Race weekend musing...

pablo wrote:

> More ludicrous consipracy theories. Now it's about unofficial horsepower
> limits Ducati decided to unfailry break. It would all be alright if Hayden
> had gone for Ducati and happened to be winning, of course, but that's
> another matter.

Oh, come on, Pablo. Who said anything about fairness? It has widely been
reported that the Japanese companies agreed to a horsepower cap at 220
at the start of MotoGP, and that makes a lot of sense. That amount of
power would likely be sufficient to beat the 500s, but wouldn't
necessarily crush them, and lower power would make it easier on the
tires as well, which were not only dealing with a 20-25hp increase but
50 pounds of weight as well. That's a big jump for Michelin to deal
with. Also there was the competitiveness question, and that cap would
mean Honda wouldn't gap the field so much. Do you really believe Aprilia
made a 3-cylinder motor superior to Honda's five right out of the box? I
sure don't, I think they made all the peak power they could, damn the
rest. A year later Ducati came in and did the same, and to hell with the
rest of it. Once that happened the Japanese were forced to bail on it as
well, but it was enough to give Ducati their first win in 2003 instead
of 2005.

> I think you forget that Honda has a major design discontinuity going to
> 800 - they changed their engine configuration. Their V5 was the best engine
> back then. Their 4 isn't, it's clear Ducati now has the advantage, and given
> the fact Ducati has a long and venerable history in winning motorcycle
> designs and certainily have committed themselves to MotoGP I don't think
> they need any unfair advantages.

Again, there really isn't a fairness question, it's just the reality of
the situation. MotoGP changed the rules to "penalize" fives, which was a
very predictable thing for them to do. So Honda made changes that no one
else made, and got caught out in the process. I suspect that they also
underestimated what the others would do, as they've claimed.

Eventually things will shift again and
> someone else will hold and advantage, perhaps sooner than we think. But
> Honda had to fundamentally rework their engine congif whereas most other
> teams didn't, and I think it's obvious that.s biting them right now.

I'm not sure about that. There's an article in CN this week that talks
about there issues, and it lists a number of them - lower revs and
insufficiently sophisticated throttle control systems (unnecessary on
their V5), a change in the center of gravity due to the new motor's
placement in the chassis (up and forward). I would guess that they can
make a very competitive machine using the basic engine configuration,
but they need to work on the control systems, get more revs out of it,
and fix the chassis.

> I used to think that Honda's biggest problem was that they got too many
> conflicting inputs from too many riders without the ability to truly
> advance the bike's design, but Ducati's success shows they have been beaten
> fair and square in engineering terms, and that Ducati has the superior 800cc
> concept right now.

They do, but so does Yamaha, and Suzuki isn't far behind. Their edge
starts with the same basic design as the 990s and all the stuff that
they all learned trying to chase Honda with one less cylinder. Then you
throw in things like valve actuation differences, which mean more at
higher revs.

And evidence suggests Stoner is one hell of a talent, and
> the rough LCR season brought him alomng and made him learn lessons that
> perhaps neither Hayden or Pedrosa have had to learn. Truth is neither
> Pedrosa nor Hayden seem qyuite in Stoner's league as riders right now all
> things being equal.

Based on what? You sound like a classic front-runner, whoever is winning
at the moment is the best, so you come up with vague reasons why. All
things aren't equal, and that's why Stoner is winning. Do you think he
has three wins and leads in points on Pedrosa's Honda? How about Rossi's
Yamaha? Or anything that runs on Michelins? I certainly don't think so.

I think pretty soon Honda's budget and experience will
> come to count again and make Hayden and Pedrosa more competitive.

Well, they certainly will make Pedrosa more competitive if they possibly
can. Nicky, the absolute most he can expect is what he got last year,
and from all indications that was very little, certainly not what he
expected. I still think Pedrosa can be put back in this championship
fight by Honda (and Michelin), but the best Hayden can hope for is
eventually something to build on for next year.
 >> Stay informed about: Race weekend musing... 

pablo <pabloAT.TakeThisOut@simplyhombreDOT.net> Mon, 28 May 2007 17:01:02
>I think you forget that Honda has a major design discontinuity going to
>800 - they changed their engine configuration.

