1299: How do you operate the blipper correctly?

Ducati Forum

Help Support Ducati Forum:

Chaotic said:
I only ask because it seems as if the questions/comments/hypothetical things you are talking about are coming from someone who has never actually raced before (apparently I am wrong).

As a racer you should be fully aware of what I am talking about and know that at no point in time, would anyone, regardless of trans/electronics, be downshifting while on the gas accelerating.

It ("it" being defined as track strategy and the approach to cornering) simply doesn't work/happen like that.

You downshift into the appropriate gear as you are braking, then accelerate out of the corner while upshifting as necessary. It is that simple. It doesn't matter if somebody is a Novice club racer with a bone stock R6 or Rossi onboard the M1, that is how cornering is handled.
Click to expand...

No problem at all -- I am aware how outlandish these hypotheticals may seem, and perhaps it is beyond the scope of what this thread was intended for (I apologize for that), but I do believe there is untapped potential in this area. Even if this functionality were available, it would likely only offer an advantage at critical turns leading into long straights. Additionally, even if this were available, I would likely not be able to utilize it to a point that it would provide a competitive advantage, but it would be great to have an opportunity to test!

I would like to tap into your expertise a bit. In an ideal scenario, max power would be both available and usable immediately coming out of a turn, and sustainable until the next braking point at the end of a straight. If this were the case, would it affect how you approach cornering and shift points?
 
Aww, I think we are seeing the disconnect here. Problem is max power isn't usable at the apex of the corner where you pick up the throttle. Not due to the output of the engine, but due to traction limitations of the tire.

So as you exit the corner and stand up the bike, you are increasing revs in direct correlation to a reduction of lean angle, and an increase of available grip. Aside from the temporary loss of drive, chassis imbalance etc that would happen from a downshift, you simply couldn't use that power at that time. By the time you can, you have already hit maximum thrust the current way.

So you would end up downshifting and having to feather the throttle due to traction limitations. So once again, it's easier and faster to simply have the right gear going into the corner, and not be killing your drive changing gears on the way out. And the split second spent shifting would be a huge inhibitor to your drive heading out of the corner. More efficient to be in your exit gear going in.

Does that kinda make sense? I'm having a hard time trying to put into words what I'm seeing in my head.
 
Last edited:
Duck41 said:
I would like to tap into your expertise a bit. In an ideal scenario, max power would be both available and usable immediately coming out of a turn, and sustainable until the next braking point at the end of a straight. If this were the case, would it affect how you approach cornering and shift points?
Click to expand...

That is a physically impossible scenario due to how motorcycles corner and the lean angle required.

Max power is NEVER available immediately coming out of a turn, and never will be. There are guys who even highside 250's.

Cornering is balance of trying to negotiate available traction by manipulating the brakes and throttle in a ratio equal to the % of lean angle you are adding or subtracting. That has been a fact for as long as motorcycles have been going around corners, and that fact will always remain.

Any discussion based upon contradicting that fact is unnecessary as it is an impossibility.
 
shakazulu12 said:
Aww, I think we are seeing the disconnect here. Problem is max power isn't usable at the apex of the corner where you pick up the throttle. Not due to the output of the engine, but due to traction limitations of the tire.

So as you exit the corner and stand up the bike, you are increasing revs in direct correlation to a reduction of lean angle, and an increase of available grip. Aside from the temporary loss of drive, chassis imbalance etc that would happen from a downshift, you simply couldn't use that power at that time. By the time you can, you have already hit maximum thrust the current way.

So you would end up downshifting and having to feather the throttle due to traction limitations. So once again, it's easier and faster to simply have the right gear going into the corner, and not be killing your drive changing gears on the way out. And the split second spent shifting would be a huge inhibitor to your drive heading out of the corner. More efficient to be in your exit gear going in.

Does that kinda make sense? I'm having a hard time trying to put into words what I'm seeing in my head.
Click to expand...

I agree, max power is not usable at the apex of a corner where you pick up the throttle -I was hoping to build upon this ideal theoretical to illustrate that racing strategy would very likely be modified if this were a possibility. As we know, various lines can be taken around a corner, which can shift the point at which maximum power could theoretically be used if it were instantly available. If we have two bikes with the exact same performance, but had one rider use the geometric apex and the other rider use the delayed apex, the rider who took the delayed apex would actually be ahead by the time they had reached the next turn, provided they were exiting onto a long straight. With this in mind, if we were to imagine that max power were available directly after emerging from a corner (i.e, no waiting for revs to climb once straightened up), we would see there is even more advantage to be gained in taking a delayed apex so as to reduce required lean angle/lean duration and more quickly acquire a position with more tire traction, which would enable the ability to utilize this instant power as soon as possible. I am admittedly talking a very small duration of time here, but there is potential to reduce time nonetheless.
 
