MOTOGP » Inside Yamaha's 2008 YZR-M1

Wowie!!!! Yamaha has got to be very confident to publish a blue print plan structure such as this and not be afraid that the others may copy it. What I am saying is not about technology but the plans and the organized way it's set up. I use Microsoft Project at work and this kind of blue print to follow is what makes my boss drool. Kudos to them, but I would think they have something up their sleeves.....like an ACE they are bringing for the Yamaha M1-2K9. We are about to see some scary ***** come 2009 season.

"Pedrosa is faster as his frontal area is fractionally less- not due to his weight.

Acceleration is different and mass is important there"


Pedrosa has a smaller frontal area.... I'm sure his mother still loves him.....

Actually acceleration is as much about drag force as speed is... it's about how much EXCESS power the engine has over that required for a particular speed, the more you have the faster you can accelerate. Mass is not so important once you get rolling...

I have made a stuff up! I stated that Honda said 5 BHP for every 1kph over 200kmh, it should have of course been 300kph, Regards the speed differential in 2007, Stoner had a 15kph advantage over G.O.A.T through the speedtrap at most circuits, I am aware the overall package was better as well, in 2008 Yamaha got their act together and the bike was very good however G.O.A.T has said in after race interveiws they need more power, ( to get better acceleration or top speed) at the US gp Stoner demonstrated a speed advantage on the start straight although G.O.A.T was slightly faster elsewhere,call it top speed or acceleration yamaha need to improve!

Fair point Morgue, I agree that pnuematic valves are unlikely to make an impact on the road but I still believe restricting fuel will cause manufacturers to built better engines which is what the idea of a prototype class is. For a similar reason I also do not object the single tyre rule as it now means the guys build bikes around tyres instead of tyres around bikes, although it has removed the tyre competition. I suppose if fuel was not restricted they would still develop the bikes on a similar cost vs gain basis, Fuel consumption vs size of tank/weight of carrying the extra fuel/balance of the bike.

Restricting fuel is the wrong way to go. We do not want to see that riders that use "too much" throttle get punished by less HP towards the end of the race. The whole 800cc concept is a joke! There have been more bad injuries on the 800cc bikes than on the 990cc. What happened to Kato have nothing to do with the 990 engine. It seems to me that the 800cc with all the electronics is not "scary" enough for the riders and some push more than they would dare on the 990 (back then with less electronics).

If too much power and cost is the problem, they could put restriction on max number of valves, say, max 8 valves (totally) and 1000cc engines. So 2 valves per piston fours, 4 valves per piston twins and 8 valves singles(Honda could bring back the oval piston!!)!!!! Further, no TC, GPS and carbon brakes, single tire rule.

the forgotten point is that Ducati is the better bike in hands of Stoner.
Quiker in all aspects... top speeds, starts, fuel consumption efficiency, braking effic, conner speed, handling balance, ....every thing

only some crashes of stoner since laguna seca jeoparized his season

Paul 46!!! - Is the point of the prototype class to build better engines or is it to entertain? surely the proto class is where they get to exercise their creative minds on exotic bikes, who cares whether an engine is more efficient? as a petrolhead i want to see flurocarbons burnt with abandon, i want to see tyres(of all makes) shredded and melted and most of all I want to see racers racing!! not twist and go merchants riding a computer (that means anyone) not boffins sat in pitlane restricting fuel or adjusting suspension. As a paying customer i demand a return to 990's i want action godammit!

in short im with duke 21.

layton - I am no in total diagreement with Morgue or indeed yourself, I would love to see them have no regard for fuel consumption or tyre wear (come forward Mr Hayden!) but it is more of a challenge to build something better than the next guy has if you are both working within the same set of parameters as opposed to, what could be for them guys, almost endless resources! Also to Yamaha or Ducati or Honda the team and manufacturer championships are as important if not more so than the rider championship! it proves they have built a better bike than the other teams... As I said, all in all im not in total diagreement but I think fuel/tyre restrictions pose a better challenge to the teams.

What you need to remember is that if you had NO rules all that would happen is the company with the biggest R&D budget (HRC) would walk away with the championship. The downside is that at the moment IMHO the rules are not condusive to good racing. The reduced fuel limit as people have said previously are contributing to boring race finishes because all the bikes are in 'lean' mode towards the end so there's no overtaking in the later laps anymore. Like F1 the electronics are detracting from the skill of the riders and the sport suffers as a result. I say let the rider be the traction control and decide when to use more fuel and when to save, get rid of all the electronics and we will (cont.)