MotoGP 2012

[Mental Trousers]

Ezpeleta raises some good points: how is it that Yamaha with all it's success does not have a title sponsor? If they can't get sponsorship to make their campaign self-sustaining then basically no-one can. Which makes the whole thing unsustainable. So the necessity to reduce costs is undeniable, because eventually the series will implode and become a sad parade of 6 bikes (or 4 - how long will Ducati persist with being tail end charlie?). Who's gonna tune in to that? What manufacturer would be prepared to spend $30-50million to be a part of it?

So in these GFC times MotoGP is basically pricing itself out of the market. Let's be even more blunt: without intervention the series is dying. It's already a sad shadow of what is supposed to be a World Championship. To think that more technology, less rules, more costs, will cure things is like giving a lung cancer patient another cigarette: madness.

Yep.

Yamaha are able to stay in MotoGP partly because Dorna pays them to. Dorna covers a lot of the costs associated with transport between rounds and other stuff.

As for the lung cancer patient, giving him another packet of cigarettes isn't going to kill him any quicker. All the damage is done so he might as well live it up.

The manufacturers aren't running their own launch/traction/wheelie control/ECU/data logging, so who benefits from the 10's of millions of Euro's spent on electronics except Magnetti Marelli? Same goes for carbon brakes and Brembo. Once a single supplier is standard across the board the technological race is over and all your doing is spending crazy amounts of dosh to keep up with the Joneses, with the supplier laughing all the way to the bank as the series bankrupts itself.

MotoGP is dead, long live whatever comes next because there is no other choice.

It's not the electronics itself that is the big win for the manufacturers, it's the software that runs on that electronics. Mostly it's the data gathering and processing algorythmns where the big advances are. It's all good having a theoretical idea of what data is useful and how you should use it but that immediately falls flat on it's face the first time an engine turns over. You can't beat experience.

chassis are now a tune able item , if the new ducati engine doesn’t deliver , screwed is a term I would be using

There seems to be a couple of issues with the engine

1. weight distribution
2. power delivery

If they fix both problems it'll be all good. If they do the typical Italian thing and be arrogant twats that know better then they're screwed.

Personally, I'd love to see them fix the engine then head back in the monocoque chassis direction again. But using alloy for the entire thing rather than carbon. When they introduced the monocoque chassis they were miles ahead of the opposition and I don't reckon the engine is what's been holding it all back. However, that's really unlikely to happen.

[tbs]

Maybe Ducati will finally concede and build a V4 engine? Maybe then they will be able to locate it optimally in the bike and finally get some front end feel.

[Drew]

Maybe Ducati will finally concede and build a V4 engine? Maybe then they will be able to locate it optimally in the bike and finally get some front end feel.

What are they running now?

[Brian d marge]

What are they running now?

Something built by Harland and wolfe from the belfast shipyards

Stephen

[Drew]

Something built by Harland and wolfe from the belfast shipyards

Stephen

Doubt it, those would be two strokes.

[DidJit]

The current Ducati MotoGP engine is a V4 I believe, but in ‘L’ configuration — i.e. 90°. What some commentators have been suggesting is that Ducati narrow the angle from 90° to something like the Aprilia RSV4 (~65°) to give a little more ‘room to move’ set-up-wise.

[Brian d marge]

The current Ducati MotoGP engine is a V4 I believe, but in ‘L’ configuration — i.e. 90°. What some commentators have been suggesting is that Ducati narrow the angle from 90° to something like the Aprilia RSV4 (~65°) to give a little more ‘room to move’ set-up-wise.

its been one of those unsaid ," BUT EVERYONE KNOWS" things ...the cog of the biggest gyro is too far back , they are trying to correct fthe rake and trail to improve things but ass you saw by the british gp crash , it aint helping

2 things would help , different tyres , a bigger more powerful engine than the rest or the loss of the l shape ( which is a ducati trade mark)

Screwed , is a word we might be using soon

Stephen

[Mental Trousers]

It's a 90° L shape which makes it long and because the front cylinders are the long part of the L the CoG is closer to the rear and lower than is optimal. Because the CoG is lower and rearward the weight transfer is biased towards the rear, which affects grip and feedback at both ends. The Ducati's have always been damn good on the throttle because the weight is towards the rear, analogous to a Porsche 911.

