How's that a disadvantage though?? Less inertia means easier to flick side to side, better acceleration, etc. I would think those are advantages on any type of track.Lack of inertia .
Top end speed on long straights . I agree on a more technical track it's a advantage .How's that a disadvantage though?? Less inertia means easier to flick side to side, better acceleration, etc. I would think those are advantages on any type of track.
Correct .I'll claim ignorance here, aren't there 3 cranks in this picture? I assume the far left is the SL, what are the other 2? 1199 and 1199R?
Wouldn't that be made up by the shear lightweight factor of the bike as a whole? Yes mainly acceleration but you'll still have a high top speed with that lightened bikeTop end speed on long straights . I agree on a more technical track it's a advantage .
I was more thinking of the lines of rotating mass of the crankshaft not the entire bike . Keep in mind it is a question not a statement .Wouldn't that be made up by the shear lightweight factor of the bike as a whole? Yes mainly acceleration but you'll still have a high top speed with that lightened bike
You're referring to the fact that a higher mass will want to rotate faster once going hence making the bike go faster top end?I was more thinking of the lines of rotating mass of the crankshaft not the entire bike . Keep in mind it is a question not a statement .
The fact inertia will be lost but can be added with a different flywheel .
That's it .You're referring to the fact that a higher mass will want to rotate faster once going hence making the bike go faster top end?
Yeah, I know what you're getting at and if it was only the crank that was the difference in weight savings then it would help, but when the whole bike is so light...it's probably gonna make much more of a difference than the extra bit of inertia. I think the bike is something 30-40lbs lighter than most bikes with fluids...that'll make more of an impact than the rotating massThat's it .
The questions are really only based around my own development with my bike .Yeah, I know what you're getting at and if it was only the crank that was the difference in weight savings then it would help, but when the whole bike is so light...it's probably gonna make much more of a difference than the extra bit of inertia. I think the bike is something 30-40lbs lighter than most bikes with fluids...that'll make more of an impact than the rotating mass
The inserts (plugs) in the crank cheeks are kinda interesting, as well as the machined removal of material. We used to bore holes in my Norton crank cheeks and replace the bore with Mallory inserts. Mallory being a lot heavier than the OEM crank cheek material. The reason being, we could remove more material from the areas of the crank furthest away from the rotating CL of the crank, thus reducing a bunch of crank flex under maximum loading. Less crank flexing, of course keeps everything moving in the proper direction reducing wear and tear, as well as drag. If I were going to the expense of replicating the SL motor, blue printing, balancing, etc. I would take a long look @ not only the lighter crank shaft, but also the way Ducati has moved the material around on the crankshaft. Just sayin, pretty impressive piece of work that SL assembly!!!