What's Wrong with the Ducati?

J4rn0 said:

You are saying 08 and 09 were basically the same for Casey as 010. Wrong.



...



So, again, the general rideability problems of the Ducati and the additional front end problems of 010 should not be mixed. That you like it or not, it's a fact, that Stoner's different performance in these different seasons shows very clearly.

Click to expand...

I'm not saying they were the "same", you are to frame the debate. You have been saying Stoner wasn't able to tell his engineers useful feedback to solve the rideability problems this year. I'm saying first of all that its ........, Ducati just were not as determined to fix it as they are now that they signed Rossi. You are saying the rideability problems appeared this year only, I'm again calling ......... Rideability problems have existed, but they just weren't addressed with such fierce determination as they are now. Alex Briggis keeps sending us cute messages and pictures, but what we really see is a war room. These guys are treating this Rossi-Ducati signing as a project similar to the 1969 Race to the Moon. You guys frame it as business as usual (the theme of this and other thread recently) but its NOT, it IS 'Rossi treatment as usual'. The rest of the grid doesn't get this kind of treatment by their manufacture.



Tom says he was just joking, but I quite like the suggestion of Ducati saying 'Rossi must improve for Ducati to be Ducati.'

Jumkie said:

These guys are treating this Rossi-Ducati signing as a project similar to the 1969 Race to the Moon.

Click to expand...

I get it, so Rossi's crew are not really in Italy, they are in a secret location pretending they are at the Ducati factory?

Goatboy said:

I get it, so Rossi's crew are not really in Italy, they are in a secret location pretending they are at the Ducati factory?

Click to expand...

I suppose my point was too complex for you to understand. Would you like me to draw pictures?

J4rn0 said:

It's always like being in a loop with you. Whatever the initial topic you always end up with Rossi, Rossi, Rossi: he's your obsession.



Rossi always gets privileged treatment, right? Great. See? I got the idea. They pay him millions, just to spend more millions to... to make him win! Whatever it takes.



And imagine that they do all that, when they could just listen to some other rider and act accordingly. But no, they will listen only to Rossi and do anything he says and cover him with gold because... Right, why should they do that? Ah, sure, because this is what the Mafia ordered.

Fantastic. Really. Send the script to Hollywood, Jum. I find it boring, but that's just me. Go on, by all means. You are a man on a mission.

Click to expand...

It's obviously not a question of catering to Rossi's whims because Ducati honor him as a god.



It's as I said (and you conveniently ignored) Ducati MUST make the Ducati less idiosyncratic and more rider friendly

- because if Rossi does not do well on the Italian brand - it will be a marketing nightmare and in general have a negative

impact on their reputation. They will not be able to blame their deficencies on the inadequacy of riders like Melandri

and Capirossi or on the illness of Stoner. If Rossi can't do well on the Ducati - no-one else can be expected to do so.

J4rn0 said:

It's always like being in a loop with you. Whatever the initial topic you always end up with Rossi, Rossi, Rossi: he's your obsession.



Rossi always gets privileged treatment, right? Great. See? I got the idea. They pay him millions, just to spend more millions to... to make him win! Whatever it takes.



And imagine that they do all that, when they could just listen to some other rider and act accordingly. But no, they will listen only to Rossi and do anything he says and cover him with gold because... Right, why should they do that? Ah, sure, because this is what the Mafia ordered.

Fantastic. Really. Send the script to Hollywood, Jum. I find it boring, but that's just me. Go on, by all means. You are a man on a mission.

Click to expand...

Ah, I see frustration is setting in. Difficult to refute what I say, eh? Yeah, I've heard it all before buddy. Am I really "spoiling" the thread or just "spoiling" your "agenda driven" assertions?



Ok, recap:



J4rno: Its not that Ducati didn't listen to Stoner but its that Stoner doesn't give his engineers useful feedback. Ducati just this year started having problems. Ducati is not making these recent improvement for Rossi, they are doing it for themselves.



Jumkie: .........



