| Author | Message | ||
     Blake |
Cool. Chaz is a class act. | ||
| Jaimec |
Just an observation: With Leon Haslam and Marco Melandri next year, BMW will be out of excuses... | ||
| Trojan |
With Leon Haslam and Marco Melandri next year, BMW will be out of excuses... To be honest the excuses are already pretty thin. They should have dumped their 'in house' electronics package last year and gone with the industry standard Marelli units that everyone else is using. The press blurb I read about Melandri joining suggested that he would be able to bring his MotoGP experience to sort out the BMW electronics. What they forgot was that he has no experience of their whacky system either, so trying to sort it out will be difficult in his first season. Haslam has progressively switched the system off this year rather than develop it further, so they are probably further away now than ever! Maybe they should do a deal with Ducati MotoGP. Ducati can supply the electronics and BMW supply the frame  Team Europa | ||
| Jaimec |
Can't have any kind of innovation if you're just going to use what everyone else is using... Fine line between winning races, and developing new technology. One of the reasons we're still stuck with telescopic forks, I guess. | ||
| Blake |
BMW sells bikes with unconventional front ends. At one time Yamaha had one too. We're not "stuck" with them so much as they work quite well, and better all the time. | ||
| Crusty |
Anybody remember the various iterations of the ELF GP bikes? You know; the H-D Springer front end doesn't dive under deceleration or braking. Maybe it's a better alternative to telescopic forks?  | ||
| Trojan |
BMW sells bikes with unconventional front ends. At one time Yamaha had one too. We're not "stuck" with them so much as they work quite well, and better all the time. The major motorcycle manufacturers know that hub centre steering and other 'funny front ends' offer significant theoretical advanatges over telescopic forks. Unfortunately there is no incentive for them to develop anything while they can still get good performance from what they already have. Add to this the huge financial investment that Yamaha have with Ohlins and Honda with Showa, and there is even less incentive for them to upset the status quo. If a small manfacturer like Vyrus manages to achieve success with hub centre steering with their Moto2 bike and it is shown to offer a big advantage then that is the only way the big factories will be forced to look at new technology. Even BMW, who are the only big factory to play with funny front ends so far in a big way (discounting the short lived and unsuccesful Yamaha GTS), still use conventional on their S1000RR sports bikes bikes and use the same Ohlins forks as every other team on their WSB bikes. Nobody wants to be the first to blink | ||
| Crusty |
I don't believe that. How much does it cost to develop a new engine, whenever the rules mandate a change? How much has Ducati spent trying to make their current bike competitive? They were just looking for an edge in handling; that's why they came up with the carbon frame to begin with. If a front end that utilizes many more moving parts offered a significant advantage, don't you think they'd all be franticly designing and building them? Back when Freddy Spencer was racing in GP, Honda had a bike that put the fuel under the engine, and it also had carbon fiber wheels that were incredibly expensive. both were bad ideas that sounded good in theory. Alternative front ends have many theoretical advantages; but in reality, their disadvantages outweigh the advantages by a large amount. In theory, the Titanic was unsinkable; the reality was somewhat different. I've been hearing about the theoretical advantages of alternative front ends for decades; I have yet to see them in reality. | ||
| Trojan |
Alternative front ends have many theoretical advantages; but in reality, their disadvantages outweigh the advantages by a large amount. The thing that has always held back hub centre steered bikes has been technology (or lack of it a few years ago) and lightweight materials. Now that we can make structural lightweight components a lot of the old arguments against funny front ends are no longer valid. However one thing that keeps us with forks is that we are used to the way they work. They may be less efficient but we like the feeling they give us. When you brake the front dives and so shortens the wheelbase, making the bike easier to turn. When you accelerate the forks lengthen and make the wheelbase longer, making the bike more stable. Hub centre steering keeps the wheelbase and attitude of the bike constant and removes suspension effects from steering input altogether. Once they get the 'feeling' built into the system there is no reason why it shouldn't work a lot better than what we are given now. Phil Read Jr (who used to race our Buell XB12) raced a Vyrus hub cente bike in British Thunderbikes a couple of years ago. He said that at first it felt completely wrong and had no feel at all, hence no front end confidence. However once he got used to the bike and the feel of the steering (and they built a little dive into the system so that he felt it under braking) it was the best bike he had ever raced and handling was absolutely superb. One of the biggest benefits was reduced tyre wear, which meant they could run much softer tyres tan the opposition. We motorcyclists are a very conservative bunch, and don't accept change very easily. The bikes we have now are so closely related to the bikes our grandfathers rode 50 years that it can be hard to see where all the inventiveness has gone. We even complain because BMW or H-D put switches in different positions to the Jap factories so what chance does real innovation have? I really hope that Vyrus or another factory make hub centre steering work in world class racing soon, just to get some new technolgy into the limelight.  | ||
| Jaimec |
One of the biggest problems with telescopic forks is that under braking, the front end collapses and you have NO suspension movement left. If there are any bumps in that corner you're going to have a hard time keeping the bike in line. The alternatives allow full suspension compliance even under maximum braking. BMW uses it on their street bikes and I fully appreciate the fact that my K1200LT doesn't pitch back and forth under braking/acceleration like everything else out there. The few people I've trusted to ride the bike all say the same thing... the bike is dead stable no matter what. However, I am also not pushing that bike anywhere near what professional riders on closed-course circuits can do, and I'm also not trying to shave tenths of seconds off of my morning commute. It's at that ragged edge of control where telescopic forks have the advantage... because all top-level riders know EXACTLY what to expect at any given time from them. They have hundreds of thousands of miles of testing experience with them. Going to an alternative front-end would mean relearning a lifetime of experience; same for the chassis engineer trying to help that rider shave those hundredths of a second. As for Yamaha being so heavily invested in Ohlins as to not pursue alternative front ends: My BMW is equipped with Ohlins SHOCKS front and rear. Ohlins wouldn't lose a thing if people started pursuing an alternative front end. | ||
| Crusty |
I've been hearing about the advantages of various alternative front ends for a long time. Back in the '80s, most manufacturers were using some sort of "anti-Dive" technology to overcome the tendency of telescopic forks compressing under braking. Even my '88 Harley FLHS had air assisted anti dive forks. Most motorcycle magazines were very enamored with assorted unconventional front suspensions. So, my question is this; Since there have been so many proponents of alternative front ends, and since there are so many theoretical advantages, why aren't any of the motorcycles that utilize them displaying higher corner speeds? All I see in the various designs are more moving parts to wear or need constant adjustment. A lot more work for a minimal theoretical advantage. | ||
| Trojan |
why aren't any of the motorcycles that utilize them displaying higher corner speeds? How do you know they aren't? It may not actually result in higher corner speeds because it is only a small part of the overall equation. However if it results in much better and more stable front brake performance (hence later and harder braking)and seriously reduced tyre wear would that would be advantage enough for you over forks? A little dive is actually a good thing because it puts more weight on the front tyre and gives the rider some feel that they think is lacking (It actually isn't lacking, they just don't have the experience of these systems to know that), so engineers build in some dive into most 'funny front ends' now. Phil took more than a year to really get to grips with his Vyrus front end, and he was only limited by the bhp restricted class the bike raced in. The team he raced for are building a 1198 powered version featuring a lot of their own improvements over the Vyrus design, and hopefully that will be raced next year in the UK | ||
| Crusty |
Phil took more than a year to really get to grips with his Vyrus front end, and he was only limited by the bhp restricted class the bike raced in. It took him over a year to get used to dealing with the front end? O.K., Did he win any races after that? If it was a horsepower restricted class, then the advantages of the extra moving parts and the added complexity should have propelled him to the front, and made him the easy victor. Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like a lot of trouble and expense for a mythical advantage. However; I could be wrong. | ||
| Jaimec |
Crusty, those anti-dive front ends worked one of two ways. Everyone but Harley restricted the compression damping on the forks when the brake was applied. Although this did limit the amount of dive, it also reduced the ability of the fork to absorb bumps under braking. Harley's system (and do you know who came up with it?) increased the spring rate under braking by limiting the total volume the air had to compress under braking. The original system utilized the volume of the engine guards as the air reservoir. Later systems used something else (I'm not sure what) because only the baggers came equipped stock with engine guards. The alternative systems do neither. The suspension settings do not change under braking or acceleration leaving the front wheel "neutral" in all respects. As Trojan pointed out... you still have the weight transfer (because that is physics) but the rider doesn't get the familiar sensation of the front end dipping, so doesn't trust what he's feeling. Ask Valentino Rossi how much that "trust" is worth. | ||
| Blake |
Conventional front end is way lighter it seems. Lighter is better, so the anti-dive may be an advantage, but it is obtained at the cost of added weight and unsprung mass. We'll see a perimeter mounted front brake before anyone tries a radical new front end in any world class racing series. Oh, we already have. | ||
| Trojan |
Did he win any races after that? Yes, quite a few in addition to lap records and an outright lap record at the Thundersprint event where I took these pictures. He didn't win the Thunderbike championship because the bike was still in development, so suffered a few mechanical breakdowns and they missed a couple of rounds I think (none related to the front end). The bike no longer races in Thunderbike as Alto Racing are working on a Superbike version. The real problem is getting riders and teams to try something new and radical rather than rely on what we know well. Once the initial 'newness' and apprehension wears off and once the engineers understand how to set the bike up properly the system really does have some major advantages over hydraulic forks. Unfortunately cost and complexity have always counted against hub sentre steering but even that is coming down with experience and new materials. The price of the new Vyrus Moto2 bike is actually cheaper than a comparable FTR or Suter machine.  | ||
| Blake |
Too much mass, some of it rotating. I just don't see a major advantage for it, but it would be cool to see it in a major pro racing series. >>> The real problem is getting riders and teams to try something new and radical rather than rely on what we know well. Once the initial 'newness' and apprehension wears off and once the engineers understand how to set the bike up properly the system really does have some major advantages... For a second there I thought you might be reconsidering your staunchly held dim view of Erik's perimeter braking system. Did you here? It's been winning in Superbike racing and won a national championship in AMA. Isn't it great to see such radical new technology developed and proven on the track? Compare/contrast to the Vyrus front end? | ||
| Jaimec |
Blake, that front end may be heavier than a telescopic fork system, but I think you'll notice that most of that weight is SPRUNG, not unsprung. I think the unsprung weight (which is what is more important) is actually less than a telescopic fork. All conjecture, of course. I have no way of doing any actual measurements. Might be cool to see, however, if someone has the equipment and the bike... | ||
| Saxon59 |
Most people resist change;In the 1950s Enzo Ferrari belived the only way to win races was with DRUM BRAKES on his cars,then Jaguar won the 24Hrs at LeMans using both DISC BRAKES and RACK&PINION STEERING.Those are pretty radical concepts but you can still find them on a few cars.  | ||
| Simond |
Lots of interesting gossip about 2012. Melandri and Haslam confirmed at BMW. Laverty and Biaggi at Aprilia. Chaz on a Duc run by his WSS team. Aoyama to join Jonny Rea at Ten Kate. Another year for Checa on the "Factory" Ducati. Tommy Hill and Hopper on Suzukis run by Jack Valentine in WSB?.... or is that Hopper to Suzuki MotoGP and Tommy Hill to a Paul Bird CRT team? Troy Corser to bow out with a season in BSB? Surely it's worth somebody riding the R1 in WSB next year. Leon Camier? Interesting. Looks healthier than MotoGP for 2012. | ||
| Trojan |
Interesting. Looks healthier than MotoGP for 2012. Even Greece looks healthier than MotoGP for 2012 I'd like to see Leon camier on a Yamaha in WSB as he really hasn't been suited to the Aprilia since he got there and needs to prove he can make it at the top. Hi sname has been mentioned in connection with the Paul Bird team (wherever that ends up being)and also the Pata Aprilia ride vacated by Haga for next year. Tom Sykes and Tommy Hill have already said they won't go to a CRT team next year I think...although things can change of course. | ||
