new frames

P

petzi

New member
some hundred threads ago we had the discussion about the new kind of frames which the factory uses for the actual monster and multistrada.

it seems that this is maybe the way ducati will go also for the superbikes. probably some of you noticed a ducati patent which features the combination of frame and engine as a bearing attachment.

couple of days ago i've read an italian article about a new frame/engine configuration which could be used next year both in wsbk/bsb and series production. it claims that the company
plans to introduce a bike with an extremely short stroke 1198cc V-twin mounted in an aluminum monocoque frame.

this new superbike will be tested in the summer and enough units will be produced for Superbike homologation for the 2011 season.

what do you think is this finally the death of the good ol' trellis frame and a step forward to build an ital-japanese bike ? or is this the normal modern way to compete with technical revolutionary features ?

if these developments are real i'm pretty curious about a possible change of design. after all i know the actual superbike series is selling rather good. a new design would be a big challenge (again)...
 
new superbike - new engine concept ?

following an interview with f.preziosi and the early results in wsbk it seems that also the v4 concept for that series could be possible.

i'm not sure if the italian media reflected his words right. finally that change would have for sure bigger influences for the model range.

monza this week-end will show new aspects of the corse-status...
 
Last edited:
you have to move on, what ducati have done in mgp is where they'll head, sbk is of no relevance to design its a production series and despite what they say they cant introduce it in limited numbers for 2011, when they wanted the extra cc's they gave up the small minimum homolgation special allowance they'ed enjoyed for so many years

FIM said:
2.9.2.1 FIRST TIME APPLICATION FOR HOMOLOGATION

A manufacturer requesting a homologation for the very first time in its existence must follow the procedure below.



The manufacturer must have produced at least a quantity of 125 motorcycles prior to the homologation inspection. The motorcycle must be on sale to the public at that time.

The minimum quantity of 500 units must be reached by the end of September of the current year.

The minimum quantity of 1000 units must be reached by the end of December of the current year.

From 2010 onwards the minimum quantity will be 3000 units.

All motorcycles must be identical to the model to be homologated with the same specifications.
Click to expand...

if they do a new frame its for the production road bike as well or they need to make a lot of race specials for sale....

I can see it coming, at the moment sbk development is extendign the life of the twin but eventually it'll have another model running alongside in an mgp derived sport bike, just like the old air cooled engine/twin sided swingarm survived when the water cooled 4v appeared....

the interesting thing for me is whether they'll go carbon not alloy, the patents registered are linked to the removal of the frame making headstock into airbox and joined to an engine, carbon makes more sense for that than alloy. If you look at the newer monsters and sf though they do use more castings which would be easily joined by beam or tube SV650 ish.
 
apart from technical details you mentioned will lead the developement of rules in motogp and results with the twin system in wsbk plus possible later adaptions of these rules the way to an decision whether the right concept will be. a scenary could be to use a base plant for motogp and wsbk (also due to the cost thing). if it should be that way it would be for sure a v4.

but then they would have the prob to homologated a road legal bike with min. 3000 units and the need to explain the customers the change from v2 to v4.

but also when this would come:

"I can see it coming, at the moment sbk development is extendign the life of the twin but eventually it'll have another model running alongside in an mgp derived sport bike, just like the old air cooled engine/twin sided swingarm survived when the water cooled 4v appeared...."

they're in need to homologate this different model.

more cheaper would be to build up some pressure to get an 'ducati-positive" change of rules in wsbk to allow more upgrades or less additional weight e.g.:rolleyes::D

gizmo: do you could immagine that they would leave one series (wsbk) ?
 
whilst the current mgp rules prevent production crankcases being used I think the manufacturers are now pushing dorna to allow them to race with production based engines. the 6 engine rule this year was the first step, 1000cc next. I'd expect to see a change so any new design starts life as an mgp engine but after say 1 full season can be used in a production environment thus allowing mgp to develop the initial engine and thus still be prototype class, manufacturer to recoup some costs if it makes production and development can still continue in mgp.

Where i see the problem is whether dorna would then allow that mgp derived engine to move into WSB where it could be developed in parallel and possibly splitting the manufacturers on grid again.

IMHO mgp should allow the above scenario and manufacturers should agree to run WSB in superstock style rules, no engine changes, no development thus reducing their costs and making it easier for privateer teams to race, manufacturers can then race and develop on the premier class and support smaller teams at less cost in WSB. Customers win out as we get development in mgp, longevity/reliability in WSB and hopefully better bikes.

Thats far too simple a solution of course and once the Italians get involved Ducati will want it swapping to suit them as in previous years.....
 
sorry, realised i hadnt actually answered your question directly, yes I se a time when Ducati will only focus on one series, the costs of racing are high and its pointless doing both series.

Personally I'm not a fan of the "win on Sunday, sell on Monday" school of marketing, its so old school now and with their target market a far more astute and discerning customer getting the right product, reliability, customer service and brand image is way more important.

Eventually they'll move out of the 1995 marketing plan and realise the money they've burned could have been better spent elsewhere, for now whilst Malboro and their other sponsors pick the bill up they'll continue, lose that and it might make them think more realistically.
 
1198 my12

coming back with some infos about the forthcoming superbike for my12.

actually they named the new bike 1198 e(xtreme).

details:
new superquadrata engine 200 hp (r-version 210 hp)
front more or less same as 1198
very short/small tail
long single swing arm
under-engine exhaust
no trellis frame
no v4
probably mass of electronic (tc, abs, etc.)
 
I dont see how that will help them in WSB, if they start winning the averaging rules will mean they will have to detune or restrict. Unless of course they've managed to get the rules altered....