Ah, I admit, this is off topic. Maybe we should both get back on topic. The Ducati is a unique machine. You ask what's "wrong" with it? Here, I'll make it more simple:



Here are the problem areas...

11285roblem Areas.png]

J4rn0 said:

I started this thread titled "What's Wrong with Ducati", how can you say I am "conveniently" ignoring that "Ducati MUST make the Ducati less idiosyncratic and more rider friendly"?

You say they must make it work because, now, they cannot afford to fail with Rossi on board. Great.



Why did they hire Rossi then, in the first place? Pay all that money, only to find themselves in such a one-way tunnel? They have lost Stoner -- too bad for them -- but why not just be happy with Nicky who's already fast, and fix the bike for him -- maybe teamed with De Puniet.



If it was only a matter of acting decisively on the problem, only a matter of will, why waste money on Rossi? Invest more in bike development, hire more engineers rather... No?



The script is absurd unless you accept the fact that they hired Rossi because they think he is the only one who can remove their stumbling block and make their bike progress. Whether or not Ducati's choice is right, we cannot know yet. But that is their motive, for sure. And they are doing it for Ducati, not for Rossi.

Click to expand...

I say ignoring because you had made the same statement earlier and I replied and you paid no attention.



Why Rossi? Because they need a major talent to spearhead the team and it just worked out that no other

big talent would go within miles of the Ducati. And Rossi (assuming he was leaving Yamaha) really had no

other option.



I don't in fact know for sure that Rossi's development skills are what will put Ducati on the top of the mountain.

What I'm saying is that fate has married Rossi and Ducati - for better or for worse, and they will look mighty

foolish if they can't do well with Rossi in the driver's seat. As I already said - it's not about making Rossi happy.

That I agree is absurd. His happiness is (if they do well) will only be a side-product of their success.

michaelm said:

Even such stoner die-hards as bunyip and I have appreciated your support of stoner whilst being a fan of rossi, and of ducati as it is not unreasonable for you to be. Your only view on this thread I take some issue with is that stoner has been deficient in not developing the bike for other riders, as I think few if any riders including valentino have this as much of a priority

.

Click to expand...

Agreed that Stoner should certainly not have been bothering to develop it for anyone else, and I don't believe anyone is saying this. The problem is they/he hasn't really improved it for himself either, hence the serious question mark on his development skill as the number one rider.



All I've said is the GP10 is a direct result of Stoner's development data and feedback, as the top dog in the team this is a no brainer, unless you feel they've ignored Casey? Maybe what Ducati did with it was the problem, whos to know. and I'm certainly not proclaiming that Rossi will fix it either, although it seems it's all smiles from Burgess and the boys at Bologna presently......



I just can't accept the fact that after watching the last fours years that Ducati haven't moved heaven and earth to keep Casey winning, they've never been a company who've accepted defeat in racing its just not in their make up, some are saying now they are only starting to with Rossi, sure a massive effort is going in but this has always been the case in one way or another, developing a carbon Fibre frame wouldn't be cheap......

Short version:

I agree with Jumkie that this years effort is not going to be the usual by the Ducati team/Factory.By far,probarbly.But right or wrong.I think there is way to much preassure on Ducati to succeed for them to not do something extra.And they have had about the same problems a few years,but probarbly hasn't had the resourses to fix it.(Not enough people to be able to follow through many more than one direction on one years bike).Unlike HRC.But with the Rossi investment they more or less have to,not to look bad.

Long version:

I wonder how long before they had planned/decided to really get Rossi.I mean,looking at their organisation in the team,with the main testrider as team manager,till this year Preziosi was more at the factory,and not attending every race.Or was he?

I could be wrong but i get the feeling they were prepairing for 2011/2012 and maybe had too high hopes for the GP10 to not needing too much developement.Who was at the factory ? Again i have no knowledge of their racedepartment structure,so i could be way off here.

As i remeber,till 2006 with the 990 they had a great bike as long as it was a fairly smooth track with good traction and no tight bends.

