How about that MotoGP! (spoilers)

Discussion in 'Motorcycle Racing' started by inline_four, Apr 18, 2004.

  1. inline_four

    inline_four Guest

    Mark, what's your excuse for Rossi beating Max? Also, note how they
    walked away from everyone else. Great race, this season is gonna
    inline_four, Apr 18, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. inline_four

    jim Guest

    At altitude, power is much lower. So Rossi didn't have to worry as much
    about getting smoked down the straights. When they get back to normal
    altitude, Rossi better pray for rain. They don't call them Honda lanes for
    Welkom is a place where chassis and rider skill mean much more than power.
    The Yamahas were 5 KPH slower than the Hondas, rather than the 10 they would
    have been at a place much closer to sea level.
    And Max didn't get it 100% right on the chassis side. You could see that
    the bike kept running wide on the exits. Enabled Rossi to stay close and get
    on the power sooner, which negates the top end advantage.
    One race doesn't make a season, especially at a track like Welkom, which
    isn't the norm.
    jim, Apr 18, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. inline_four

    Julian Bond Guest

    Some thoughts.

    The 125 and 250 races were damn good too with some heroic last lap
    battles. Danny Pedrosa especially produced a perfect move to win his
    first 250 race. The Aprilia 250s looked pretty evil to ride almost
    bouncing from bump to bump.

    - How much credence do you give to the Honda riders complaining about
    lack of testing on the new chassis and chatter in the race? And Edwards
    choosing to race the old chassis? Maybe Biaggi did a better job of
    setting up what they got than the rest of them. Or did Biaggi ride round
    the problems better? Or did he get a "special" tyre that solved them?

    - Biaggi allegedly had a slightly different "big" Michelin rear tyre. It
    lasted pretty well, given Biaggi's fastest lap on the last lap.

    - This could be the first time we actually get to see Rossi and Biaggi
    riding against each other to the absolute limit of their ability. They
    never really met in 250 and in 500/MotoGP there's always been some
    reason why Biaggi was limited. I don't feel like I've seen two top
    riders go so fast and hard for so long with so few mistakes for ages.
    Like some of the Fogarty-Corser, Edwards-Bayliss battles you had to hold
    your breath for the last few laps convinced that one of them would screw
    up somehow.

    - Rossi has had good bikes all his career. At the same time, the Aprilia
    125 and 250 were generally acknowledged at the time to be somewhat knife
    edge requiring good setup. Then his first Honda 500 had wandered off the
    plot and the following year they produced a machine with the engine
    moved up and back. It then became easier to ride for Rossi but also for
    all the other riders. When the 4 stroke appeared, Rossi got an early
    test of it from mid year. The stories go that it was a real handful
    because the Japanese test riders wouldn't ride it hard enough and
    criticise it enough. Rossi did a lot of testing that autumn and the bike
    became the winning platform we've seen. All of that may be heresay, but
    it all speaks of a rider with good development and setup skills working
    with good race engineers.

    - Now we get to Yamaha. The story goes that in the early tests Yamaha
    arrived with 4 different engine configurations and told Rossi to pick
    one to use as a platform for future development. He apparently picked
    the one they hoped he would pick. The chosen engine definitely has an
    odd firing order and a new cylinder head that may or may not be 4 valve
    instead of 5.

    - Rossi+Burgess then raised and lengthened the bike as far as they
    could. At the next test, Yamaha turn up with a cut and shut swing arm,
    different engine mounting points and forks with more length allowing
    more adjustment up and down through the triple clamps. Then 4 frames
    appear that are subtly different but interestingly extend the engine
    mounts down to the crankcase at the front. Again Rossi picks one as the
    basis for future development.

    - I think how this worked is that Burgess went through all the data he
    could get his hands on and with his knowledge of Rossi's style decided
    where they would start. The involvement in early development of the RCV
    and the final 500 with Rossi would have helped a great deal here. They
    would have also suggested some development direction to the factory who
    would have produced some alternatives spread either side of this.
    Julian Bond, Apr 19, 2004
  4. elsewhere.

    The last part of the track has one of the fastest turns in the hole season.
    220km/h whith the knee in the ground and changeing radius 3 - 4 times,
    ending up in that 1. gear bend. I suspect that the bike was not the actual
    problem for Max there, rather his head.
    I expect to se the Ducatis higher up on the fast tracks. They still have the
    top-speed edge and at lest capirossi seems like a capable rider.
    Morten Becker-Eriksen, Apr 19, 2004
  5. inline_four

    Will Hartung Guest


    Simple. Let's play with funny numbers.

    Let's say that the Honda have 100HP, and the Yamahas have 90HP.

    Let's say that because of the altitude, the machine are robbed of 5% of
    their power.

    That means that the Honda loses 5HP, whereas the Yamahas only lose 4.5. So,
    even though it's still down on power, the Yamaha has a 1/2 HP advantage due
    to altitude loss over the Honda, having lost less power (it's obviously
    still down on overall power than the Honda, but its affected by it less).

