Ducati's big banger V4...

[Busy Little Shop]

Duacti would do better if they adopted the "Big Bang" engine configuration
after all it is what I know and love the best...

Quote Crash.net

Casey Stoner confirmed his initial positive impression of the new
'revised engine configuration' for his factory Ducati during the
second day of post-season testing at Valencia.

The Australian, who won two races either side of a mid-2009 break to
treat fatigue problems, dropped from first on Monday to second on
Tuesday, despite lowering his personal best lap time by almost half a
second.

“We weren't able to make much use of the day yesterday because of the
high winds but today the conditions were much better,” said Stoner.

Stoner is riding with what sounds like a 'big bang' style engine
configuration, compared with the smoother firing order he and Ducati
have used since the switch to 800cc in 2007.

“The new engine setting, which I am preferring so far, changes the
performance of the bike in different ways, for example in corner exit,
so we have to modify the set-up in order to get the most out of it,”
he explained.

“I also have to get used to it and adapt my riding style accordingly.
It probably means I can't get on the gas as hard and fast out of the
corners but can keep it open more further in the corners.”

[Old Baldy]

Originally Posted by Busy Little Shop

Duacti would do better if they adopted the "Big Bang" engine configuration
after all it is what I know and love the best...

Interesting Larry...are you referring to your own 45 or....?

If so...I didn't know you'd built a custom crank and cams? (thought you had a regular RC45 360 V-4 crank setup, which is not a "Big Bang")

90Deg V4 70 crank (Desmocedici - not Big Bang)
000----090----180------290----020--090----180----270----360
000----090----180------290----380--450----540----630----720
-1-------4---------------3------2-------------------------1-

90Deg V4 360 crank (RC30/45 etc)
000----090----180----270----360----090----180----270----360
000----090----180----270----360----450----540----630----720
-1------4---------------------3------2--------------------1-

90Deg V4 180 crank (VFR, etc)
000----090----180----270----360----090----180----270----360
000----090----180----270----360----450----540----630----720
-1--------------3--------------------2-------------4------1-

90Deg V2 360 crank (Ducati, Suzuki TL*/SV etc)
000----090----180----270----360----090----180----270----360
000----090----180----270----360----450----540----630----720
-1---------------------2----------------------------------1-

I4 (regular 180 crank)
000----090----180----270----360----090----180----270----360
000----090----180----270----360----450----540----630----720
-1--------------3-------------4-------------2-------------1-


I4 90crank (Yamaha R1 crossplane)
000----090----180----270----360----090----180----270----360
000----090----180----270----360----450----540----630----720
-1---------------------2-------------4------3-------------1-

[mikstr]

maybe they went with the Twin Pulse set-up they had on their last 990 (and have on the D16RR; first option on Baldy's list)?

[Busy Little Shop]

Update Wed Nov 12 2009

Stoner and Hayden top the charts... both are really happy with the
progressive delivery more traction big banger over the peaky delivery and
less traction screamer...

Casey Stoner Nov 12 2009

"We are testing a new engine it's got a new firing order (big bang)
something to smooth everything out and to make the bike easier to
ride. So far it's been very positive, the bike feels really good,
we've got a little more torque, it's just more consistent as I come
out of the corner we've found a lot more traction because the engine
isn't so peaky and so touchy (screamer) that I've really found a heck
of a lot more traction with the same settings that we've been running
all weekend so we're really happy."

Nicky Hayden Nov 12 2009

“We worked on confirming a few things today and I think we found what
we were looking for. I like the changes we've introduced to the bike,
the power delivery is definitely more progressive (big bang) although we still
need to find the ideal setting for it. I got my lap times down by a
couple of tenths today, thanks to the new Bridgestone tyres, which are
great.

Valencia test final times 2009

1. Casey Stoner AUS Ducati Marlboro Team 1min 31.900 sec (35 laps)
2. Dani Pedrosa SPA Repsol Honda Team 1min 31.944 sec (38 laps)
3. Nicky Hayden USA Ducati Marlboro Team 1min 32.805 sec (40 laps)
4. Andrea Dovizioso ITA Repsol Honda Team 1min 32.825 sec (51 laps)
5. Marco Melandri ITA San Carlo Honda Gresini 1min 32.936 sec (36 laps)
6. Mika Kallio FIN Pramac Racing 1min 32.988 sec (39 laps)
7. Aleix Espargaro SPA Pramac Racing 1min 33.275 sec (55 laps)
8. Loris Capirossi ITA Rizla Suzuki MotoGP 1min 33.464 sec (43 laps)
9. Hector Barbera SPA Aspar Ducati 1min 33.787 sec (57 laps)
10. Marco Simoncelli ITA San Carlo Honda Gresini 1min 33.856 sec (35 laps)
11. Alvaro Bautista SPA Rizla Suzuki MotoGP 1min 34.163 sec (45 laps)
12. Hiroshi Aoyama JPN Interwetten Honda MotoGP 1min 34.821 sec (47 laps)
13. Joan Olive SPA Promoracing (Moto2) 1min 38.718 sec (37 laps)
14. Xavier Simoen BEL Gresini (Moto2) 1min 39.151 sec (12 laps)
15. Kenny Noyes USA Promoracing (Moto2) 1min 45.427 sec (2 laps)