With the Porsche 911 series cars you have to brake in a straight line as long and as deeply as possible, get the turn over as quickly as possible while going slower through the mid section, then get on the gas hard and fast when it's pointed in the right direction. The exact handling traits of Ducati GP machines since they started using an L shaped engine. It's also why Stoner has been able to win on it when nobody else could, cos he and the bike are both all about the exit.

[rachprice]

It's a 90° L shape which makes it long and because the front cylinders are the long part of the L the CoG is closer to the rear and lower than is optimal. Because the CoG is lower and rearward the weight transfer is biased towards the rear, which affects grip and feedback at both ends. The Ducati's have always been damn good on the throttle because the weight is towards the rear, analogous to a Porsche 911.

With the Porsche 911 series cars you have to brake in a straight line as long and as deeply as possible, get the turn over as quickly as possible while going slower through the mid section, then get on the gas hard and fast when it's pointed in the right direction. The exact handling traits of Ducati GP machines since they started using an L shaped engine. It's also why Stoner has been able to win on it when nobody else could, cos he and the bike are both all about the exit.

That's the most sensible thing I have read in a while, not that I completely know or understand the mechanics!!

[GD66]

2 things would help , different tyres , a bigger more powerful engine than the rest or the loss of the l shape ( which is a ducati trade mark.

Well, having a bigger engine than the opposition paid off handsomely for them in WSBK !
And regarding the 90deg L shape, you could also argue that the trellis chassis was also a Ducati trademark, and it didn't take them long to lose that when they started shagging round with the thing. Who on the Joe Public side of the spectator fence would know or care if they closed their 90 degrees down to 65 as they tried to get the thing working ? They're stubborn bastards...

[Mental Trousers]

The vee twin is also a Ducati trade mark. Except in MotoGP.

The only reason that engine is still a 90° L is because they're Italian and they're stubborn.

From what I understand it has the broadest spread of power of all of the MotoGP engines while having the highest rev limit, but the riders aren't able to use it properly because the engines delivery is too aggressive. So what should be a plus for them isn't.

[slowpoke]

The manufacturers aren't running their own launch/traction/wheelie control/ECU/data logging, so who benefits from the 10's of millions of Euro's spent on electronics except Magnetti Marelli?

It's not the electronics itself that is the big win for the manufacturers, it's the software that runs on that electronics. Mostly it's the data gathering and processing algorythmns where the big advances are. It's all good having a theoretical idea of what data is useful and how you should use it but that immediately falls flat on it's face the first time an engine turns over. You can't beat experience.

I know what you're getting at but I doubt there's any Honda/Yamaha/Ducati software involved, it's all Magnetti Marelli. It says a lot that a company with BMW's huge resources and technological nous via F1 couldn't develop their own system in WSB and it's only when resorting to the tried and true MM that they finally start winning. I could be wrong but I reckon the only experience the 3 MotoGP manufacturers are getting is how to maximise the MM system(s), which you'll never see on a sportsbike in our lifetimes, especially the GPS based individual corner engine mapping type stuff. Expense for no real world gain is just an engineering luxury no-one can afford.

Personally, I'd love to see them fix the engine then head back in the monocoque chassis direction again. But using alloy for the entire thing rather than carbon. When they introduced the monocoque chassis they were miles ahead of the opposition and I don't reckon the engine is what's been holding it all back. However, that's really unlikely to happen.

Same here. I love the concept of the monocoque and I hope we see it again. Giving Yamaha/Honda decades of a head start with ally beam frames and hoping to beat them at their own game is a big ask, as they are finding out. Unless they are intent on producing their own version of a UJM I don't see the point of it.

[Trudes]

http://twitpic.com/a47z1g

[Drew]

http://twitpic.com/a47z1g

Fuckin awesome!

[rachprice]

bless that midget is showing his expected form for the ring

pretty tight top 3