>But
>Honda had to fundamentally rework their engine congif whereas most other
>teams didn't, and I think it's obvious that.s biting them right now.

It was Honda pushing for 800cc wasn't it? And 800 lets them build a V4
from the V5 keeping the same stroke, bore, pistons, cylinder head
design, cam design and so on. Everyone else kept the same basic layout
but had to downsize the engine. I can't remember when Ducati switched to
a screamer engine but that's what they're running now. Suzuki were
running air valves last year because they intended to use them this
year. But the 800 is a whole new engine and I think it's got a different
V angle. Kawasaki have switched to air valves from valve springs.

They've all had to create something new. And in some ways Honda had the
least work to do. But there's a problem. The 990 V5 had too much power
everywhere and had to be held back by the electronics making
driveability more important than outright peak power. At 800cc and
210hp, more of that power can be used more of the time, so the engines
can be in a higher mechanical state of tune. Which in turn puts more
emphasis on the electronics. There's been talk that the Magnetti Marelli
systems (used by Ducati and Yamaha) is the cutting edge and the Honda
system is the simplest and crudest.

Right now, I tend to believe the story coming from Honda. They tried to
build a bike that was nimble and handled well with enough power that was
easy to use. Unfortunately Ducati and Suzuki went for outright top speed
and have still managed to make something that handles acceptably. There
may not be any connection but this mirrors 250 where the knife edge
Aprilias have had more top speed, the Hondas have had been better in the
corners. But somewhere between theory, manufacturing, testing in Japan,
testing by their factory riders and whatever, the balance compromise has
come out wrong.

I'm getting just a little tired of the whole "Pedrosa's getting all the
attention, poor Nicky isn't getting anything" story. By his own words,
Honda have been throwing parts at Hayden. Engine, swingarm, fork clamps,
steering head angles, top fairings. He's asked for last year's frame but
been told the new engine won't fit. (Heard that before? Rossi last
year?). Across all their riders, Honda have the very lightest and
smallest to some of the heaviest and biggest. On any one weekend the
natural order has been shuffled and a different Honda rider has come out
on top with only Nakano consistently struggling at the bottom. They've
all been complaining about something on the new design.

--
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
*** Just Say No To DRM ***
 >> Stay informed about: Race weekend musing... 

Julian Bond wrote:

> It was Honda pushing for 800cc wasn't it? And 800 lets them build a V4
> from the V5 keeping the same stroke, bore, pistons, cylinder head
> design, cam design and so on.

From an article on the new Honda: "Honda's new powerplant isn't just
four cylinders off the old RCV engine. It's more extreme design than the
old 990".

Everyone else kept the same basic layout
> but had to downsize the engine. I can't remember when Ducati switched to
> a screamer engine but that's what they're running now. Suzuki were
> running air valves last year because they intended to use them this
> year. But the 800 is a whole new engine and I think it's got a different
> V angle. Kawasaki have switched to air valves from valve springs.

> They've all had to create something new. And in some ways Honda had the
> least work to do. But there's a problem. The 990 V5 had too much power
> everywhere and had to be held back by the electronics making
> driveability more important than outright peak power. At 800cc and
> 210hp, more of that power can be used more of the time, so the engines
> can be in a higher mechanical state of tune. Which in turn puts more
> emphasis on the electronics. There's been talk that the Magnetti Marelli
> systems (used by Ducati and Yamaha) is the cutting edge and the Honda
> system is the simplest and crudest.

I think that might be slightly off, the old power wasn't quite that
extreme for everyone, it wasn't in complete abundance. The V5 made the
power it needed without having to be tuned as extremely as the others,
and they could make the power they needed and smoothly all across the
powerband without cutting-edge electronics. The other guys couldn't, so
were leaning more on electronics to deal with resulting inconsistencies
or inadequacies.