[mikstr]

Did I read that correctly?????? A V4 with a peaky power delivery? Peaky is synonymous with cammy right? WOW!!! I thought that V4 and cammy were mutually exclusive. What`s next Larry? Will you tell us that the V4 does not offer the best architecture for optmizing handling? Oh how the mighty have fallen.........

[Busy Little Shop]

Originally Posted by Old Baldy

Interesting Larry...are you referring to your own 45 or....? If so...I didn't know you'd built a custom crank and cams? (thought you had a regular RC45 360 V-4 crank setup, which is not a "Big Bang")

It is interesting Baldy... have you noticed that the RC30 and RC45 share
the same firing order as your Ducati V2??? that's because we are the 4
stroke equivalent of a 2 stroke big banger whereas the Yamaha cross plane
crank is not... this is due to our 360º crank phasing which places all the
rods on the same plane...

90Deg V4 360 crank (RC30/45 etc)
000----090----180----270----360----090----180----270----360
000----090----180----270----360----450----540----630----720
-1------4---------------------3------2--------------------1-



90Deg V2 360 crank (Ducati, Suzuki TL*/SV etc)
000----090----180----270----360----090----180----270----360
000----090----180----270----360----450----540----630----720
-1---------------------2----------------------------------1-


I4 90crank (Yamaha R1 crossplane)
000----090----180----270----360----090----180----270----360
000----090----180----270----360----450----540----630----720
-1---------------------2-------------4------3-------------1-

Origins of the Big Bang in Gp racing was Doohan and the Honda RVF 750
works 4 stroke racer...

Quote Max Oxley

"Developments of the 91 NSR 500 focused around Doohan testing a number
of designs as HRC shifted their main push behind the new up and
comer... For some while Doohan had been asking engineers to replicate
the wide power band characteristic of the RVF750 4 stroke endurance
bike, which he and Gardner had used to lead the previous summer's
Suzuka 8 Hours... HRC answer was the 2 stroke equivalent of the the 4
stroke Big Bang... technically speaking all four cylinders fried
within 70 degrees to afford the tire more time to hook up."

"Consider and instant success by Gardner "Jesus, this is amazing" but
Doohan was a doubter... the 92 NSR droning big bang had a very
flat exhaust note which made it sound slow to riders... It was only
during HRC's final preseason phase that Doohan began to believe in the
Big Bang... He found little difference in lap times but the close
firing order was easier on tires and set up."

"Rainey and company were in for the shock as the season kicked off...
Utilizing the Big Bangs ability to find traction where others could
not... Doohan ran away with the first four races... winning by
anything up to 28 seconds wet or dry... The Big Bang proved such a
giant leap forward that rival factories Cagiva, Suzuki, Yamaha rushed
to build copies... having learned the NRS's secret by playing
track side audio recording against an oscilloscope."

"There could be no doubt now... Honda now had the best 500 on the grid
by quite some margin... the big bang NRS proved to be a winner in a
variety of hands... Since the 80 when engine HP dramatically
outstripped tire and chassis performance... GP teams had been hiring
tail sliding dirt trackers form America and Australia because no one
else could wrestle these monsters into submission."

Quote MCN on Doohan's decision to return to the screamer:

"Doohan felt he'd become stale during '96 by simply going
through the motions to wrap up his third straight crown, and
he needed something to rekindle the old fire. He found it in
a return to his "screamer" non-Big Bang NSR motor,
notoriously difficult to control."

All in all it's hello big bang goodbye screamer for Ducati in 2010... expect
Stoner's and Hayden's comments to focus on the new V4 being bike easier
to ride with lots more traction... something that 360º V4s are noted for...

[Busy Little Shop]

Originally Posted by mikstr

Did I read that correctly?????? A V4 with a peaky power delivery? Peaky is synonymous with cammy right? WOW!!! I thought that V4 and cammy were mutually exclusive. What`s next Larry? Will you tell us that the V4 does not offer the best architecture for optmizing handling? Oh how the mighty have fallen.........

