How about that MotoGP! (spoilers)

Mark, what's your excuse for Rossi beating Max? Also, note how they
walked away from everyone else. Great race, this season is gonna
rock!

 

At altitude, power is much lower. So Rossi didn't have to worry as much
about getting smoked down the straights. When they get back to normal
altitude, Rossi better pray for rain. They don't call them Honda lanes for
nothing.
Welkom is a place where chassis and rider skill mean much more than power.
The Yamahas were 5 KPH slower than the Hondas, rather than the 10 they would
have been at a place much closer to sea level.
And Max didn't get it 100% right on the chassis side. You could see that
the bike kept running wide on the exits. Enabled Rossi to stay close and get
on the power sooner, which negates the top end advantage.
One race doesn't make a season, especially at a track like Welkom, which
isn't the norm.

 

Some thoughts.

The 125 and 250 races were damn good too with some heroic last lap
battles. Danny Pedrosa especially produced a perfect move to win his
first 250 race. The Aprilia 250s looked pretty evil to ride almost
bouncing from bump to bump.

- How much credence do you give to the Honda riders complaining about
lack of testing on the new chassis and chatter in the race? And Edwards
choosing to race the old chassis? Maybe Biaggi did a better job of
setting up what they got than the rest of them. Or did Biaggi ride round
the problems better? Or did he get a "special" tyre that solved them?

- Biaggi allegedly had a slightly different "big" Michelin rear tyre. It
lasted pretty well, given Biaggi's fastest lap on the last lap.

- This could be the first time we actually get to see Rossi and Biaggi
riding against each other to the absolute limit of their ability. They
never really met in 250 and in 500/MotoGP there's always been some
reason why Biaggi was limited. I don't feel like I've seen two top
riders go so fast and hard for so long with so few mistakes for ages.
Like some of the Fogarty-Corser, Edwards-Bayliss battles you had to hold
your breath for the last few laps convinced that one of them would screw
up somehow.

- Rossi has had good bikes all his career. At the same time, the Aprilia
125 and 250 were generally acknowledged at the time to be somewhat knife
edge requiring good setup. Then his first Honda 500 had wandered off the
plot and the following year they produced a machine with the engine
moved up and back. It then became easier to ride for Rossi but also for
all the other riders. When the 4 stroke appeared, Rossi got an early
test of it from mid year. The stories go that it was a real handful
because the Japanese test riders wouldn't ride it hard enough and
criticise it enough. Rossi did a lot of testing that autumn and the bike
became the winning platform we've seen. All of that may be heresay, but
it all speaks of a rider with good development and setup skills working
with good race engineers.

- Now we get to Yamaha. The story goes that in the early tests Yamaha
arrived with 4 different engine configurations and told Rossi to pick
one to use as a platform for future development. He apparently picked
the one they hoped he would pick. The chosen engine definitely has an
odd firing order and a new cylinder head that may or may not be 4 valve
instead of 5.

- Rossi+Burgess then raised and lengthened the bike as far as they
could. At the next test, Yamaha turn up with a cut and shut swing arm,
different engine mounting points and forks with more length allowing
more adjustment up and down through the triple clamps. Then 4 frames
appear that are subtly different but interestingly extend the engine
mounts down to the crankcase at the front. Again Rossi picks one as the
basis for future development.

- I think how this worked is that Burgess went through all the data he
could get his hands on and with his knowledge of Rossi's style decided
where they would start. The involvement in early development of the RCV
and the final 500 with Rossi would have helped a great deal here. They
would have also suggested some development direction to the factory who
would have produced some alternatives spread either side of this.

 

elsewhere.

The last part of the track has one of the fastest turns in the hole season.
220km/h whith the knee in the ground and changeing radius 3 - 4 times,
ending up in that 1. gear bend. I suspect that the bike was not the actual
problem for Max there, rather his head.

I expect to se the Ducatis higher up on the fast tracks. They still have the
top-speed edge and at lest capirossi seems like a capable rider.

 

altitides.

Simple. Let's play with funny numbers.

Let's say that the Honda have 100HP, and the Yamahas have 90HP.

Let's say that because of the altitude, the machine are robbed of 5% of
their power.

That means that the Honda loses 5HP, whereas the Yamahas only lose 4.5. So,
even though it's still down on power, the Yamaha has a 1/2 HP advantage due
to altitude loss over the Honda, having lost less power (it's obviously
still down on overall power than the Honda, but its affected by it less).