> Right now, I tend to believe the story coming from Honda. They tried to
> build a bike that was nimble and handled well with enough power that was
> easy to use. Unfortunately Ducati and Suzuki went for outright top speed
> and have still managed to make something that handles acceptably. There
> may not be any connection but this mirrors 250 where the knife edge
> Aprilias have had more top speed, the Hondas have had been better in the
> corners. But somewhere between theory, manufacturing, testing in Japan,
> testing by their factory riders and whatever, the balance compromise has
> come out wrong.

Honda has traditionally gone for top peak power in the premier class, so
this situation where they're down on power is really completely new,
perhaps the first time since the NS500 triple. That I believe was a
miscalculation on their part, but it may also be revealing of problems
with their basic design. They deny that, so it's hard to say.

> I'm getting just a little tired of the whole "Pedrosa's getting all the
> attention, poor Nicky isn't getting anything" story.

Julian, you were tired of that before he was even born, anything along
those lines was always destined to get your back up...

By his own words,
> Honda have been throwing parts at Hayden. Engine, swingarm, fork clamps,
> steering head angles, top fairings.

Yes, and he's saying nothing is really working that well, because it's
all baby steps - frames with slightly different flex characteristics and
the same geometry, bodywork that is minimally larger, etc.

He's asked for last year's frame but
> been told the new engine won't fit. (Heard that before? Rossi last
> year?). Across all their riders, Honda have the very lightest and
> smallest to some of the heaviest and biggest.

That's not exactly accurate, is it? Pedrosa, Nakano, Elias and Melandri
average 57.5kg/126.5lbs and 5-4, and their tallest guy, Hayden, is only
5-8. One can easily argue that Checa (5-7, 69/152) wasn't the intent and
is just a stop-gap, the expectation was that Stoner, 25 pounds lighter,
was the guy they'd have in that seat, they made room for him and his
team the year before when Yamaha couldn't close the deal. And last year
Honda seemed quite willing to let Hayden go, reportedly offering him
only half of what Yamaha and Ducati were offering. And they have
mini-wop Dovisioso prepping in 250. In comparison, the lightest factory
team is Ducati, because of adding Stoner, and they average 5-6 and
129lbs (Repsol is 5-5 and 132lbs). But Ducati is much larger overall
because of Barros and Hofmann at D'Antin.

On any one weekend the
> natural order has been shuffled and a different Honda rider has come out
> on top with only Nakano consistently struggling at the bottom. They've
> all been complaining about something on the new design.

Pedrosa has come out on top more often than not, their top finisher in 3
of 5 races, and in one he was taken out by another rider, so the only
time he's lost to another Honda on the track was in France - in the
rain, his big weakness, and to a guy on Bridgestones. The bike's basic
bodywork design trades straight line protection/streamlining for a
larger rider (meaning small but mainstream in GP racing terms) for less
resistance side-to-side - who does that help, a larger guy or a truly
tiny guy who can hide behind that mini fairing but doesn't have the
strength/leverage to flick the old bike?

Here's another bit from that article: "The works Honda's increase in
revs doesn't seem to have brought much in the way of more power,
however; it works for Dani Pedrosa with his really light weight and
smaller frontal area, but as soon as the rider is slightly heavier or
causes more drag, the engine just doesn't have the high-rpm power to
push him through the air... Only the smaller riders appear to be able to
get something out of the bike by the end of the straights - courtesy of
their extremely small frontal area." Meanwhile, Horiike says HRC is "too
busy" to give Hayden a completely new fairing.

Julian, it seems like you're going through an awful lot of effort to
bury the obvious...
 >> Stay informed about: Race weekend musing... 

"pablo" <pabloAT RemoveThis @simplyhombreDOT.net> wrote in message
news:hoOdnSEWX7z18MbbnZ2dnUVZ_s-rnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> ... I think pretty soon Honda's budget and experience will come to count
> again and make Hayden and Pedrosa more competitive.

Lucky prediction over a month ago...
 >> Stay informed about: Race weekend musing...