One factor that has not been mentioned is piston speed. There was a very good article that was posted/pasted on here about a year or so ago of an article from one of the Brit mags on that subject and they seemed to think that the V-twin would not be in WSBK much longer because that engine simply could not go any faster and had reached the end of its product life. It will be interesting to see what happens in the next few years with the V-twin.....I don't have a dog in that fight since I sold my Mille....just curious.
__________________
Only one left not in captivity.
One factor that has not been mentioned is piston speed. There was a very good article that was posted/pasted on here about a year or so ago of an article from one of the Brit mags on that subject and they seemed to think that the V-twin would not be in WSBK much longer because that engine simply could not go any faster and had reached the end of its product life. It will be interesting to see what happens in the next few years with the V-twin.....I don't have a dog in that fight since I sold my Mille....just curious.
Yup, piston speed is dependent on the stroke of the motor and twins INHERENTLY have a longer stroke than fours, so their piston speeds are higher, and this limits their maximum RPM, which in turn limits their power potential. It's very simple engineering fact. This is one of the prime reasons that fours have great power potential than twins of equal displacement. No argument at all.
__________________ Old Baldy / WWBO #451
Ducati 996
Kawasaki KLR 650 '02
Kawasaki KLR650 '06 OB's Blog
Well done meat there Baldy! Didn't mean to imply any specific make/model corners the market on poseurdom, (well, there DOES seem to be a dis-proportunate numer of douchebags on blinged out Gixers and Busas) Just the fact that some people spend SOOOOOOO much money for nothing else than to "act" like some kind of asphalt hero, down to actually grinding down their knee sliders, just to impress some other douchebag who doesn't know any better. Bikes are kinda like tools to me, there are correct tools for each job, and when I see some dipshit using a $600 Snap-on torque wrench as a hammer, it's the same as seeing some assclown strech the swingarm on a GSXR1000 12'', it's dis-respecting the "soul" of the tool. I guess if you paid for it you can do what you want, but don't expect me to do much more than shake my head and mutter...."douchebag...." What can I say, I'm a cranky old fookin' man!
Anyway, ride on, it's all about goin' for a ride...........
-Rocky-
__________________
ROCKYMT
Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."
One factor that has not been mentioned is piston speed. There was a very good article that was posted/pasted on here about a year or so ago of an article from one of the Brit mags on that subject and they seemed to think that the V-twin would not be in WSBK much longer because that engine simply could not go any faster and had reached the end of its product life. It will be interesting to see what happens in the next few years with the V-twin.....I don't have a dog in that fight since I sold my Mille....just curious.
So....getting back to Larry's point that the twins are quickly becoming extinct, I simply pointed out/reminded the old guy that the twins are still heavily restricted compared to the fours, within the current FIM rules...and that I believe that if they (the twins) start to become uncompetitive with their current penalties, the rules provide for larger intake restrictions and lower weight penalties to again restore the balance....so don't count the twins out just yet.
YMMV, as always.
Removing the restrictions will help the race teams but the point I made was
that Ducati's engineers need to be busy at work right now with the new V4
replacement because it takes about 3 years worth of development to go
from CAD drawing to race bike...
OB, i am not arguing with you i just think your opinion in biased towards a brand name so you make it all make sense to you
Twins have always needed a CC advantage and the reasons are known but also they are disadvantaged from the get go because of the things you mentioned and from a race point it is not a optimum race motor. it might be a great street motor and i am sure you want to see the bike you buy race we all do i bought a 51 There becomes a point where going from a 851 to 1200 over how many years to keep the twin in a position to race what you but gets old IMO. At some point it becomes move on to what makes better sense and a 1400cc twin is not it.
they might be able to keep the curve and rules in such a way to allow things like a 1500 cc ducati twin with 45mm TB and a 14 lb weight penalty but is that really racing, or is it a way to help save the ducati line and name?
I am not a owner of the bike so i am looking at this from a unbiased look at the series and lines as a whole and you clearly are biased int he one direction and possibly that clouds any real objectivity
"Exercise restraint and discipline, only responding to posts from legit customers and those with constructive positive intent, you will find that the handgrenades explode harmlessly. You have many satisfied customers who are happy to have the parts you've made. My suggestion to you is keep making good parts, keep getting more customers, take care of them and let them speak for you."
Removing the restrictions will help the race teams but the point I made was
that Ducati's engineers need to be busy at work right now with the new V4
replacement because it takes about 3 years worth of development to go
from CAD drawing to race bike...
