MotoGP

[GuzziMoto]

9 hours ago, Lucky Phil said:

Who was the old Nascar tuner that used to run the legal maximum fuel tank capacity but then ran 2 inch fuel pipe to the engine. There was no actual rule for fuel pipe diameter. Was he a cheater that should have been banned for life or a smart tuner/builder following the letter of the rules not the intent?

Not always a simple as it seems. 

So, pushing the grey area of the rules is not what Yoshimura Suzuki and Mat Mladin were accused of doing. I am not accusing them of anything, either. I am simply talking about what happened. It was the AMA / DMG that accused him of cheating, and the evidence was pretty clear as they had the illegal crank out of his superbike in their hands, having been removed from his bike at a race weekend after he had just won the race. He was then disqualified from the race. That is all fully documented and none of that is my opinion or me accusing him of anything. It is what it is. The crank simply was not the same as the homologated sample crank, nor did it match additional sample cranks that were provided by Suzuki after the crank was pulled from his bike. The crank was likely a factory race part, but I don't know that. I only know the crank was not a standard production crank and the rules said it had to be. It was a black and white violation of the rule book. It was also years ago, but you can still find information about it on the internet.

Whether or not you put all the blame for this on Yoshimura Suzuki, Mladins team, or you put the blame on both of them, or perhaps you are like some people out there and blame the AMA / DMG for this, that is up to you. But it is clear that a non-homologated crank was found in his bike at a race weekend. Two race weekends in a row. And that was clearly against the rules. My personal feelings about Mladin don't enter into it. But it did not surprise me that his bike was illegal. There are plenty of other question marks about him and his team and cheating, but this episode was a clear cut case of cheating. Until this hit the fan it seemed like the AMA / DMG were looking the other way about the actions of him and his team. But that is getting into a grey area.

Edited August 1 by GuzziMoto

[p6x]

MotoGP 75 years anniversary special liveries stream;

As usual, they don't allow embedding, so you will have to click on the link to watch on YouTube directly;

Which is your favorite?

For me, it is the Aprilia's 250 domination back in the days when two strokes were ruling the competition;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLyXjiV2zBM

 

[LowRyter]

12 hours ago, Lucky Phil said:

Who was the old Nascar tuner that used to run the legal maximum fuel tank capacity but then ran 2 inch fuel pipe to the engine. There was no actual rule for fuel pipe diameter. Was he a cheater that should have been banned for life or a smart tuner/builder following the letter of the rules not the intent?

Not always a simple as it seems. 

Smokey Yunick.   Legend has it that NASCAR said he was running with an illegal fuel tank, couldn't prove it but disqualified him anyway.  NASCAR techs removed the tank during the inspection.  After being disqualified, the gas tank still laying on the pavement, Smokey started the car and drove back to the pits.

This was just one of many stores.  Before there were templates to measure stock cars, Smokey built a 7/8 scale car that fooled the eye.  He also built a gondola Indycar and put a wing on an Indy Roadster long before outlaw sprint cars. 

https://www.dailysportscar.com/2016/01/24/the-infamous-and-incredible-1967-smokey-yunick-chevrolet-chevelle.html

 

 

I'd say the difference is that Mladdin's team broke existing rules.  In Smokey's case they had to invent new rules.

[LowRyter]

well now I'm on Smokey rant.  The only reason I thought it would of interest here is because Guzzi riders appreciate the torque tilt when we goose the engine.  Smokey raced an Offy at Indy with "reverse torque" to improve handling on the oval. 

Most modern passenger car engines rotate counterclockwise as viewed from the flywheel. (There’s no critical reason; it’s mainly a convention.) If we could reverse the engine’s torque and thus the torque reaction on the chassis as well, then theoretically we can improve load distribution for the left-hand only turns of American oval tracks. And that was Smokey’s plan with his entry in the 1959 Indianapolis 500. The Reverse Torque Special was a Kurtis-Kraft 500H featuring a special trick. Its Offy engine and drivetrain were modified to rotate in the opposite direction.

 

https://www.macsmotorcitygarage.com/another-look-at-smokey-yunicks-reverse-torque-special/

also note, this is a laydown,  the engine deeply canted to put weight distribution to the inside and lower CG

rant over, sorry GP-er's

Edited August 1 by LowRyter

[GuzziMoto]

That is classic inventiveness. Smokey Yunick was a creative fellow. Engine rotation is especially important on motorcycles. Guzzi's lack the resistance to changes of direction that other motorcycles have due to the direction the crank spins in. Of course, they have a factor other motorcycles don't have, the sideways torque reaction when getting on or getting off the throttle.  But you can have your Guzzi well and truly wound up and it makes no difference to how easily the bike changes direction. Where as on a normal big bore twin high rpms make it noticeably harder to change directions. Side note, on motorcycles whose crank runs side to side instead of front to back like a Guzzi crank the engine may spin in the same direction as the wheels or opposite of the wheels. Spinning the engine backwards, opposite of the wheels, can make the bike easier to steer but isn't commonly done for other engineering reasons. Back in the day some of the 500cc two strokes had two separate cranks, one for each pair of cylinders, and they spun them in opposite directions to cancel out the gyroscopic effect. Modern MotoGP bikes don't have two cranks, but they do spin the crank backwards as mentioned earlier. For a MotoGP bike the extra engineering is worth it when the payoff is easier to change directions. So this came full circle back to MotoGP.

I don't really get too worked up over the paint schemes, but I did like the old Aprilia look from back in the day. 

[gstallons]

He was crafty ! 

[p6x]

I think the MotoGP thread as derailed...

[gstallons]

This happens , it will get back on course .

[Scud]

10 minutes ago, gstallons said:

This happens , it will get back on course .

Unless, of course, someone comes along and points out that the BMW K75 and K100 "flying brick" engines had the clutch and flywheel assembly spinning in the opposite direction of the crankshaft. If someone were to mention that, then this thread might stray further off course.

[Lucky Phil]

Thread drift, an indication of how boring the original topic is getting. 

Ciao

[docc]

I admit that I monitor this thread, but have posted on it sparingly. Largely because I have about zero interest in this sort of sanctioned racing, across the board. Perhaps this comes from an early interest in, er, "unsanctioned" racing . . .  

It does seem that analogies to other kinds of motorsports, and motorsports history, are relevant to the topic.

Carry on, carry on. My racers aren't the racers you are looking for . . .

[Lucky Phil]

My advice to Motogp. No aero, no ride height devices, tyre pressures checked "in the legal range" at the start of the race and after that whatever it is it is. That will do for starters to stop it turning into Formular 1 for a while. 

Phil

[gstallons]

ride height devices ?              

[Lucky Phil]

2 minutes ago, gstallons said:

ride height devices ?              

The suspension squatting device they all use on the rear for accelerating out of corners. They also use a suspension compressing device on the front for launching at the start and after that it's passive. I'd allow that for safety reasons.

Phil 

[LowRyter]

21 minutes ago, Lucky Phil said:

My advice to Motogp. No aero, no ride height devices, tyre pressures checked "in the legal range" at the start of the race and after that whatever it is it is. That will do for starters to stop it turning into Formular 1 for a while. 

Phil

totally agree.  I think your suggestions would improve the show and make it safer.  The wings are soooo ugly.

Edited August 1 by LowRyter