Capirossi said lots of times it was hard to turn,and said the same thing about the2007 800cc.2007 he talked about wheight transfer problems and couldn't get frontend feel.Then Melandri said about the same thing.Melandri never really rode the bike fully,it seems though.Nicky's first year was more or less bad luck,communication problems and things that delayed him comming up to speed.

I'm not really sure what Nicky thought of the 2009 bike.It seems he was ocuppied blaming himself not to have figured the bike out.



So,it seems maybe the frame has been too stiff everywhere for years,and also hard to turn for years.



Casey Stoner on the other hand MUST have had a completely different ridingstyle on the Ducati then.

I'm guessing he saw the problems as the others did,but adapted around it somehow.Using rearbrake and slided front and rear in a more controlled way.

Philip Island this year for instance.There was a section(3i think)with that long left turn up and over a hill where he said in an interview,he let the front slide very much there.I think he was quite fast in that section all weekend.Stoner was on the edge while the others were nere the edge maybe then.

If everyone else is trying to get as good grip in the front as possible,how are you going to be faster than that?Maybe this is what Ben Spies is talking about when he sais he can't really understand what Stoner is doing.

And maybe this is why Stoner prefered the 2009 forks and Hayden didn't.

Maybe this is part of the reason Preziosi said he could kill him or whatever.

He rides around the problems and slides the front like no other.Has a unique style and setup.This is great,he's fast,but not for Ducati in the longrun.

Then they finally get Rossi,and Burgess+team.(The obvious)-Now,we can spare no expences because it will pay off.Marlboro will be happy,just say a number and we will pay up-We have one of the most interresting teams,looking at number of fans and possible new fans of Hayden and Rossi.They both are quite media-friendly,and Rossi with team have a record of being a solver of problems.

J4rn0 said:

Honestly, Jum, I think you are probably just drinking too much.

Click to expand...

Finally, something we agree on. Look, the thread is fair. And so far, I'd say we've managed to debate without it completely getting crazy. Its a fair question you ask: What's wrong with the Ducati? Thing is, we are gonna go places in the discussion where it will lead to some personal bias and such. All good.



Sp more to the topic at hand. Anyway, its hard to state exactly what is wrong with it. Seriously dude, Loris, Stoner, and Nicky probably given them some good feedback but the problem has persisted. Though I contend its because they perhaps didn't try to tackle the problem as fierce as they are now showing. The thing is complicated because of the unique design to have the engine be part of the chassis. If I had one bet, I'd say this is where their problems come from. Its a flaw that permeates the rest of the function. Mental Anarchist has said plenty of good takes, and in particular, he said the rear grip issue at Yamaha was one that they weren't able to fix. The point I liked however was that to fix this it presents other problems as reaction. Though, I'd contend, it wasn't much of a problem at Yamaha since they were on the podiums all the time. Not the case with Ducati. They've messed with a few thing here and there, but the general overall design has not changed radically. Yes, not even the carbon swing arm, since this is not a core but rather a peripheral. I think they will change something rather major in the overall design. I think they are doing that as we speak and will present this as one of may possible solutions. Then Rossi will have a few to chose from, which if they make enough solutions, then one should be alright as a baseline for the season. (Again, something they were not willing to do before, not because they didn't have decent feedback, but frankly because they did not treat the problem as dire. Now they do.)

I think in all this discussion there is a huge void between what a riders feedback is and does towards development. I am certain that I am not an expert at what feedback a rider gives but I am also certain that it is not engineering specifics.



Now please correct me if I am wrong but a rider's feedback would consist more of "the bike does ...... when I let the throttle of here" and "when i initiate turn in the bike does ....."



I don't believe that the rider says "the direction of the fibre in the carbon fibre steering head should be at 56 degrees from the vertical rather than its current 54 degrees as the flex and resonance of it is incorrect when the motor is at 17,500 rpm" or "the algorithm used in the fuel mapping when the tank gets into the bottom 3rd is a little bit out I think".



Now I am happy to be corrected but if you think the latter is correct which by the sound of some comments and opinions is what some people think then I would suggest you are wrong.



