MotoGP no more highsides ?

[Tommy Cookers]

I have the impression that the bikes are able to have significant microprocessing/sofware capacity and sensor capacity. Couldn't they detect and alleviate a highside situation, say by greatly increasing (rebound?) damping temporarily (or does this happen already ?)

Highsides seem to be mostly a rear suspension effect, is rear suspension travel much greater than front travel ?

[CMSMJ1]

As a (slow) ex racer - highsides are more a tyre issue where you have a slip ..it grows and the weight comes off the suspension..allowing it to grip again..and over you go.

Not sure you would ever remove them - I would also say that the sport needs fewer electronic tricks interfering with the rider control.

IMO it takes away the very direct and real connection with the bike.

I have never ridden with any of these controls...but I am not sure I would like them....though they could make me faster!

[ESPImperium]

Im having trouble following MotoGPs new rules, and whilst they are trying to reduce cost, the cost of a high end Moto GP team now is getting more than at least 5 F1 teams with what they are spending, in otherwords Hondas MotoGP team spend well over $100m a season, and HRT, Marussia, Caterham, Williams and Sauber dont spend that much.

When it came to budgets and safety in F1 there was something called a SECU that came into place in 2008. This stopped cheating with TC and also made the systems more easy to work with (then) and as a result shut budgets down massivly as Ferrari were reportedly spending $20m on electronics R&D each year then. Last time i was watching MotoGP someone suggested that the large teams there were spending 7 figure sums in electronics R&D.

I am thinking that all bikes should have a SECU and with that less electronics to sort things out, it would make riders ride and not open the throttle up and let the chips sort things out as this would make the sport more about feel and touch, and the riders would then know that potential damage is just a quater twist away.

As for this CRT thing, i have no idea who was day dreaming at the funny farm at the time but i can make no hed nor tail of it.

[strad]

As a (slow) ex racer - highsides are more a tyre issue where you have a slip ..it grows and the weight comes off the suspension..allowing it to grip again..and over you go.

Yep...Totally agree..That's why last season there was much discussion of the tires. As CMSMJ1 says the rear loads up then unloads like a spring and launches you...or at least me... I have flown like superman....a few times

[mzivtins]

Less high sides is more down to overpowered engines.

Everyone knows motogp engines are pretty much overpowered for what the rear tyres can output. From this, the teams all map engines and develop them for ultimate control and smooth torque curves, it then becomes easier to ride.

Look back at the 500cc two strokes, the huge powerband was like a turbo, and that massive abrupt climb would catch the rider out, now with driver by wire throttles and in exhuast valves.

I would then say it is probably very little to do with suspension and tyres, stick a 500cc two stroke engine in the chasis, or develop the ignition to give a similar torque curve and we will see many more highsides.

Also, the issue last year was with the bridgestone front tyre... so many low-side crashes, weakest link in the chain it seems.

A good way to see this is to see all the latest road sportsbike, they implot dynamic engine restrictions, drive-by-wire throttles etc... this means you can hop on a 186mph(limited) GSXR-1000 sports bike, and put it in GSXR-600 mode... which will then have the same power output and tourque curve of the 600.

And i bet you, round most tracks, the 600 is right on the heels of the 1000.

Less high sides through better drivability.

MotoGP, is too easy these days.

[Tim.Wright]

Yep...Totally agree..That's why last season there was much discussion of the tires. As CMSMJ1 says the rear loads up then unloads like a spring and launches you...or at least me... I have flown like superman....a few times

I've never ridden a bike, but from obsering a lot of highsides over the years, I'd describe it as the opposite. I.e. the rear tyre loses grip, the back steps out and the bike leans down. then the rear suddenly grips again which causes a roll moment that spits the bike over.

I think the key to avoiding this would be to avoid the second bite of grip on the rear tyres.

Though I do agree, the less driver aids the better.

Tim

[GSpeedR]

I've never ridden a bike, but from obsering a lot of highsides over the years, I'd describe it as the opposite. I.e. the rear tyre loses grip, the back steps out and the bike leans down. then the rear suddenly grips again which causes a roll moment that spits the bike over.