    It's a complete guess, but since the altitude makes the air thinner, less
    oxygen is getting into the combustion chambers to make power, so a across
    the board percentage cut in power seems "fair" and "reasonable".


    Will Hartung
    Will Hartung, Apr 19, 2004
  6. inline_four

    Chris Cavin Guest

    I was thinking they'd still be in the same boat percentage wise, but putting
    it in that light I can see where the difference could come into play on the

    Chris Cavin, Apr 19, 2004
  7. inline_four

    Davide Tosi Guest

    According to Luckynelli who, being a friend of Vale's father, has first
    hand information, the odd firing order is exactly the main development in
    the M1 compared to last year's bike. It's enough to listen to the sound of
    the engine, it's really different, more "full", more roaring.
    Davide Tosi, Apr 19, 2004
  8. inline_four

    inline_four Guest

    Yes, I noticed that when the test videos came out. It's not weird at
    all, rather a time honored GP development approach to an
    uncontrollable power delivery. It's probably either a big bang motor
    (4 cylinders firing at or close to the same time) or something similar
    to Ducati's twin-pulse motor (2 cylinders at a time kinda like a
    twin). This indicates to me the motor was overpowering the chassis
    and/or suspension and they needed to get a more controllable slide and
    tire wear. If this approach is successful (and it probably is since
    they've stuck to it thus far), they might start cranking out more
    power now. We'll see.
    inline_four, Apr 20, 2004
  9. inline_four

    Julian Bond Guest

    We're reading mostly the same reports and actually drawing the same
    conclusions. And that conclusion is that Rossi+Burgess are better at
    what they do than the other rider+race engineer combinations. And Yamaha
    know that and are busting a gut to give them what they ask for. Funny
    how success breeds success. I think the telling thing here is the
    reports of altered weight distribution and the photos of the lengthened
    swing arm. This is exactly the sort of change that comes from a race
    team not from a design engineer. It looks as though it's made the bike
    more forgiving and if that's the case it's something the other riders
    and race engineers should have worked out last year.

    Go back to the Rainey-Roberts years and the Roberts team were constantly
    fighting with the factory to get what they wanted even to the extent of
    using a ROC chassis. The difference now is that the factory seems to be

    Something nobody has mentioned is the likely impact of Honda losing
    Burgess+Rossi as a development team. They've lost Cobas (RIP) and
    Edwards-Gorst are no longer together as well. Mat Oxley suggested in a
    pre-season review that the one thing that might give Rossi the
    championship is that Honda implode and end up chasing engineering
    ghosts. We've maybe seen an inkling of that in their messing around with
    the rear suspension.
    Julian Bond, Apr 20, 2004
  10. inline_four

    Julian Bond Guest

    A one-sided crank is very unlikely. A twin pulse motor would be easy but
    put horrendous strain on the gearbox/crankcases. It looks possible that
    they've gone to a cruciform crank which will introduce some vibration
    but would allow almost any timing order. The downside of this is that
    exhaust design gets much harder. Exhaust tuning is really important and
    a straight 4 with even timing should lead to the most effective and
    powerful result.
    Julian Bond, Apr 20, 2004
  11. inline_four

    Julian Bond Guest

    Hey I'll crow with the best of them. It was something to shout about
    last year when they repeatedly got on the front row, led the first lap
    and won a race wasn't it? Just as it was to watch Nakano hold pole
    position for 30 seconds.

    Right now I am concerned that the 999 seems to be flawed and that the GP
    bike has plenty of power but wayward handling. Mainly because I'd like
    to see Capirossi and Bayliss getting among the 6 Hondas. Same goes for
    Suzuki, Kawasaki, Aprilia and Proton. That last second a lap is awful
    hard to find. Twas ever thus.
    I mentioned Edwards+Gorst because for a while there they had a very
    close and successful partnership, like Fogarty and Bass before them.
    Cobas got a mention because of his ability to get the best out of the
    last 500 and the first of the RCVs. I get the feeling I'm damned if I do
    and damned if I don't. If I mention names I'm too focussed on
    individuals. If I don't I'm being too vague.

    Like all business it *is* a game of individuals and the characters and
    the relationship of the team owner, race engineer and rider *is*
    important. You can't look at Doohan's and Rossi's success without also
    looking at Burgess.

    <grin> Really Mark, you're so f**king negative. Get over it. Or I'll put
    you back in the kill file. That'll teach you! </grin>
    Julian Bond, Apr 20, 2004
  12. inline_four

    Henry Guest

    ...and I had serious preconceives. I really doubt that Ducati is one of
    the big ones in Moto GP, not last year, as turned out, neither this year.
    The GP bikes are too different, each bike is unique. At least for Rossi.
    Its like a request program, he asks for it and get it, sooner or later,
    maybe several times in this year only. This is not the playground for
    Ducati. Superbike yes, GP no. Anyhow, my opinion.

    I believe we will have an interesting race year. Rossi had a hard fight,
    the Yamaha is not as good as the Honda was, and Biaggi is willing to win,
    what was not obvious last year, and these packages Yamaha/Rossi vs.
    Honda/Biaggi are fairly equal, as we have seen last weekend. If Yamaha
    doesn't improve to fast, this year will be one of the most interesting
    ones, like the 80/90's with Lawson/Rainey/Schwantz/Mamola and later on
    Doohan (Just to name some... yeah flame me).