If the former is correct then to assume that a rider can get to this level of the game, win a WC against the alleged GOAT and more race wins in 4 seasons then anyone else, can not relay what the bike is doing in every different part of the track under ever different condition is just preposterous.



I doubt there is a rider in the field who is unable to give quality feedback to the engineers.

Anders GUZZI said:

Short version:

I agree with Jumkie that this years effort is not going to be the usual by the Ducati team/Factory.By far,probarbly.But right or wrong.I think there is way to much preassure on Ducati to succeed for them to not do something extra.And they have had about the same problems a few years,but probarbly hasn't had the resourses to fix it.(Not enough people to be able to follow through many more than one direction on one years bike).Unlike HRC.But with the Rossi investment they more or less have to,not to look bad.

Long version:

I wonder how long before they had planned/decided to really get Rossi.I mean,looking at their organisation in the team,with the main testrider as team manager,till this year Preziosi was more at the factory,and not attending every race.Or was he?

I could be wrong but i get the feeling they were prepairing for 2011/2012 and maybe had too high hopes for the GP10 to not needing too much developement.Who was at the factory ? Again i have no knowledge of their racedepartment structure,so i could be way off here.

As i remeber,till 2006 with the 990 they had a great bike as long as it was a fairly smooth track with good traction and no tight bends.

Capirossi said lots of times it was hard to turn,and said the same thing about the2007 800cc.2007 he talked about wheight transfer problems and couldn't get frontend feel.Then Melandri said about the same thing.Melandri never really rode the bike fully,it seems though.Nicky's first year was more or less bad luck,communication problems and things that delayed him comming up to speed.

I'm not really sure what Nicky thought of the 2009 bike.It seems he was ocuppied blaming himself not to have figured the bike out.



So,it seems maybe the frame has been too stiff everywhere for years,and also hard to turn for years.



Casey Stoner on the other hand MUST have had a completely different ridingstyle on the Ducati then.

I'm guessing he saw the problems as the others did,but adapted around it somehow.Using rearbrake and slided front and rear in a more controlled way.

Philip Island this year for instance.There was a section(3i think)with that long left turn up and over a hill where he said in an interview,he let the front slide very much there.I think he was quite fast in that section all weekend.Stoner was on the edge while the others were nere the edge maybe then.

If everyone else is trying to get as good grip in the front as possible,how are you going to be faster than that?Maybe this is what Ben Spies is talking about when he sais he can't really understand what Stoner is doing.

And maybe this is why Stoner prefered the 2009 forks and Hayden didn't.

Maybe this is part of the reason Preziosi said he could kill him or whatever.

He rides around the problems and slides the front like no other.Has a unique style and setup.This is great,he's fast,but not for Ducati in the longrun.

Then they finally get Rossi,and Burgess+team.(The obvious)-Now,we can spare no expences because it will pay off.Marlboro will be happy,just say a number and we will pay up-We have one of the most interresting teams,looking at number of fans and possible new fans of Hayden and Rossi.They both are quite media-friendly,and Rossi with team have a record of being a solver of problems.

Click to expand...

Nail on the head. I'm saying that chassis is the problem (sitting from my computer of course). Its the core, and from this design the problems derive. Yes, Capirossi did mention he had problems with the weight transfer which again points to a chassis design that for better or worse was not being address (again, from my distant and layman observation).

Mental Anarchist said:

I think in all this discussion there is a huge void between what a riders feedback is and does towards development. I am certain that I am not an expert at what feedback a rider gives but I am also certain that it is not engineering specifics.



Now please correct me if I am wrong but a rider's feedback would consist more of "the bike does ...... when I let the throttle of here" and "when i initiate turn in the bike does ....."



I don't believe that the rider says "the direction of the fibre in the carbon fibre steering head should be at 56 degrees from the vertical rather than its current 54 degrees as the flex and resonance of it is incorrect when the motor is at 17,500 rpm" or "the algorithm used in the fuel mapping when the tank gets into the bottom 3rd is a little bit out I think".