It's a complete guess, but since the altitude makes the air thinner, less
oxygen is getting into the combustion chambers to make power, so a across
the board percentage cut in power seems "fair" and "reasonable".

Regards,

Will Hartung
()

 

I was thinking they'd still be in the same boat percentage wise, but putting
it in that light I can see where the difference could come into play on the
straights.

-Chris-

 

According to Luckynelli who, being a friend of Vale's father, has first
hand information, the odd firing order is exactly the main development in
the M1 compared to last year's bike. It's enough to listen to the sound of
the engine, it's really different, more "full", more roaring.

 

Yes, I noticed that when the test videos came out. It's not weird at
all, rather a time honored GP development approach to an
uncontrollable power delivery. It's probably either a big bang motor
(4 cylinders firing at or close to the same time) or something similar
to Ducati's twin-pulse motor (2 cylinders at a time kinda like a
twin). This indicates to me the motor was overpowering the chassis
and/or suspension and they needed to get a more controllable slide and
tire wear. If this approach is successful (and it probably is since
they've stuck to it thus far), they might start cranking out more
power now. We'll see.

 

We're reading mostly the same reports and actually drawing the same
conclusions. And that conclusion is that Rossi+Burgess are better at
what they do than the other rider+race engineer combinations. And Yamaha
know that and are busting a gut to give them what they ask for. Funny
how success breeds success. I think the telling thing here is the
reports of altered weight distribution and the photos of the lengthened
swing arm. This is exactly the sort of change that comes from a race
team not from a design engineer. It looks as though it's made the bike
more forgiving and if that's the case it's something the other riders
and race engineers should have worked out last year.

Go back to the Rainey-Roberts years and the Roberts team were constantly
fighting with the factory to get what they wanted even to the extent of
using a ROC chassis. The difference now is that the factory seems to be
listening.

Something nobody has mentioned is the likely impact of Honda losing
Burgess+Rossi as a development team. They've lost Cobas (RIP) and
Edwards-Gorst are no longer together as well. Mat Oxley suggested in a
pre-season review that the one thing that might give Rossi the
championship is that Honda implode and end up chasing engineering
ghosts. We've maybe seen an inkling of that in their messing around with
the rear suspension.

 

A one-sided crank is very unlikely. A twin pulse motor would be easy but
put horrendous strain on the gearbox/crankcases. It looks possible that
they've gone to a cruciform crank which will introduce some vibration
but would allow almost any timing order. The downside of this is that
exhaust design gets much harder. Exhaust tuning is really important and
a straight 4 with even timing should lead to the most effective and
powerful result.

 

Hey I'll crow with the best of them. It was something to shout about
last year when they repeatedly got on the front row, led the first lap
and won a race wasn't it? Just as it was to watch Nakano hold pole
position for 30 seconds.

Right now I am concerned that the 999 seems to be flawed and that the GP
bike has plenty of power but wayward handling. Mainly because I'd like
to see Capirossi and Bayliss getting among the 6 Hondas. Same goes for
Suzuki, Kawasaki, Aprilia and Proton. That last second a lap is awful
hard to find. Twas ever thus.

I mentioned Edwards+Gorst because for a while there they had a very
close and successful partnership, like Fogarty and Bass before them.
Cobas got a mention because of his ability to get the best out of the
last 500 and the first of the RCVs. I get the feeling I'm damned if I do
and damned if I don't. If I mention names I'm too focussed on
individuals. If I don't I'm being too vague.

Like all business it *is* a game of individuals and the characters and
the relationship of the team owner, race engineer and rider *is*
important. You can't look at Doohan's and Rossi's success without also
looking at Burgess.

<grin> Really Mark, you're so f**king negative. Get over it. Or I'll put
you back in the kill file. That'll teach you! </grin>

 

...and I had serious preconceives. I really doubt that Ducati is one of
the big ones in Moto GP, not last year, as turned out, neither this year.
The GP bikes are too different, each bike is unique. At least for Rossi.
Its like a request program, he asks for it and get it, sooner or later,
maybe several times in this year only. This is not the playground for
Ducati. Superbike yes, GP no. Anyhow, my opinion.

