My Take on MotoGP 2006

It wasn't Repsol that wasn't supported, it was Hayden, who was on a
completely different bike than the others. With some degree of
development still given to the old 211, some to Hayden's Brno, and
probably a lot to the 212, they were likely spread rather thin. There's
also the question of the amount of credibility Nicky had with Japan,
were they kind of ignoring him, perhaps thinking he was too
inexperienced to know, or was just complaining in the way they may have
gotten used to from varuious guys in 04-05? We do know there was some
degree of development with the old bike, because Pedros and Melandri
had worked through several chassis during the year, and Dani had some
new power parts at Brno. I kind of think they'd written '06 off as a
learning year early on, and it just takes time to change corporate
direction, if it happens at all.

Again, Dani had a completely different motorcycle, no common parts.
Nicky was talking about clutch issues way back in the winter, so that
was a chronic problem that lasted the entire year. There was some
indication that Dani may have had a version of the new coil spring
clutch early on, but his motor had both more space and better cooling
for the thing, and they could fall back on the old diaphragm unit at
any time.

Nick's other issues were not as much power early in the season and the
edge grip issue, plus some corner entry problems that may have been a
combination of the chassis and the clutch. The grip problem must have
been a geometery issue, but he raced with the same basic chassis from
Jerez until Sepang, after he'd tested the newer one at Brno. It wasn't
a total solution, but apparently somewhat better. One of the problems
the chassis gave him was increased tire wear, so he generally ran
harder compound rear tires than some of the others, which in turn added
other issues at some races where softer would have been more ideal.

I never saw anything definitive on the dimensions of the Brno, but the
thought has been that it was generally more compact, HRC trying
concepts that would be used on the 800. The old 211 had a rather long
wheelbase, so his might well have been shorter. It had a more compact
engine, so likely also had a longer swingarm.

 

hayden was the only guy able to finish on the podium in almost every race...
given how competitive this season was, the safe bet is his bike was pretty
darn good overall, so this entire bullshit about how much the bike he
*chose* early in the season supposedly sucked ought to mercifully end soon.
hayden is a great rider, and he obviously -by his own repeated statements-
freely *chose* the *right* mother@! bike.

such is the beauty of being in the repsol hrc team - you get so many choices
that it may sometimes get disorienting, but this is a team with over 3x the
budget of any other team, and when the riders use it right, it tells.

my bet is hayden and pedrosa score a 1-2 next year. the order? i think the
odds favor hayden, but it''ll be close.

 

that's my hope/prediction, too!

screw all these guys that say "hayden will be like KrJr and never win
another GP".

i say RE-PEAT in '07!!!

w

 

hayden wastellar in 06 - his consistency meant that either

1 - he was the smartest rider
2 - he was the most versatile and adaptable rider-bike combo

either way, it guarantees him to be a top contender in 07 - he has always
done well, and is guaranteed to do so again. if he's not among the top
3 -barring disaster- i'd be very shocked.

 

Sop in other words, all the things Hayden has been saying since last
winter about the bike, all the things that HRC has been saying about
it, all the things various journalists have reported, even the
observable bike behavior on the track, all of that is wrong, massive
fabrication, because the perfect knowledge of Pablo is aligned
otherwise. I see...

On the subject of podiums, the final count was Hayden 10, Rossi 10,
Pedrosa 8, Capirossi 8, Melandri 7. So I guess that means Rossi's bike
was just as perfect as Hayden's all year?

 

I predict it will die a slow painful death, only to be resurrected in March.

 

Or vice versa.

 

Mark N spews:

Nobody said that. All those things you conspiracy
theorists think were purposeful actions on the part of HRC to
derail Hayden were actually typical engineering, team, and
rider problems. Hayden and Co. fixed them better than
anybody else this year, as indicated by the points. Even the
clutch looked awfully good in Valencia.

It was just as screwed up too. Chatter and overheating being the two
most
public issues.

In any case, both Hayden's and Rossi's bikes (teams) were the best of
the class.


Go fast. Take chances.
Mike S.

 

Hayden's quote on http://www.superbikeplanet.com/2006/Nov/tb/061102z.htm
"The chassis seems quite good and there's definitely more corner speed with
this bike - I think the tyres will change a lot with a different profile
with more on the edge." would indicate that if the Brno bike was indeed a
dimensional transition between the 211 and the 212, Michelin was not putting
a lot of effort into building a tire fit it and lack of edge grip was the
price to be paid.

 

I was searching the SpeedTV website this afternoon trying to figure
out where they hide the Dennis Noyes' articles. The column he wrote
just before Estoril had this...

 

My guess would be that if Hayden's 211 was a transitional bike in that
regard it was a very subtle one. The bike still had to be big enough
and stable enough to handle 990cc power. The 800 must have a smaller
powerplant and the weight is therefore more concentrated, and the bike
is visibly much smaller as well. That and the reduced power all leads
to a different riding style, and it seems Honda was designing this bike
for a different style as well, something that would work for the
smaller riders coming out of 250. Hayden's 211 certainly tested some
concepts relating to making the bike more compact, but they were still
working with a 990cc motor and higher power. And I don't recall Nicky
saying the way he had to ride the bike was materially different than
the previous 211s, which is what he's saying now with the 212.

