What does the future hold for Jack Miller?

AJV80 said:

Miller can be quite fast on the MarcVDS and get top ten finishes, which is respectable. Although I think he struggles with consistency and crashes causing injuring and further inconsistent results. He needs a season of good top ten finishes to place him well in the standings to get noticed. He has another year on his contract now, if he did have a good 2017 season I don't know what factory rides would be available to him.

Even if a factory team could see potential in his talent, I doubt they would gamble on him based on his consistency record to date.

Click to expand...

He has two seasons until the next factory ride is up. I can't see the Japanese favorites taking him, he's more likely to end up at ktm. Which may not be such a bad thing come 2018-2019.

Barbedwirebikerr said:

He has two seasons until the next factory ride is up. I can't see the Japanese favorites taking him, he's more likely to end up at ktm. Which may not be such a bad thing come 2018-2019.

Click to expand...

I don't think the Yamaha or Honda factories will take him either tbh, not unless he pulls a rabbit out of the hat next season which is doubtful. What are your predictions for KTM's performance in 2018 and 2019?

I could be wrong with this but I was surprised they opted to use a trellis frame, didn't Ducati run a trellis frame which beared no fruit? I thought they scrapped it after struggling with it?

AJV80 said:

I don't think the Yamaha or Honda factories will take him either tbh, not unless he pulls a rabbit out of the hat next season which is doubtful. What are your predictions for KTM's performance in 2018 and 2019?

I could be wrong with this but I was surprised they opted to use a trellis frame, didn't Ducati run a trellis frame which beared no fruit? I thought they scrapped it after struggling with it?

Click to expand...

??? They won a championship on it. The bike used Ducati's traditional steel trellis chassis design until the GP9, when they introduced the carbon fibre chassis using the engine as a stressed member. From memory they adopted the aluminium twin spar frame in 2012 by decree of Rossi.

Arrabbiata1 said:

??? They won a championship on it. The bike used Ducati's traditional steel trellis chassis design until the GP9, when they introduced the carbon fibre chassis using the engine as a stressed member. From memory they adopted the aluminium twin spar frame in 2012 by decree of Rossi.

Click to expand...

I thought they used it to win a championship to, but didn't really put the bikes strengths down to the fact they had a trellis frame and more on Stoners abilities and the bikes drive out of corners. I saw in an interview with a Ducati engineer explaining the weight distribution of the 2007 bike. i think its engine position was more rear biased or something like that and it suited the Bridgestones rears better than other bikes and gave them immense drive out of the corners that others struggled to match.

Do they still use the trellis frame, i honestly don't know and didn't think they did. I think they have been more consistently competitive of late compared to 2008 onwards.

None of the other bikes use the trellis frame either, if there was an advantage to a trellis frame i would have thought factory Honda/Yamaha guys would be all over it by now or at least testing them.

But yes fair point mate, really poor choice of words saying the frame didn't bear fruit. That wasn't what i was really trying to say, more that they tried it and opted away from it for a reason. I thought KTM might have opted to go for something more conventional and similar to the rest of the field, god knows they will have than their work cut out for them as it is.

AJV80 said:

I thought they used it to win a championship to, but didn't really put the bikes strengths down to the fact they had a trellis frame and more on Stoners abilities and the bikes drive out of corners. I saw in an interview with a Ducati engineer explaining the weight distribution of the 2007 bike. i think its engine position was more rear biased or something like that and it suited the Bridgestones rears better than other bikes and gave them immense drive out of the corners that others struggled to match.

Do they still use the trellis frame, i honestly don't know and didn't think they did. I think they have been more consistently competitive of late compared to 2008 onwards.

None of the other bikes use the trellis frame either, if there was an advantage to a trellis frame i would have thought factory Honda/Yamaha guys would be all over it by now or at least testing them.

Click to expand...

Stoner didn't much care for the steel trellis frame - he felt that the flex was abrupt and imprecise and had little positives. I've always thought that it was part of Ducati's DNA because aluminium was too expensive and was very much part of their heritage. With the 916 and its derivatives being so successful in production racing I suppose they wanted to bring this into the GP paddock. I maintain their was a degree of stubborn pride behind the decision to run a steel trellis frame for so long.

The carbon chassis was very finicky pernickety and hard to set up let alone ride. Stoner thought it was great and had huge potential - but then he was the only one that could ride it competitively. I think even he conceded that when it wasn't right or precisely within its narrow parameters it was a ..... to use.

