Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News > Old News > MotoGP

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-09-2001, 12:24 PM   #41
Rafi
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 34
Default Re: Traktiun Kontrol

Although the engine management systems will effectively work as traction-control devices, I think that no extra assistance in the world would allow most mere mortals (myself included) ride like Rossi, Biaggi, or even Doohan. Although wheelspin sure does make for some exciting racing!!
Rafi is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 12-10-2001, 03:17 AM   #42
pplassm
Founding Member
 
pplassm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,875
Default Re: Aprilia announces GP1 contender

Not really. Somebody spammed this announcement all over the internet. I received the same thing from 3 different sources, non of whom I recognize.



__________________
Mongo just pawn in game of life.
pplassm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2001, 04:06 AM   #43
jamesohoh7
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 211
Default Re: Big Shake Coming

Yeah, that's all good, WSB bikes are proddy-based. You're right; the WSB limits are that way to equalize otherwise vastly unequal machinery.. point taken. Though we're talking about GP1 here (primarily) where anything goes. My point about the unfair size limits for 2s is this: What's to keep some 4s developers from coming out with a radical new induction system (not mechanically super/turbo-charged) that adds.. say 20% more power, but is otherwise within the rules limits? With a 4s, you have a lot of things to play with that can produce more power with the same displacement... with a 2s, it's ALL about the displacement b/c the porting is pretty well maxed out currently. Now, f.i. for 2s could open up new doors.. but we'll probably never know. My view is that if you at least give the 2s some more cc headroom, they can remain competitive w/each leap in the 4s tech. Being brand new, you and I know that the 4s teams will quickly match the weight (if not already), so the "4s are heavier" argument will go away soon I think...unless the rules mandate that they weigh xKg more than a 2s.. I admit I don't know the rules that well for this.



I don't know.. it's a tough argument on either side, for sure... I just think that at this level, essentially an 'anything goes' type of deal, that they could just let everyone have the same limits and see which technology 'wins'.



A really large 2s may make gobs of power, but it won't be ridable, so that in itself will limit the ultimate/practical size anyway.. the argument about power-stroke frequency winds up getting lost in tire-spin and usefulness of that power I think.

I remember reading either Doohan or someone like that saying that current 500cc machines hardly touch the ground anyway b/c they're so violent.. so maybe no one could ride a 550 or 600cc 2s? hmmm.



I guess I'm just a 2s fan so much that it pains me to see this happening!.. I'm biased, I admit.



-James
jamesohoh7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2001, 05:09 AM   #44
starvingstudent
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 486
Default I have to agree...

The Tuono doesn't do much for me. Maybe it's different in person, but it sort of looks...plain. It looks a LOT more comfortable than the Mille R, though.



The Mana I like. I'm not sure about this short-tail thing (the F650CS is the same way), but I really like the bike overall. The gas tank looks great.
starvingstudent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2001, 05:23 AM   #45
starvingstudent
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 486
Default Overall, though...

I think that the Falco is a much more attractive street-oriented sportsbike than the Tuono and I think that the CapoNord is a much more attractive standard than the Mana.



These models are starting to get a bit too close to each other--time to release a second engine configuration for Aprilia streetbikes?
starvingstudent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2001, 05:33 AM   #46
Lincoln
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 203
Default so what you're saying then is...

...racing classes should be based on MPG????



i hear they're going to implement that line of thinking in top fuel next year



Lincoln is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2001, 07:20 AM   #47
RayRevolver
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 20
Default Re: Big Shake Coming

McCoy admitted that there was a traction control device on his YZR500 bike that he used this past year...Whatever the system, the riders can still hang the back out.

The only reason to let this happen would be because, just like F1, it is hard to tell if a team is using a computer for traction control, so might as well let em have it...If it was up to me I would say no.
RayRevolver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2001, 07:33 AM   #48
JohnGeisz
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 100
Default Re: Big Shake Coming

I like the option of 2-stroke in off-road racing, too. I ride a CR-500 in enduros and hare scrambles because it's light, controllable and for me, tunable! I can tune the bike for different events with minor exhaust changes. And though 4-strokes have some distinct superlatives, I can still wrench on a 2-stroke without major tools.



