Yup, they were basically able to make the ZX-10's a twin mid-corner as a traction aid. You can hear it go to a notably more rumbling engine note as it accelerates off the corner.
...that was after the Duc was neutered "in the interest of competition". Had Ducati been allowed to race the bike as intended, it probably would have been a different story. ...at least until Bautista crashed the shit out of it.
I heard on Eurosport that Ducati folks were laughing at the 250 rpm penalty. That did nothing to hurt them.
Agreed. Honestly they probably expected the hit to come and we’re ready for It. 250rpm over a 16,500rpm rev range is basically negligible. It was Bautista turning the thing into a bowling ball that did them in. Hopefully Davies continues to move forward. My guess is Redding will come out swinging. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Disagree. Power delivery that is not in two cylinder pulses at a time makes easier for the electronics.
It's been a while, but IIRC it went from a Twin, to a Triple as lean angle decreased, then back to an I-4 as he/they got near vertical.
Talking to the project head. https://www.fastbikesmag.com/2019/1...t4Oyx1QWtqG2V4kj1Jukz_x9pALNDlFpGc2kQRYTmTcys
There totally is. It's why GP bikes keep changing firing orders to modify how the power pulses hit the tire and effect whether the grip is used for drive to propel the bike forward or edge grip to keep it from sliding in the turn.
I think he meant that there is no need to qualify the source of the grip because there is only one kind. Talking about mechanical grip on bikes is like talking about vertical height. It's not wrong, but it's unnecessary. Well, that's how I read what he was saying.
I was thinking I should make a disclaimer. Drive grip would be a better way to describe what we're calling "mechanical" grip in the motorcycle world.
Honda have been resting on their laurels far too long. Their prices are why their stuff doesn’t sell as well as others, which outperform Honda.
How was this done, was it by just cutting out cylinders, from 4 to 2 to 3, and back to 4? Interesting!!