Few have been able to articulate why and how Casey Stoner was able to ride that bike to a rostrum far less the measures he introduced to his riding to win on it. It is simply beyond the layman.

Arrabbiata1 said:

Stoner didn't much care for the steel trellis frame - he felt that the flex was abrupt and imprecise and had little positives. I've always thought that it was part of Ducati's DNA because aluminium was too expensive and was very much part of their heritage. With the 916 and its derivatives being so successful in production racing I suppose they wanted to bring this into the GP paddock. I maintain their was a degree of stubborn pride behind the decision to run a steel trellis frame for so long.

The carbon chassis was very finicky pernickety and hard to set up let alone ride. Stoner thought it was great and had huge potential - but then he was the only one that could ride it competitively. I think even he conceded that when it wasn't right or precisely within its narrow parameters it was a ..... to use.

Few have been able to articulate why and how Casey Stoner was able to ride that bike to a rostrum far less the measures he introduced to his riding to win on it. It is simply beyond the layman.

Click to expand...

The reasons you mentioned above actually may also explain KTM's reason in using the steel trellis frame. I know their RC8 superbike had a trellis frame.

Maybe its a case of sticking with something they already know and comfortable with.

Casey was truly amazing and brilliantly fast, I had the pleasure of seeing him win twice on the Ducati at PI, I was also lucky enough to have a BBQ dinner after the 2010 race with both his Parents at the Seahorse Motel bbq area.

AJV80 said:

The reasons you mentioned above actually may also explain KTM's reason in using the steel trellis frame. I know their RC8 superbike had a trellis frame.

Maybe its a case of sticking with something they already know and comfortable with.

Casey was truly amazing and brilliantly fast, I had the pleasure of seeing him win twice on the Ducati at PI, I was also lucky enough to have a BBQ dinner after the 2010 race with both his Parents at the Seahorse Motel bbq area.

Click to expand...

I met Colin and Bronwyn by chance in the paddock in around 2001 when Stoner was racing in the British 125 championship. Crutchlow was in the same race.

Regarding KTM, that would be my feeling - going with what they know and understand.

BarryMachine said:

Id give Stoner the most talented ever but Marquez more "risk it".

Click to expand...

I wouldn't give any of this bunch most talented in a million years, fact is the bikes of 20-30 years ago were beasts to ride and this lot would never get to the finish line.

Theo said:

I wouldn't give any of this bunch most talented in a million years, fact is the bikes of 20-30 years ago were beasts to ride and this lot would never get to the finish line.

Click to expand...

As much as I dislike Rossi, I think he would have done exceptionally well 20-30 years ago. Winning the number of titles he did in his career never would have happened back then, but his bike control is quite exceptional. And you forget that the only way to ride those 500cc machines was to be smooth with throttle, something Rossi is a master of doing. His braking ability would have reaped dividends back then as it does now.

JPSLotus said:

As much as I dislike Rossi, I think he would have done exceptionally well 20-30 years ago. Winning the number of titles he did in his career never would have happened back then, but his bike control is quite exceptional. And you forget that the only way to ride those 500cc machines was to be smooth with throttle, something Rossi is a master of doing. His braking ability would have reaped dividends back then as it does now.

Click to expand...

Agree. Stoner and Rossi, less so Lorenzo due to the temperamental finicky nature of the 500s.

How they would had coped on Duke's Avon shod Norton is entirely another matter

Arrabbiata1 said:

Agree. Stoner and Rossi, less so Lorenzo due to the temperamental finicky nature of the 500s.

How they would had coped on Duke's Avon shod Norton is entirely another matter

Click to expand...

I couldn't see Lorenzo and Marquez doing well in the older 500cc era. Well I think Lorenzo would have done better than Marquez. But MM himself, to ride those bikes the way he rides the modern bikes? Unthinkable. Could you imagine attempting that kind of insanity at the Salzburgring up against the barriers?

What was the difficulty with the Norton? I don't know nearly enough about the immediate post-war era.

JPSLotus said:

As much as I dislike Rossi, I think he would have done exceptionally well 20-30 years ago. Winning the number of titles he did in his career never would have happened back then, but his bike control is quite exceptional. And you forget that the only way to ride those 500cc machines was to be smooth with throttle, something Rossi is a master of doing. His braking ability would have reaped dividends back then as it does now.