They already have a giant-killer V4 ready, if they wish. They don't yet wish.
__________________ Old Baldy / WWBO #451
Ducati 996
Kawasaki KLR 650 '02
Kawasaki KLR650 '06 OB's Blog
I am not a owner of the bike so i am looking at this from a unbiased look at the series and lines as a whole and you clearly are biased int he one direction and possibly that clouds any real objectivity
That's funny right there.
You fail to remember that the rules do not ALLOW either type of motor to become advantaged. How is this biased to one or the other? If the Ducati starts to win too much, it gets penalized more until it doesn't. And the other way round.
Read the fooking rules, dude.
__________________ Old Baldy / WWBO #451
Ducati 996
Kawasaki KLR 650 '02
Kawasaki KLR650 '06 OB's Blog
They already have a giant-killer V4 ready, if they wish. They don't yet wish.
True it's a giant killer of a V4 but it was never designed for the rigors of
WSBK... it will need a complete redesign based on what they have learned
since the 990 MotoGp days... if I were an engineer at Ducati given the task of
their next WSBK racer... I'd be drafting up a bore out version of the 2010
Gp10 800 with the aim of keeping the cost in sight for their loyal core of
street and track riders... like you!!!
True it's a giant killer of a V4 but it was never designed for the rigors of
WSBK... it will need a complete redesign based on what they have learned
since the 990 MotoGp days...
I'm curious why you believe it NEEDS a full redesign, Larry?
(Frankly, I agree...but I'm interested in your reason(s))
__________________ Old Baldy / WWBO #451
Ducati 996
Kawasaki KLR 650 '02
Kawasaki KLR650 '06 OB's Blog
For starters... it needs a big bang crank like Mr.RC30 and Mr.RC45...
Larry, why would you want them to switch to a more even, screamer firing order than they currently have? They have a true big-bang type firing sequence that offers a much longer "rest period" within the firing sequence than a simple 360 crank with alternate firing orders, like the RC45 or RC30.
The firing sequence is 0 - 90 - 290 - 380 and then a LONG 340 degree rest period....much, much more of a "big bang" order than the simple 360 crank order of the RC45.
For someone who thinks the big-bang is a good characteristic, I'm curious why you would have Ducati move further away from it, by adopting the screamer sequence of the RC45?
Now, the reason that I would have suggested a redesign is primarily packaging....I've never been a proponent of the LONG "L" format of the Ducati V motors, with the horizontal cylinder so "horizontal" forcing the crankshaft location to be so far back, and thus affecting the overall weight distribution of the bike towards the rear.
I think that Ducati originally designed the flat V-twin (L-twin) layout in a time when it was thought that the COG of the bike should be as low as possible, and when front-rear weight bias was much more rearwards as a norm. Modern thinking has the idea of mass-centralization, to allow for much faster steering transitions and agility of the bike, with lower moments of inertia....and this means RAISING the bike's COG to a point closer to the overall bike + rider COG and centralizing the bike's mass as close as possible to the point. Also, moving away from the long L-Vee format with its resulting long engine, allows the crank and gearbox to be scooted forwards MUCH closer to the front tire, and allowing further front bias as well as a significantly longer swingarm with an even shorter wheelbase....all good things, in current race design thinking.
I think Ducati continued to adopt the "long engine" layout at least PARTIALLY due to the historical influence of the "L" layout....and to distinguish themselves from the rest of the herd, even though it looks as if they did tilt the "V" further back than in their twins...to help shorten the long engine. It's still a LONG, LONG engine compared to a modern I4, of course.
In my view, with a clean slate and no historical influence, they might (should) have rotated that V even further to a more "normal" layout, while retaining all the rest of the Ducati goodness...the Desmocedici/Ducati valvetrain, the big-bang firing sequence that seems to be making a re-emergence, etc, etc.
__________________ Old Baldy / WWBO #451
Ducati 996
Kawasaki KLR 650 '02
Kawasaki KLR650 '06 OB's Blog
You fail to remember that the rules do not ALLOW either type of motor to become advantaged. How is this biased to one or the other? If the Ducati starts to win too much, it gets penalized more until it doesn't. And the other way round.