You are correct. In steady-state, the lateral force from the motorcycle tires balance the roll moment from the CG being offset due to roll angle. At corner exit, there is a significant amount of applied thrust load and thus lateral force is attenuated due to the combined loading (the tire is operating at a higher slip angle than required by a free-rolling condition). Snapping the throttle closed produces a step-input change in longitudinal load (demand) to zero and the lateral forces increase in a similarly aggressive manner, relaxation effects notwithstanding. The step change in roll moment flings the rider off the bike and often throws the bike into the air. This will occur regardless of whether you have a suspension or not.

The electronics/TC serve to prevent longitudinal slip (and thus body yaw) from increasing unstably and also better controls the thrust demands (on or off throttle) to better avoid the situation above.

MotoGP, is too easy these days.

That's a ridiculous statement. MotoGP is safer, and the punishment for error is a worse lap time rather than a serious crash...has nothing to with with difficulty or skill. The rider who doesn't make mistakes will still pass the rider who does.

[mzivtins]

Sorry, i just share the same opinion as the riders, journalists and fans.

The 500cc two stroke era and then the following 1000cc 4 strokes with their more basic throttle responses and torque curves, were absolutely stupid to ride.

You can see it in the body language, the riding styles and the fact the interest in the sport as dwindled over the years.

Why do we not see riders spinning up the rears to slide round the apex? Gary McCoy and other wheel spinning artists would exit a corner with the rear spinning and the front wheel 2 inches off the ground, and thats what was needed to ride these on the edge, it was incredible to watch, and a skill that only the top few would have.

These days we don't see it because there is no need, power comes on better, the bikes engine output is mapped for a more 'Easy' to live with power delivery.

It's has been the main focus of so many teams this season, it is why Suzuki have pulled out of motogp and are prototyping an inline 4 cylinder gsxr-type engine... they believe the timing options available to them will give more driveability over shear power.

This has been said to be copying honda, its terms of what they want from an engine.

Yes it is my opinion, but if the teams and the riders are all saying the bikes are now easier than ever to ride, then i don't think im generally wrong, although i wish i was, it is boring... the bikes dont scream like they are being ripped through hell anymore, and i miss it.

Kenny roberts makes a good point... the latest motogp are all more or less traction controlled up to their eye-balls:

Mine doesn't have all those electronic devices on it and it's wheelying everywhere. I don't know how they ride it. It wheelies everywhere, it doesn't have anti-wheelie. If you wheelie it more than two seconds, it blows up because it's missing oil. So, they said don't wheelie for more than two seconds. Why would you make a motorcycle that you can't wheelie, but that wheelies everywhere? And you can't wheelie it for more than 2 seconds. So it's bullshit. I wouldn't like that."

I rode the old 500 a week ago in England, and I liked it a lot better than I like this.

I think, for me, saying that motogp bike are easier to ride these days is the same as saying F1 is safer. It both is and isn't. The rawness of motogp has gone, and the exposure to danger to an f1 driver as decreased significantly, that doesn't mean there aren't new challenges for the riders/drivers, it just means motogp has suffered from it... and formula 1 has gained, safer racing whilst having cars that are on knife edge is beautiful.

Seeing someone make a pass round the outside of another rider whilst doing this is quite something special, that not everyone on the grid could do:



Plus it has been proved time and time again, if you can get the slide right, it will be a faster line through a corner, which of course is the opposite in 4 wheeled racing.

All these opinions are just balls anyway, because by the end of this season the tyres would have ruined F1 for the drivers anyway, and more fans

[GSpeedR]

Sorry, i just share the same opinion as the riders, journalists and fans.

The 500cc two stroke era and then the following 1000cc 4 strokes with their more basic throttle responses and torque curves, were absolutely stupid to ride.

You can see it in the body language, the riding styles and the fact the interest in the sport as dwindled over the years.

Why do we not see riders spinning up the rears to slide round the apex? Gary McCoy and other wheel spinning artists would exit a corner with the rear spinning and the front wheel 2 inches off the ground, and thats what was needed to ride these on the edge, it was incredible to watch, and a skill that only the top few would have.

These days we don't see it because there is no need, power comes on better, the bikes engine output is mapped for a more 'Easy' to live with power delivery.

It's has been the main focus of so many teams this season, it is why Suzuki have pulled out of motogp and are prototyping an inline 4 cylinder gsxr-type engine... they believe the timing options available to them will give more driveability over shear power.

This has been said to be copying honda, its terms of what they want from an engine.