Duck41 said:
I agree, max power is not usable at the apex of a corner where you pick up the throttle -I was hoping to build upon this ideal theoretical to illustrate that racing strategy would very likely be modified if this were a possibility. As we know, various lines can be taken around a corner, which can shift the point at which maximum power could theoretically be used if it were instantly available. If we have two bikes with the exact same performance, but had one rider use the geometric apex and the other rider use the delayed apex, the rider who took the delayed apex would actually be ahead by the time they had reached the next turn, provided they were exiting onto a long straight. With this in mind, if we were to imagine that max power were available directly after emerging from a corner (i.e, no waiting for revs to climb once straightened up), we would see there is even more advantage to be gained in taking a delayed apex so as to reduce required lean angle/lean duration and more quickly acquire a position with more tire traction, which would enable the ability to utilize this instant power as soon as possible. I am admittedly talking a very small duration of time here, but there is potential to reduce time nonetheless.
Click to expand...

I have zero idea what you are talking about.
you will highside to the moon if max power is available on corner exit.
 
Still ignoring the fact that the person who was already in the proper gear would still have better drive than the one who was trying to downshift before they could accelerate.
 
reganc said:
I have zero idea what you are talking about.
you will highside to the moon if max power is available on corner exit.
Click to expand...

I'm referring to the point at which maximum power could be used (i.e., where there is sufficient traction), thereby preventing the risk of high side. A higher cornering speed would extend the time it would take to reach this point, whereas a lower cornering speed would enable the ability to get on the gas sooner. By the time this point is reached, throttle is applied and the rider must wait for revs to climb to the next shift point. It is here that a short interim exists between the point of applying full throttle and the point at which maximum power is achieved.
 
shakazulu12 said:
Still ignoring the fact that the person who was already in the proper gear would still have better drive than the one who was trying to downshift before they could accelerate.
Click to expand...

I am taking this into consideration. All things equal, if acceleration could occur at maximum power for even a fraction of a second longer than would otherwise be possible, then an advantage could be gained. It would be impossible to already be in the "proper" gear of this theoretical scenario without the ability to arrive at (or close to) maximum power instantly, since doing so would exert forces that would be counterproductive to achieving a lower time (e.g., attempting to take a fast 2nd gear corner in 1st gear). There would be too much force and too little traction at lean -it is only the point at which maximum throttle could be applied that the lower gear (likely closely matched in ratio) could be utilized to arrive at maximum power more rapidly.
 
Except it still doesn't work like that. You have MX experience right? What happens to the rear wheel when you feed in power, vs dump the clutch? Slip or grip?

While your new line can use full power quicker (from a distance perspective), it's also going to be in the corner longer (to brake slow enough to square it off) and off the throttle longer. You are also going to give up tons of track position during the process. You can see something like this just watching a GP race. Notice the lines they take in a crowd vs when they are circulating by themselves. It's all a give and take and you are only considering the application of one singular variable and ignoring tons of others such as geometry, traction, weight transfer, and overall laptime. It's why Chaotic asked if you were an engineer and your race experience. Generally speaking these types of discussions are started by engineer types that don't race if you hang around moto forums long enough.
 
Last edited:
Fair points. Track position would definitely have to be taken into consideration, as it would certainly leave the inside open for the taking. I believe I've taken your other variables into consideration, although it is quite possible I'm being too optimistic about certain aspects, including whether any benefit from this functionality could actually be harnessed in a competitive race environment. It seems likely that single-speed electric motor equipped superbikes will render the discussion expired long before I have a chance to see these hypotheticals tested.
 
Last edited:
I think you are being massively optimistic as to the application of full throttle and when it could be accomplished. Dumping full engine power on a 600 or 1000 class machine in a low gear is going to result in the bike flipping over backwards. So you are going to end up modulating the throttle anyway until higher speed/gears are reached. Problem is, the guys who just took the corner 40 mph faster than you did are also doing the same thing and just opened up 15 bike lengths on you.

There is nothing to stop you from manually using the clutch in the manner you are describing already. There is a reason (many actually) why nobody does it though. Several years ago the Ducati's were running a fuel management strategy where the engine was literally shutting off during corner entry. Even with all the electronics in the world to bring the power back on smoothly, they abandoned it.
 
Duck41 said:
As we know, various lines can be taken around a corner, which can shift the point at which maximum power could theoretically be used if it were instantly available. If we have two bikes with the exact same performance, but had one rider use the geometric apex and the other rider use the delayed apex, the rider who took the delayed apex would actually be ahead by the time they had reached the next turn, provided they were exiting onto a long straight. With this in mind, if we were to imagine that max power were available directly after emerging from a corner (i.e, no waiting for revs to climb once straightened up), we would see there is even more advantage to be gained in taking a delayed apex so as to reduce required lean angle/lean duration and more quickly acquire a position with more tire traction, which would enable the ability to utilize this instant power as soon as possible.
Click to expand...

