Yooperbikemike's 2013 MotoGP Thread

Agree, but as you said 'for the most part'. I wonder at having different things like flywheel weights (for example) and how something like that would affect how the bike comes off corners. I realize that my example is highly simplistic compared to the alien magic smoke harnessed by a 213V, but it seems to make sense that there would be build/design factors that would compliment different tracks.

Plus, on the r&d side of things, testing different versions of this widget or that under race conditions would be added value.

Yes, they want to win championships. But as, or maybe even of more importance, is the return of investment on technologies developed.


I'd love to be a fly on the wall to find out what really goes on, why, and what they gain from it.

wouldn't that suck!!!!
I've heard about that type of traction control and such, no doubt it's in use, and it wouldn't be that difficult to do with the technology available.
I still think the engines are about the same, be too hard to judge when and where certain engines would be used, and if you lose one early, then the entire season could be shook up because you had to use engine tuned for tracks a,b,c, instead of the one tuned for tracks d,e, and f.
just seems like it wouldn't be worth chancing.

GP bikes are like nothing else. I was watching Lorenzo at Laguna a few years back and he was doing a practice start between turns 4 and 5. He totally binned it with way too much throttle into turn 5. Looked like something I would do. His excuse was that the traction control doesn't kick in that fast after a start and entered the corner with the same throttle that he always did. :eek1

I think that was Lorenzo at Mugello QP.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/101194

I think it was Nicky,but I don't remember the track...

Estoril?

http://www.motogp.com/en/news/2012/ducati team estoril

Ducati isn't too circumspect about describing the exact nature of the problem.

It was definitely Nicky...Poor bastard.

Yes, Rossi and Lorenzo prefer different chassis, but they both have two bikes using the chassis they prefer. Chassis testing usually gets done at tests rather than race weekends, as two 45 minute sessions, often with different weather, makes it tough to evaluate properly and to do back-to-back testing.

It's an interesting idea to rotate engines in chassis, but with just 5 engines this season, there are more important considerations. Rumor in Spain is that Yamaha is having problems with its engine, after Lorenzo had a drop in power, and now they've detuned to keep the engines from blowing up. This does not bode well for either Mugello, or the championship.

I believe they used to do that in the days of 500cc two strokes, when there was less electronic interference and engines could be rebuilt in between races (or even in between sessions). But two factors prevent that now. First, they only have five sealed engines to last a year, and so having a different spec engine to suit one track would cause too many problems at other tracks. And if that engine blows, then you lose any potential advantage anyway. Secondly, the possibilities offered by electronics and chassis set up is so much bigger that it is quicker and easier to tweak a few settings. Requires a lot less testing too. Changing and testing settings is 10 seconds and a few laps, changing and testing a different crank weight, well, you can imagine it's a little bit more time consuming.

GPS is banned, but that hasn't made a bit of difference. They use the inputs from the timing loops, plus lean angle, speed, and distance travelled, to work out exactly where the bike is on the track. Power delivery, torque and horsepower are all dialed in appropriate to the virtual track map in the bike's ECU.

Hayden's problem at Estoril was that the bike thought the T3 timing loop was the starting line, and so the power delivery was half a lap wrong. With a big fast front straight and a tricky, technical rear section, including the slowest chicane on the circuit, you can imagine how well that went.

Lorenzo's problem at Mugello was taking the short cut back to the finish line after Casenove Savelli, cutting off the rear half of the circuit. Did basically the same thing as Hayden, confusing the bike and thinking it was half a lap away from where it was. That's a bit less of an issue at Mugello than it is at Estoril, as the track is more flowing, fewer really slow sections.

Yikes.

Has this link been posted here yet? (Krop, is this guy a credible source? )

http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/817/16135/Motorcycle-Article/Single-Track-Mind--Where-to-Ducati-.aspx

Looks like wild speculation, but......

Page 156: http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=840592&page=156

It sure looks, smells and walks like wild speculation.

Thanks for the earlier page link. I had looked but obviously not that well.

No. Grains of truth expanded to create a heady brew of speculation.

Not sure if the new gearbox will require new case halves

The question is, will a seamless transmission use the same size gear shafts? Those shafts may be bigger than a conventional transmission, to house the additional components to make a seamless gearbox work. This is not a question I know the answer to, but it may not be as simple as it appears.

Yes many variables including increased shaft length/spacing of bearings hence my crankcase halves comment

A question for Neil Spalding... I've missed some of the practice so haven't heard every word from the Eurosport gang this year.

Ben says some interesting things about Yamaha, Ducati, WSBK, tires in Moto GP, and so forth.

http://www.crash.net/motogp/interview/191762/1/exclusive_ben_spies_-_qa.html

Sounds like an extended version of his tweet announcing his departure from Yamaha. I hope he pulls a Barros and gives some real details on his way out of MotoGP.