Ducati goings on. Part 2.

[Oscar]

Now what is that CF box just above the clutch....upper surface is plumbed to the airbox, lower surface to crankcase...seems an awfully large breather to route a frame spar over And what an efficient use of the frame mounting point on the front bank....to bolt a CFbox onto...

Maybe oil reservoir tank? Remember the HUGE scavenging tube from the 'tilted' sump? That had to be delivering oil to somewhere..a tank with gravity-feed back to the oil pump, one would think.

[dave_m]

really disappointed that they were unable to test the new parts in Portugal. They need a spark. A step. Something that gets them within 15 seconds of the leader. That alone with invigorate Vale and give him that desire to push it again.

I'm not sure the test mattered too much, as they wouldn't have had any new parts for this round anyway. I am curious about this round, as the GP12 was "unrideable" at Qatar and the Jerez practice sessions, but the Jerez race and Estoril seemed to be improvements. This round at LeMans should give us an idea whether they' can continue to make progress, or if they will revert to last year's scenario where they could not maintain improvements between race weekends. The bike has been too unpredictable for a while, anything that works at one track doesn't carry over to the next, but the Ducati team might be able to make real progress if they can stop getting lost every other race weekend.

[Hanuman]

Maybe oil reservoir tank? Remember the HUGE scavenging tube from the 'tilted' sump? That had to be delivering oil to somewhere..a tank with gravity-feed back to the oil pump, one would think.

Could be. But not sure what you mean about the scavenging tube delivering oil somewhere, the photo doesn't reveal all that much, but that braided line/tube supposedly led from the rear bank to the sump pick-up point. In any case, its elaborate shape seems to be aimed at directing air out the fairing gills.

[Another observation: it seems they added what seems to be another oil level window below the now useless old one... ]

[Oscar]

Could be. But not sure what you mean about the scavenging tube delivering oil somewhere, the photo doesn't reveal all that much, but that braided line/tube supposedly led from the rear bank to the sump pick-up point. In any case, its elaborate shape seems to be aimed at directing air out the fairing gills.

You're right. I just had a look at that image again blown up and I don't think it is a tank at all, just a shroud to try to get the radiator airflow to pass out the shark gills where the low-pressure would be greatest. That's fairly conventional practice for air-cooled aircraft engines - well-cooled ones, that is - to put as much effort into extracting the air as you put to getting it into the cowl in the first place.

I'm guessing here but I'd suggest that when they rolled the engine back, the rear head bank moved from being an effective baffle pretty much aligned with the shark gill vent rear face to too far aft and slanted back, and the leading head bank blocked off more of the intake air than in the older position. They're picking off the highest-pressure air from the nose of the fairing to provide a ram-effect for the airbox, the unsplit radiator is now significantly in the turbulence from the wheel, guard, forks etc. so getting maximum effectiveness on the airflow scavenging side would be a logical point for effort. Improving cooling airflow scavenging was the point of the winglets...

Making sure the cooling exit airflow goes out the fairing vents and not back past the tank is also likely to improve rider comfort - roast chestnuts is not conducive to being able to pass on one's DNA..

[TwoStroke Institute]

Looks like a vent bottle/breather to me, but I don't see it as a part of the oil temp control, i would just bung a finned aluminium tank or an oil coooler there rather than that thing.

[Hanuman]

Looks like a vent bottle/breather to me, but I don't see it as a part of the oil temp control, i would just bung a finned aluminium tank or an oil coooler there rather than that thing.

That's my thought as well. Rather complex, though. The earlier (Valencia?)ally frame had a similar unit, but of a different shape, hence my deflection out the gills comment. That earlier frame appeard a lot more 'normal' than the current unit, which has bastardised (higher upper beam, bent engine hangers as opposed to straight ones, tall area around the swingarm pivot) to roll back the V. Changes on changes, compromises on compromises.

[Oscar]

Looks like a vent bottle/breather to me, but I don't see it as a part of the oil temp control, i would just bung a finned aluminium tank or an oil coooler there rather than that thing.

Hell, yes, c/f is woeful at heat transfer so it's no supplementary oil cooling. The reason I think it is a shroud rather than a tank is the extremely close fitting to the cylinder head, appropriate to prevent air leakage but not necessary for a tank, which would benefit from airflow around it and also isolation from vibration frothing the oil.