Duck41 said:
I'm referring to the point at which maximum power could be used (i.e., where there is sufficient traction), thereby preventing the risk of high side. A higher cornering speed would extend the time it would take to reach this point, whereas a lower cornering speed would enable the ability to get on the gas sooner. By the time this point is reached, throttle is applied and the rider must wait for revs to climb to the next shift point. It is here that a short interim exists between the point of applying full throttle and the point at which maximum power is achieved.
Click to expand...

That is what happens NOW.

The whole point of lines/geometry through a corner is to get to WOT as quickly as possible. The lines that are taken vary between bikes based upon HP/acceleration and track layout. The lines I take on the RSV4 are completely different than the lines I take on the Grom when I race it on the same tracks.

In essence, the idea is the get the thing in there as fast and hard as possible, get it turned and upright and on the gas (point and shoot). The exceptions are longer duration corners where that line isn't possible.

The things you are talking about (later apex so you can get to WOT quickly) are exactly what goes on now. And being able to downshift while on the gas doesn't do anything to help/change that.

Once again, the desired apex (or post-apex) gear is selected while braking and entering the corner, this is done to put you at the desired RPM when you get back on the gas. And that is decided based upon apex speed, how quick you want to accelerate out of the corner and how much traction is available.

So when you come off apex, everything is already done. You are in the appropriate gear and at the right RPM to maximize acceleration based upon the available traction.

Done.

There is nothing that could, would or should change that. That is how every corner is handled by every rider in the world, even the multi-million dollar Honda MotoGP bikes approach/handle corners in that fashion.
 
Duck41 said:
I'm referring to the point at which maximum power could be used (i.e., where there is sufficient traction), thereby preventing the risk of high side. A higher cornering speed would extend the time it would take to reach this point, whereas a lower cornering speed would enable the ability to get on the gas sooner. By the time this point is reached, throttle is applied and the rider must wait for revs to climb to the next shift point. It is here that a short interim exists between the point of applying full throttle and the point at which maximum power is achieved.
Click to expand...

If a rider is "waiting for revs to climb", then he should have performed an additional downshift prior to apex.

And you are also missing the fact that it is impossible to go from full lean angle to completely vertical, at least on any corner I have ever seen or went around. They simply aren't shaped like that. There will ALWAYS be a transition where you are applying throttle as you are managing lean angle.

So while you might be "waiting for revs to climb", that is necessary because you cannot utilize any more power. If you were in a lower gear at that point, the RPM's would be too high, the power would be to "twitchy", you would overload the rear tire and highside.

If you have your gearing correct, you will come off apex at say 10k RPM, and between 10k-14k you are accelerating as you are standing the bike up. More power at that point would be useless because you don't have the grip to utilize it. Then you reach 14k (ideally before being completely vertical) and upshift.

Done.
 
Chaotic said:
That is what happens NOW.

The whole point of lines/geometry through a corner is to get to WOT as quickly as possible. The lines that are taken vary between bikes based upon HP/acceleration and track layout. The lines I take on the RSV4 are completely different than the lines I take on the Grom when I race it on the same tracks.

In essence, the idea is the get the thing in there as fast and hard as possible, get it turned and upright and on the gas (point and shoot). The exceptions are longer duration corners where that line isn't possible.

The things you are talking about (later apex so you can get to WOT quickly) are exactly what goes on now. And being able to downshift while on the gas doesn't do anything to help/change that.

Once again, the desired apex (or post-apex) gear is selected while braking and entering the corner, this is done to put you at the desired RPM when you get back on the gas. And that is decided based upon apex speed, how quick you want to accelerate out of the corner and how much traction is available.

So when you come off apex, everything is already done. You are in the appropriate gear and at the right RPM to maximize acceleration based upon the available traction.

Done.

There is nothing that could, would or should change that. That is how every corner is handled by every rider in the world, even the multi-million dollar Honda MotoGP bikes approach/handle corners in that fashion.
Click to expand...

Correct, that is what is being done now. My point being that lines, gear selection, and shift points vary based on available power and how quickly a bike can accelerate. If acceleration and power are lower, it is more important to maintain a higher corner speed in order to carry momentum that would otherwise take too long to recover. Conversely, bikes with more power can and will take different lines in order to utilize the bike's ability to accelerate more rapidly. Thus, if this functionality were available, in certain conditions it could feasibly provide a competitive advantage since, at least to my knowledge, there is no vehicle (be that Moto 3, Superbike, MotoGP, etc.) which is capable of eluding the need to climb through the rev range when accelerating from a gear that was committed to prior to entering an apex.
 
Chaotic said:
If a rider is "waiting for revs to climb", then he should have performed an additional downshift prior to apex.

