an I4, or the other way round.



Honda have always wanted to do something new, even when they had a race winning design. Thats their thing. Doohan and JB reportedly would fight them all the time. In the process Honda mostly just stuff themselves up more than the competition. Mass centralization for instance.



Rossi left because he was more important than Honda and thus angry. Thats absolutely perfect. Exactly what I want to see more of. Since then its been Yamaha 4 w/c vs Honda 2? Excellent.



Mush vs bricks. Exactly what I want too. Riders choose your weapons.



I think the biggest difference I have with many on here is that one year of Stoner winning was enough to satisfy me. I demand no more of him or of motogp to keep him there. In fact better to move on than have another Doohan or Rossi era. On this aspect they are all the same to me.



The last 10 years were dominated more by a single rider than rules or manufacturers. If it becomes dominated by one manufacturer regardless of the riders, then ok, we have a big problem.

birdman said:

ECU is on the list for next year 2013? How will it work with all those engines. It wont, its just like control tyres. Bricks are good for some, bad for others. Control ECU will be good for a V4, bad for an I4, or the other way round.



Honda have always wanted to do something new, even when they had a race winning design. Thats their thing. Doohan and JB reportedly would fight them all the time. In the process Honda mostly just stuff themselves up more than the competition. Mass centralization for instance.



Rossi left because he was more important than Honda and thus angry. Thats absolutely perfect. Exactly what I want to see more of. Since then its been Yamaha 4 w/c vs Honda 2? Excellent.



Mush vs bricks. Exactly what I want too. Riders choose your weapons.



I think the biggest difference I have with many on here is that one year of Stoner winning was enough to satisfy me. I demand no more of him or of motogp to keep him there. In fact better to move on than have another Doohan or Rossi era. On this aspect they are all the same to me.



The last 10 years were dominated more by a single rider than rules or manufacturers. If it becomes dominated by one manufacturer regardless of the riders, then ok, we have a big problem.

Click to expand...

They all use the same MM system, except for Suzuki who have stuck with Mitsubishi. Suzuki will probably be the only manufacturer who must change hardware, and they will probably improve as a result (slowly). Like the F1 ECU, the MotoGP software will probably be insanely complicated, and it's primary purpose will be to freeze some types of development, not make things go backwards.



We will never see mush vs. brick b/c the manufacturers have decided that low fuel consumption is more important than tire development. They didn't know they were making that decision--that's why the MSMA are so pathetic. They've wrecked the sport on accident.

mylexicon said:

They all use the same MM system, except for Suzuki who have stuck with Mitsubishi. Suzuki will probably be the only manufacturer who must change hardware, and they will probably improve as a result (slowly). Like the F1 ECU, the MotoGP software will probably be insanely complicated, and it's primary purpose will be to freeze some types of development, not make things go backwards.



We will never see mush vs. brick b/c the manufacturers have decided that low fuel consumption is more important than tire development. They didn't know they were making that decision--that's why the MSMA are so pathetic. They've wrecked the sport on accident.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

hawkdriver said:

What are you riding, I've heard of people who mix race fuel and other chemicals with their fuel to get what they need. That isn't for me but I'm way to slow to be needing special brew fuel. I'm thinking about buying a Triumph Bonnie and just cruising around, no more need for HP wars for this old dog.

Click to expand...

2005 ZX10R. I never had a problem. Maybe got stuck with 91 octane twice at most. Couldnt even tell the difference on road. No need to rev past 7k anyway. I have access to plenty blending stuff, pure ethanol and toluene for instance. Not interested in more HP either. Thing is Ive seen old station tanks pumped dry and what comes out at the end is definitely an engine killer unless they had developed a map which senses the problem and kicks in to save it. I dont know how on high compression but maybe there's a way with modern EFI?

mylexicon said:

Page 1 (the only page) of "Povol's Guide to Organizing International Prototype Racing":



If Honda had not pushed for 800cc, 21L, and 6 engines; no one could discern the men from the boys, and MotoGP would be overpopulated with posers. Any and all attempts to return posers to the ranks of MotoGP must be resisted. Better to let MotoGP die an honorable, heterosexual death than to have it perverted by the .... socialists who think they know how to build/ride prototype motorcycles better than the manufacturers. The end goal of any respectable racing series is to have one bike and one rider. When the series goes bankrupt, and the new organizers implement "necessary" reforms to improve the racing, the .... socialists who like close racing must be lynched one by one, along with their monkey gods, until the new organizers acquiesce.

Click to expand...

LOL!!! I like that!!



Of course engineers (manufacturers) look for ever-more-complicated engineering solutions, mechanical, electrical - it's what they do. When you hand over the keys to the palace to the manufacturers you are guaranteed to get engineering solutions. The decision-making process of MGP obviously needs to be more democratic in it's governance. Input from teams, riders, manufacturers, governing bodies all need to be balanced to create the ideal formula.