Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I vaguely remember a big-wig at Honda laughing at the prospect of Rossi racing for them again... but i wonder how true to their word they really are

You'd think Rossi would literally LEAP at the chance to get on that Honda now after the piece of shit Ducati has pumped out again.

My hope is that Marquez gets the seat and Pedrosa gets the arse all together, Rossi finally retires and some of those nutbags in Moto2 make the step up.

  • Replies 486
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

The Ducati is definitely not the bike to be on this year, but am I the only one that thinks Rossi may have been affected (even if only slightly) by the knowledge that he hit simoncelli in the back in the crash that killed him?

Sure he might have died even if Rossi didn't hit him as he came off, but it can't be an easy thing to deal with

I doubt he felt the need to prove much after his 4th...5th... 6th... And so on...

I've just been thinking for a while now that something like that has got to f**k with your head no matter how much of a professional you are. Not only a fellow rider, but countrymen and friend..

He's always publicly stated that he would much prefer to be in Australia, and that he spends as much time as he can.

Perhaps now he has a family, and in the wake of Simoncelli's tragic death, he's decided to hang it up so he can enjoy life. Hell; he's still got all his fingers and toes, not many racers end up with a full complement.

I'd be happy to see him in a V8SC; he's got a no bullshit approach, and I'm sure he'd adapt easily. He certainly wouldn't be the first rider to race cars.

Casey Stoner dominates opening MotoGP practice at Le Mans

Pos Rider Team/Bike Time Gap

1. Casey Stoner Honda 1m34.321s

2. Dani Pedrosa Honda 1m34.908s + 0.587s

3. Andrea Dovizioso Tech 3 Yamaha 1m35.065s + 0.744s

4. Ben Spies Yamaha 1m35.202s + 0.881s

5. Hector Barbera Pramac Ducati 1m35.213s + 0.892s

6. Jorge Lorenzo Yamaha 1m35.239s + 0.918s

7. Cal Crutchlow Tech 3 Yamaha 1m35.318s + 0.997s

8. Alvaro Bautista Gresini Honda 1m35.336s + 1.015s

9. Nicky Hayden Ducati 1m35.403s + 1.082s

10. Valentino Rossi Ducati 1m35.829s + 1.508s

11. Karel Abraham Cardion Ducati 1m36.291s + 1.970s

12. Stefan Bradl LCR Honda 1m36.500s + 2.179s

13. Randy de Puniet Aspar Aprilia 1m36.935s + 2.614s

14. Aleix Espargaro Aspar Aprilia 1m37.916s + 3.595s

15. Mattia Pasini Speed Master Aprilia 1m38.140s + 3.819s

16. Yonny Hernandez Avintia FTR-Kawasaki 1m38.209s + 3.888s

17. Michele Pirro Gresini FTR-Honda 1m38.255s + 3.934s

18. James Ellison Paul Bird Aprilia 1m38.943s + 4.622s

19. Danilo Petrucci Ioda-Aprilia 1m39.110s + 4.789s

20. Ivan Silva Avintia Inmotec-Kawasaki 1m39.729s + 5.408s

21. Chris Vermeulen Forward Suter-BMW 1m41.398s + 7.077s

was a top race. love watching any racing at that track. Pity F1 cannot go there instead of some of the Tielke sh*t tracks.

and one add was sensational, why cant F1 have on set of add breaks every half hour??

It'll be very interesting to see who gets Casey seat and probably Spies one too!

Cal should hop straight into Spies spot, but managers and agents will be fighting tooth and nail over that spare factory Honda spot

I imagine they've already jockeying for negotiation position 6 months in advance

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...