To the extent it was different, it was only one bike, and I'd think
Michelin wouldn't make different tires just for it, probably not the
best way to allocate their resources.

 

sturd foams at the mouth:

Oh, I beg to differ. Pablo claims Hayden made his bike choice
completely without any pressure from Honda, and it has proven to be the
right one. He's also said that Honda fully supported him all year as
their number one rider, as they always do. I think there are plenty of
people who would think that notion is absurd on the face of it. Now my
guess is that he in part gets this from the Spanish press and Spanish
forums, neither of which would ever suggest that Pedrosa had a better
bike than Hayden, oh no...

All those things you conspiracy

Of course that's not really what I have said. The farthest I have gone
in that direction is that they probably have viewed Pedrosa as their
future and therefore have started treating him that way already, from
allowing him to choose to ride the evolutionary RCV last winter (a
choice they effectively didn't give to Hayden) to not telling him to be
a good teammate at Estoril.

were actually typical engineering, team, and

Hayden and team seem to have done a very good job of making the best of
what they had, but I can't really agree that they "fixed" the problems,
they just worked around them as best they could. And as for the clutch,
Motegi clearly got senior management attention, and Hayden had two new
clutches to try once they got to Portugal. Hayden pronounced them
"better" but was hardly raving about them. Still, it showed what even a
minor fix could do to his pace.

I doubt it. No question the chatter issues were a huge problem, but
that chassis lasted only four rounds and didn't cost Rossi anything at
one and probably very little at another. The bike wasn't perfect after
that, no bike ever is, but he would have won in France, he managed to
win 3 of the next 5 races and was hurt at the other two, and after the
summer break the bike was good enough to be in the top three on every
grid and in every race - until Rossi trashed it at Valencia, that is,
and then apparently started making excuses. The Laguna failure was the
result of a touring pace and incredibly hot conditions, and any other
overheating is a bit speculative. The motor certainly wasn't as
reliable as the Hondas and he really paid for it once, but that doesn't
make the bike screwed up. Sure seemed to handle well enough all year,
beyond the temporary serious chatter.

After Pedrosa's, probably so - how many problems did Dani have this
year? Beyond the inability to ride in the rain or avoid hitting his
teammate, that is? I don't recall ever seeing or hearing of any issue
with his bike, and how many times was his bike the fastest through the
traps, or almost so? Best machine on the grid, hands down...

 

Mark N thinks:

Actually, that's exactly where it points. He's the man. Nobody
else is in as good a position to make sure the development
is going the right direction. Plenty of others share whatever
blame there may be in not getting the bike to be the
best on the grid but he's at the top of that pyramid.

Mind you, as evidenced by the points, he and his team
did a better job than any other team this year. So
all the credit to him.


Go fast. Take chances.
Mike S.

 

I don't believe the "touring pace" line for even a second. He'd slowed
down less than a second a lap, and at anything above moderate speeds
the power required to go faster increases as the cube of the speed
while the cooling airflow over the radiator increases at best linearly
with the speed.

He destroyed his tire then his motor blew up; not he destroyed his tire
so his motor blew up.

But regardless, 2 mechanical DNFs for Rossi is 2 more than all the
Hondas combined. But he left Honda and went to Yamaha willingly, and
not having the best motor out there is part of the deal with that.

-jake

 

Mark N misunderstands:

Pssst. It's *Honda*. Any conjecture that they don't have the
will or the wallet is pure fantasy.


Go fast. Take chances.
Mike S.

 

Why is it that people make a big to-do about switching between Michelin and
Dunlop, yet not so much to Bridgestone? Does Bridgestone have similar grip
characteristics to Michelin?

 

Carl Sundquist asks:

That's a good question. I've never seen anything in the press
about the different characteristics of todays slicks. Back in
the good ole' good ole's, when my endurance team had
a tire sponsorship from Bridgerock, Dunlop was reputed
to be (and from my experience was) more forgiving than
Michelins. The Dunlops started sliding a bit earlier
but when they did slide it was in a nice, easily controlled
way and you could still load them a bit more. Michelins
may have had higher ultimate loading levels but when
they broke loose - BANG - they broke loose and
you were in big trouble.

The Bridgerocks were closer to the Dunlops then in
that they slid early. Too bad the ultimate traction
level never made it up to Dunlop level. My whole
Bridgestone experience was with endurance tires
though.

Note that this was late 80's.

So what are the modern tires like? Anybody?


Go fast. Take chances.
Mike S.

 

It must be great to worship someone as a youngster, then grow up to be
their peer, and friend.

 

sturd trots out another cliche:

In this particular case it was the will, but that was probably driven
to some extent by their wallet, which, while larger than anyone else's,
is hardly unlimited. They simply chose to not invest too much in the
development of Hayden's bike, which may have been a budgetary decision
made long before the season started. That bike always seemed to be
something of an offshoot, at least after the original intro at Brno in
'05, and there was probably a lot of mixed feeling within HRC about the
nature of the project. In the end it seems like it became something of
an embarrassment, which certainly wasn't intended. Kind of ironic,
given that the general perception of Honda is that they want to make
the machine the star and show their engineering brilliance, and they
ended up with an abortion of a machine that a gutty, smart, determined
kid and his team turned into a champion anyway...

 

Yeah, I here Sete talking about what a nice guy he is all the time.

Bruce