Read the fooking rules, dude.
what does the rules have to do with this? Ducati said they would leave if were not able to race their 1200cc bike so i am unsure how you keep clinging to the "rules" allow it, course they do and that is my point. do you really think the rest of the large name brands are going to ditch the easier, cheaper, more reliable inlens in favor of 1400 cc twins because the rules allow it?
the rules change to suit ducati or had you not noticed
i will give you the gap that 4's have gained on the lead ducati gets is now 200cc not 250cc but at some poing the powers at be should stop changing the rules to suit a brand and be more interested in the racing IMHO
"Exercise restraint and discipline, only responding to posts from legit customers and those with constructive positive intent, you will find that the handgrenades explode harmlessly. You have many satisfied customers who are happy to have the parts you've made. My suggestion to you is keep making good parts, keep getting more customers, take care of them and let them speak for you."
what does the rules have to do with this? Ducati said they would leave if were not able to race their 1200cc bike so i am unsure how you keep clinging to the "rules" allow it, course they do and that is my point. do you really think the rest of the large name brands are going to ditch the easier, cheaper, more reliable inlens in favor of 1400 cc twins because the rules allow it?
the rules change to suit ducati or had you not noticed
I can't argue when I can't even grasp your point, or understand your logic.
Let's move on, we're wasting each other's time.
The only thing I understand from your post is "the rules change to suit ducati or had you not noticed" - and to that, I would FULLY agree. Our difference is that you think there is some mystical advantage now, for Ducati, while to folks that understand this stuff, it is simply an attempt to keep the different configurations closely competitive. The rules do not allow for any advantage of one format over he other, based on ACTUAL RACE RESULTS.
You also ignore the inherent advantage of the fours in other areas...but that's probably something you're struggling to grasp, as you conveniently ignore that aspect.
We're done on this one. It's like me arguing with my daughter....I always lose, despite there being very little logic to the argument.
__________________ Old Baldy / WWBO #451
Ducati 996
Kawasaki KLR 650 '02
Kawasaki KLR650 '06 OB's Blog
I can't argue when I can't even grasp your point, or understand your logic.
Let's move on, we're wasting each other's time.
The only thing I understand from your post is "the rules change to suit ducati or had you not noticed" - and to that, I would FULLY agree. Our difference is that you think there is some mystical advantage now, for Ducati, while to folks that understand this stuff, it is simply an attempt to keep the different configurations closely competitive. The rules do not allow for any advantage of one format over he other, based on ACTUAL RACE RESULTS.
You also ignore the inherent advantage of the fours in other areas...but that's probably something you're struggling to grasp, as you conveniently ignore that aspect.
We're done on this one. It's like me arguing with my daughter....I always lose, despite there being very little logic to the argument.
you certainly like to try to make yourself feel better then OB, amen to you
i did not state the duce had a advantage other then 200cc
you claim "they" are trying to keep a config in the mix and everybody but you and ducati owners realize that is not the case. they are trying to keep ducati alive by racing what they can sell.
how can ducati switch to a inline for example and survive?
i am all for options but helping the old dog live another decade bores me more then attracts me just some food for thought
i am not argueing or getting huffy so go back and yell at your daughter man, learn to chill
"Exercise restraint and discipline, only responding to posts from legit customers and those with constructive positive intent, you will find that the handgrenades explode harmlessly. You have many satisfied customers who are happy to have the parts you've made. My suggestion to you is keep making good parts, keep getting more customers, take care of them and let them speak for you."
"Exercise restraint and discipline, only responding to posts from legit customers and those with constructive positive intent, you will find that the handgrenades explode harmlessly. You have many satisfied customers who are happy to have the parts you've made. My suggestion to you is keep making good parts, keep getting more customers, take care of them and let them speak for you."
For someone who thinks the big-bang is a good characteristic, I'm curious why you would have Ducati move further away from it, by adopting the screamer sequence of the RC45?
Mercy Baldy... Ducati is adopting the big banger like the good characteristic found in the RC30 / RC45...
"Exercise restraint and discipline, only responding to posts from legit customers and those with constructive positive intent, you will find that the handgrenades explode harmlessly. You have many satisfied customers who are happy to have the parts you've made. My suggestion to you is keep making good parts, keep getting more customers, take care of them and let them speak for you."
that the twins are still heavily restricted compared to the fours, within the current FIM rules...and that I believe that if they (the twins) start to become uncompetitive with their current penalties, the rules provide for larger intake restrictions and lower weight penalties to again restore the balance....so don't count the twins out just yet.
Linear Mode