[tom]

To me LeMans was a BIG throwing down of the gauntlet by Rossi to Ducati. He proved in one fowl swoop that he still has race winning pace and by the lap times could quite easily have won that race but for his briefly fogged up helmet and Lorenzo's amazing first lap.

How in gods name can a bike be capable of a win in a wet race and yet be so utterly ordinary in the dry? I just cant see the problem being a power delivery thing if that was the case then their results would be even worse in the wet. Rossi commented (some where?) after LeMans (and I'm paraphrasing here) that Ducati has a vague front end but in the wet everyone had a vague front end. But again if it was a set-up or weight distribution problem then wouldn't a vague front end be even vaguer in the wet? That seems to be a bit of a retraction from previous Ducati riders comments that the lack of front end feel situation has improved. Perhaps it is improved but not fixed?

Channel 10 over here in Oz had a good interview with Preziosi and asked him specifically about the engine power delivery issues. He seemed sceptical that power delivery was the issue but said that the new engine on the way would be a softer delivery engine and should answer the question either way.

In my mind I keep going back to Furusawa's point about the Ducati making the 'wrong' noise. i.e. the engine vibrations/noise is drowning out or masking the feel the riders need from the chassis. The better feel in the rain could have something to do with the fact that the feel the riders pick up on a wet track is at a different frequency to the feel they pick up on a dry track and the wrong noise the engine makes is closer to the frequency of the feel in the dry than the wet. Therefore the engine noise doesn't mask the wet feel, only the dry.

It would be great to ask Furusawa how the wet vs dry disparagy in the Ducati's results fit with his 'wrong noise' theory.

[redmike34]

I think, given the day and age we're in, that it's entirely possible that Ducati have a very sorted electronic map for wet conditions, which they use to great effect, but which is not really applicable to dry conditions.

Rossi definitely does complain about the Duc's front/rear ends, but I think the thing he's been carping the most about lately is the Duc's power delivery. Bad power delivery in the dry ain't no fun, but in the wet it should almost inevitably wind up in the gravel trap. The fact that he didn't wind up there today (and, in fact, ran the best lap of the race) would seem to indicate that whatever problem they have with throttle response in the dry must not be there when they plug in wet settings?

At any rate, it illustrates what Ducati is up against. A riddle wrapped in a mystery surrounded by an enigma... or however that phrase goes. AFAIK, a bike that's bad in the dry should be WORSE in the wet, not better. They might do better with a divining rod than with their data about bike settings...

[Flyinlow27]

its biggest impact was proving that Vale still has the 'smoothness' to get on the rostrum. Rain races, according to a fellow MotoGP rider, said it was about who could be the smoothest and use the least throttle. This is VR46's style. We've known this for a long time. The Ducati is still heavily flawed. Let's hope these tests bring dry weather improvements.

As a VR46 fan> Ducati fan, this is serious chips in the bank for Vale to market himself for a Honda/Yamaha next year. Just sayin.

[dave_m]

I just cant see the problem being a power delivery thing if that was the case then their results would be even worse in the wet.

I think redmike34 hit on it a little, but but in the wet the riders aren't using anywhere near the amount of throttle / power they are in the dry, so it doesn't matter that Rossi/Hayden can't really get on the gas, because no one can. I'm pretty sure if the Ducati riders wanted to ride slower and and soften up the power enough, the Ducati would be OK in the dry as well. They'd be even farther off the pace than they are now, but the bike would feel better. Although that makes me wonder again if they need a different test rider to supplement Battaini, I'm not sure his speed is the problem, but maybe someone more sensitive to the problems the GP riders are having.

[Zaphod]

A bike that's bad in the dry shouldn't always be worse in the wet.

Look at Ant West and that pile of junk he was (perpetually is ?) on.

In the wet, you're on tippy-toes, and due to the surface conditions, you are in no-way loading up the frame,tyres or suspension in the same way you are when you are using a heavier hand in the dry.

Case in point, anyone see the Honda chatter last night ? Frag rear tyres, yes/maybe/possibly/looked like it...... but I didn't see any chatter. Not loaded up like it is when it's dry (er)

Good for Rossi and his confidence last night, but means bugger all to a Duc in the dry.

True comment about the soft throttle approach though, when it's that diabolical, Stoner can't use his throttle talent the way he can in the dry. To big a risk of the thing spitting you off.