I believe we will have an interesting race year. Rossi had a hard fight,
the Yamaha is not as good as the Honda was, and Biaggi is willing to win,
what was not obvious last year, and these packages Yamaha/Rossi vs.
Honda/Biaggi are fairly equal, as we have seen last weekend. If Yamaha
doesn't improve to fast, this year will be one of the most interesting
ones, like the 80/90's with Lawson/Rainey/Schwantz/Mamola and later on
Doohan (Just to name some... yeah flame me).

Henry

 

Mark,

At the risk of sounding like I'm picking on you, can I just ask what
experience you have with the GP scene? What qualifies you to have
insight into the factory-team-rider relationships? Have you been
involved in a development process? Prove me wrong, I'll then gladly
eat my words. I just don't understand what you're basing your
conclusions on other than the massive lap time number crunching you
are so fond of and the interviews we've all read and drawn our own
conclusions from. I think you will agree with me when I say riders
and crew chiefs cannot or do not want to always publicly reveal their
cards, even with regard to the past.

 

A one-sided crank's imbalance can be offset with counter weights and
perhaps balancing shafts, a la Aprilia Mille. Certainly any firing
order change from a standard 4 cylinder firing order would increase
strain on the gearbox and other parts. So what, they can be modified.
They were already picking out of 4 brand new motors. I know nothing
about exhaust tuning. Can you elaborate?

 

At it's simplest level, exhaust tuning is all about managing pressure
waves. When the exhaust port opens it generates a pulse. This pulse gets
reflected back by discontinuities like the collector where the 4 pipes
in a 4-1 join and the end of the tailpipe. You want to arrange for a low
pressure part of the reflected wave to reach the exhaust port just as it
opens to suck the gases out and a high pressure just as it shuts to
force the new intake mixture back into the cylinder. Since everything is
a fixed length this only works perfectly at one rpm and harmonics of
that rpm. And it works in reverse half way between these peaks. One of
the big tricks is to smear out the pulses so that the effect is more
even across the rev range. A 4-1 on an even firing 4 has the most effect
here because each cylinder can help all the others and there are lots of
alternate path lengths and firing intervals to smooth out the torque
curve. So even though the tuning for 1-1 is off, it's working perfectly
for 1-3. This is why Honda keep changing around the exhaust arrangement.
The obvious 3-1 and 2-1 for front and back banks of cylinders didn't
work as well as a 2-1 2-1 1-1.

Bike engines typically have other problems because layout requires a
tight turn immediately after the exit from the head and fast flowing gas
doesn't like turning corners. And the 2 exhaust valves make for an oval
port instead of circular. And as on the intake, there are mass effects
as well. A fast moving gas wants to keep moving but a small pipe
produces too much drag.

This stuff is less important than on two strokes but it's still a
critical part of engine development.

Curiously F1 has gone to a pair of 5-1 tuned perfectly for peak power
and then used electronics to make the engine driveable everywhere else.
They've effectively given up on trying to fill in the holes in the rev
band by mechanical design in pursuit of peak power.

 

It was so hot at the front that the TV didn't show the other battles but
Barros passed Edwards and Hayden, the 3 other Yam were fighting, we never
saw Capi but he fought obviously.
TV realisation was really poor, as usual...

 

Ehhh, usually I'd agree with you, but this was an unusual situation. This was
one of those moments where you needed 3 screens. If they'd cut away from
Rossi/Biaggi I'd killed someone, and if I had those 3 screens I would have
attempted to grow another eyeball and have all of them swivel independently.

They could only show one thing at a time, and their choice was pretty much
made for them.

At least our Speed TV didn't show it live, so it was edited sanely and they
had the commercials w/o missing any of the racing.

-gc

 

Did anybody say that they did? They had four different frames. Rossi pick
the one he like. That doesn't meen that one or any one were buildt on his
spec. I don't think any rider sepc frames these days, do you?

The guys that weren't able to develop and set up the bike should be able to
take advantage of the setup that rossi prefer? Where he knows the limits and
signals, and they don't? It would suprise me a lot to see much improvement
in those guys.
And for that last part, I don't see much difference in a good bike that look
bad in the hands of some the plants best riders and a bad bike that look bad
in he hands of the similar riders. Yamaha did look bad last year. Of cource
it make a difference if it's not as bad as most thought, but it still takes
some one to prove it, and all the more do they deserve the applaud if they
do.

/MBE

 

This win must put Rossi as the best rider in Grand Prixs of all time.
Biaggi could not do anything with the Yamaha but Rossi makes the
Yamaha look supreme.
I hope to see Colin Edwards giving Rossi a run for his money later in
the season.