Long single sided swingarm, 200+Bhp? sounds like a wheel spinning nightmare to me so it'll need electronics with lots of TC
 
i'm afraid the series will face a further tec war when i read the facts. nowadays you need standard 200 hp and, for handling this, massive electronic help to keep the power on the track.

it's a kind of loop which every manufacturer has to follow to be competitive or to leave and being unsuccessful.

wsbk is also on the way, apart from motogp, to leave a stock orientated racing to a high tec/high budget series. bsb/idm are 'low-budget' series compared to them.

i thought they would bring a new v4 superbike to use also the basic plant for both series but on the other hand ducati is v2...
 
FWIW I can't see the point of Ducati soldiering on with a twin for their superbike. Having stopped factory participation in WSB and BSB this leaves MotoGP as their focus, and in that series they race a V4.

Surely it's not rocket science for Ducati management to twig that their road going superbike should be an (affordable) V4 featuring various bits of electronic trickery. If they take this route then it might actually tempt me to change my 998.
 
Speaking to someone who's seen the bike it does have a airbox which supports the engine and forks and also an under engine exhaust, v-twin so Petzi's info seems true so far.
 
Freak said:
Speaking to someone who's seen the bike it does have a airbox which supports the engine and forks and also an under engine exhaust, v-twin so Petzi's info seems true so far.
Click to expand...

there is quite a bit of chat about the new v twin engine and lack of frame around the interweb :D exhaust seems like its going underslung as well.

i still think it'll need a v4, a lot of new 1098/1198 owners wont see a need to change and whilst a new frame is exciting its not like its radical enough (IMHO) to force a shift.

Its going to be interesting to see if Honda do the rumoured v4 as well
 
petzi said:
good question! i reckon it opens up new different technical solutions.
Click to expand...

Isn't the biggest plus that they can build lighter frames using aluminium or carbon fibre? The (100%) trellis frames were limited by the fact they were made from steel. NCR do titanium versions (yum), but I guess that's too expensive for mass production.

I guess on the fully faired bikes it's less of an issue as you don't see so much of the frame. On the Monster, Hypermotard, etc. the frame is more visible.
 
petzi said:
i think a new, non trellis frame is for traditional ducatisti a pretty radical change:)
Click to expand...

239desmo said:
Does a non-trellis frame open up possibilities of more radical designs?
Click to expand...

petzi said:
good question! i reckon it opens up new different technical solutions.
Click to expand...

It depends upon how its manufactured. the trellis frame has a number of advantages, not least tooling costs are minimal as all you need are jigs, there are no molded or hydro formed parts needed, all you do is cut, weld and make sure the bits are in the right place. The easiest example i can use is on a head angle, with tubes/welds its simple to cut say the bottom spars longer, top spars shorter and you have a slacker angle for a different type of use.

Now compare that to where the headtube/steerer assembly sits in an airbox, it'll be constructed as a number of sheets or formed pieces welded together, the headtube has to join to them in te middle of that box and its not easy to lengthen the bottom or shorten the top of a molded piece as they'll have a radius for the steerer tube molded in, it could reduce the options you have to create more frames from the same pieces.

if you look at how Sergio Robbiano designed the Bimota's you'll see he uses big CNC pieces around the engine and for dropouts and suspension parts, these are more expensive to make than cast or molds but join with tube, this allows the same parts to be used in different ways and for different models, you can easily use the same bits but with different legnth of tube.

So, you now need to define what radical is, is it just a wacky design or one which allows Ducati room to create more options with the same basic tooling?

I can see lots of advantages in using a monocoque/airbox/headtube assembly and removing the twin spar or trellis but radical design isn't one of them. I'd prefer to see the airbox and rear subframe made from carbon as thats the material that would show how radical Ducati will go in technology terms. A v4 would mean smaller more compact engine (which i think they'll try and get with a shorter stroke anyway) and this makes packaging the frameless bike a bit easier . its going to be an interesting bike to see in the metal, I've been lucky enough to see the GP bike pulled apart and know how that airbox/headtube works and if they can do the same in a production environment it does move things on a notch especially if the R uses carbon for that construction.
 
miloVanMultistrada said:
Isn't the biggest plus that they can build lighter frames using aluminium or carbon fibre? The (100%) trellis frames were limited by the fact they were made from steel. NCR do titanium versions (yum), but I guess that's too expensive for mass production.

I guess on the fully faired bikes it's less of an issue as you don't see so much of the frame. On the Monster, Hypermotard, etc. the frame is more visible.
Click to expand...


it depends, if you used a good quality heat treated cro mo you can probably get a comparable weight aluminium and steel but the cost would be high, reynolds 953 (its used in micro light aircraft) http://reynoldstechnology.biz/our_materials_953.php would do the job nicely but would be expensive :)

I'm not sure how cheap the frameless airbox would be to construct initially but it should be lighter and eventually cheaper, carbon wont be, mold costs on an airbox like that I'd guess somewhere around 25 -50K US$ minimum
 
Gizmo said:
i still think it'll need a v4
Click to expand...

some interesting reply of c.domenicali about this issue after talking with the media about the influence of rossi in developing future bikes:

...Poi Domenicali passa alla produzione: “Un V4 di produzione? Mai dire mai. Abbiamo davanti un foglio bianco e vogliamo pensare a moto affascinanti per il futuro. V2 o V4 vedremo”.

in short: a serial v4? never say never. we've got a white sheet of paper in front of us and would like to think about a fascinating future bike. we'll see if v2 or v4....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom