Yamaha to Honda in MotoGP?

[Busy Little Shop]

Originally Posted by Dezmo

Oh really Larry?

Really... Honda is happy with the V4 engine configuration whereas the riders
aren't happy with this particular V4... standby because HRC is committed in
getting it right...

[Busy Little Shop]

Originally Posted by mikstr

isn`t the gripe about the 212`s engine position essentially the same one that was adressed at the RC45 (based on a few articles/tests/rider interviews I had read years ago; thought I`d allude to the sources before the Meltdown Kid decides to have a go at me, lol)?

Ah... the great RC45 engine in the frame debate...

T.W.O. magazine states "the problem with the RC45 the engine's weight
is too far forward"...

Julian Ryder states in his V Force book... "the problem with the RC45
is the engine is too far back and too high up"...

Oh where did the RC45 engine position work the best??? right where HRC
knew it would... 10mm further forward than the RC30...

[mikstr]

because HRC is infallible right? Besides, what do the two riders criticizing the 212 know about handling anyway, I mean they probably bought their way onto the MotoGP starting grid.... Probably teh same as all those riders who could never get the 45 to handle properly. Sounds like a great big conspiracy to me......

[drthompson65]

Jesus another damn V4 thread...

[Busy Little Shop]

Originally Posted by mikstr

because HRC is infallible right? Besides, what do the two riders criticizing the 212 know about handling anyway, I mean they probably bought their way onto the MotoGP starting grid.... Probably teh same as all those riders who could never get the 45 to handle properly. Sounds like a great big conspiracy to me......

HRC is not infallible... but do you have the two riders that agree how far and
in what direction the engine should shift in the frame???

The RC45 did handle properly:

Alan Cathcart is a respected racer who has the privilege of being able to test
all the top race machines for public consumption. This highly envied position
allows him to give readers an insight into the real differences between makes,
and even between years. This is revealed in his articles for Motorcycle Racer
magazine, among others. Below are some of the salient comments on Colin Edwards'
1999 World Superbike RC45, when Alan was given the chance to test it at the end
of the 1999 racing season."

"The next day shone, and it was time for a track test I'll always remember.
That's not just because I ended up doing a lap time that brought smiles and
compliments from HRC race staff, but because of the qualities of the bike I did
it on - arguably the finest Superbike I've yet ridden. And, yes - this was less
than a month after I'd ridden Carl Fogarty's world champion Ducati, so I do have
a valid basis for comparison."

[mikstr]

They pay engineers to figure those things out, they pay riders to ride. A decent engineer should be able to take the rider`s input and figure out what needs to be done to correct the problem and improve the package (if he or she cannot do that, they should be assigned to another area and replaced with someone who can).

as for the comments from Cathcart, you would hope that after six years (and millions of dollars) of development they would finally have gotten it right. That fact aside, the RC still did not claim the title that year and, when it comes to racing, winning is the only thing that matters (to paraphrase, no one remembers who finished second).

[Busy Little Shop]

Originally Posted by mikstr

They pay engineers to figure those things out, they pay riders to ride. A decent engineer should be able to take the rider`s input and figure out what needs to be done to correct the problem and improve the package (if he or she cannot do that, they should be assigned to another area and replaced with someone who can).

I agree... but first an engineer must decide if problem rest in the tire or the chassis...

[Busy Little Shop]

Originally Posted by mikstr

as for the comments from Cathcart, you would hope that after six years (and millions of dollars) of development they would finally have gotten it right. That fact aside, the RC still did not claim the title that year and, when it comes to racing, winning is the only thing that matters (to paraphrase, no one remembers who finished second).

As per HRC's way... the V4 was in constant development from 93 to 99 and
it was not the reason for the second place finish... rather it had more to
do with Showa suspension and Michelin tires... two companies Honda
adamantly stuck by... also the fact you had to ride the RC45 like a Gp racer
something Kocinski was willing to do...

HRC Superbike boss Syuhei Nakamoto is in no doubt there was a problem
with Michelin's range of tyres for the V4 RC45, which compromised grip
and the ability of all Honda riders to put the power to the ground.
All-new rubber one month later, plus a revised set-up combined to
redress the problem to spectacular effect.

Nakamoto said this more composed handling was due to the new improved
suspension response from the new Showa front end...

Quote Alan Cathcart:
Riding Kocinski's bike first underlined this - because to make this
bike work, you have to ride it like the four-stroke GP racer it's now
undoubtedly become. Maybe that's why little John took to it so quickly:
as the only rider to win world titles in GP and Superbike racing, the
re-invented RC45 must have reminded him of the two-strokes he used to
race in GP's!

[Dezmo]

Originally Posted by Busy Little Shop

Really... Honda is happy with the V4 engine configuration whereas the riders
aren't happy with this particular V4... standby because HRC is committed in
getting it right...

Spun in true Larry fashion

[mikstr]

Originally Posted by Busy Little Shop

standby because HRC is committed in
getting it right...

is that akin to "flogging a dead horse" I wonder?.......