And for pavement competition, I like 4-strokes fine... but I hope there will always be a 2-stroke option. Variety is the spice of life. If everything goes 4-stroke, then wouldn't we miss out on different platforms competing?



It probably will happen, but I think it's a shame to see whole categories of bikes die because of their alleged environmental impact. (As if people would ride them to work)
JohnGeisz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2001, 01:48 PM   #49
Jack_R750
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 32
Default Read my post again, I think I made my point better than this

I said that there is no point of mentioning the "huge" displacement advantage of the 4-strokes against 2-strokes, because this advantage doesn't give 4-strokes anything - they produce MORE and MORE CONTROLLABLE power from SAME amount of fuel DESPITE the cc advantage - thus the cc advantage doesn't matter, from practical point of view these motors - 500cc 2-stroke and 1000cc 4-stroke - are equal in their basic characteristics. The only thing left for this "advantage" is people crying "oh, this engine can produce almost the same power from half the capacity" - as I said, I don't see any point in that kind of comparison - you judge the bike by its engine's physical size (deriving from its capacity) or by its characteristics? I don't care if manufacturers manage to stick 3000cc engine in a road-going slick sportbike, as long as it eats less fuel and produces more power than the current 1000cc bikes. And the rules are an EQUALIZER, to bring some kind of equal starting point to racing. It would not be equal to limit 4-strokes to 500cc too, because the engine produces its power HALF the times the 2-stroke engine does (I suppose you know how the different configurations work, I'll try to show why anyway). Thus 2-strokes are HALF the size of 4-strokes - actually, if you imagine a 2-stroke 500cc parallel twin and 4-stroke 1000cc inline 4, they have exactly the same power cycles - every half engine rotation a cylinder of 250cc (both that of a twin and of an inline 4) impacts the fuel mixture and produces working power, just that in 2 engine rotations the 2 cylinders of a 2-stroke produce working power 2 times each, and 4-stroke's 4 cylinders produce the same power 1 time each. If you understand the basics of physics, you can see that the initial standpoint for these 2 engine configurations is identical, and theoretically, they are supposed to produce exactly the same power. The 2-stroke is lower on power due to its design limitations - the power is not fully utilized in a 2-stroke engine, etc etc.. Enough physics for today. If there was an 8-stroke, the limitation for it should be also DOUBLE the 4-stroke limitation, see the explanation above.

So I think I made my point, trying to expain the correctness (IMHO) of GP rules.

By the way, being not so funny as you think you are, the MPG is a very important characteristic of an engine - so I bet the manufacturers won't try and burn even more fuel to get even more power - after all the gas tanks are limited in size, and fuel adds A LOT of weight, don't you think? They'll try to improve the means of getting that power to work.. And that's exactly related to the MPG we're talking about. Also, can't resist a bit more physics - the energy of exploding fuel mixture is CONSTANT and only 33% of it exploited in 4-strokes (something like 25-27% in 2-strokes), and the only 2 ways of getting more power from the engine is BURN MORE FUEL or USE THE ENERGY BETTER. I prefer the second way, what about you?

Don't forget another thing, these bikes are designed with a road-going technology improvement in mind, and I think you won't like a bike that can go only from one gas station to another, in a straight line..
Jack_R750 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2001, 02:23 PM   #50
Jack_R750
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 32
Default Re: Overall, though...

You mean they are all based on the same 1000cc V-Twin? Then I suppose one of the best next steps for them is to release a smaller variation of this engine, and stick it into a good beginner bike - a la Suzuki SV650 or Cagiva Raptor 650, and maybe a different type of smaller bike - Mille 650, for instance, or some 650 variation on a Honda SuperHawk theme? Or maybe they can retune the engine enough for a big-displacement V-Twin dirtbike (the 650 variation of Suzuki DL1000 - V-Strom)? Or maybe an Italian cruiser is on the way (that would be the coolest option, in pissing off Harley fans And I hope it has Italian flavor - old Ducati cruisers looked great) Million options.. I think they'll pick one.
Jack_R750 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off