Crash.Net User: ZeR0 Kun

Comments rating: 175
Position in rating: 626

Show Comments on:

ZeR0 Kun

May 12, 2013 12:52 PM
Last Edited 593 days ago

WSBK » WSBK Monza: Melandri prevails in three-way Monza thriller


one reason why WSBK have far closer racing compared to MotoGP - despite the obvious disparity in the bike performance and configuration, plus the use of advanced electronics similar to the latter - is because the use of metal brakes instead of carbon brakes. the use of metal brakes extends the braking distance, which in turn making the useful speeding length between corners shorter. this shifts the emphasis from outright power, to acceleration and under braking stability. ducati have shown in many years that despite their twins are a few horsepower down compared to the fours, the use of metal brakes offset their lack of power and allows them to fully utilised their advantage in handling. metal brakes are also more road-relevant when it comes to product development in R&D. MotoGP should go for metal brakes. face facts - advanced electronics in MotoGP have found its way to the production bikes. but carbon brakes? after more than 20 years and still not even commercialised.

ZeR0 Kun

November 16, 2012 11:40 PM

MotoGP » Colin Edwards eyeing FTR-M1 for 2014?


@ shamarone i do agree with you on the brakes. carbon disc/carbon brakes are another point that drives the costs up, have little application to road-going products, and did not produce close racing despite being around for 20 years already. look at WSBK as the finest example - even though they also use loads of electronics like motoGP and the disparity of bike performance due to engine configuration, the races are arguably closer thanks to the use of metal brakes. the development costs of metal brakes can easily be recouped from the sales of production version that benefits from the work done in racing, making it more attractive to new suppliers that seek to expand their technology. more suppliers also mean less cost through competition of brake supply.

ZeR0 Kun

November 16, 2012 2:45 PM

MotoGP » Colin Edwards eyeing FTR-M1 for 2014?


@ mrfill as long as the factory lease the engine to the teams/builders, the same rule as per factory should be applied. however, the main factor whether the leasing can be afforded by the teams are eventually, down to the engine costs itself. in my humble opinion, pneumatic valves should be outlawed in the sense that 1) the development cost of this technology is astronomical from scratch therefore deter many manufacturers/engine builders from entering motoGP with basic, decent technology and 2) no application of pneumatic valves on production machines even after more than 20 years after its introduction, making it impossible for factories to recoup their investment in this technology via sales of their road-going products. not only this will reduce the cost tremendously, but also may have knock-on effects on the close racing - rev-ceiling will be lowered without the need of standard electronic rev-limiter, thereby reducing power. when the cost down, factories can lease and/or sell t

ZeR0 Kun

November 16, 2012 1:48 PM
Last Edited 770 days ago

MotoGP » Colin Edwards eyeing FTR-M1 for 2014?


@ mrmwink i do agree with you. but as you pointed out that factories does not necessarily build the best chassis, this is also the very reason why they reluctant to lease the engine - the prospect of specialist chassis builders able to beat their engine suppliers will imply the factories themselves are average chassis builders compared to the specialists - something unthinkable for the factories when motoGP suceess can impact their bike sales, where they build everything including the chassis. they can afford lease the engines in moto3 because the impact of moto3 on sales is very small, a fraction to what motoGP success can bring. factory can offer at least engines that were one or two specifications behind factory equivalents. however to lower down the cost on the engines (and thereby attracting more manufacturers/engine builders), pneumatic valves must be banned. after more than 20 years with no application to the production machines, there is little relevance for this technology t

ZeR0 Kun

November 10, 2012 2:06 PM
Last Edited 776 days ago

MotoGP » Yamaha gives M1 technical presentation


great information. now please ban those carbon disc brakes and allow ferrous-metal discs instead. it will increase the braking distance tremendously, and in turn we can see more overtaking as most moves are done under braking. this will change the emphasis from outright power and top speed, to acceleration and stability/traction out of corner. even from R&D point of view, it will be more relevant to the production brakes used on the streets. face facts - electronics from MotoGP have found their way to production bikes, but carbon brakes? 22 years and still not there.

ZeR0 Kun

September 29, 2012 12:59 PM
Last Edited 818 days ago

MotoGP » Ezpeleta paints MotoGP vision


his vision is possible, provided that: 1. give more leeway in engine design (no more maximum bore size) and maximum number used, but exotic technologies such as pneumatic valves needs to be outlawed. just like F1, pneumatic valves is the reason why the engine costs sky-rocketed and very few manufacturers can produce competitive engines within that high cost. in fact, no road cars use pneumatic valves after 20 years of introduction. 2. free ECU design for all and allow all those gizmo including traction control. again, production bikes will benefit from these and the cost can be absorbed into production. 3. outlaw carbon disc brakes and use non-ferrous metal discs. like the pneumatic valves, no production bike/car use carbon brakes due to limitation of those items and the use of metal discs can see the cost be absorbed into production while the final production product may benefit from the R&D in racing. to those who doubt whether item 2 and 3 will widen the gap, they should

ZeR0 Kun

September 29, 2012 1:00 PM
Last Edited 818 days ago

MotoGP » Ezpeleta paints MotoGP vision


cont: to those who doubt whether item 2 and 3 will widen the gap, they should look at WSB - despite the disparity of design and performances between the bikes and the use of traction control is allowed in the series, the racing is considerably closer than motogp, due to the use of steel brakes. hopefully this not only will drive the cost down and makes it sustainable in the long term, but also will attract more manufacturers to the sport. especially to those that only have basic technologies and modest budget but want to use racing as a R&D for their production bike. or maybe will tempt back many manufacturers that stayed away from motogp due to the ridiculous costs and technologies that may not benefit their production bike and sales. for any manufacturers, bikes or cars, production and sales are always the cornerstone of their survival.


Page 2 of 18
« 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  »

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 - 2014 Crash Media Group

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