Click to expand...

I've never ridden a 500cc gp bike but the 250 of those days was hairy, the revs had to be kept high all the time, I even managed to fall off mine on clutch release the first time I took it to a track day while stationary (well almost stationary) in the pit lane, how we all laughed, moved about a foot and wound up with a broken footpeg. I eventually half managed to use it after about 6 months, sadly its gone to my youngest now and he is a lot better than I ever was.

JPSLotus said:

I couldn't see Lorenzo and Marquez doing well in the older 500cc era. Well I think Lorenzo would have done better than Marquez. But MM himself, to ride those bikes the way he rides the modern bikes? Unthinkable. Could you imagine attempting that kind of insanity at the Salzburgring up against the barriers?

What was the difficulty with the Norton? I don't know nearly enough about the immediate post-war era.

Click to expand...

Not so much difficulty, sweet frame. Lithe but slow in comparison to the Gilera's. Actually it caused great controversy when Duke switched to the latter in an era that nationalism was paramount. In my opinion Les Graham's championship on the Porcupine was a greater feat. In both cases I'm more referring to the terrifying tread shedding tyres. Think of how blessed we are today simply as road riders. We have no comprehension.

Arrabbiata1 said:

Not so much difficulty, sweet frame. Lithe but slow in comparison to the Gilera's. Actually it caused great controversy when Duke switched to the latter in an era that nationalism was paramount. In my opinion Les Graham's championship on the Porcupine was a greater feat. In both cases I'm more referring to the terrifying tread shedding tyres. Think of how blessed we are today simply as road riders. We have no comprehension.

Click to expand...

The tires in general in those days were utter .... by even semi-modern standards. Sure they were the best the world had to offer, but to go back on those tires especially when using modern tires...insanity.

JPSLotus said:

The tires in general in those days were utter .... by even semi-modern standards. Sure they were the best the world had to offer, but to go back on those tires especially when using modern tires...insanity.

Click to expand...

The old slicks were terrible as well, behaved like remoulds hahahaha, use to see the tread sliding off he side on tracks that had more of one type of corner than the other like Silverstone 10 right 6 left.

JPSLotus said:

I couldn't see Lorenzo and Marquez doing well in the older 500cc era. Well I think Lorenzo would have done better than Marquez. But MM himself, to ride those bikes the way he rides the modern bikes? Unthinkable. Could you imagine attempting that kind of insanity at the Salzburgring up against the barriers?

What was the difficulty with the Norton? I don't know nearly enough about the immediate post-war era.

Click to expand...

I agree with Lorenzo outshining MM on a 500 2stroke with their brutish power delivery and very limited electronics. Lorenzo's smooth consistent style would have worked once he got a rhythm up. MM id imagine would suffer many spills constantly trying to push snd find the limit when he needs to move through the field.

Marquez did a pretty good job in 125cc there's no reason why he wouldn't ride a 500cc differently than he rides a MotoGP bike.

p4p1 said:

Marquez did a pretty good job in 125cc there's no reason why he wouldn't ride a 500cc differently than he rides a MotoGP bike.

Click to expand...

The power delivery on the 500cc is in a very narrow power band and comes on brutally with much more power than a 125 has, it has a totally different engine characteristic to a MotoGP's more linear power delivery. Not saying Marc would be hopeless on one, but given his wild riding style it wouldn't be anywhere near as forgiving as his MotoGP is with its current electronics.

To compare MM and JL on a 500, I would say MM's riding style would be much more prone to highsides on a 500 than JL's .... I could be wrong.

Arrabbiata1 said:

Not so much difficulty, sweet frame. Lithe but slow in comparison to the Gilera's. Actually it caused great controversy when Duke switched to the latter in an era that nationalism was paramount. In my opinion Les Graham's championship on the Porcupine was a greater feat. In both cases I'm more referring to the terrifying tread shedding tyres. Think of how blessed we are today simply as road riders. We have no comprehension.

Click to expand...

Les Graham, who scored less points than the second and third place getters, yet won the championship ;-)

Dr No said:

Les Graham, who scored less points than the second and third place getters, yet won the championship ;-)

Click to expand...

I was more referring to the challenge of the AJS over the Norton. But to think, people complain about the BSB 'showdown' being unjust.