Yes it is my opinion, but if the teams and the riders are all saying the bikes are now easier than ever to ride, then i don't think im generally wrong, although i wish i was, it is boring... the bikes dont scream like they are being ripped through hell anymore, and i miss it.

Kenny roberts makes a good point... the latest motogp are all more or less traction controlled up to their eye-balls:

Mine doesn't have all those electronic devices on it and it's wheelying everywhere. I don't know how they ride it. It wheelies everywhere, it doesn't have anti-wheelie. If you wheelie it more than two seconds, it blows up because it's missing oil. So, they said don't wheelie for more than two seconds. Why would you make a motorcycle that you can't wheelie, but that wheelies everywhere? And you can't wheelie it for more than 2 seconds. So it's bullshit. I wouldn't like that."

I rode the old 500 a week ago in England, and I liked it a lot better than I like this.

I think, for me, saying that motogp bike are easier to ride these days is the same as saying F1 is safer. It both is and isn't. The rawness of motogp has gone, and the exposure to danger to an f1 driver as decreased significantly, that doesn't mean there aren't new challenges for the riders/drivers, it just means motogp has suffered from it... and formula 1 has gained, safer racing whilst having cars that are on knife edge is beautiful.

Plus it has been proved time and time again, if you can get the slide right, it will be a faster line through a corner, which of course is the opposite in 4 wheeled racing.

All these opinions are just balls anyway, because by the end of this season the tyres would have ruined F1 for the drivers anyway, and more fans

I'll reply to a couple of points. The bikes are faster than they've ever been in history, so it isn't easy to reference how good the 'racing' is compared to the past. Many riders complain about excessive electronics, but I question whether those same riders would accept the speed reduction if all of those electronics were removed. The bikes simply can't go as fast without it. So, yes, they are certainly more drivable, just as F1 racecars are more drivable than racecars from 30 years ago. However, F1 benefited from drastically from improved aero and tire technology that could cope with it. Maybe MotoGP has flat-lined?

With regard to sliding the rear tire around corners, I agree that it is certainly an impressive display of skill, concentration and bravery. However, it's also not as fast particularly with modern tires (peak forces at lower slip and more falloff after it). If it was, we would see even more of because the electronics packages would be able to use chassis sensors to control body slip angles. So your complaint is probably better directed towards Pirelli rather than the TC, IMO.

MotoGP is one of the few (the only?) upper tier motorsports bodies that has a strongly rooted development cycle from racing to product sales. 500cc 2-strokes went extinct because the motorcycle buying population wanted 4-strokes. Technologies pioneered in MotoGP do actually trickle down to the manufacturers' sportbikes, the most notable of which is the electronics packages. While I've never personally ridden with such a system, I understand that it certainly makes aggressive bikes more drivable, but such systems seem to have a real benefit for the average rider (and ABS is on its way) and probably won't be going away.

People seem to dislike recent MotoGP racing because:

1.) it's not visceral enough
2.) not enough passing, positions too spread out
3.) it's too safe

I only have a problem with the third one. All my opinion, of course.

[Gatecrasher]

Great points GSpeedR. Motorcycles in the showrooms were starting to flat line a little bit as manufacturers started to bow to political pressures on excessive speed and road fatalities. Also does the average rider really want to ride a full on 180hp sports bike in the rain ? I know mine is left at home. It is awesome that you can buy a modern bike for 1/10th the price of a Ferrari with similar performance but few people have the skill to be able to actually utilize it.

MotoGP style electronics has now filtered down to all of the major brands, Yamaha being the last. The new Ducati 1199s allows you to set the bike up for different modes of riding.. wet, sport, track. Giving different power curves, max power/shift points, suspension settings, ABS, traction control, anti-wheelie. Everything that will make the bike more enjoyable for the consumer. I have a Ducati 1098 that is setup more for the track and riding it on the street is not always an enjoyable experience, try taking an F1 car out in stop and go traffic and you would know what I mean.

I applaud the manufacturers for pushing the envelope and making the new bikes faster and easier to ride for us mere mortals. As for MotoGP it will almost always come down to the best rider, the rider is still more important than the bike and I hope it stays that way. The only way to change the series would be to increase drag bunching up the field more on the straights, more like Moto3. Keep the traction control electronics, it is safer for the riders, but ditch anti-wheelie, launch control and keep suspension non remote adjustable.