Quote from: duccarlos on September 28, 2015, 02:19:22 PM
What have they transferred to their WSBK?

AFAIK, it's zip squat on both counts.

The Fireblade is legal for Vintage Class now.

Quote from: duccarlos on September 25, 2015, 08:58:35 AM
I can't see a future where they don't go to a 4 cylinder superbike unless they decide to drop out of WSBK. What's the point of having a MotofGP bike (prototype) and not apply what you've learned from it to a street bike?

I'm not following your argument or Raux's - If you're talking about the Panigale in WSBK, the bike has won four of the last six WSBK races, is second in both the individual and manufacturer's championship point tallies this season and has been on the pole & the podium with a lot of consistency, so is doing just fine with two cylinders. Or you're saying that the rules in MotoGP that pretty much force every manufacturer into some configuration of four cylinders mean that Ducati is also forced to offer a street bike in the same layout.  

It's perfectly possible to build a racing twin (or for that matter, a street-going one)  that can make more power than any existing motorcycle chassis & electronics package can handle - yes, it's going to have a higher displacement than a 4-cylinder motor that makes the same power, but all that really means is that an arbitrary rule limit on displacement will force racing manufacturers toward 4-cyl., which is exactly what's happened in MotoGP.

For what it's worth, Preziosi* always said that Ducati would have preferred to race a twin in MotoGP, but that the rules - particularly the displacement limits - forced them to run four cylinders.

I'm not saying Ducati won't ever offer a V-4 superbike to the public (which they already do, albeit in small, exclusive numbers). As a V-4 fan, I'd love it if they had one in the heart of the model lineup - and a superlight single, while we're making up a wish list. I'm just saying that they don't need to do so in order to make money as a company or to win races in WSBK.

*Yeah, yeah, I know... But despite his shortcomings as a team director, I think we can posit that the guy knew more about the engineering side of a racing motorcycle than anyone commenting on this thread.

Preziosi's engineering failures is what led to motogp failure and the lack of championship since the last gen 1098r. So I dont put too much intomhis engineering skills compared to other manufacturers' leads or even previous Ducati leads. I would even go as far as calling him the Italian Erik Buell.

Quote from: Raux on September 28, 2015, 04:37:56 PM
Preziosi's engineering failures is what led to motogp failure and the lack of championship since the last gen 1098r. So I dont put too much intomhis engineering skills compared to other manufacturers' leads or even previous Ducati leads. I would even go as far as calling him the Italian Erik Buell.

So, how do you explain the improvement in MotoGP results acheived by Dall'igna prior to any changes being made to the bike?

What improvements?

Preziosis was not designer of Al frame, they subcontracted that out.

http://www.motogp.com/en/news/2015/09/28/iannone-i-thought-i-had-their-pace/185821

http://www.motogp.com/en/news/2015/09/28/redding-it-wasn-t-a-great-day/185765

http://www.motogp.com/en/videos/2015/09/28/rabat-tests-a-motogp-bike-in-aragon/185882

Quote from: Raux on September 28, 2015, 09:39:35 PM
What improvements?

I think you're mis-understanding; as I read it, Speeddog is talking about the fact that the GP14 (a Preziosi designed bike) went faster and achieved better results when Dall'igna took over the team. Which is to say that there was speed in the bike that Preziosi - or for that matter, Valentino Rossi and Jeremy Burgess - never found.

In my opinion, the engineers who work at bikes on this level are trying to do an incredibly difficult thing in a field where getting it 98% right means you'll almost never see the podium. The fact that Preziosi, Buell, Dall'igna or the Honda engineers who put Marquez on a nearly unrideable bike this year didn't get to 100% doesn't lead me to the conclusion that I know more than they do about motorcycle design and I can discount everything they've ever said on the subject.

It's worth noting at this juncture that the monocoque frameless design that was not ready for prime time in 2011 is doing just fine in WSBK now that it's out of its infancy in MotoGP. Sometimes ideas aren't wrong, but it takes a while to get them right.

Quote from: Raux on September 28, 2015, 09:39:35 PM
What improvements?

Dovi ranked 5th in points, with 2 podiums, 13 rounds into the 2014 season, just prior to the introduction of the GP14.2 at round 14.

Dovi was ranked 8th, with a best finish of 4th, at the same point in 2013.

No one can ever convince me Preziosi was right for the program. He put Ducati too far down the development curve to be competitive. Only Stoner made a difference.

Quote from: Raux on September 29, 2015, 04:16:24 AM
No one can ever convince me Preziosi was right for the program. He put Ducati too far down the development curve to be competitive. Only Stoner made a difference.

Ok bro, that's enough of you running your soup cooler. I tried to steer this back with three separate 'News' articles, but you just want to pregnant dog. Let it rest, or start your own pregnant doging thread.

Interesting link on Iannone Kopf.
Crazy Andrew has had some good results with his crook shoulder. He's outshining Dovi by a fair margin imo. I wonder who Ducati can lure to ride for them in the next few years?

Quote from: koko64 on September 29, 2015, 05:30:00 AM
Interesting link on Iannone Kopf.
Crazy Andrew has had some good results with his crook shoulder. He's outshining Dovi by a fair margin imo. I wonder who Ducati can lure to ride for them in the next few years?

We'll see how far they've come next year when most of the big contracts are up.