Mark N <(E-Mail Removed)> Wed, 13 May 2009 20:17:35
>> No, they've not reverted. It is a four. Mark mispoke.
>
>No, I didn't. I was talking about Ducati's tradition, which goes back a lot
>farther than '03. And the GP bike has pretty much been a pair of V-twins run
>in parallel.

Oh, yes, the Desmosedici is just a couple of V-Twins side by side.
Nothing new here, please move along.

>> Ducatis are not like other bikes. They've always been very happy to think
>> outside the box.
>
>Oh, please. As long as the bike is a 90-degree V-twin, uses desmodromic
>valve actuation, and a steel tubular frame, that is.

I'll defend "Ducati are not like other bikes" because they clearly
aren't. Desmo valves, belt drive cams, steel frames, single sided swing
arms, under seat exhausts. A few of these things have been done by
others but Ducati has often been first or have made them iconic.

"Think outside the box".
Your starter for 10. Since say 1965, what innovations have Ducati made
before the rest of the industry or at right angles to the way the rest
of the industry has gone? Or just in GP racing, what has been different
about their approach? The last time people tried a chassis made from
composites, the factories weren't the only game in town and there was
room for enthusiastic non-factory teams to try things like this. Now, I
can't imagine any of the Japanese factories doing such a thing or anyone
but Ducati trying it. Even BMW haven't really innovated with their new
superbike frame and they can be pretty left-field with their designs.

--
Julian Bond E&MSN: julian_bond at voidstar.com M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173
Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/ T: +44 (0)192 0412 433
Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/ skype:julian.bond?chat
Viewer Discretion Advised

Mark N spews:

> >> I thought the GP bike was a four. Have they reverted?
>
> > No, they've not reverted. It is a four. Mark mispoke.
>
> No, I didn't.

Ahh, of course not.. How could you possibly have
mispoken? Unthinkable. My mistake.


Go fast. Take chances.
Mike S.

Julian Bond wrote:
> Mark N
>
> >> No, they've not reverted. *It is a four. * Mark mispoke.
>
> >No, I didn't. I was talking about Ducati's tradition, which goes back a lot
> >farther than '03. And the GP bike has pretty much been a pair of V-twinsrun
> >in parallel.
>
> Oh, yes, the Desmosedici is just a couple of V-Twins side by side.
> Nothing new here, please move along.

So do you deny that a big part of the reason that Ducati was
immediately siccessful in MotoGP was that they DIDN'T try much of
anything really new when they arrived? They stayed with their tried-
and-true SB homologation special formula of a chromoly space frame,
desmo valve actuation, L-configuration motor, and then the capper was
ignoring the unofficial 220 horsepower cap. Even the V-four was
conventional in MotoGP terms, where no one else was even considering a
twin given the rules.

> >> Ducatis are not like other bikes. They've always been very happy to think
> >> outside the box.
>
> >Oh, please. As long as the bike is a 90-degree V-twin, uses desmodromic
> >valve actuation, and a steel tubular frame, that is.
>
> I'll defend "Ducati are not like other bikes" because they clearly
> aren't. Desmo valves, belt drive cams, steel frames, single sided swing
> arms, under seat exhausts. A few of these things have been done by
> others but Ducati has often been first or have made them iconic.

I'm not saying they are just like any other bike at all, I'm
suggesting they don't necessarily think outside the box anymore than
anyone else. They just have to be different, they really can't or
won't make Japanese copycat bikes like, say, Triumph. I think all of
the European manufacturers recognize that they have to do it
differently to some extent, because they simply can't compete head-to-
head on Japanese ground. But, on the other hand, Ducati has a very
strong traditional streak in their own approach. Even their single was
really a V-twin.

> "Think outside the box".
> Your starter for 10. Since say 1965, what innovations have Ducati made
> before the rest of the industry or at right angles to the way the rest
> of the industry has gone? Or just in GP racing, what has been different
> about their approach? The last time people tried a chassis made from
> composites, the factories weren't the only game in town and there was
> room for enthusiastic non-factory teams to try things like this. Now, I
> can't imagine any of the Japanese factories doing such a thing or anyone
> but Ducati trying it. Even BMW haven't really innovated with their new
> superbike frame and they can be pretty left-field with their designs.

Again, as usual, your thinking is trapped in the view from where you
sit, your perspective. From your view it seems that what the Japanese
do - multi-cylinder bikes, particulary inline fours, valve springs,
aluminum twin-spar frames, etc. - is conventional by definition. But
how many innovations have the Japanese made or popularized in the last
50 years, how much have they contributed to steetbike and racebike
advancement? There have been quite a number of attempts at carbon
composite frames in GP racing over the years, but perhaps the Japanese
haven't emphasized this because they see the downsides and don't see
the production application of this, so don't see the point.

You mention underseat exhausts as a Ducati innovation/contribution and
that's very true, but isn't it really just a style statement? The
practical impact is weight carried too high and heat issues,
particuarly for riders, so is this a good thing? Looks cool, but part
of that is just that Ducati did it, and the 916 was such a
revolutionary syle statement. And that's because Ducati pretty much
has to roll the dice on things like that, because they can't afford to
be conventional in Japanese terms. Sometimes it doesn't work too well,
like the 999 or the butt-ugly late-model 900SS. And desmo valve
actuation pretty much sucks from a streebike standpoint, too expensive
to maintain, is of little value - the Japanese could never get away
with crap like that. But it ends up being of real value on an 800cc
MotoGP bike, which I seriously doubt has been part of the Ducati
master plan over the last 30 years...

"Andrew" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...

http://www.motogp.com/en/news/2009/D...ly+for+Bayliss

Is that really positive? I dunno.


> --
> Andrew
> 00 Daytona
> 00 Speed Triple
> 71 Kawi H1
> 05 Squiddo

On Thu, 14 May 2009 20:50:00 -0700, "Andrew"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>http://www.motogp.com/en/news/2009/D...ly+for+Bayliss
>
>Is that really positive? I dunno.

I was thinking exactly that this morning. Bayliss managed a best of
1:51.2 round Mugello, which is not that special compared to the GP
there last year - about what Melandri managed, in fact.
--
Champ

ZX10R (road), ZX10R (race; breaking), GSX-600(race; sold), GPz750 turbo (classic) Hayabusa (touring)
To email me, neal at my domain should work.