[Hansd]

In wet conditions they use completely different tires than in the dry; and this makes a huge difference.
Rossi's corner exit was astounding - he gained 1 or 2 bike lengths in only the first 10-20 meters out of some corners.

[TwoStroke Institute]

Biggest factor was Rossi waking up thinking it was a good chance for a podium. Ducati always has been good in the wet. Nobody knows why.

I did see Preziosi's interview and had a great deal of trouble understanding what he was trying to convey. At first the engine had too much torue down low the the new engine will make more torque down low, then said they wanted the power peak and torque peak closer. WTF. One thing is for sure he's aged 10yrs in the past 18months and I think he thinks he's the perfect patsy if the Ducati/Rossi dream ends

[redmike34]

In wet conditions they use completely different tires than in the dry; and this makes a huge difference.
Rossi's corner exit was astounding - he gained 1 or 2 bike lengths in only the first 10-20 meters out of some corners.

Sure... but everybody's using those same tires, yeah? So the Ducati is taking better advantage of the wet tires than the Honda, and all but one Yamaha, where it is usually completely unable to do the same thing with dry tires, which are also the same for everyone.

All else being equal, it seems like it must be in the black box... at least, to this marginally informed layman.

[motor]

Ducati is obviously good in the wet, but did this theory (Ducati is good in the wet) exist while Stoner was at Ducati?

I'm genuinely curious, cos Stoner was fast in the wet and fast on dry, too. So I can't imagine Stoner's performance providing any proof to Ducati being fast in the wet.

Or did it happen after Rossi came to Ducati (slow in the dry, quick in the wet).

Or were other Ducati riders proving to be consistently quick in the wet even while Stoner was around?

I'm not trying to imply that Rossi is quick in the wet - Hayden has been fast in the wet during the last two years as well (don't remember prior to that) but wondering if there is anything since 2011 that made Ducati faster in the wet or if it's been that way always.

[Cappra]

As a VR46 fan> Ducati fan, this is serious chips in the bank for Vale to market himself for a Honda/Yamaha next year. Just sayin.

I'll go out on a limb and say VR will never be back on a Honda or a Yammy. Why would they? Between being full of good young talent and good choices, VR only having another two years of racing and some lingering bad blood for leaving, why would they?

Vale has got to make the Duke work. And I think Vale just put enormous pressure back on the Ducati engineers. He just showed he has the will and the skill to race hard - just give him the kit.

[Cappra]

Thanks for the comments guys, there are lots of interesting thoughts and observations there, but noting gels for me - it still seems inexplicable.

It seemed to me that Vale just found his mojo again - 'stuff it! I'm good in the wet, lets just take the fight to them - nothing to lose - hey this works - just take it by the throat and will it into submission'.

All speculation . Maybe the next round might bring new insight .

[Rossifumi]

I'll go out on a limb and say VR will never be back on a Honda or a Yammy. Why would they? Between being full of good young talent and good choices, VR only having another two years of racing and some lingering bad blood for leaving, why would they?

Vale has got to make the Duke work. And I think Vale just put enormous pressure back on the Ducati engineers. He just showed he has the will and the skill to race hard - just give him the kit.

I tend to agree with this - nothing much to be gained by either Rossi or Honda/Yamaha by going back. Rossi's final curtain call in motoGP will be spent trying to get competitive on the Ducati and in reality it only looks as bad as it does in the context of the immediate success at Yamaha in 04. When Rossi joined Yamaha the general view was that it would take a season or two to be back at the front - if it takes 2 seasons at Ducati to be running at the front I still think it could be classed as a success.....assuming they do get there!

[Gar]

I skimmed the thread so if someone already hit these points I apologize!

Rossi made 2 points about the abilities of the Ducati in the wet:

1) they have a very good wet weather electronics package

2) the vagueness of the front-end of the Ducati isn't as much of an issue in the rain, where everyone has vagueness in the front-end.

[Squidpuppet]

I skimmed the thread so if someone already hit these points I apologize!

Rossi made 2 points about the abilities of the Ducati in the wet:

1) they have a very good wet weather electronics package

2) the vagueness of the front-end of the Ducati isn't as much of an issue in the rain, where everyone has vagueness in the front-end.

