Motorcycle Forums

Manners?

Listen sonny..take that finger from out your spotty, illiterate little arse and pay attention.

Pleb.

What ongoing upgrades are you talking about H5?..there haven't been any. Perhaps you should pay a bit more attention too? 

Eh?

"What ongoing upgrades are you talking about H5?..there haven't been any. Perhaps you should pay a bit more attention too? "

This article... "And with practice in Misano badly disrupted by rain that limited the set-up time available to his rivals, crew chief Jerry Burgess says a better understanding of how much the updates have improved the GP12 will come this weekend in Spain."

“Without going into too much the steering head is in a little bit of a different position and it allows you to get more adjustment on the front."

"Aussie Burgess though denied the upgrades were too little, too late"

Are we talking at cross puroposes here? Are you saying that Rossi's possible improvement isn't down to the bike being developed?

Wosi, do you purposely set yourself up for a fall?..

.."Stoner was a genius on that bike but over rode it..because he didn't have the capability to really get to the bottom of it's handling woes." - Surely this comment can also be laid at the door of Rossi as well, ten fold? The bottom line is Wosi, Stoner was winning on that bike, unfortunately, Rossi hasn't..

Shiny Shiny

In Haysi Fantayzee land Wosi?

See that shiny aluminium thing that wraps around the engine now CHR?..the same thing that everyone else uses?..Without that Ducati would be nowhere now

Not necessarily though - The first two versions of the shiny aluminium thing were no better than the CF frame according to VR. This one appears to have a different headstock positioning according to JB - so you could draw a reasonable conclusion that a new frame geometry is responsible for the perceived improvement, not the material. The same geomerty could have yielded a similar result on the CF bike

Too simplistic Bulto..

You seem to be forgetting the engine rule..six per year.

How many pitlane starts would Ducati have to endure because their engine WAS the frame, like the one they had last year because the engine cases needed a make over for the Aluminium spider monocoque, until they hit upon the solution?

You're assuming this new frame/swingarm package of upgrades is the finished article. That they have the right numbers.

Simply put, this year, engines #5 & 6 have new casings that allow more adjustment and that's with them using a beam frame.

There is no reason the geometry can't be transferred to a new monocoque CF design but..that would be no guarantee of success. The example you give of VR saying there was no difference in the first frames was because the geometry was inherently wrong. If it's wrong it's wrong so it doesn't matter what it's made out of.

If they built a CF bike with the right geometry, maybe then you'd see the real shortcomings of Preziosi's design in carbon.

It's no coincidence that every bike that races at world level runs a beam frame.

If this bike does improve because of the new geometry and getting numbers back into the ballpark, why would you want to go back to the rigid, fixed old monocoque that has limited adjustability?

Part of the reason Ducati haven't been successful, even with Stoner, is because the bike worked good some places and not others. You may need that adjustability to fine tune the chassis for different tracks.