| Simond |
My money is on Laverty on the Aprilia next year. | ||
| Trojan |
My money is on Laverty on the Aprilia next year. I think a lot will depend on how threatened Biaggi feels and if Laverty gets equal treatment in 2012. He has signed a 2 year deal and Biaggi will probably retire at the end of 2012, so maybe he is playing the long game and hoping to be team leader in 2013 after playing second string to Biaggi next year. My money for 2012 would probably be on the BMW team of Haslam and Melandri. From what I have heard BMW have eventually decided to ditch the Bosch/BMW electronics and go to Marelli next year, which with Melandris experience and a new crew (also with Marelli experince) should turn the fickle BMW into a regular top 3 contender. With some decent winter testing behind them theyshould hit the ground running next year. Ducati will be in the last year of the 1198 and it is hard to see how they can improve on it for next year while developing the 1199 for WSB in 2013. Checa will be quick of course and I expect Chaz Davies to be on the pace pretty quickly, but I think they will be beaten next year. | ||
| Jaimec |
Carlos SHOULD retire, while he's on top. I think I'd rather be remembered as the "World Champion" instead of the guy who tried to stretch out his career. Hey, what do I know? He won the championship well past what most consider a racer's prime. He and Biaggi (last year's champ) prove it's not ALWAYS a young guy's world! Power to them both. | ||
| Simond |
Strangely Carlos has been THE guy stretching out his career for the last 8 or 9 years. Who would have guessed he still had a World Championship in him. | ||
| Trojan |
Given the current state of the Althea Ceramica group (under investigation for massive fraud in Italy) it may still be doubtful if the team make it to the grid next year despite all their assurances. Maybe another backer would take over but Carlos didn't vene have a confirmed ride until after race one on Sunday, so maybe the situation isn't as clear as they would like us to think. Until Sunday it was pretty sure that he would sign for BMW Italia... With Ducati running the 1198 for a further year with no more upgrades it could be a year too far for him...but then I've said that for years about Checa and he keeps proving me wrong! | ||
| Blake |
>>> I think the (hub-centered steering front end's) unsprung weight (which is what is more important) is actually less than a telescopic fork. I don't see how with the massive hub and steering mechanism required. Seems to me that overall mass and unsprung mass would be significantly greater versus top of the line fork setup. | ||
| Vagelis46 |
""Even Greece looks healthier than MotoGP for 2012 : )"" Yes we do !!!!  | ||
| Trojan |
I don't see how with the massive hub and steering mechanism required. Seems to me that overall mass and unsprung mass would be significantly greater versus top of the line fork setup. This may have been true a few years ago with older designs, but a lot of work has been put into reducing the weight of hub centre steered front ends. I think you would be surprised at the relative lack of difference in weight (both sprung and unsprung). Modern upside down forks are pretty heavy items and you still have the same brake discs, calipers etc to add on to the overall weight. If you look at where the weight is distributed on the Vyrus you'll see that a lot of components are removed from the unsprung mass. Because braking forces are separated from steering forces, you don't need to make the steering system as bulky or as resistant to shocks (and therefore not as heavy) as with 'normal' front ends. The front 'fork/steering arm' pivots on the 'frame' rather than the headstock in the same way as the rear swingarm does on conventional bikes, and therefore only a proportion of its weight contributes to unsprung weight of the front end and is actually 'hybrid weight' (a combination of sprung and unsprung weight). The front shock is remotely located and does not count towards unsprung weight at all. On a 'normal' bike the fork lowers would be included in the unsprung weight in addition to the wheel, calipers, tyre etc adn this would actually be as heavy or heavier than the Vyrus system.. Also the dynamic advantages of being able to separate sterring from suspension more than makes up for any slight weight penalty. | ||
| Al_lighton |
"The front shock is remotely located and does not count towards unsprung weight at all." Huh? You're going to have to explain that one to me. Can't you define the "unsprung weight" as the mass that moves relative to the relatively static chassis? If the shock has the spring and the damping mechanisms on it, aren't the moving portions of the shock and dampers, as well as whatever linkage rods that connect to them, part of the unsprung weight, regardless of where they are located? |
