Crash.Net User: petrolbonce

Comments rating: 547
Position in rating: 224

Show Comments on:

petrolbonce

November 12, 2012 2:37 PM

MotoGP » Major changes in store for Ducati?


@Codger don't forget the reason Rossi gave for not going to Ducati for 2004. He said that Ducati built bikes to suit themselves, not their riders. Rossi wasn't the only one who said this, but is AFAIK the only person to go into print with it. This seems to have been demonstrated pretty well in subsequent seasons. All of which calls into question Rossi's decision to go to Ducati in the first place. Was it just the money? It appears that in 2007 Ducati happened to get things right (and had the added advantage of the tyres) which as you say probably made it even harder for riders to get their way. You can imagine Ducati saying to Stoner, "the bike won in 2007, get out there and win another title."

petrolbonce

November 12, 2012 1:14 PM

MotoGP » Major changes in store for Ducati?


@Codger it's not so much that Stoner's style suited the 2007 Ducati as the 2007 had a couple of major advantages that had nothing to do with the chassis. One was the engine. All credit to Ducati for building an engine that was so much more powerful than the opposition, but that was a major contributor to Stoner's title. The other was the tyres. Ducati were on Bridgestone, which were in a different league back then. Another major contributor. Both advantages were short lived. Not only have Honda and Yamaha made great leaps in the power stakes since then and the tyre wars come to an end, but Yamaha and Honda have continually improved the handling of their bikes since then while Ducati have more or less stood still. Those factors explain Stoner's slide down the order season on season from 2007 to 2010. That's not to say Stoner isn't a great rider - he is. Just that Ducati rested on their laurels for too long and are now playing a desperate game of catchup.

petrolbonce

November 12, 2012 1:08 PM

MotoGP » Major changes in store for Ducati?


I don't think the handling problems are down to the chassis design, nor do I think there's any evidence that Ducati can't build a chassis. Over the last two years Ducati have tried several chassis variations with very little improvement. The major problem seems to be the insistence on sticking with the overly long "L4" engine. Drop that and it will allow them much more leeway in positioning the engine. That will probably result in an end to their handling woes. Suter or anybody else building a chassis for the "L4" will probably find themselves with exactly the same problems. The issue for any chassis designer with that engine will be that they are trying to compensate for the shortcomings imposed by the engine, rather than trying to build a chassis that handles. The engine design is an important part of the chassis design. Honda for example dropped their own "L4" engines back in 1983 and haven't looked back since.

petrolbonce

November 12, 2012 1:00 PM

MotoGP » PICS: Jorge Lorenzo gets launched from the lead


@Mike Hunt 1. Yes blue flags were being waved. Ellison had already passed several, so the excuse that he couldn't pull over safely at that point holds no water. He had already had several chances to get out of the way. 2. From the regs 1.22.1 "During the race, the rider concerned is about to be lapped. He must allow the following rider(s) to pass him at the earliest opportunity." So yes it does mean get out of the way. 3. You only get a blue flag when you are about to be lapped, so Ellison could not have thought the rider behind was in 10th. When I was racing if you passed two blue flags without at the very least clearly checking how close the rider behind was then you were in trouble. If the rider actually caught you and you didn't get off the racing line you'd probably be looking at a black flag the next time you crossed the line.


Page 4 of 43
« 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.