Yes you did read it correctly the V4 is still the best engine architecture...

With a V4 you have the choice between a screamer (peaky) with offset
crank pins or the big banger (linear) crank pins on the same plane...


Screamer (peaky) V4 with off set crank pins... (you can offset them 180º
or 70º or 15º or what ever you wish...)




Big Bang (linear) V4 with the crank pins on the same plane...

[mikstr]

Curiously, Yamaha could easily have chosen to reproduce the firing order you hail as ultimate when they redesigned the M1 engine years ago (and truthfully could have done it at any time since) and yet they consciously chose not to. In the ensuing years, they have won four MotoGP championships (narrowly missing out on a fifth) in six years. By comparison, the RC45 wth its "ultimate" firing order also competed for six years (in a lower class mind you). In the same time span (how convenient wouldn`t you agree?), it only managed one (yes, 1) world title. Need I remind you too that that was over ten years ago now and technology has marched, make that leapt, forward since then. Are we to believe then that a design that was just a cut above a dismal failure ten years ago is somehow the hot set-up today?

Sorry Larry, but my money is on Yamaha and the enviable record of success they have earned with their crossplane configuration.

Looking forward to reading your rebuttal, lol

P.S. I love how you try to put words in my mouth, lol Never, and I mean, NEVER, have I come anywhere close to saying the V4 is the best configuration. It seems I may have uncovered the root of the problem, you can`t read!!!!!!

[Mashuri]

Originally Posted by mikstr

Curiously, Yamaha could easily have chosen to reproduce the firing order you hail as ultimate when they redesigned the M1 engine years ago (and truthfully could have done it at any time since) and yet they consciously chose not to.

Good point. We haven't heard anything about the M1's being peaky and hard to ride. Quite the opposite -- yet they have the same firing cadence as a "screamer" 180 degree V4. How do you explain that one Larry?

[mikstr]

Come now, you don't really expect him to answer the question do you? No, expect some long-winded diatribe full of useless quotes that refer to everything and anything but the topic at hand. That, my friend, is Larry, the poster child for denial.

[BC999S]

At all costs keep this thread going.

It keeps Larry out of the other ones!

[mikstr]

it's not that simple unfortunately, lol

[Old Fart]

Originally Posted by mikstr

Did I read that correctly?????? A V4 with a peaky power delivery? Peaky is synonymous with cammy right? WOW!!! I thought that V4 and cammy were mutually exclusive. What`s next Larry? Will you tell us that the V4 does not offer the best architecture for optmizing handling? Oh how the mighty have fallen.........

You forgot to add 'motor of death'

[Old Baldy]

Originally Posted by Busy Little Shop

It is interesting Baldy... have you noticed that the RC30 and RC45 share
the same firing order as your Ducati V2???

90Deg V4 360 crank (RC30/45 etc)
000----090----180----270----360----090----180----270----360
000----090----180----270----360----450----540----630----720
-1------4---------------------3------2--------------------1-

90Deg V2 360 crank (Ducati, Suzuki TL*/SV etc)
000----090----180----270----360----090----180----270----360
000----090----180----270----360----450----540----630----720
-1---------------------2----------------------------------1-

ahhhh, no. Can't say I have. They have totally different firing intervals, as the firing sequence shows above.

I guess I don't understand your question/statement, Larry.....


How are these the same?

-1------4---------------------3------2--------------------1-
-1---------------------2----------------------------------1-

[Old Baldy]

Originally Posted by BC999S

At all costs keep this thread going.

It keeps Larry out of the other ones!

shhhhh!!!!

I'm taking one for the gang here......all this V4 stuff is making me ill.

[PSk]

If a v4 with a big bang firing order is better than a v4 with a normal firing order on the track then I'm surprised Ducati have to produced a twin, because that is the point of the big bang.

The only reason they stagger the crankpins slightly is to be kind to the gearbox, etc. components and feed the power in over a slightly wider range ... which I guess makes a big bang v4 better than a twin ... heck countered my own point

I'm really surpised that it's faster, as Yamaha (as others have said) could have chosen any firing order and they chose one which everybody refers to has a virtual v4 and when you look at it it matches the v4 180 crank the most in gaps between the combustion pulses:

90Deg V4 180 crank (VFR, etc)
000----090----180----270----360----090----180----270----360
000----090----180----270----360----450----540----630----720
-1--------------3--------------------2-------------4------1--------------3

************I4 90crank (Yamaha R1 crossplane)
************000----090----180----270----360----090----180----270----360
************000----090----180----270----360----450----540----630----720
************-1---------------------2-------------4------3-------------1-


Yamaha did not care about engine architecture so much as what worked at where it mattered, the rear tyre and then worked backwards and this selected the firing intervals, etc. To me that is the right answer, not starting at the engine and working towards traction ...