And you are also missing the fact that it is impossible to go from full lean angle to completely vertical, at least on any corner I have ever seen or went around. They simply aren't shaped like that. There will ALWAYS be a transition where you are applying throttle as you are managing lean angle.

So while you might be "waiting for revs to climb", that is necessary because you cannot utilize any more power. If you were in a lower gear at that point, the RPM's would be too high, the power would be to "twitchy", you would overload the rear tire and highside.

If you have your gearing correct, you will come off apex at say 10k RPM, and between 10k-14k you are accelerating as you are standing the bike up. More power at that point would be useless because you don't have the grip to utilize it. Then you reach 14k (ideally before being completely vertical) and upshift.

Done.
Click to expand...

This goes back to an area I've responded to in a previous post, which essentially alludes to the notion that the proper gear for entering an apex is relative. It would be impossible to already be in the proper gear of this theoretical scenario without the ability to arrive at (or close to) maximum power instantly, since doing so would be counterproductive to achieving a lower time. There would be too much force and too little traction at lean -it is only the point at which maximum throttle could be applied that the lower gear could be utilized to arrive at maximum power more rapidly. If successfully interoperated with traction and wheelie control, this functionality could be utilized to increase drive in certain scenarios.
 
You speak of "climbing through the rev range" as if that is a negative thing (and from what I gather, that is what you are trying to eliminate).

That climbing of revs is a good thing. Power builds as revs climb, and traction increases as lean angle is reduced.

So you get on the gas at full lean angle and the rear tire starts to spin/slide a lil (maximizing forward acceleration while utilizing every bit of available traction).

Power builds as revs climb, but the additional power is compensated for by reducing lean angle as you are finishing the corner (which gives you more grip). But you are still on the limit of traction with the rear tire spinning/slipping. So the revs building is a good thing. It allows you to utilize as much power as you can handle with the available grip, and gives you more power as revs build while you reduce lean angle.

Then you tap redline as you reach close enough to vertical so that you have optimal grip. Then you shift gears.

The whole thing is a process allowing you to use all of the power and grip available, while providing you with more power (as revs build) and as you reduce lean angle, in a natural, smooth, predictable, controllable fashion.

You simply cannot use "max power" any sooner in the corner exit process because there is no more grip available (traction is fully utilized now). So if this hypothetical technology you are proposing became available, it would have to be compensated for with more electronics to restrict power even further.
 
Last edited:
Chaotic said:
You speak of "climbing through the rev range" as if that is a negative thing (and from what I gather, that is what you are trying to eliminate).

That climbing of revs is a good thing. Power builds as revs climb, and traction increases as lean angle is reduced.

So you get on the gas at full lean angle and the rear tire starts to spin/slide a lil (maximizing forward acceleration while utilizing every bit of available traction).

Power builds as revs climb, but the additional power is compensated for by reducing lean angle as you are finishing the corner (which gives you more grip). But you are still on the limit of traction with the rear tire spinning/slipping. So the revs building is a good thing. It allows you to utilize as much power as you can handle with the available grip, and gives you more power as revs build while you reduce lean angle.

Then you tap redline as you reach close enough to vertical so that you have optimal grip. Then you shift gears.

The whole thing is a process allowing you to use all of the power and grip available, while providing you with more power (as revs build) and as you reduce lean angle, in a natural, smooth, predictable, controllable fashion.

You simply cannot use "max power" any sooner in the corner exit process because there is no more grip available (traction is fully utilized now). So if this hypothetical technology you are proposing became available, it would have to be compensated for with more electronics to restrict power even further.
Click to expand...

I don't view climbing through revs in and of itself as bad per se, but the fact that these engines produce maximum power only at higher revs, thereby causing an interim between the point where maximum power could be utilized and the point where it becomes accessible, is an inherent weakness that could be potentially mitigated (and which manufacturers currently attempt to mitigate by advancing the speed with which these engines rev). I do see your point about how the currently used lean/throttle modulation strategy takes full advantage of the amount of power that can actually be used at any given time as the rider progresses through the turn; however, if this hypothetical functionality were available, I could see it being advantageous in certain situations to further reduce the amount of time in the lean, more rapidly establish a lean angle that is sufficient for handling the influx of power, and getting to the maximum power sooner so as to create more drive and a higher trap speed.
 

Similar threads

H
08 1100 hyper back brake problems
Replies
2
Views
68
hagsack
H
S
Idle gear (plastic) and primary sprocket failure – 2017 1299 Pani
2
Replies
20
Views
1K
baggerman
B
S
Valve check/adjustment
2
Replies
29
Views
4K
slapshotb
S
Vicati
For Sale Panigale 1299s and Panigale 959 Full bolt ons
Replies
11
Views
491
Vicati
Vicati
R
Problem after changing the the sprockets and chain
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Chriss
Chriss

Register CTA

Register on Ducati Forum! This sidebar will go away, and you will see fewer ads.

Recent Discussions

Back
Top