MOTOGP » Stoner keeps 'new set-up' on top

Shouldn't the height of the mass/weight IE Motor+rider related to the centred/central point of gravity come to this equation????

Salty - we need Jack to help us here but I'd think that the height of the c/g would affect the amount of weight transfer (somewhere I read that they designed the M1 with a fairly high c/g to get more weight transfer allowing Rossi more effective braking) - moment arms and all that stuff, my physics is pretty rudimentary. I suppose this stuff is boring the fanboy crowd but it's sure helping me understand what's going on better. Never too old to learn - and yet I knew EVERYTHING when I was young so how much more do I know now?? Scary, ain't it?

I guess in a weird way all this physics discussion is relevant here as this was an article about 'testing'...

Separately, I'd say Ducati should push new parts on to Elias. On the strength of his showing at LS and Brno, he could help Duc push the fight to Rossi and help CS. Besides, if there's one rider Rossi is perhaps wary of, it would be Elias. Remember Estoril 2006 or earlier that year - was it Jerez?

Whotcha say?

Oscar:with all these book learning theories&imformation created by computers by now all manufactures should have the perfect GP bikes sitting on the grid but we ain't,I believe one of the reasons Rossi does so good is the Burgess factor,how many times have we seen Rossi improve on his quali time in warm up then from warm up to race pace,I believe it is Buress's practical experience's,we do see Burgess sitting at a computer,he would be looking at braking distance,lean angle,throttle opening ect,a computer beats standing on a corning with a note pad noting what the rider is doing then racing to the next corner to repeat the process,you have this book learning you cant get experience from books

Salty - couldn't agree more, mate. Alan Cathcart's tests last year showed how different manufacturers have taken different sets of compromises: the M1 was designed to suit Rossi's requirements exactly and who better to design a bike for and who better than JB to get that translated into the metal? Ducati lucked out that Stoner could ride their thing so well, nobody else could, and I suggest that they've adjusted their compromises recently a bit and that is why Elias, for instance, was able to use it so much better. I believe Rossi is the best in the whole field at riding around the compromises, Stoner is very fast but in a fairly narrow band.

Oscar:I would say Stoner is the fastest rider in MotoGp, but Rossi's experience and the Burgess factor negate Stoners speed advantage,Rossi and Burgess are a great combination I doubt if Burgess can spell physics let alone know what it is,it is his mechanical knowledge that useually swings the scales in Rossi's favour on race days,you can have all the computers you want they cannot compete with hands on knowledge,that give the bike the final winning tweak....Check "The Fastest Indian" not a theory or computer insight.

Salty - I suspect JB is every bit as good on his physics as he needs to be, but for sure he has the ex-racer's knowledge of how rider 'feel' translates to chassis etc. matters and the ability to hear what the rider is saying and make the bike do what the rider wants / needs. To me Stoner is incredibly intense about his racing - much as Doohan was according to JB, and he doesn't seem yet to have learned how to operate well outside that zone. I can't see him doing the 'win at the slowest possible speed' thing - Rossi can do that but can also run 101% for the whole race (remember Phillip Island 2003 - I think - hunting down that 10-sec penalty?) I think that's why he is the better racer contd

contd. and will continue to be until Stoner gets more depth in his repetoire. That said, I admire Stoner's utter focus on going just as fast as he can everywhere, it's quite awesome to watch sometimes, and I don't buy the 'doesn't want to race another rider' thing, he just goes all out all the time. The fact that he's only had one DNF with Ducati is testament to the fact that he gets it right MOST of the time, once he learns to get it right as consistently as Rossi (who ain't perfect but IS demonstratedly better) he's going to be very, very hard to beat while on competitive machinery. You can see though why Rossi wouldn't be happy to let him get too close to JB - the Rosser isn't dumb..

Oscar, you are also right about throttle modulation: By accelerating you place more of the bike's weight on the rear wheel, by braking you are doing the opposite. That's why Keith Code insists in turning with the throtthe at least slightly open: Rear tyres are much fatter that front tyres, so in order to have maximum grip you need to place more of the bike's weight to the rear.

The problem is that by opening the throttle you accelerate, which widens your trajectory so your corner entry must be scheduled in a deliberate way that allows the early throttle opening. (It's the "slow in fast out" principle)

Heck, I got carried away with this physics mumbo-jumbo and... here's a remark on the "normal" discussion:

I think that Stoner is indeed very brave in trying to ride to the limit all the time but this can be a double-edged sword: It's difficult to do any tyre managment at this constant blister-pace and it also poses great risks as last race proved. A master race tactician will try to manage his resources in the race situation. This might involve the compromise of letting your adversary ride on your wheel or even pass you but this doesn't mean you're going to lose the race, it might mean you are not over-risking and ensuring you have decent grip for the crucial final 2 laps.