Now I am happy to be corrected but if you think the latter is correct which by the sound of some comments and opinions is what some people think then I would suggest you are wrong.



If the former is correct then to assume that a rider can get to this level of the game, win a WC against the alleged GOAT and more race wins in 4 seasons then anyone else, can not relay what the bike is doing in every different part of the track under ever different condition is just preposterous.



I doubt there is a rider in the field who is unable to give quality feedback to the engineers.

Click to expand...

Jumkie said:

Does anybody think that Rossi will tell them, look, change this fork tube to have less ribs on its outer shell and use carbon with less cross weave or instead use titanium on this part and etc.? NO! He tells them the problem he's experiencing and the engineers try to present solutions. And sometimes it’s multiple attempts to solve one problem.

Click to expand...

Great minds hey! And mine isn't even soaked with tequila!!!

Mental Anarchist said:

I think in all this discussion there is a huge void between what a riders feedback is and does towards development. I am certain that I am not an expert at what feedback a rider gives but I am also certain that it is not engineering specifics.



Now please correct me if I am wrong but a rider's feedback would consist more of "the bike does ...... when I let the throttle of here" and "when i initiate turn in the bike does ....."



I don't believe that the rider says "the direction of the fibre in the carbon fibre steering head should be at 56 degrees from the vertical rather than its current 54 degrees as the flex and resonance of it is incorrect when the motor is at 17,500 rpm" or "the algorithm used in the fuel mapping when the tank gets into the bottom 3rd is a little bit out I think".



Now I am happy to be corrected but if you think the latter is correct which by the sound of some comments and opinions is what some people think then I would suggest you are wrong.



If the former is correct then to assume that a rider can get to this level of the game, win a WC against the alleged GOAT and more race wins in 4 seasons then anyone else, can not relay what the bike is doing in every different part of the track under ever different condition is just preposterous.



I doubt there is a rider in the field who is unable to give quality feedback to the engineers.

Click to expand...

Exactly - well said.

Some people like to imply the riders are the brains of the engineering department. Bollocks.

They would be simply telling their engineers where they are having issues & what those issues are.

The rest is fairy tales.

Talpa said:

The problem is they/he hasn't really improved it for himself either, hence the serious question mark on his development skill as the number one rider.

Click to expand...

So in your view, Stoner having the most race wins to date, in the 800 era, wasn't a good measure of how well one is developing a bike ?



Whats measures should he have been observing? How well everyone else went on their bikes ?







You need to start off by thinking just a tiny bit Talpa



Good to have you back

Anders GUZZI said:

Casey Stoner on the other hand MUST have had a completely different ridingstyle on the Ducati then.

I'm guessing he saw the problems as the others did,but adapted around it somehow.Using rearbrake and slided front and rear in a more controlled way.

Philip Island this year for instance.There was a section(3i think)with that long left turn up and over a hill where he said in an interview,he let the front slide very much there.I think he was quite fast in that section all weekend.Stoner was on the edge while the others were nere the edge maybe then.

If everyone else is trying to get as good grip in the front as possible,how are you going to be faster than that?Maybe this is what Ben Spies is talking about when he sais he can't really understand what Stoner is doing.

And maybe this is why Stoner prefered the 2009 forks and Hayden didn't.

Maybe this is part of the reason Preziosi said he could kill him or whatever.

He rides around the problems and slides the front like no other.Has a unique style and setup.This is great,he's fast,but not for Ducati in the long run.

Click to expand...

This is good post that gets close to the heart of what I believe is the problem. But even then, after watching Stoner at PI I think he goes beyond using rear brake to get grip to the front, I think he is a supreme at using the throttle to balance the front/rear grip ( a level over what the average may do with the rear brake ). This is something of a base cornering requirement of riding dirt track in Aust. ( and he started doing it as a kid ) .... it may also elplain why Spies doesn't "get it yet" ( which bodes well for him when he does ) Its a different style of riding and is allways on the edge, but a way of playng with or utlizing whats happening within the edge zone.