MotoGP » Will aluminium frame be Ducati's silver bullet?

"The positives of this bike are certainly the engine, which I like, and the fact that it handles a bit better than the previous one" – Valentino Rossi.

Sort Comments: Oldest | Newest


November 10, 2011 2:25 PM

A silver or magic bullet? NO

A step in the right direction? Without doubt

The different demands between a race bike & a road bike or even a road derived race bike mean what works for one may be disasterous for the other.

In testing the Panegale has been described as sublime but it is not and never will be a knife edge prototype racer where miniscule changes can turn a bike from a race winner to a dog


November 10, 2011 2:27 PM

@who knows

and didn't you see this past year? Has Rossi forget how to communicate? Because he's been giving information and "feedback" all year. Did you not see where Rossi said "he's just a rider and not an engineer"? Unless the engineer and designers can turn that information into useful parts, bits, and solutions it means nothing. Engineers and riders both need each other but the rider's part has been over romanticized. Riders help identify the problems but it's the engineers who fix the problems and come up with new solutions.


November 10, 2011 2:40 PM

I was under the impression that Rossi and JB had already decided that the material of the frame was irrelevant in terms of its effect of handling, and that the key to making the bike better was in the weight distribution? Having a perimeter frame won't in itself necessarily lead to any solutions until they fix the issues to do with COG and the overall balance of weight.


November 10, 2011 2:42 PM


I put Rossi above the others too but not because I think he really is the fastest. Stoner and Lorenzo are also phenomenal riders, blindingly fast and consistent.

What impresses me the most, in regard to what you say is that Yamaha managed to match their frame/settings to the Bridgestone within half a year, and better still, manage the championship (2008). Makes Ducati look a bit... inefficient :)



November 10, 2011 2:42 PM

(-cont.) What lies behind the above, is that Stoner offered wins to Ducati but his extraordinary riding and his willingness to risk masked the Ducati defects and just made the teammate and satellite riders look useless. This allowed Ducati to just sit and watch their wonderboy either win or lowside.

Rossi changed all that because he doesn't want to risk and won't over-ride the machine as Stoner did. Now they really need to sort the bike out.

I am actually enjoying very much what is happening in Ducati: it's 2 completely different worlds, 2 totally different philosophies that came together and we have the opportunity to watch this gruesome but also I am sure deeply productive process of trying to develop a better bike.


November 10, 2011 2:52 PM

And there I was,all the while believing that silver bullit's were there to terminate blood sucking vampires :)
As a Ducati man for decades,I tend to agree with RawDawg regarding the marketing disaster bit. Though I swore to mothball the fleet when they lost Stoner and signed Rossi,the blood is thicker than the water.
What would be a marketing disaster is if they resurrected the D16RR,raced it in SBK and it failed dismally.
Lets see what Sepang brings.
Impressive in testing was Abraham having jumped from the 'winglet' GP10 800 to the 1000 GP whatever.
Who knows ? He may be the magic bullit for them next year.

Who knows..? - Unregistered

November 10, 2011 2:53 PM

you forget allready? Ducati use stressed frameless engine... every changes rossi want on the frame (should be) section, followed with a new engine... And Rossi have no problem with duc engine... As engineer how they fix frame related problem while the bike have no frame?


November 10, 2011 3:49 PM

@Who knows..?

Let's be crystal clear on what you're saying. Are you saying that Rossi is more important in turning the Ducati around than the engineers?

Because I don't feel that way. It's not up to Rossi to turn the Ducati around - it's up to the guys that design and make the bike. Riders don't design anything or make any parts or come up with any solutions. It wasn't his fault the bike was a piece of junk and he isn't the one that is going to be crunching any data and doing any anaylsis back at the factory to solve the bike's problems.

Page 3 of 14
« 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  »

Join the conversation - Add your comment

Please login or register before adding your comments.

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.

© 1999 - 2015 Crash Media Group

The total or partial reproduction of text, photographs or illustrations is not permitted in any form.