Pete

[Old Baldy]

Originally Posted by PSk

If a v4 with a big bang firing order is better than a v4 with a normal firing order on the track then I'm surprised Ducati have to produced a twin, because that is the point of the big bang.

The only reason they stagger the crankpins slightly is to be kind to the gearbox, etc. components and feed the power in over a slightly wider range ... which I guess makes a big bang v4 better than a twin ... heck countered my own point

I'm really surpised that it's faster, as Yamaha (as others have said) could have chosen any firing order and they chose one which everybody refers to has a virtual v4 and when you look at it it matches the v4 180 crank the most in gaps between the combustion pulses:

90Deg V4 180 crank (VFR, etc)
000----090----180----270----360----090----180----270----360
000----090----180----270----360----450----540----630----720
-1--------------3--------------------2-------------4------1-

************I4 90crank (Yamaha R1 crossplane)
************000----090----180----270----360----090----180----
************000----090----180----270----360----450----540----
************-1---------------------2-------------4------3-------

270----360
630----720

------1-

Yamaha did not care about engine architecture so much as what worked at where it mattered, the rear tyre and worked backwards and this selected the firing intervals, etc. To me that is the right answer, not starting at the engine and working towards traction ...

Pete

I agree with the concept of starting at the tire, but I contend that Yamaha did not really CARE that much about firing order....because they CLEARLY state that the main reason for the cross plain has LITTLE to do with actual firing sequence...and MUCH to do with reducing the inertial torque of the crank.

They wanted a smooth mechanical torque flow from the even 90 degree spacing of the crank throws. They really didn't care about the actual combustion firing sequence....and they SAID this in their summary of this configuration. They were simply after trying to make a less "noisy" torque affect at the wheel, for the rider (and probably the electronics) to sense the edge of traction. The reduction in inertial torque from the evenly spaced crank throws was deemed to be more important than the firing combustion unevenness of this configuration.

There was absolutely NO incentive or goal to try to replicate any of the older "Big Bang" configurations. That was old hat...for old folks to ponder endlessly about

[Latebraker]

Originally Posted by Old Baldy

I agree with the concept of starting at the tire, but I contend that Yamaha did not really CARE that much about firing order....because they CLEARLY state that the main reason for the cross plain has LITTLE to do with actual firing sequence...and MUCH to do with reducing the inertial torque of the crank.

They wanted a smooth mechanical torque flow from the even 90 degree spacing of the crank throws. They really didn't care about the actual combustion firing sequence....and they SAID this in their summary of this configuration. They were simply after trying to make a less "noisy" torque affect at the wheel, for the rider (and probably the electronics) to sense the edge of traction. The reduction in inertial torque from the evenly spaced crank throws was deemed to be more important than the firing combustion unevenness of this configuration.

There was absolutely NO incentive or goal to try to replicate any of the older "Big Bang" configurations. That was old hat...for old folks to ponder endlessly about

Excellent points. One of the side benefits was that the engine revs up quicker because the pistons aren't stopping and starting together in pairs. RRW found that the new R1 would hit 150 HP faster than all the other 1000's on the dyno.

[Busy Little Shop]

Originally Posted by Mashuri

Good point. We haven't heard anything about the M1's being peaky and hard to ride. Quite the opposite -- yet they have the same firing cadence as a "screamer" 180 degree V4. How do you explain that one Larry?

Yamaha weren't hard to ride... they were soft to save engines...

Quote Rossi:

"In 2010, riders will be restricted to just six engines for the entire
IS-race season, something Rossi has doubts about. "Is all for save
money," said Rossi. "We know the reason, but for sure six engines for
IS races is a lot. But it's the manufacturers who decided this rule,
so I hope they are able to understand the limit of these engines. For
sure it will be more tricky work. We hope in the future the economical
situation in the world is coming better and is possible to use more
engines."

Quote Tech 3 Manager

Asked if their engines were detuned, Monster Yamaha Tech 3
Team Manager Herve Poncharal said he did not know what Yamaha
engineers did but both Colin Edwards and James Toseland said their
new, sealed engines felt "soft" and weaker on acceleration than before
Brno. Dani Pedrosa and Nicky Hayden, however, said their engines felt
the same. Hayden then pointed out that he was using his Brno engine at
Indy. One rider who wasn't hurting in engine performance was Alex de
Angelis, who recorded the highest top speed of the weekend, 201.26 mph
(323.9 kph)"

[Busy Little Shop]

Originally Posted by Old Baldy

How are these the same?

They are both big bangers...