I'll add a thought to that. The abrupt power delivery of the Ducati is less of an issue in the wet. Why? Because nobody is getting on the gas hard while leaned over. Everybody has to get the bike upright before opening the throttle aggressively. Once the Duc is upright, the abrupt power delivery is moot, wack the gas at will. In the dry Rossi has to wait longer (get the bike more upright) than the Yams and and Hondas to open the throttle big.

[tom]

I'm not sure I can accept that logic squidpuppet. To me a bike with abrupt or aggressive power delivery would go from being hard to ride in the dry to imposable in the wet. I cant see it going the other way. They get on the throttle as early as they can wet or dry and the rider (or the computer) feeds the power on in as smooth a way as possible to ensure use of all the traction available. This smoothness is most critical in the wet and less so in the dry. I understand what you are saying about having to get the bike more upright before you get on the power but that does not mean that you can then put up with a more aggressive power delivery. To my understanding the prevailing thought has always been that power delivery needs to be tame and smooth in the wet and to that effect the slower underpowered bikes come into their own in the wet. It strikes me very unusual that the opposite appears true of the Ducati, where the aggressive unridable beast of the paddock turns into a pussy cat in the wet... something not right there and surely there has to be a clue in there for Ducati

If you assume Ducati's issue is one of power delivery, then the problem must be with the dry electronic settings and not with the engines basic characteristics as an engine that works well in the wet must be flexible and smooth by default (or at least be made so by the electronics). Yet the problem I see with assuming the issue is with electronic settings is that the settings work well in the wet, so Ducati are good at setting up the electronics and wet settings to my mind would be a lot harder to get right than dry settings where smoothness is not as critical. I just cant see Ducati producing a superb wet electric set-up and making such a bollocks of the dry electronic set-up. It doesn't make sense which is why I'm still leaning towards Furusawa's 'wrong noise' theory.

I dont buy the 'Rossi just tried harder' this race, theory at all. He was the fastest rider on the track by 0.3 seconds at LeMans, that's a one and a half second turn around from where he normally is. Even if he was leaving a safety factor in his previous races just because there was no chance of a podium, there is no way a rider of his quality would use a 1.5 seconds safety factor. For riders like Rossi, Lorenzo, and Stoner, riding around in safe mode would involve a 0.3 to 0.5 second slow down. These guys would struggle to stay awake running 1.5 seconds off their pace. The bike is the key to the pace difference, not the rider.

[Hanuman]

They were 10 seconds slower on Sunday compared to any of the FP/QP sessions.
10 seconds....that's like riding around on the IODA CRT with a plug lead pulled. What does that tell you about how much they can soften off the power for these sloshingly wet sessions?
I wouldn't just take it as granted that the Ducati works well in the wet...it's worth considering the converse, that the Honda and Yamaha set-ups - so much better in the dry - aren't so flash in the wet.

[Gustav O]

They were 10 seconds slower on Sunday compared to any of the FP/QP sessions.
10 seconds....that's like riding around on the IODA CRT with a plug lead pulled. What does that tell you about how much they can soften off the power for these sloshingly wet sessions?
I wouldn't just take it as granted that the Ducati works well in the wet...it's worth considering the converse, that the Honda and Yamaha set-ups - so much better in the dry - aren't so flash in the wet.

Except for Rossi I would say the Yamaha set up seemed the best out there, sure Cal and Dovi crashed but that was while pushing for third. Lorenzo took off and in parc fermé Lorenzos tires looked great compared to Rossis and mostly Stoners.

[Hanuman]

They were 10 seconds slower on Sunday compared to any of the FP/QP sessions.
10 seconds....that's like riding around on the IODA CRT with a plug lead pulled. What does that tell you about how much they can soften off the power for these sloshingly wet sessions?
I wouldn't just take it as granted that the Ducati works well in the wet...it's worth considering the converse, that the Honda and Yamaha set-ups - so much better in the dry - aren't so flash in the wet.

Except for Rossi I would say the Yamaha set up seemed the best out there, sure Cal and Dovi crashed but that was while pushing for third. Lorenzo took off and in parc fermé Lorenzos tires looked great compared to Rossis and mostly Stoners.

For sure.
I should have worded it along the lines of:
(Ignoring rider's individual dialling-in) The deterioration of the Yamaha/Honda/Ducati in wet-set up trim may not be equal...

Or something like that... I hope it makes sense.