    Henry, Apr 20, 2004
  13. inline_four

    inline_four Guest


    At the risk of sounding like I'm picking on you, can I just ask what
    experience you have with the GP scene? What qualifies you to have
    insight into the factory-team-rider relationships? Have you been
    involved in a development process? Prove me wrong, I'll then gladly
    eat my words. I just don't understand what you're basing your
    conclusions on other than the massive lap time number crunching you
    are so fond of and the interviews we've all read and drawn our own
    conclusions from. I think you will agree with me when I say riders
    and crew chiefs cannot or do not want to always publicly reveal their
    cards, even with regard to the past.
    inline_four, Apr 20, 2004
  14. inline_four

    inline_four Guest

    A one-sided crank's imbalance can be offset with counter weights and
    perhaps balancing shafts, a la Aprilia Mille. Certainly any firing
    order change from a standard 4 cylinder firing order would increase
    strain on the gearbox and other parts. So what, they can be modified.
    They were already picking out of 4 brand new motors. I know nothing
    about exhaust tuning. Can you elaborate?
    inline_four, Apr 20, 2004
  15. inline_four

    Julian Bond Guest

    At it's simplest level, exhaust tuning is all about managing pressure
    waves. When the exhaust port opens it generates a pulse. This pulse gets
    reflected back by discontinuities like the collector where the 4 pipes
    in a 4-1 join and the end of the tailpipe. You want to arrange for a low
    pressure part of the reflected wave to reach the exhaust port just as it
    opens to suck the gases out and a high pressure just as it shuts to
    force the new intake mixture back into the cylinder. Since everything is
    a fixed length this only works perfectly at one rpm and harmonics of
    that rpm. And it works in reverse half way between these peaks. One of
    the big tricks is to smear out the pulses so that the effect is more
    even across the rev range. A 4-1 on an even firing 4 has the most effect
    here because each cylinder can help all the others and there are lots of
    alternate path lengths and firing intervals to smooth out the torque
    curve. So even though the tuning for 1-1 is off, it's working perfectly
    for 1-3. This is why Honda keep changing around the exhaust arrangement.
    The obvious 3-1 and 2-1 for front and back banks of cylinders didn't
    work as well as a 2-1 2-1 1-1.

    Bike engines typically have other problems because layout requires a
    tight turn immediately after the exit from the head and fast flowing gas
    doesn't like turning corners. And the 2 exhaust valves make for an oval
    port instead of circular. And as on the intake, there are mass effects
    as well. A fast moving gas wants to keep moving but a small pipe
    produces too much drag.

    This stuff is less important than on two strokes but it's still a
    critical part of engine development.

    Curiously F1 has gone to a pair of 5-1 tuned perfectly for peak power
    and then used electronics to make the engine driveable everywhere else.
    They've effectively given up on trying to fill in the holes in the rev
    band by mechanical design in pursuit of peak power.
    Julian Bond, Apr 21, 2004
  16. It was so hot at the front that the TV didn't show the other battles but
    Barros passed Edwards and Hayden, the 3 other Yam were fighting, we never
    saw Capi but he fought obviously.
    TV realisation was really poor, as usual...
    Pierre Bonneau, Apr 21, 2004
  17. inline_four

    gcash Guest

    Ehhh, usually I'd agree with you, but this was an unusual situation. This was
    one of those moments where you needed 3 screens. If they'd cut away from
    Rossi/Biaggi I'd killed someone, and if I had those 3 screens I would have
    attempted to grow another eyeball and have all of them swivel independently.

    They could only show one thing at a time, and their choice was pretty much
    made for them.

    At least our Speed TV didn't show it live, so it was edited sanely and they
    had the commercials w/o missing any of the racing.

    gcash, Apr 21, 2004
  18. Did anybody say that they did? They had four different frames. Rossi pick
    the one he like. That doesn't meen that one or any one were buildt on his
    spec. I don't think any rider sepc frames these days, do you?
    The guys that weren't able to develop and set up the bike should be able to
    take advantage of the setup that rossi prefer? Where he knows the limits and
    signals, and they don't? It would suprise me a lot to see much improvement
    in those guys.
    And for that last part, I don't see much difference in a good bike that look
    bad in the hands of some the plants best riders and a bad bike that look bad
    in he hands of the similar riders. Yamaha did look bad last year. Of cource
    it make a difference if it's not as bad as most thought, but it still takes
    some one to prove it, and all the more do they deserve the applaud if they

    Morten Becker-Eriksen, Apr 26, 2004
  19. inline_four

    Colin Guest

    This win must put Rossi as the best rider in Grand Prixs of all time.
    Biaggi could not do anything with the Yamaha but Rossi makes the
    Yamaha look supreme.
    I hope to see Colin Edwards giving Rossi a run for his money later in
    the season.
    Colin, Apr 29, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.