2023 V4R, anyone else disappointed?

Ducati Forum

Help Support Ducati Forum:

Ducatiforum members trying to sort out suspension geometry =
calculating the hangover GIF
 
A lot of comments ON the V4R from guys who say they don't like the bike. Then why comment?
 
Last edited:
then on a on track Ducati video of it for the spec of the 2023 R I see this.. where's that set to +3?

View attachment 45794

I see the source of “confusion” related to the +3 to -3 SA pivot issue. This photo clearly shows it, IF it is the actual configuration of the final production bike. Physics doesn’t lie, but sales and documentation can be “incorrect” in stating it. Follow me here:

When the rotating concentric pivot, which rotates around the fixed point/hole in the engine case to raise/lower the front of the SA, is set to +3, the “front” of the SA (not the pivot point) indeed raises “up”, but in doing so, the actual pivot point is lowered “down” to the lowest position in the SA relative to the chassis, rear axle & chain pull angle, so the effect is LESS anti-squat. To the casual observer the front of the SA is “raised”.

When the rotating concentric pivot, which rotates around the fixed point/hole in the engine case to raise/lower the front of the SA, is set to -3, the “front” of the SA (not the pivot point) indeed goes “down”, but in doing so, the actual pivot point is raised “up” to the highest position in the SA relative to the chassis, rear axle & chain pull angle, so the effect is MORE anti-squat. To the casual observer the front of the SA is “lowered”.
 
I see the source of “confusion” related to the +3 to -3 SA pivot issue. This photo clearly shows it, IF it is the actual configuration of the final production bike. Physics doesn’t lie, but sales and documentation can be “incorrect” in stating it. Follow me here:

When the rotating concentric pivot, which rotates around the fixed point/hole in the engine case to raise/lower the front of the SA, is set to +3, the “front” of the SA (not the pivot point) indeed raises “up”, but in doing so, the actual pivot point is lowered “down” to the lowest position in the SA relative to the chassis, rear axle & chain pull angle, so the effect is LESS anti-squat. To the casual observer the front of the SA is “raised”.

When the rotating concentric pivot, which rotates around the fixed point/hole in the engine case to raise/lower the front of the SA, is set to -3, the “front” of the SA (not the pivot point) indeed goes “down”, but in doing so, the actual pivot point is raised “up” to the highest position in the SA relative to the chassis, rear axle & chain pull angle, so the effect is MORE anti-squat. To the casual observer the front of the SA is “lowered”.

Shouldn’t the relationship between the position of the front of the swingarm, the swingarm angle, and the anti-squat effect be direct? When the position of the front of the swingarm is lower, isn’t the swingarm angle reduced (i.e. flatter), and the anti-squat effect reduced?

Raising the front of the swingarm should increase the swingarm angle and increase the anti-squat effect.

As stated here:

“There are two forces in the rear end that can be utilized–and even tuned–to nicely counter that weight shift. One is the driving force, or thrust, that pushes the rear wheel forward. Because the swingarm is at an angle to the ground, a portion of that forward thrust acts to lift the back of the bike–much as you can push horizontally on the bottom of a ladder against the side of a building to raise the ladder more. Like the ladder, the greater the angle of the swingarm, the more force is transferred into lift.”

Source:

 

Register CTA

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